|
|
|
|
|
This image has expired.
Final Stats:
| Total Votes |
0 |
| Average Score |
0.00 |
| Verdict |
Not Rice
|
|
Picture
Information
|
| URL:
http://riceornot.ricecop.com/?auto=69638 |
|
| Comments: 49 (Read/Post) Favorites: 0 (View) |
Submitted
on: 12-27-2007
|
 View Stats |
Category:
Vehicle Group |
|
|
Description:
Two General Motors lemons that don't live up to their names.
kw: Pontiac LeMans, Hummer H2 |
Showing page: 1 of 3
[ 1 2 3 ]
 |
| #1 |
12-27-2007 @ 09:04:24 AM |
| Posted By : Skid |
Reply | Edit | Del |
H2 is a lemon? I know they're large and basically useless for everything (including offroading), but I didn't realize there was anything wrong with their construction or mechanical bits.
|
|
| #2 |
12-27-2007 @ 11:37:50 AM |
| Posted By : Adambomb |
Reply | Edit | Del |
I think that's what he means.
I'll take the LeMons
[Edited by Adambomb on 12-27-2007 @ 11:39:03 AM]
|
|
| #3 |
12-27-2007 @ 05:55:17 PM |
| Posted By : Obsidian |
Reply | Edit | Del |
Also - what name did 'H2' have to live up to? It was a new name in 2003 with no predecessor. Sounds like you're confusing the terms make and model as one in the same.
|
|
| #5 |
12-27-2007 @ 06:15:58 PM |
| Posted By : Obsidian |
Reply | Edit | Del |
#4, Of course - he didn't type 'brand name'.
"Two General Motors lemons that don't live up to their names."
The LeMans is understandable - if you're one of those GM purists who still thinks it's the 60's - then this Pontiac LeMans would be a bit underwelming in comparison to the first gen Pontiac LeMans.
The H2 is not understandable when it comes to 'living up to it's name'. The name 'H2' never stood for anything up until the day it was added to the Hummer brand in 2003.
By that reckoning, the present Impala should be called a lemon because it isn't a near copy of the orginal Impala - and the CTS is a lemon because it 'doesn't live up to it's name' because it isn't a spitting image of Cadillac's heyday years of big chrome boats.
[Edited by Obsidian on 12-27-2007 @ 06:20:25 PM]
|
|
| #7 |
12-27-2007 @ 06:26:31 PM |
| Posted By : Adambomb |
Reply | Edit | Del |
#5, The new Impala IS shit when compared with the ones of yesteryear :P
As for the CTS, my Uncle has one and I quite like it.
|
|
| #8 |
12-27-2007 @ 06:29:06 PM |
| Posted By : Skid |
Reply | Edit | Del |
#5, The name "h2" doesn't stand for anything, but "Hummer" does.
LeMans and Hummer are both the names of the vehicles. Even if one's a model name and one's a brand name, a name is a name and these two don't live up to them.
I think that's the gist of it.
|
|
| #9 |
12-27-2007 @ 06:30:16 PM |
| Posted By : Adambomb |
Reply | Edit | Del |
Also, it was called AM General Hummer before GM bought them.
[Edited by Adambomb on 12-27-2007 @ 06:30:46 PM]
|
|
| #10 |
12-27-2007 @ 06:35:08 PM |
| Posted By : Sensekhmet |
Reply | Edit | Del |
#1, Well, there's this video of an H2 climbing a light off road trail, driving onto a piece of rock and breaking down under its own weight.
|
|
| #11 |
12-27-2007 @ 06:51:37 PM |
| Posted By : Obsidian |
Reply | Edit | Del |
#8, But the H2 is not called a "Hummer H2" - that would make it a Hummer Hummer H2 and lead to redundancy (and an alliteration).
Make: Hummer | Model: H2
It's not like they included the brand name with the model name. Plus - it would be incorrect to call it a Hummer outright without being specific which would lead to confusion. Presently - there are 2 different vehicles in the Hummer brand and refering to either of them in the sentence "I own a Hummer" is misleading as to what Hummer product the speaker is actually talking about.
Granted - if you're looking at the brand's rather brief history as a whole - the H2 (and to a much less extent the H3) seem to fail at conveying a sense of offroaditude as pioneered by the renamed AM General H1. But - neither the H2 or H3 are successors to the H1 and have no image to carry - just names given to vehicles in a segment.
[Edited by Obsidian on 12-27-2007 @ 06:52:42 PM]
|
|
| #14 |
12-27-2007 @ 07:00:11 PM |
| Posted By : Sensekhmet |
Reply | Edit | Del |
#11, ...and have no image to carry...
So why they try to emulate H1's front clip?
|
|
| #15 |
12-27-2007 @ 08:03:06 PM |
| Posted By : Subourbon187 |
Reply | Edit | Del |
#11, WBMJ just said the H2 was a piece of crap, where the hell are you pulling all this other nonsense from?
|
|
| #17 |
12-27-2007 @ 08:29:18 PM |
| Posted By : Obsidian |
Reply | Edit | Del |
#15, Because Hummer is the brand and H2 is just a model. Models don't "live up to a name" - especally when the model name is 5 years old.
|
|
| #19 |
12-27-2007 @ 08:40:55 PM |
| Posted By : Obsidian |
Reply | Edit | Del |
#14, They call it "brand idenity" or "common design language".
It's bullshit really. Everyone knows the H2 is intended to look like the H1. Given the H1's sucess and fame - why wouldn't GM try to milk it and use a similar front fasica on all products sold in the Hummer brand to enforce the idea that an H2 is as good as an H1?
The H2 is nothing to an H1 - but GM is hoping for dumb people with lots of money who are obsessed with image.
|
|
| #20 |
12-27-2007 @ 09:03:21 PM |
| Posted By : Subourbon187 |
Reply | Edit | Del |
#17, WBMJ said "name" which could infer both make and model. I was just confused as to why you're splitting hairs with his terminology seeing as how you appear to have a similar attitude towards H2's as he does. When it comes to utility the H2=/=H1, it's as simple as that.
But, more on point, I agree with the statement. The 80s LeMans was a ultra-bland cramped econo-box and the H2's only real functionality is maneuvering effortlessly over small bumps in the road while it's middle aged housewife driver's make their way to Yoga.
[Edited by Subourbon187 on 12-27-2007 @ 09:04:40 PM]
|
Showing page: 1 of 3
[ 1 2 3 ]
Login to leave a comment
|
|
|
|
|
