Dumass car makers!!

Thomas Moats opined in news:utCcnTU8i4 snipped-for-privacy@comcast.com:

And not just kids....

But that's where intuitive learning and Darwin rules come in.

Point being the automakers need to be picking their battles... it's stupid to not be proactive on the switches.

I don't like gizmos like that anyway, but I think those dumbass tree-huggers need a good shooting in the face.

The the driver of the GT know he was in a race? LOL

mike hunt

Stephan Rose wrote:

Thomas Moats opined in news: snipped-for-privacy@comcast.com:

Well, sorta... the complaint is that 3-5 year olds were leaning out windows and putting knees on the window switches and strangling themselves..

Dont ask me why the keys were left on

The switch being easy to modify as per the Mitsu (pull up) type.. it's stupid to keep the rocker type.

at 20 Aug 2003, J Alex [ snipped-for-privacy@nospamx.info] wrote in news:vdP0b.16523$ snipped-for-privacy@nwrddc02.gnilink.net:

In Europe a few years back I believe it became mandatory to have pressure sensors on power windows just because of the kid accidents. So the technology should be readily available. I believe the method used is the same as the 'pressure sensitive' method used on garage door openers. But I believe they stop rather than move back. I'd have to call my dad and have him check his new car to see what it does...

The sad part is not just the people injured, but the stupid parents who are too busy to keep an eye on their children when they're in the car. My children are in their 30's now and neither of them was ever hurt by a closing door or an electric window while they were living with me. Of course, I didn't have a cell phone, pager, PDA, or notebook to distract me when I was getting the kids ready for a trip. Of course, that's just my opinion- I may be wrong (to quote Dennis Miller). Tom F.

"Mike King" wrote

Well, crank-starts weren't defective, but I'm glad we have electronic ignition.... It doesn't have to be defective to be designed better.

I agree that parents should be more watchful. But I also think that if a potentially dangerous situation can be designed away at little or no cost, it should be.

It the new American way to riches, screw up then blame someone else for you mistake and sue. ;)

mike hunt

JS wrote:

That is what I thought. Think of this. Would you leave a child in the car with the engine off and the windows rolled up on a hot summers day? Of course you would not, why? Well read the papers on any given summers day and you will see just that scenario resulting in a dead or near dead child. Now who's fault is that? the parents or the manufactures because there is not a placard in the car telling you not to do that? Point is, no child should be left unattended in a vehicle with or with out the keys in the ignition. If power windows were not the issue then being locked in would be. If being locked in were not the issue then it would be the hot metal of the safety buckles burning little hands. Children do not belong in a vehicle by them selves no matter what the situation period.

I'll bet that child was unsupervised. So you should be asking why was that child allowed to be in that situation?

I feel it stupid to have to have warning placards, special switches, and anything like that to avoid a injury because of someone's stupidity. It aint just happening in cars, look at hair dryers for example.

A shunt in series with the window drive motor. The voltage across the shunt is directly proportional to motor current which is directly proportional to motor effort. This voltage could be used to stop or reverse the motor at a predetermined point. Of course, this doesn't address the parental issue. And, this issue differs substantially from your garage door example: there's no key or operator license required to operate a garage door.

There is nothing wrong with the switch, it's design is just fine.

It's funny. People complain about too much government interference. Yet by this statement, that is exactly what you want.

"Thomas Moats" wrote

Who's talking about government interference? I thought we were talking about Ford making their vehicle safer.

Faulty engineering? Is it faulty engineering when some one becomes electrocuted because they were using hair dryer in the shower? It happens, why do you think there is a warning placard on the electric cord advising you not to do so? There is nothing faulty in the design of the switches. The only thing faulty I see is your reasoning.

Greg B. opined in news:nVO0b.158930$Oz4.43374@rwcrnsc54:

Do a search on this group and note all the complaints about slow and sluggish windows.

This would be directly reflected in the current draw and a constant source of complaint... it wont work, except when the cars are new.

Besides THEN you'd have to have a limit switch on up and down positions..

Thats why I dont understand why they dont use the lift-switch.

Bad example and written incorrectly at that. (electronic ignition replaced points, should be electric start) The same usage ease that you cite for electric starter motors could be applied to push button power window switches. Some people find the push button type easier to use. (like me)

No, the example was fine. He said: "Why should a manufacturer need to change something that isn't defective." I gave an example something that wasn't defective, but was a good candidate for re-design.

Yes, a slip on my part.

Sure. So recess them.

Because electric start is much easier to use than hand cranking. The same damn reason electric windows replaced hand cranked ones.