The year was 2017, and a General Motors team was hard at work on the GMC Jimmy – a midsize 4×4 SUV on a proper body-on-frame platform to rival the likes of the Ford Bronco, Jeep Wrangler, and Toyota 4Runner. The vehicle program, which was to be based on the 32XX architecture shared with the then-upcoming 2023 GMC Canyon midsize pickup truck, was ultimately cancelled – as GM Authority reported back in 2019. But there’s an interesting tidbit about the Jimmy that seems to have escaped our reporting: the engine.
A rendering of the GMC Jimmy by GM Authority
You see, the stillborn SUV would have featured the turbocharged 2.7L L3B inline four-cylinder gasoline engine, branded as TurboMax earlier this month, as the standard powerplant. That should come as no surprise, given that the boosted four pot is now standard fare in the all-new, 2023 GMC Canyon. Arguably more interesting, however, is the fact that the Jimmy would have also offered something that wasn’t planned for the Canyon: a V8.
2023 GMC Canyon AT4
Sources involved in planning the unrealized off-roader tell GM Authority that the GMC Jimmy product team fought hard to offer a V8 engine, which necessitated certain provisions in the underlying 32XX platform, ones that would have made the SUV more expensive as a whole. In fact, it was this additional financial outlay that made the Jimmy a GMC exclusive, as GM would not bring a Chevrolet variant to market.
Additionally, an optional V8 would have been the Jimmy’s key differentiator and unique selling proposition, as the Wrangler and 4Runner did not offer an eight-cylinder engine at the time of development.
2023 GMC Canyon AT4X
Alas, neither the GMC Jimmy, the 32XX platform, nor the V8 engine ended up making it to market, falling victim in mid-2019 to General Motors’ hard pivot toward autonomous and electric vehicles, along with their development and associated investments. As a consolation prize of sorts, GM did end up approving another GMC off-road sport utility vehicle – the Hummer EV SUV. The battery electric super SUV, however, currently carries a $100K starting price (before any dealer-added up-charges) – a far cry from the roughly $40K starting price that the Jimmy would have carried. The next best thing, then, are the Jimmy’s pickup truck variants – the GMC Canyon AT4 and Canyon AT4X. Neither of these, however, offers a V8.
2024 GMC Hummer EV SUV
Want more juicy insider stories about GM? Then subscribe to GM Authority for more GMC Jimmy news, GMC news, GM business news, and around-the-clock GM news coverage.
Comments
With gm’s overall better truck reliability, it would have been a SOLID contender. THE CUSTOMER… remember us, Mary? No? I am not surprised. This is another cross to barra for the growing list of bad decisions.
I still don’t get how the hummer, selling 2 units during the first quarter, is a better decision than building this Jimmy, or even making capacity for more canyons.
Because the hummer is recouping r&d costs for the ultium platform which will allow GM to show profitability on the EVs sooner.
When companies say they are losing money on vehicles it’s a lie. Say you spend $1 million on r&d and at first you sell 10 vehicles. If those vehicles done sell for cost plus $100k to cover r&d accounting wise they are losing money even though the vehicle may cost $20k to build and they are selling it for $40k.
HEY GUYS WHY CANT WE BUILD A REAL BLAZER OR A JIMMY WITH A REAL ENGINE NOT A 4 cyl. Who ever is making crazy decisions on is killing GM …. Now talking about stopping Camaros another STUPID CRAZY idea you will just sell more mustangs ‼️‼️oh and how about the for Bronco I see a lot on the road ??? And GM has nothing to put out like that .. I worked as a line mechanic for chevy for 10 years and was prop to be there when GM made GOOD AND REAL cars and trucks !!! PLEASE WAKE UP AND LETS GET BACK TO BEING #1 AGAIN
I have 1997 GMC Sonoma had 2.2 liter engine. I did LS swap to the vehicle, Not only increasing power but mileage to the gallon of fuel. Why can’t these engineers make better decisions.
mary is making these quick looney decisions. They are quick decisions, cause she dont want to be late for the new sales at Macys.
Reuss is also contributing to these bad decisions. I believe Mary is ultimately responsible, but he’s right in there. Sexism doesn’t solve gm’s problems, policy decisions are at fault here.
