By on January 10, 2020

The much-rumored return of Hummer to the General Motors fold is apparently a go.

According to sources who spoke to The Wall Street Journal, GM has purchased hyper-expensive ad time during next month’s Super Bowl game, during which it plans to reveal its intent to resurrect the name of once loved (and equally derided) brand. It won’t be a brand, however.

Tapped to promote the vehicle, as well as GM’s push into electric vehicles, is L.A. Lakers forward LeBron James, sources claim. In its future form, Hummer will not be a hulking SUV with fuel economy rivalling that of a Saudi oil tanker. Rather, the resurrected name will be found on the flanks of an electric pickup truck, one GM plans to build at its Detroit-Hamtramck assembly plant in Detroit.

Expected to go on sale in early 2022, the vehicle will not be the first model of a returning brand. Instead, it will be badged as a GMC (which happens to combine two previous rumors into one reality).

GM embarked on its EV pickup journey in response to crosstown rival Ford’s decision to build an all-electric version of its F-150 pickup. That vehicle is expected to launch next year. Competition also exists in the form of the Rivian R1T, which enters production late this year.

It seems names hold sway over a great many people’s hearts. Forever linked to the U.S. military but also to rappers, general ballers, and a certain Lieutenant in the Miami-Dade Police Department, Hummer became a cultural force after GM wrestled the name away from AM General. Though civilian production lasted only a decade, ending in 2009 after a recession and bankruptcy knocked GM to the ground, the name still holds weight. The SUV-filled decade that followed had many wondering why the hell GM axed Hummer while keeping Buick around.

Just like Ford, it seems GM feels that a hard-to-sell propulsion source needs a shot of name recognition and heritage in order to get buyers’ attention.

Super Bowl 54 will be played February 2nd in Florida. We’ll be watching.

[Image: LeStudio/Shutterstock]

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

Recommended

60 Comments on “Report: Hummer *Will* Return, Expect a Super Bowl Ad...”


  • avatar
    Felix Hoenikker

    Electric vehicles would not be hard to sell if reasonably priced. IMHO, that is no more than 20% more than the ICE vehicle it is derived from or if not from a ICE powered clone, then not more than 20% more of it’s closet ICE analog.

    • 0 avatar
      dwford

      EVs will always be a hard sell as long as you either have to rewire your house or go get dinner every few days while waiting to fill your vehicle. Then there’s the epic depreciation.

      • 0 avatar
        mcs

        @dwford: Depreciation high? Maybe you could give us some links for tesla depreciation? Rewire the house? For me, it was a 5 foot run of cable and a NEMA 14-50 outlet. Hardly a rewiring. The Model 3 can add 75 miles of range in 5 minutes at a V3 Supercharger. Kind of tough to have dinner even at McDonalds if that’s the amount of time you have.

      • 0 avatar
        RangerM

        EVs are fine for (probably close to) 90-95% of peoples’ needs.

        It’s that other 5-10% that becomes a problem, and prevents most (including me) from considering them.

        Purchasing a second ICE car to make up for the shortcomings of an EV doesn’t make sense, so you either go hybrid, or you stick with ICE (which works 100% of the time).

        • 0 avatar
          Luke42

          As an EV proponent, having 90%-95% of regular drivers running on electricity would more than solve the problems I’m looking to solve.

          90%-95% is about right in my estimation, as well. And I’m happy to save 90%-95% of the gasoline for all y’all who really need it. Gasoline is too useful to p!ss away on my commute.

          Changing gasoline from a mainstream consumer technology into a niche technology would be a huge improvement.

