Mark Reuss on Autoline After Hours
Our new head of Global Vehicle Engineering Mark Reuss will be on Autoline After Hours tonight at 7 p.m. EDT and you can join the webcast right here on FastLane. Mark is the son of former GM President Lloyd Reuss and is back stateside from a stint down under running Holden. He is a certified car guy and has been known to throw a car or two around such famed race venues as the Bonneville Salt Flats in Utah and Nürburgring Nordschleife in Germany. Get your questions ready and join Mark, John McElroy, Peter Delorenzo and others right here on FastLane to talk cars, culture and customers with an engineering spin.
Free Videos by Ustream.TV
Pop-out Chat Window
Got questions for Rapid Fire? Put “AAH Question” in the subject line and e-mail it to viewermail@autolinedetroit.tv
Or, leave us a message by calling 1-620-624-9291 or by clicking below!
(Live show will continue)
Pop-out Chat Window
Got questions for Rapid Fire? Put “AAH Question” in the subject line and e-mail it to viewermail@autolinedetroit.tv
Or, leave us a message by calling 1-620-624-9291 or by clicking below!
(Live show will continue)
- Posted in Cars & Trucks
to this comment On October 30, 2009 at 9:14 pm Kurtis Knappe said:
Mark has to be one of the most down-to-earth guys. Great show
to this comment On October 31, 2009 at 5:13 am Andrew Charles said:
Thanks to John for asking my question, but I don’t think Mark really answered it. I never suggested the G8 was more efficient than the Malibu, but then the G8 only has a 5-speed auto, while the Malibu has a 6-speed—not a fair comparison. So let’s compare GM’s midsize sedans with 6-speed autos:
The old port injection 3.6 with 6-speed was available in both the rwd CTS and fwd Malibu. Which is more economical? The rwd CTS.
The new SIDI 3.6 with 6-speed auto is available in the new LaCrosse, CTS, STS and the Holden Commodore. The LaCrosse gets better mileage than the Malibu, but can’t match the rwd CTS or STS. The rwd Commodore with the 3.6 SIDI V6 and 6-speed auto gets as good or better mileage as the Accord—and no GM sedan in North America can match that. Which is most efficient? The rwd Commodore (the same car as the G8, but with rhd and new engines).
The new 3.0 SIDI V6 with 6-speed auto is available in the fwd LaCrosse and rwd CTS and Commodore. The rwd CTS is more economical than the fwd LaCrosse already, and GM has promised a version with 30 mpg hwy—even better than the Accord. The 3.0 L Commodore is also more economical than the Accord and may get even more than 30 mpg hwy. Again, rwd models win.
The 3.0 L SIDI with 6-speed auto and awd is also available on both the LaCrosse and CTS. The fwd based LaCrosse loses 2 mpg with awd, the rwd-based CTS, just 1 mpg, and the larger 3.6 L SIDI engine loses almost nothing with awd. Clearly the awd system GM uses in its rwd cars is far more efficient than that it uses for fwd cars. R/AWD wins over F/AWD for economy.
This situation is not unique to GM. In those few cases where automakers use the same engine paired with transverse or longitudinal transmissions, the longitudinal layout is always more economical, often by a large margin (compare the Citroen C6, Peugeot 607 with the Jaguar XF with the shared V6 diesels; compare the Lexus IS220d with the Toyota Auris and Avensis; compare the Passat with the A4—the packaging and transmission efficiencies of the longitudinal layout outweigh any “inherent” losses).
to this comment On November 2, 2009 at 2:56 pm Kurtis Knappe said:
My thoughts exactly.
There’s a strong case for the Commodore SV6 to come to NA. It gets 22 combined mpg and about 280 horsepower (if I’ve done my conversions correctly
.
So, it gets the same combined mpg of a V6 Accord, more horsepower, it’s RWD and it looks amazing.
to this comment On November 1, 2009 at 10:04 am Des Vadgama said:
Thanks for the insight, guys.
to this comment On November 1, 2009 at 4:54 pm SteveG said:
I can’t believe GM is putting the crappy 1.8L engine in the Cruze. Don’t you guys ever learn!?
Dumb name, lame powertrain, derivative styling=FAIL
to this comment On November 1, 2009 at 6:07 pm SierraGS said:
I was impressed by Mr. Ruess’s depth of knowledge about vehicle design and the challenges that lie ahead in weight reduction and efficiency gains and was very encouraged by the comment that “competitive” is not good enough and that GM vehicles should be the best in their segments.