No sexism what so ever here! Remember Macys does throw good sales, and we are all as one! Bruce Jenner is now all American , and shops were the sales are, J-lo has kids named pronouns who shop at Macys, and we all shop at General Motors! I just say we need to be focused in cars the way we have done since birth.
V8 are things is the past, time for the grey hairs to realize that. EV is the future. Get with the program
Dennis, you pose it as if it was an “either/or”?…
They make the Canyon today, the incremental costs for a V8 Canyon based Jimmy would be minimal, or are you saying GM can’t “walk and chew gum”?
The platform is not suitable to a midsize SUV like Bronco or Wrangler, the replacement platform was canceled.
Stop saying “it’s not that hard” when you don’t know what the f you’re talking about.
Your right. Putting off-road SUV names like Trailblazer and Blazer on CUVs is a much better plan 🙄
Was the Trailblazer name ever really used on an “off-road SUV”?
GMT 360 Trailblazers was a lot more robust than the current one. They were marketed head-to-head with the Jeep Cherokee/Grand Cherokee.
Though the 360s had body on frame construction, which certainly lent them to have more off-road potential, these weren’t off-road vehicles. Most were used as pavement princesses and wouldn’t fare that well off-road without some aftermarket upgrades.
Ultimately, my point is that the Trailblazer name never had a ton of off-roading heritage or recognition as such.
Well now I just FORD is going to makes 60th anniversary MUSTANG that will look like early Mustangs ….. SO THANKS GM FOR STOPING CAMAROS IN 2024 so SO SO STUPID so chevy is going to make MUSTANG #1 all because of not THINKING …. Even if guys like Camaros they might end up buying a MUSTANG because there is no camaros TO BUY ..VERY SAD‼️‼️
How is that making what the customers want?
Typical dumb GM bean counting, which they’ve been doing for decades.
Mary’s just the latest installation to keep the bean counters happy.
@Dennis This is the conventional wisdom but also the sunken cost fallacy at play. They aren’t going to recoup money on this. It takes enough Ultium batteries, which they already can’t produce, to make 3 other regular sized EVs. They are throwing good money after bad, thinking a prestige piece will help sales and recoup the cost. What they’ve made has already developed the Ultium platform and anything after this is good money thrown into the sunk cost fallacy. If they cut the Hummer, they’d have enough batteries for more cars that everyone is waiting on, like the Lyriq. Their expense per car at such small scale is absurd.
Wrong, ESG is the reason. Its also the reason ford, who makes all their money off tue F-series is going to be in the red for a second strait year on EV’s that nobody buys. Its also the reason toyota has a new CEO, mearly 2 months after the last CEO said that EV’s were “not a priority” and toyota was going to milk gas cars as long as they can.
These big corporate bankers need arrested as ESG qualifies as racketeering, and all board members from GM and ford should be investigated for aiding and abetting.
Thank you
it’s not. It’s Mary cozying up to the current administration for greenie/lefty credits, acceptance, awards and headlines.
Cross to barra- 😂
Ideology based business decisions.
Please 🙏 gm built the gmc Jimmy v8 and let ford jeep and toyota to disappear on the dust
Because of coming regulations the EV has a future vs the ICE.
The cost will decline via trickle down.
The problem is no matter what people want the regulations globally are against the people and the mfgs have to build what will be permitted.
The next election can change things here but only for 4 years and then it can easily change back. The mfgs can’t afford these continued changes and have to chose one.
The green agenda folks know this and like in an argument you control the language you can’t old the fight. Here it is the global regulations. You control the market.
The problem with GM upper management is that dinners AR the
White House are more important than her customers!
You can say it was going to have a tri-power 427, but if you don’t build it it’s just another lie coming out of Detroit. Give us what we want and will pay for and quit jamming 4 cylinder crap down our throats.
And EV and AV crap as well
Another GM blunder. If GM would build a mid size truck/suv, with a small V8. They could corner the market in a second! EV’s are NOT the answer.The cost is nuts, the range is too smal. And the charging takes way to long. Plus, no one is even getting into the replacement battery costs, or the recycling of them. The USA, is just not ready to have these EV’s, shoved down our throats. Come on GM, build real trucks again! The public will return like never before
GM missed the boat again! A V8, full frame, mid-sized SUV …. When can I order one. My son in law is a loyal GM customer but recently bought a Toyota mid size SUV since it had a full frame. I understand the issue with limited resources and budget. Even more reason to have your pulse on the customer. Stop letting the bean counters run the company!
