Well, GM has finally killed the Hummer H1 after 14 years of civilian duty. Should this be seen as destroying a brand icon, like Mazda suddenly throwing the Miata in the trash, or as an environmentally conscious, respectable decision? And is this the beginning of the end for the entire overweight, unaerodynamic, gas-guzzling Hummer brand?  

Well, all I can say is, "Good riddance!" Talk about the absolutely wrong type of car for anyone this side of Baghdad to be driving. Actually, I just heard some discussion this morning on NPR from an Army officer just back from Iraq that the Hummer is the wrong vehicle for Baghdad as well. It was designed for the plains of western Europe and pushing back the godless communists, not driving through bomb-infested streets of a crumbling city. What is needed there is something with much heavier armor while maintaining some degree of maneuverability.

What's my point? The Hummer, while perhaps with some value in 1986, is the wrong vehicle for 2006. People need to realize the advantage of using the right vehicle for the right job. I realize that this seems to miss the emotional appeal of vehicle selection, but remember that emotional appeal changes over time. People driving nasty, brutish, and short-mileage vehicles need to evaluate what the appeal is. Is it to look tough? Is it to know that you have the ability to cross the plains of western Europe and push back the godless communists, if needed? Efficiecy and wise product selection can be cool again. It just takes some delicate prodding in the right direction. That prodding can come from many directions; from the consumers, from the government, from the media. The point is that it needs to start from somewhere and that people need to get serious about using the right tool for their needs. Being wise used to be valued.  

GM sold out Hummer?  Bummer.  

Get off the Hummer bashing already.  My H2 get 12.5 mpg in the city and almost 15 mpg highway driving, and at highway speeds using regular gas.  Smaller suv's get just a little more mpg.  

Where to begin. . .
  First, sfowle, Mazda did not "throw away" the Miata.  It has always been named the MX5 Miata, but is now simply MX5, and Mazda is leaving off the "Miata" in official company documentation.  Although, most people will certainly recognize the new vehicle, and continue to refer to it as such.  
   Serious Cave Monkey, right on.  Interesting how the H1 civilian version did so well, considering that it went civi just one year after a direct competitor, the Lamborghini LM002, was pulled from the market for slow sales.  The LM002, as you might remember, was originally a vehicle developed for the same purpose as that of the HMMWV.  The Lambo was originally named "Cheetah".  But, without the government contract, the Cheetah never acheived production for military use, and, never garnered the attention that the "HUMMER" did during Desert Storm.
  Zoomporsche, please give us all a break from the underacheiving "justification" of the mileage from your rig.  First off, IF you can obtain 15MPG anywhere other than a downhill grade at 55MPH, my hat is off to you.  But, please, please, please explain to me the purpose of driving a vehicle that weighs 6,400 pounds without the utility of a truck bed.  Normally, I would suggest a gender specific lack of femoral artery flow, but it seems as though women like to buy these behemoths as much as men, so I must digress.  Might I suggest a redesigned for 2005 Nissan XTerra?  The only area in which it lags the H2 significantly is in towing (5K vs 7K).  Acceleration is better in the X, off-road prowess is similar, and cargo dimensions are actually better in the "smaller" X when you consider that the spare tire is NOT mounted INSIDE of it.  Packaging issues aside, I AVERAGE 19MPG in mixed driving, and 21 over the road.  I would call this a SIGNIFICANT improvement over your mileage (40% highway, 52% city/mix).  All of this, and, I only paid a little over $23K.  How much did you spend?  Allow me to pull another question from my rhetoric.  Do you actually drive yours off road?  When my wife and I camp, we go OFF ROAD, with loads of gear, and a great dane (she's plenty comfy in the back seat - the dog, not the wife, ha ha).  I almost choked when it came time to buy and SUV, but our needs negated the possibility of keeping a manual 4 cylinder Altima.  There's justification.  
  I do, of course, understand that different people have different tastes, and if you use yours off road, don't use it as your daily driver, etc, that is great.  I also remember that this is a free country and you may do as you please.  I think that the words of sfowle might have been misconstrued.  Stating that the HUMMER brand is overweight, gas guzzling, and under-aerodynamic is merely statement of fact.  Gas guzzling, we've already covererd that.  Overweight, sure, yours weighs 2K more than mine.  Under-aerodynamic, what SUV isn't?  My point is that I think it is a blanket statement about all SUV's, but that the HUMMER brand consists of only that.  What was the point of continuing to build a truck that costs over $100K, has capabilities that few used, took up too much space, and consumed way too much foreign fossil fuels?  Like any model with a 14 year consumer market life span with very few revisions, one would say that it had a good run.  

About time,

I could not see why that bomb was sold as long as it was, it was only bought by oddball millionaires who wanted to make a statment of indulgence, so good riddance indeed.

Save Gas, Don't Waste It.  

Why would they go and do that? Oh yea, I know! Because soccer moms would rather buy the H2&H3, both just reskins of other GM vehicles. Both junk, with no off road abilities, but who needs that when your in the mall all day?