CONTENTS:
GM Unveils Interior Occupant Sensor.
Our E-mail Address: samgauto@samscars.com Our Phone Number Is 508-999-3213
|
|
General Motors has developed new technology designed to help prevent
children from dying or becoming seriously ill in dangerously hot vehicles.
GM and the National SAFE KIDS Campaign released data indicating that at
least 120 children-most of them age 3 and under-have died of heatstroke
in hot, parked cars since 1996. To address this problem, GM has designed
a new low-energy radar sensor and publicized a public awareness campaign.
The sensor technology is so sophisticated that it can detect motion as
subtle as the breathing of an infant sleeping in a child safety seat. "We
are targeting a sensor like this for certain vans and full-size utilities,"
said GM Vice Chairman Harry Pearce. "We intend to begin this rollout
in the 2004 calendar year, to alert care givers or passersby about the
presence of an unattended child in a potentially dangerous, hot vehicle."
The sensor will focus primarily in the rear seating area, where children
are most likely to be. Once it detects that a child or another living being,
such as a pet, is present and that the
temperature is at or is likely to increase to potentially dangerous levels, the sensor will trigger the horn to sound three distinct chirps, similar to the "S" in an SOS distress signal. Extreme heat affects infants and small children more quickly and dramatically than adults. Heatstroke, or hyperthermia, occurs when the body's temperature reaches 105F. Dr. Bar-Or's research revealed that the air temperature in a car exposed to the sun on a 95 degree day can exceed 122 degrees within 20 minutes and 150 degrees within 40 minutes. Leaving a window slightly open on a hot, sunny day may do little to prevent the heat inside a vehicle from rising to a level that's dangerous for children, vulnerable adults and pets. Because of the misconception that opening the windows may make a difference, and because of a general lack of awareness about this issue, GM, in partnership with the National SAFE KIDS Campaign, will immediately launch a public education effort. The campaign, called "Never Leave Your Child Alone," will caution parents and care givers not to leave children unattended in vehicles, and to always keep cars locked while they're in garages or driveways.
 Quite
a few of our customers
were nice enough to pass along comments to me that they enjoyed my style of writing in the last "My Turn" article. Well, you asked for more, so, here it is.
While we're were on the subject of transmitters, I'd like to share another incident with you that centered around a similar problem. A customer came in this June to request another keyless entry transmitter for her 92 Oldsmobile Cutlas Cieria. I ordered the part, ($99.00, another factory overpriced part, my opinion of course), and called the customer to come by so I could program it to the car. The procedure in the 1992 Cieria service manual is much shorter than the one for the Toyota. That's the good news. The bad news? The service manual is wrong for the 1992 model year. The procedure in the 92 Cieria service manual said to: 1) Turn the ignition off. 2) Jump together terminals A and B of the ALDL (Assembly Line Diagnostic Link) connector under the left hand dash. 3) Press unlock on one transmitter. 4) Press unlock on the second transmitter. 5) Disconnect the jumper wire. Well, let me tell you, I must have done this procedure about six times. The new transmitter would never work. (I was ready to strangle either the transmitter or the car). Fortunately, this customer was also very patient. I decided to return to our in-shop library and pull the service manual for a year older car, a 1991 Cieria. The procedure for the 1991 was totally different. That procedure said to 1) Access the remote entry connector, (green in color), in the trunk under the left rear wheelhouse trim. 2) Put a screwdriver between the two terminals in the connector to join them together. 3) Push any button on the first transmitter. 4) Push any button on the second transmitter. 5) Remove the screwdriver and reseat the trunk trim. It worked! But why did I have to use a 1991 procedure on a 1992 car? Why did the 1992 procedure not work? Alas, it brings back memories of one of my General Motors instructors. In the past, a GM instructor told us in class that the acceptable error in a service manual for any car is 20%. Meaning that, if a typical service manual for one car is about 1,000 pages long, in that manual, it is acceptable to have a maximum of 200 incorrect pages. According to him, the manual has to be at the dealership by the time the first new car is. Due to that rush on engineering and publishing, this 20% margin of error is considered acceptable. I think that this error rate is way too high! No wonder technicians spend a portion of their day trying to figure these cars out. Even the factory service manuals are wrong! Remember, the repair work we do can only be as good as the printed service manual. If the reference information from the factory is incorrect, how good will a repair be based on flawed instructions? Who has to take the blame when something goes wrong? And, how does that end up being the technician's fault? Don't make me go there! Then there was a recent little situation with my car, a 1997 Nissan.