The company will always be driven by the finance people since making $$ is the purpose of the company. Folk are obviously buying what GM is putting out here so they have no incentive change..yet
Once again GM has no clue. A Jimmy with a V-8 – I’d trade my Tahoe in any day!!
Instead they invested to 100k bummer ev with overlander crap on it .. terrible choices by the top brass . That would have sold for lot people . The colorado/Canyon already gets crap Mpg etc . Smh
I’m just shaking my head after reading this article… what a missed opportunity!
IT’s not the investment in the vehicle that was the problem, it was the capacity to build it. Wentzville capacity is maxed with the Canyon/Colorado and Savanna/Express. No other plants are designed to handle that chassis. So they would have to make a considerable investment at Wentzville or another plant to make it happen. Given that GM was shifting plant production to EV manufacturing and new plants for battery production cash was probably tight. The Hummer being built on the same platform as the Silverado EV, Sierra EV, Escalade IQ etc did not have the same problem, that plant was already in the works. And the development costs of Hummer specific content (body shell and interior) will easily be paid for if they sell 10,000 units over the life of the product. The extra benefit of being a Halo product for GMC and testing bed for EV tech before it hits high volume models is a bonus.
Drain the freak’in swamp people. She (Mary) needs to go 1st, immediately. Then down to the one that does not know how to drive. Remember Indy pace car (CorvetteZR-1) into the barrier?
Relax fellas. Sounds like wishful thinking and reporting on GM Authority’s part to get you fired up, which it sounds like it did. All a mute point anyway, they’re not going to do it even if they were thinking about it.
A feeble attempt at casting doubt on a publication with a 100% track record related to gm. Shame on you buddy.
If you actually read the site, you’d know they are not in the business of lying or getting people fired up.
I’m not sure how feeble the attempt was. I held off purchasing a new Tahoe this year after reading articles on this outlet (too many to recall) predicting a total refresh of that model was coming in 2024, including renderings. As it turns out the predictions and countless articles were completely wrong. I’m not insinuating anyone was lying but your assertion of having a 100% track record relating to GM might be a stretch.
What’s “a stretch” is insinuating that GMA made up this story “to get you fired up”. That was indeed a feeble attempt, as it is you who is making things up, not GMA.
As for the 2024 MY SUV refresh of the full-size SUVs, I have been following this closely as I too am waiting for the refreshed models. I can tell you the GMA have been 100% right on this including features and dates. The fact that GM pushed back the refresh to another model year has nothing to do with GMA. Your line of thinking is like blaming your local news outlet for reporting that the local supermarket will close at an earlier time than the supermarket planned on closing for the past few months.
Oh and from what I remember, GMA was also the first to tell us that the refresh will no longer be coming for 2024 MY. No one else reported on it, but GMA did. After almost four decades in the newspaper publishing business (now retired), I can tell you that this is responsible and honest reporting – a positive that you’re trying to spin into a negative. Are you perhaps doing it “to get people fired up”? Just seems feeble and pathetic on your part. As my grand kids would say, “you a hater.”
This is all great.GM better wake u!!
Remember: Big Mary (the bear-a) is in charge. Any vehicles even bordering on fun or a good idea are going to be cancelled (and of course replaced by a penlight battery powered model). Mary hopes to run the company into the ground and give up market share. Keep any hope for a turn around in check. After all girls don’t wanna have fun. They want to keep in good standing with the greenies. Maybe I’ll get a ride on John Kerry’s personal jet. Or even Bill (the software glitch) gates.
Get on the bus you plebes. Nothings going to change while I’m in charge. I’m untouchable after all. I’m doing such a good job dropping popular models and helping the competition. Ha ha
Plus I’ve got my fan boys on this site that will tell you to relax. True plebes. I know best, so stifle.
I have been telling you people about lower case gm. This is what I meant, no competitive spirit, no bravado, no confidence in their abilities, always on the back foot retiring and retreating, canceling a potentially popular and profitable SUV is what lower case gm is all about. Forget the V8, just the existence of a bof midsized SUV is what would put gm in the fight.