          Win-win-win

          • 0 avatar
            ToddAtlasF1

            So the problems you’re looking to solve are:

            1. Energy independence. The US is now known to have all the oil it needs.
            2. Balanced trade. Without EVs, we’ll need no new imports to replace oil that we can now supply at home.
            3. The middle class, that can afford ICE cars without subsidies and even seem to be able to afford subsidizing EVs and roads for EVs to drive on for wealthy parasites. Make them buy EVs and remove the subsidies that won’t be affordable when they aren’t rich trinkets for the donor-class, and the economy will implode until we’re back to the days of serfs and lords.
            4. Freedom of movement being available to the majority. Efforts to control the populace that once took a week can be enacted in a day instead.
            5. The need for foreign wars dropping off. We have oil. We’ll need to get in bed with African warlords and slavers to expand the EV supply line.
            6. Clean air and water. We have a century of knowledge about minimizing the environmental costs of ICE cars, but EVs will wreck ecosystems we’ve never had to think about.

            You might solve all those problems, but you’ll probably just create a new dark age by being stupid enough to think you can allocate resources better than free markets can. Free markets are just a way of characterizing free people acting in their own best interests as something to contain.

          • 0 avatar
            Luke42

            @ToddAtlasF1,

            “You might solve all those problems, but you’ll probably just create a new dark age by being stupid enough to think you can allocate resources better than free markets can. Free markets are just a way of characterizing free people acting in their own best interests as something to contain.”

            This is the kind of ignorant thing you say if you get all your news from conservative media. Conservative media just makes stuff up, and so you really have no idea where people like me stand.

            I’m a proponent of free markets. I have a degree in business, and have been part of several startup companies. I plan to get rich in the free market.

            Markets are one of the most powerful human institutions ever created, and humans create them wherever they go, and no matter what rules are imposed on them.

            However, the market does some things badly. One of the things markets do badly is invest in long-term innovation, because its very expensive and the returns are very uncertain. There is a big need for government investment in a world-leading capitalist country. I was naive about this 20 years ago, and you remain so today.

            My ide America involves a predominantly capitalist economy, but with carefully considered government investment in research and in creating new industries — such as the EV industry. There’s little doubt that a mature EV industry will be a big improvement in terms of economic efficiency, geopolitics, and reduced environmental damage. However, the industry won’t create itself — because it’s too much of a long-term bet for a bank to lend you money to develop a new battery chemistry, or to figure out how to scale up manufacturing processes. If you remember high school chemistry, you’ll be familiar with the idea of “activation energy” — something needs to light the fire before a market can start doing its thing. So, where do you get the match, metaphorically speaking? That would be government investment.

            Anyway, your comment is pretty ignorant about where I’m coming from. If you want to know what a liberal thinks, you’d better ask one — your media has badly misinformed you about what we actually think.

          • 0 avatar
            ToolGuy

            ToddAtlasF1,

            Might I suggest that today’s GM (for example) is not necessarily a product of free markets?

          • 0 avatar
            Peter Gazis

            ToddAtlasF1

            You’ve been drinking the oil company kool-aid

            Oil wells can only be fracked so many times. Soon the law of diminishing returns kicks in. New wells are going deeper and are being put in areas harder to access. Long term oil prices keep going up.
            EVs are built to be recycled. Batteries are getting larger and Charging times are coming down. It will never be as fast as filling up your car at the gas station, but being able to charge at home eliminates all the stops you have to make at the gas station when you’re not traveling long distances.

            Around me both major airports( O’hare & Midway) are being expanded. Major highways (90, 94 & 294) are adding lanes..Our rail system is being modernized. All which goes against your travel restriction theory.

          • 0 avatar
            Art Vandelay

            @Luke, I don’t totally disagree with your characterization of so called conservative media, but where is he supposed to go? So called “Mainstream” media was simultaneously trotting out the likes of John Brennan and James Clapper as authoritative fact. I mean Jesus Christ…Clapper oversaw a level of spying on Americans that would have made the KGB in the 80’s blush and they kept trotting him out like he was an American Hero. And Brennen has been caught in more lies than a teenager trying to explain a D- on their report card.

            Maybe we live in a world like Men in Black where the tabloids are the only ones getting it right. They certainly arent any worse than either side of today’s media.

          • 0 avatar
            Art Vandelay

            And additionally @Luke, his characterization of Liberals is no different than yours of limited Government Conservatives. Most of us can’t stand Sean Hannity either. Maybe you should talk to one.