Several weeks ago the alternator started making a whining sound. Not really
new to me as I have recently seen a pattern of 1997 Nissans needing alternators
at low mileage. All replacement alternators today are rebuilt, whether
you purchase them from the dealer or from an aftermarket source. Both the
dealer part and the aftermarket part come with the same 12 month / 12,000
mile warranty. In addition, the aftermarket part has a considerably lower
cost. With the lower cost combined with the same warranty, we normally
suggest our customers use the aftermarket part. I figured I would be special
and opt for the genuine Nissan alternator. Well, try putting it in. First
you have to either pull the radiator completely out, or, if your brave,
pull the right front wheel off, remove the air conditioner compressor,
swing it aside, then pull the alternator. Although I'm only 34, its getting
tiring working on cars during the day only to go home at night and work
on your own car. (One of the reasons I bought an Asian car. Less repairs,
or so I thought). Anyway, I opted to have our brave staff replace the alternator.
Nelson was the lucky one to get stuck with such a fun job. After pulling
the wheel and air compressor, the old alternator came out relatively easily.
Now try putting in the new one. Well, it has to be the same size as the
one that came out. Oh, really? Not! The Nissan replacement alternator has
a larger bracket than the original alternator's design. Like most things
in automotive, manufactures seem to have a strange mentality. "Design the
new one so it will also barely fit the older models, so that we only have
to make one type." Well, I'm getting sick and tired of that rationale.
The replacement Nissan, or shall I call it "fits all" alternator has a
wider yoke bracket than the original. As a result, the alternator bolt
just barely catches two or three threads. This did not seem right to me.
Especially where I bought the genuine Nissan replacement. I called a friend
at the Nissan dealer. He told me that it was the correct one and, yes,
the mounting bolt will hold it, but just barely. Thinking back to last
month, we had another 97 Nissan that needed an alternator, yet we did not
have this trouble. How come? On that car, we elected to use the aftermarket
alternator. In that case, the alternator rebuilder rebuilds the old unit
so you get an alternator back with the same case and bracket. Serves me
right for trying to be different. Well, my car's on the road again. I hope
those two or three bolt threads that are holding it in will not give way
on our local bumpy roads. If you see an alternator lying somewhere in the
street, please pick it up, it might be mine.
The company said that many of the non-recalled Wilderness AT tires on the road today appear to perform substantially better than the tires recalled last year. However, analysis of real world performance data, information from NHTSA and lab and vehicle testing indicate that some of the non-recalled Wilderness AT tires will probably experience elevated failure rates at some time in the future. Specifically, the company's decision to replace all Wilderness AT tires on its vehicles is based on several factors, including: Field data, which is real world tire performance data, recently received from Firestone showed that failure rates had increased for some of the Wilderness AT tires. Projections indicate that the failure rates, while still relatively low compared with tires recalled last year, could reach unusually high levels in the future. Information shared by NHTSA showed that failure rates in actual road performance for many of the non-recalled Wilderness AT tires were measurably worse than comparable tires from other manufacturers. Laboratory and vehicle testing by Ford shows that tire design and variations in physical characteristics of the non-recalled Wilderness AT tires make them less durable than comparable tires from other manufacturers. The comparable tires include Goodyear tires on more than 500,000 Explorers. These test results are consistent with the NHTSA information and the real world data described above. Given the consistency among results from Firestone, NHTSA and Ford's own data, the company concluded that it does not have sufficient confidence in the future performance of some of the Wilderness AT tires and that it will take the precautionary measure of replacing all Wilderness AT tires on its customers' vehicles. William Clay Ford, Jr., chairman of Ford Motor Company, said, "Today's announcement to replace Wilderness AT tires reflects our deep-seated conviction that customer safety always comes first. Ford will be replacing twice as many tires as last year, and the company is working with other major tire manufacturers to expand the supply of replacement tires as rapidly as possible. Initial details of the program: The company is replacing all 15, 16, and 17 inch Wilderness AT tires
on Ford Motor Company
Walter Ulewicz Jr., born in New Bedford, he spent his early years in New Bedford and lived in Fairhaven for 13 years before moving to Rochester 18 years ago. Mr. Ulewicz was employed for the past nine years as a stationary engineer for Myrant Co. in Sandwich, formerly ComElectric. He had previously been employed as a stationary engineer with ComElectric in New Bedford for a year, Brayton Point in Somerset for five years and Acushnet Co. for 10 years. He earned his associate's degree in business management from Newbury Junior College in New Bedford. Mr. Ulewicz was a Navy veteran, serving in the Cuban conflict and as a master sergeant in the Air National Guard for more than 20 years. He was active with the Coast Guard Auxiliary, Flotilla 67, in Marion, where he was the vessel safety check examiner and the marine dealer visitor. Mr. Ulewicz Jr. held AUXOP and was a coxswain and air observer-in-training. He had served as past vice commander for the unit. Calvin C. MacKay, born in New Bedford, he lived in the city most of his life. He was a member of the First Church of the Nazarene in New Bedford. Mr. MacKay was a fork-lift operator for 28 years for Velvet Drive Transmissions of New Bedford. He was a member of the United Auto Workers Union. He enjoyed golfing.
|
|
|
|
|