The lower case gm speaks volumes about the company.
There was absolutely no reason to change that logo other than to look submissive and afraid.
Probably pushed by the same lefties/greenies that didn’t like the name Redskins.
Not building the Jimmy was an epic mistake. GM needs a Bronco/Wrangler rival–these are today’s “cool guy” equivalent to what vehicles like Camaro once represented. Also, Jimmy would help GMC continue to cultivate an image of Jeep rival which would better differentiate it from Chevy.
GM’s biggest problem is not building truly distant brands like FCA/Stellantis. An Arcadia and Terrain are no different than Buick or Chevy offerings except for A4 trim and Hummer. GMC could eventually command 1980s Olds market share if managed correctly
Back when the S-10, was the “Next Best Thing”, They kept teasing about putting a small block in them. NEVER happened. My son and I did it our selves. Then, we put solid Dana axles under it also. Both something GM should have done long before we did it. I agree,GM has constantly gone the opposite direction then they should. This ESG krap, is just that….KRAP. It will be the doom of American industry. This woke stuff is all a scam. All the wrong group of people, are reaping the benefits. not the American consumer. Lets stop all the nonsense, before it’s too late.
What I don’t understand is how the 4 cylinder gets the same MPG than the 6 cylinder in my 2016 Colorado? They go to a 4 cylinder for better MPG right?
Supposedly better MPG and lower emissions.
The I4 brings slightly more power and a lot more torque in a bigger, heavier vehicle. It might have done better in the old Colorado chassis. I wonder what a BMW B58 would do in a mid-sizer though…
Well, at least they didn’t try building it in China and importing it…
Who cares if they wanted too, they didn’t. They have lots of good ideas but the stuff that hits the market is mistakes like the Hummer EV, current Blazer. Camaro’s slit windows, 2019 truck interiors, etc.
The GM Bean Counters kill another model that is now red hot and GM is left twiddling their thumbs. This project needs to be brought back from the dead with or without the V8 and with an electrification option to make it viable as GM and other brands continue their changeover to electric propulsion.
How sad. Abandoned for their EV push meanwhile they could have been competing with the new Land Cruiser, the Wrangler, Bronco and 4Runner who continue to own the off road midsize segment. A Jimmy AT4X would have slotted right in with the big off road packaged Broncos and TRD Pro 4Runner.
The V8? Meh. Not needed with the TurboMax around other than to maybe have a niche option in the segment. It would have to be the 6.2 or bust if they did. 5.3 wouldn’t cut it.
I agree with many frustrated comments about what this could be. There should be a solution since everybody sees potential in this: A recognizable name for a real off roader, a booming market, good source of engines, EV production to offset any criticism from certain sectors, so what is the reason to stop it?, cost?. My take would be to grab a Yukon frame, reduce its size to the level of making it 2 doors or 2 doors and 2 half doors, strip it from major luxury items, stuff the V-8 that it already carries, give it its own design (or not, since we are talking about reducing costs) and give one to Chevy so they can come back with a K-5 and leverage the use of that frame. If the goal of building it without having to invest so much is accomplished, the success expectations would even help finance more EV programs. And that keeps both spectrums of customers happy. Wouldn’t it?
Wow, haven’t seen a comment section this heated for awhile! I like to be optimistic, but ultimately trying to understand what the right balance is. Surely there is a way to invest in EV technology while still putting some investment and development on ICE powertrains and producing cars that specific buyers want. Part of me feels they can make some great EVs and great ICE models at the same time, win in both arenas, they just need to have a solid plan for allocating resources and maintaining costs. SUVs use to always be built off truck platforms until the 1990s, I would like to think they could use this formula to create an off-road contender without breaking the bank and having a tough midsize SUV. Look at how well the 4Runner has been fairing despite an incredibly old platform.
Your optimism is lost on Mary. She has been more than vocal on committing to an all-EV company.
Yo morris, time for Mary to move on, like move onto a company she is fit to run. Like something she knows about. But she is the 1 percent of CEO’s who do it for the yearly bonus’s. Don’t care about the job , just the pay.