          • 0 avatar
            RangerM

            [email protected]

            I think you misinterpreted my number. I meant that an EV could probably meet 90-95% of each individual’s needs, NOT that it could meet the needs of 90-95% of all drivers–which isn’t the same thing.

            I have an F150 and it’s overkill for most of my driving. But, it’s that last 10% of my individual needs where the F150 is the correct tool for the job, and I’m not in a position to own two vehicles. Most people aren’t, so they select their vehicles based on their most extreme scenario.

          • 0 avatar
            zerofoo

            “My ideal America involves a predominantly capitalist economy, but with carefully considered government investment in research and in creating new industries — such as the EV industry.”

            Conservatives have “tax-cuts” for their pet projects and the left has taxpayer “investments” for theirs.

            Our Federal government has no authority to do either. Show me in the constitution’s 18 enumerated powers where the federal government is empowered to “invest” in things.

            Both conservative and leftist strategies create a cesspool of crony capitalism and rent-seeking. Neither are desirable in our economy.

            Private companies do long-term research all the time. Private universities also do this type of research as well.

            Government financing of pet-projects is what got us into this mess of lobbyist driven debt and deficit.

            Government should govern – not pick winners and losers in markets.

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            “1. Energy independence. The US is now known to have all the oil it needs.”

            Fracking has a short lifespan.

        • 0 avatar
          Carlson Fan

          “EVs are fine for (probably close to) 90-95% of peoples’ needs.”

          That’s why as a 2nd or 3rd vehicle in a multi car household they make a lot of sense. I agree they are not quite ready yet to completely replace and ICE car.

          I own a Volt and when I’m done with that my next commuter will be a full-on EV. They are cheaper to run and more fun to drive. For me, the way they drive is their biggest selling point, followed by the fact that they require less time to maintain.

          • 0 avatar
            Imagefont

            More fun to drive and cost less to run – I’d agree with that. But you pay more up front, which is the problem. If people could pay more up front in order to save money later they’d never finance anything ever again. Unfortunately the math never works out. You pay more up front and it’s still more overall than you’d spend on an ICE vehicle when you calculate the break even mileage. Of course it depends on your model of comparison.
            Less maintenance? Sure, I guess, although I don’t think there’s really much maintenance these days associated with a cars gasoline engine. Oil changes? Not very often, I do my own and it’s not a gigantic burden. Spark plugs every hundred thousand miles? Air filter every 30 thousand miles? Transmission fluid every 60 thousand miles? You’ll spend more time checking the air in your tires and topping off the washer fluid – in either car. I think the less maintenance argument is overblown unless you can think off some egregious time consuming chore your car demands.

  • avatar
    TMA1

    Too bad it won’t be a separate brand, model, or ICE-powered. I thought GM was interested in making money, but I guess I’m wrong.

  • avatar
    Lou_BC

    Mustang Mach E and now Hummer E?

    Why not?

    GM calls the new SBC Ecotec. Ford calls their turbo V6’s Ecoboost. Ram has the Ecodiesel.

  • avatar
    VW4motion

    Let’s hope GM does a better job at R and D than past pieces of junk like the H2 and H3.

    • 0 avatar
      highdesertcat

      ” past pieces of junk like the H2 and H3.”

      For those who love them, they are not pieces of junk. One of my retired military acquaintances here in El Paso, TX, has three used Hummers and is constantly looking for more Hummers of all kinds to become available (at the right price).

      Those Hummers, including the H2 and H3, available in the market place are priced like a collector’s item, even if they are in sad shape.

      A dedicated collector understands about the additional requirement for maintenance and repair.

      • 0 avatar
        dwford

        What additional maintenance requirements would there be for GM truck based SUVs? Broken trim pieces?

        • 0 avatar
          highdesertcat

          I checked with the guy and he told me that the ones in sad shape required a multitude of fixes from fuel injectors to waterpump, and heater motors to power window motors.

