Pontiac Solstice Forum banner

1 - 20 of 32 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
72 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Power or Manual? This Pic from Autoweek shows what seems to be a manual window arm on the Pssenger side, and a set of buttons for power windows on the drivers side.

I just caught it and thought it was Odd.
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,570 Posts
That's a conceptual mock up of the interior I believe. It has both so they can see how the manual cranks and the power buttons would look. From this I would say that they are planning the base 20k Solstice to have cranks and power optional. Fine with me. I'm still not too old and feeble to be able to crank a window up and down. :cheers
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,901 Posts
The first image I've attached is a 1500x1150 of the production Solstice interior with just power windows.

Looking at these images again though I have two questions. In the second and third image I've circled in red two items. Anyone know what they are? The button is very close to the ignition area, and juts out fairly far from the console compared to the other buttons. It has what looks like a half circle with a line jutting up from the bottom to either a sun/star/gear like item. Is this another OnStar button of some type? If so why is there another onstar button on the visor still, and I've never seen that design before too. I want to guess starter button maybe if it's not onstar? Not really sure though from the image on it.
Here's the unedited [IMAGE].
The last image is a quick drawing of what I think it looks like.

The other item is the rectangular shaped area circled in red. Looks like it might almost be a compartment or some sort of display area like what's with the guages.

Anyone got any ideas on these?
 

Attachments

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,206 Posts
The square thing is an indicator for both passenger occupancy (and whether to partially or fully supress the passenger airbag based on whether it is a small occupant or normal weight/size occupant or any occupant at all) and whether they have a seat belt on.

The round button is the adjuster for night lighting intensity.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,901 Posts
Ahh, ha. I was pretty sure they were something simple. I've never seen the passenger airbag sensors before besides the one in a Silverado, and that's on the rear view mirror. Same with the light dimmer, I'm used to a much different style of dimmer switch that's in my car.
 

·
Mod Emeritus
Joined
·
7,468 Posts
Good observation on that window crank! I have never noticed it, but sure enough it is there.

I would suspect power windows to be an option. GM has to leave something off for the car to hit their $20K price point. Crank windows is fine with me, so long as I can reach the crank from the drivers seat (although I’d likely order power as an option). My Fiero has crank windows and they are a real PITA. I cannot reach the passenger door window without pushing myself out of the seat and lying across the center tunnel. Its still hard to reach after all that! Its much easier to get out and walk around the car to operate it, which is not all that convenient either.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,266 Posts
My daily driver Ford Ranger has crank windows, and I'm fine with it. But man, I miss electric mirrors. I'll never do without them again. Every trip to the car wash is just a beating. Getting out, adjusting the passenger side mirror, getting in, getting out, adjusting again...etc....
 

·
Senior Member
Joined
·
4,592 Posts
No body mentioned the operational/repair cost of electric windows, i've seen so many fairly older cars with broken electric windows, and it seems the cranks hold out longer, but I could be wrong. I prefer cranks in thinking less to go wrong with the vehicle (this being I hold onto my cars for years, I'm not a leasee). Let's hear from those of you that might think electric windows are not a long term cost issue, maybe you can swing my vote!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
275 Posts
GM did "something" (added a circuit breaker ?) to the power window motors around 1987 and used them through about 1995 that would fail and the window would rise an inch, stop, wait a minute, raise another inch, etc. I have never had a replacement motor fail.

Anyone have more specific information ?

Personally like power windows since is often hard to reach the passenger side when belted in.
 

·
Mod Emeritus
Joined
·
7,468 Posts
RODEO said:
No body mentioned the operational/repair cost of electric windows, i've seen so many fairly older cars with broken electric windows, and it seems the cranks hold out longer, but I could be wrong. I prefer cranks in thinking less to go wrong with the vehicle (this being I hold onto my cars for years, I'm not a leasee). Let's hear from those of you that might think electric windows are not a long term cost issue, maybe you can swing my vote!
I cannot disagree that power windows add to the complexity of a car, and the extra mechanical bits make it more likely that a failure could occur. However, I do not think it is a problem to be overly concerned with. Most cars do not suffer tons of power window failures. Sure some have power window motors burn out and need replacement, and that is a pain. Crank windows should work until the end of time. Yet, I have seen tons of very old cars with high mileage on their original power window motors. I do not think bad power window motors is an epidemic.