Going from what I saw in August I know the GM designers, engineers and management are capable of doing this and I am anxious to see what they will offer going forward.
to this comment On November 1, 2009 at 9:41 pm Danny K. said:
I saw the interview and was thoroughly impressed with Mr. Reuss and what seemed at least to me to be a great depth of knowledge for the cars and a passion for the company. It left me scratching my head that a company such as GM could have such obviously talented and passionate people on board and end up in the fix that it’s in. It seems you guys have the talent and everything else it takes to be a world-class automobile company, but there is something disfunctional in your company and it gets in the way of your reaching those heights,
I am a loyal Honda customer, I currently drive a 2002 Acura TL I bought new. It’s about time for a replacement and I love the new Buick Lacrosse. Two things make me hesitate. First, I’ve read so-so reviews on the base V-6. Second, although I am thoroughly impressed with the car, I just am not to the point where I trust that you guys haven’t cheapened what’s underneath. Are you to the point yet where the underlying parts are going to have the same reliability as my Acura? Based on what I know about my family members and friends and their experience with GMC and Cadillac products, I’m inclined to believe not. Not that there is anything major that went wrong with them, just typical annoying GM-type components that fail and cost $300+ a pop and fairly regularly … a friend or mine who used to work at his grandfather’s (now his uncle’s) GM dealership says, “typical annoying GM stuff.”
Based on Mark’s comments, I know you guys are serious about making GM stand for world-class automobiles, so I want to tell you this: I don’t have those kinds of problems with my Acura. I also didn’t have them with my Honda Accords before that. Neither did my dad, my brother or my uncle. Your cars are pretty intriguing, but what can I say? I’m used to having the best (at least in my way of looking at things). That is the only thing that makes me hesitate about buying the Lacrosse.
Finally, I read an intriguing comment on another blog. Someone made an interesting comment about how GM executives get to drive new automobiles all the time. The person commenting on a story mentioned that GM should buy a bunch of 5 to 8 year-old GM cars (and cars of the competition) and instead have executives driving them around for comparison.
Anyway, great interview, I wish you guys the best.
to this comment On November 1, 2009 at 11:41 pm Mike C said:
Mark Reuss talked about getting customers to try GM again. Putting the best warranty in the auto business on the cars is what it will take to win the customer over.
You earned your bad reputation for your products over a period of time. Unless you want people to wait for 10 years of good product to start buying GM cars again, you must provide a compelling reason to buy now, which is to say, a 7 year/100,000 mile warranty or longer would get the buyers back and considering GM again. Without the better warranty, I will not buy a GM car again, after having bought 4 GM cars in the past, including 2 with engine failures.
If you believe that your cars are best, as in “May the best car win,” you must prove you believe the slogan by backing them better.
to this comment On November 9, 2009 at 4:27 am Rick Rohde said:
Smart move bringing the Insignia over, Now if we could just get the Commodore back as an Impala, the Caprice, and the new Astra in coupe, sedan, and five door you might really have something and with Mark at his new job, maybe we will see some good, I mean’t the best results.
to this comment On November 14, 2009 at 11:44 pm CarZ said:
GM has their work cut out for them after the past bismal 21+ months or so. Anything you put out at this point has to be comparable or better to gain consumer confidence. GM is a proud name in American automaking history. I believe they can gain back that title, but they’ll have to earn it back.
to this comment On November 16, 2009 at 9:25 pm kenZ300 said:
How about GM buying the best selling vehicle in each class and making it available for it’s executives to drive home for a week on a rotating car basis. Maybe they would get an idea of what makes those vehicles number one in their respective class. Then come back and make something that is far superior because the competition is already building a better upgraded model.
to this comment On November 17, 2009 at 11:02 am Jock Sinclair said:
Ken,
You’re partly right. But instead of GM buying the cars for the execs, the execs need to go incognito to dealers in the Detroit area and buy them. That way they can evaluate directly the dealer experience.
Also, when their cars need maintenance, instead of handing the keys to a secretary in the morning and getting a good-as-new car back in the afternoon, they also should personally take their cars to a dealer in the Detroit area — again incognito — so they can evaluate directly what kind of service they receive.
Mr Henderson, Mr Lutz, and Ms Docherty should evaluate directly how they get treated at all kinds of dealers. It’s hard to manage something if they don’t have a direct feel for what they are supposed to be managing.
to this comment On November 23, 2009 at 1:50 am KenZ300 said:
I like it….. Sounds like a plan for management to get closer to their customers and their dealers.
Now will GM executives do it ??
to this comment On November 23, 2009 at 11:42 am Jock Sinclair said:
It’s doubtful. Apparently the execs have private elevators from the top of the Ren Cen that don’t even stop at the floors below where the GM worker bees toil away. It sounds as though they don’t want feedback, even from their fellow GM employees.