          Since he spent his career in the Army in the Motor Pool from day one to his retirement, he isn’t afraid to pull an engine or a transmission and has been known to rebuild and reseal them himself.

          But he does try to stay clear of buying an overpriced collectible.

          Sometimes there is also some body damage, and that requires a knowledgeable fabricator/welder to get it right.

          Private party sales are always a gamble.

      • 0 avatar
        VW4motion

        I used to drive type 1 Jetta’s, loved driving them and fixing them. I get it. Just now GM needs a more reliable product.

        • 0 avatar
          ToddAtlasF1

          I loved my Jetta MK2. It was the second of my nine German cars. At the time, it hadn’t dawned on me that cars shouldn’t need engine mounts, a heater core blown by a faulty radiator cap that was a known issue for at least half a dozen years, front struts, half shafts, an air conditioning compressor, and an assortment of bulbs to be carried at all times during its first 65,000 miles.

          It wasn’t until I owned a Honda for a few years that I realized what a dolt I’d been by driving German cars for two decades. To be fair, the German cars seemed pretty great after cars from GM, Ford and Mopar. Maybe they weren’t much more reliable, but they were beautifully assembled and made out of fasteners that didn’t corrode for when you had to replace things. They handled better too, just as they handled better than Japanese cars until German reunification stripped them of all merit.

          • 0 avatar
            Art Vandelay

            In fairness to German Cars, the Mk II Jetta is a dud even by German car standards. The worst car I have ever owned and it was purchased new by my family and cared for. That list includes 300 dollar FIATs, an Alfa Romeo 75 that twice caught on fire, and a 200 dollar SEAT that was basically a spanish built copy of a MK I Jetta. A Vega is a mid 90’s accord by comparison.

          • 0 avatar
            ToddAtlasF1

            Okay. I also had a Mercedes 240D, a Porsche 924S, an Audi 4000S Quattro, an Audi 5000S, a BMW E30 325, an E36 325is, an Audi A6 3.0T, an Audi A7 3.0T and a bunch of other BMWs, Mercedes, and a Mini through various relationships. My three Honda products have had less total problems than the best one of them.

          • 0 avatar
            Art Vandelay

            I had a chunk of those. My 240d was solid but honestly so slow and miserable to drive it wasn’t worth it. I’ve never had an Audi worth a darned and I forgot about my 5000…it was right there with the Jetta. My E36 was meh but such a good looking and driving car I forgave it (it was an M). Didn’t keep it into old age. My E30 now, it was as good as any of my Japanese or Korean rides. It was a Euro Spec 320i touring and that thing never gave me any trouble and I had it for many hard, Southern Italian miles. They don’t make them like that anymore.

            My water cooled Porsches…the less said the better.

    • 0 avatar
      Art Vandelay

      Yeah I don’t know anyone that had issues with the H2 other than your standard GM interior cheapness. They were by all accounts mechanically solid. No idea about the 3.

  • avatar
    PeriSoft

    I’ll say this about Hummer: They picked a good ad agency. The “like nothing else” ads from their last couple of years were really well-executed.

    • 0 avatar
      SPPPP

      I laughed so hard at the “It’s Not Magic” ads featuring “David Chesterfield”. My favorite was a quickie about an end-of-year sale featuring the tagline “Making Hummers Disappear”. Obviously fake disappearing Hummer, complete with dog running through the second half of the shot. :) Sadly, I can’t find it on the internet.

  • avatar
    Schurkey

    First Guess: The price of REAL Hummers just went up.
    Second Guess: REAL Hummer owners are now pissed about the direction GM decided to go. “Orphan” is still better than “Joke”.

  • avatar
    Eaststand

    I reall y dont understand GM.

    Why would you bring back Hummer, known the world over as the most unenvironmentally friendly car brand of all time, deservedly or not, they are, as an eletric car?

    Its the most tone deaf thing possible

    • 0 avatar

      As Russians say “Что русскому хорошо, то немцу смерть”. It all depends on your perspective.