That said, there is nothing wrong sticking to crank windows if you are concerned about a power window problem down the road. They definitely would be less likely to fail. Its really about whether you think the convenience of having the power is worth the risk of failure and their added purchase cost or not. As I said, I’d definitely want them if I cannot easily reach the passenger door crank. What a hassle that is! If I can reach the crank easily, then its not a big deal to have them IMO.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
275 Posts
Had the tape crank window in my son's GA fail and it was a real PITA to change. Hardest thing about a power window motor is driving the centers out of the rivets (had a few that would not budge with a normal hammer).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
53 Posts
padgett said:
Had the tape crank window in my son's GA fail and it was a real PITA to change. Hardest thing about a power window motor is driving the centers out of the rivets (had a few that would not budge with a normal hammer).
Padgett has a valid point, power window motors are a lot easier to replace than the crank tape. Both power and crank windows can fail. The ratio of power to crank windows is far higher now a days, so naturally you will more about power window problems than you will crank. All my vehicles have power windows and my Solstice will be no exception. Here's a tech tip, next time pop those rivets out with 1/4" drill bit.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
275 Posts
I have no problem drilling the rivets out once the centers are driven out with a drift. Sometimes they are easy but a couple (driver's side of the 90 Bonne was an example) it takes a really big hammer. Drill will not bite if the center is extended even a few thousandths.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,570 Posts
I agree with the argument that manual cranks are more reliable, and if stone cold reliability in a window mechanism is important to you, I would say get the manual cranks. They should last the life of the car. Cranking the passenger side in a roadster shouldn't be that hard because it's relitively close, but there is something cool about power windows, as long as they're working. I also agree with ARP, electric mirrors are actually more important to me than electric windows, I'm sure that they will come together in a convienience package.

The only other agrument in favor of cranks is weight. You might be able to save as much as 7-8 lbs if you delete the electric windows and mirrors. That's not a lot of weight, but for people who are obsessed with weight to the point they are willing to spend tons of money on cabonfiber hoods to maybe save 10 or 15 lbs, it should be a consideration. Personaly, I could swayed either way. It will all depend on the option packages.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,844 Posts
Would the fact that it's a roadster have any bearing on the life of the window motors? I know we don't plan on getting the interior wet, but it happens. For that matter, will we all be discussing underdash electrical gremlims a few years from now?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,206 Posts
AeroDave said:
...

The only other agrument in favor of cranks is weight. You might be able to save as much as 7-8 lbs if you delete the electric windows and mirrors. That's not a lot of weight, but for people who are obsessed with weight to the point they are willing to spend tons of money on cabonfiber hoods to maybe save 10 or 15 lbs, it should be a consideration. Personaly, I could swayed either way. It will all depend on the option packages.
Believe it or not, I have it on good authority (from a friend who supplies window crank and an interior systems for many OEM vehicles) that in some cases, pwr windows are actually lighter than their crank counterparts. In worst cases nowadays, crank windows only save about 24 oz total on the whole car weight. I believe the corvette is actually a wash as far as weight goes.

So, get your power windows and before you go out, just hit the bathroom :thumbs
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,570 Posts
solsticeman said:
Believe it or not, I have it on good authority (from a friend who supplies window crank and an interior systems for many OEM vehicles) that in some cases, pwr windows are actually lighter than their crank counterparts.
I believe it. Electric motor technology is so much more efficient than it used to be, that motors can be alot smaller. I'm not against power windows now, I'll probably end up getting them in my Solstice, but having repaired power systems and AC systems in older 50's and 60's cars has made me prejudiced against them for reliability reasons for many years. I used to say I don't want power anything and no AC in my new cars, but time has shown me that those systems are much better now, and I'm getting over it. My last car has gone almost 10 years without really having to charge the AC and nothing has failed. So I feel better about being too lazy to crank up the windows! :rolleyes
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,844 Posts
To me, the biggest advancement in the last 20 years ('84 vs '04) is reliablity, both in drive train and ancillary systems. Yes, gas mileage has gotten better, from 20MPG to 25MPG or 25%. And performance has gotten better by almost 50%. But most of the things that used to break at 75,000 miles are still working (to some degree) at 150,000, or a 100% improvement! Of course, this is partially offset by the increase in cost. But, adjusted for inflation, that's still less than a 30% price jump.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
275 Posts
I have a theory on that 8*) First cars are generally lighter than they used to be which meeans less stress on the drivetrain. Tires grip a lot better so you do not have a lot of tire slip/stop - jerks are terrible on longetivity.

Machining tolerances are a lot better but so are the additives in premium motor oils and the filters seem finer.

One big reason is more gears and *much* lower cruise RPM - in 1970 most engines were turning over 3000 rpm at 70. Today it is 2000. And the "high miles" cars that last tend to have mostly "highway miles".

Final bit is much better rustproofing - is surprising how many thirty, forty, and fifty year old cars you see still driving in areas that do not rust (part of the reason I live in Central Florida, 50 miles from the nearest coast).

So all of these bits together lead to 200,000 mile cars where 100,000 was considered "all done" thutty yar ago.
 
1 - 20 of 32 Posts
Top