    • 0 avatar
      Peter Gazis

      Eaststand

      A Hummer EV proves that American capitalism can thrive in an environmentally friendly world.
      It also says to the rest of the world “You can make anything environmentally friendly” Expect to see a flood of innovation result.

    • 0 avatar
      Peter Gazis

      Eaststand

      A Hummer EV proves that American capitalism can thrive in an environmentally friendly world.
      It also says to the rest of the world “You can make anything environmentally friendly” Expect to see a flood of innovation result.

      • 0 avatar
        ToolGuy

        “I don’t always hate every idea until my favorite company adopts it, but I always hate every idea until my favorite company adopts it – and then I love it, because it’s my favorite company and they adopted it (but I used to hate it).”

        • 0 avatar
          Art Vandelay

          “I don’t always hate every idea until my favorite company adopts it, but I always hate every idea until my favorite company adopts it – and then I love it, because it’s my favorite company and they adopted it (but I used to hate it).”

          Nobody is talking about the Cybertruck.

    • 0 avatar
      Luke42

      Turning Cadillac, or Buick, into GM’s high tech (pronounced “electric vehicle”) brand would make much more sense from my perspective.

      Since Chevy got the Volt and the Bolt, Cadillac and Buick are old tech for old people, as far as I’m concerned. Chevy is their high tech brand.

      With Hummer, they’re giving themselves the biggest green-car handicap I can imagine.

      If they’re dead set against making Cadillac/Buick relevant, why not resurrect Saturn or Pontiac as their EV brand?

      I’m getting my Tesla this summer. GM will still be at the starting gate flinging PowerPoint’s at each other while I drive off into the sunset in my Model Y.

      • 0 avatar
        ToddAtlasF1

        “Turning Cadillac, or Buick, into GM’s high tech (pronounced “electric vehicle”) brand would make much more sense from my perspective.”

        Calling their ‘high tech’ EV brand Detroit Electric would send the wrong message.

        • 0 avatar
          Luke42

          @ToddAtlasF1

          The “Detroit Electric” brand name was owned as recently as 2016:
          https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Detroit_Electric_SP.01

          They were attempting to copy Tesla’s super secret business plan.

          Now, you were alluding to the Detroit electric of the early 1900s. It sounds like you’re trying to mock electric cars by bringing this up, but it actually refers really good history-of-engineering lesson to anyone who knows what they’re talking about.

          If you read up on the Detroit Electric cars for real, you’ll find that those early 1900s had roughly the specs of a golf cart. Those cars never really went away, they’ve just been relegated to off-road/low-speed applications until the computer industry started building the economies of scale necessary to build lithium-ion batteries. Golf cars have been a solid industry for at least 70 years, and that’s what i can find without looking very hard.

          Once the computer industry built the economies of scale for more modern battery chemistries in the late 1990s, highwayworthy electric cars started to by built and became a mainstream consumer product with the introduction of the Nissan Leaf around 2010.

          Since that time, Tesla has been pushing the economies of scale in the battery industry as hard as possible, and they’ve made some pretty nice cars while doing it.

          Tesla has also one of the few “luxury” brands that I personally respect, because it’s about more mere conspicuous consumption — it’s about getting a front row seat for the high-tech low-carbon future.

          GM can’t use Detroit Electric, because it’s currently taken by a modern (though struggling) EV maker. I’d happily drive a modern Detroit Electric vehicle, and the history is pretty cool.

      • 0 avatar
        Schurkey

        “Turning Cadillac, or Buick, into GM’s high tech (pronounced “electric vehicle”) brand…”

        Don’t confuse “high tech” with “Politically-Correct”.

        • 0 avatar
          Luke42

          This doesn’t have anything to do with political correctness (AKA good manners).

          This is about selling cars.

          Personally, I will only pony up new car money for a vehicle with an electric drivetrain.

          Does GM want to sell me a car? Then they’d better sell me what I want.

          Go test drive an electric car, and you’ll see why. Smooth low end torque. Lower operating costs. Simpler designs.

          I’ve owned three pick up trucks over my driving career, and in starting to want another one. But the drivetrain in each and every one has been slow, clunky, and loud compared to the contemporaneous cars. An electric pickup truck would fix this. Even a hybrid would be less clunky. And, yes, there are environmental benefits — but that’s just a part of the overall package of ways hybrid and electric cars are better.

          I am very interested the electric F-150 and the Cybertruck, and I’m also shopping for a used Silverado Hybrid for now.

          Yes, its different than what you’re used to. Yes its change. Yes, people complain about things that are different. But lets not let “change anger” eclipse “better”.

          • 0 avatar
            Luke42

            If GM wants my money, they’ll need to build EVs.

            If GM wants your money, they’ll need to build what you want.

            Either way, they have to move the metal.

          • 0 avatar
            ToddAtlasF1

            “This doesn’t have anything to do with political correctness (AKA good manners).”

            Political correctness (AKA cultural marxism) has nothing to do with good manners and everything to do with crushing the First Amendment on the road to stripping freedoms of action.

            I’m all for you buying an EV with your own money. I’m all for you putting solar panels on your roof with your own money. I’m all for you installing a charger in your garage, with your own money. For some reason, the people who want EVs have wanted others to pay for all of that so far.

      • 0 avatar
        Art Vandelay

        “Since Chevy got the Volt and the Bolt, Cadillac and Buick are old tech for old people, as far as I’m concerned. Chevy is their high tech brand.”

        Old people buy Avalons

    • 0 avatar
      Robbie

      Can you please become CEO at GM..?

  • avatar
    jack4x

    Waiting for Hummer (the commentor) to go full Deadweight….

  • avatar
    Garrett

    The Venn Diagram that shows people who fondly remember Hummers and those who want an electric vehicle consists of an overlap that includes one person: an Austrian former bodybuilder who ended up governor of California.

  • avatar
    Michael S6

    Questionable decision to bring back Hummer given that GMC is a duplication for chevrolet and already has a sub brand Denali. However, GM does not have much to lose as it’s not investing in a new Brand name and dealer network. In 2022 all the former H2 urban cowboys can now find a more ecological replacement.

  • avatar
    tankinbeans

    Considering Hummer can mean lobster in German, they should make it a hydrogen fuel celled armored tank.

  • avatar

    more idiocy from the company with the world’s worst marketing.

    this move makes less sense than the Manchester United foolishness.

    the only way Electric Hummer will be a “Hit” is to the bottom line.

    Mary Barra is an utter failure.

  • avatar
    TimK

    Hummer EV makes a lot of sense, nobody in the target market cares what it weighs, and they can afford the outrageous price tag. This thing will be a hit with faux ranchers, police departments, politicians, and those companies that build bullet-proof bug-out vehicles.

  • avatar
    EBFlex

    First Ford completely ruins the Mustang name and now GM is completely ruining the Hummer name.

    FCA may as well come out with a Prius competitor and name it “Road Runner Demon” or “Super Bee Hellcat”

  • avatar
    ponchoman49

    If GM isn’t filing for bankruptcy by 2025 I will be stunned. The rudder-less direction clueless Marry is steering this vessel will soon leave it lost at sea!

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • SPPPP: Yes, but unfortunately, the manufacturer may have reduced cost by eliminating the tooling for the ignition...
  • SPPPP: The greenish gold is not my favorite color, but I’d much rather look at that than a black car. At least...
  • Verbal: With all these various flavors of crossovers/SUVs that Ford will be cranking out, at what point are they...
  • 65corvair: Had an Altima as a rental, I wasn’t impressed. My ’14 Accord (base model, no extras) with...
  • tomLU86: So, if Ghosn, “le cost-cutter”, effectively slashed costs, what is there left to cut in terms of...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Timothy Cain
  • Matthew Guy
  • Ronnie Schreiber
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Chris Tonn
  • Corey Lewis
  • Mark Baruth