PT CRUISER THE WAY TO GO

Matt Whiting wrote:
> SRG wrote:
>
>> Another problem that seems to be cropping up more and mo The
>> multi-function switch, which controls the lights, fog lights,
>> high-beams, dome (interior)lights and turn signals, fails and works
>> erratically.
>
>
> This isn't unique to the PT. I've replaced the one on my 96 GV as well
> as my 94 Chevy K1500.
>
>
> Matt
>

I have never seen a good multi-function switch. They all have problems
because of all of the functions, and therefore connections and switches,
required in such a small space.

I have replaced them on Toyota Tercels, Dodge Neons, a Ford Taurus and
a Ford Escort GT.

Put the damned switches on the dash and reach, once in a while, it might
be good exercise! |>)

Dan

The worse is GM. THey must have a contest to decide how many functions can
go on one stalk so it cannot be figured out while driving.


"Dan Gates" > wrote in message
...
> Matt Whiting wrote:
>> SRG wrote:
>>
>>> Another problem that seems to be cropping up more and mo The
>>> multi-function switch, which controls the lights, fog lights,
>>> high-beams, dome (interior)lights and turn signals, fails and works
>>> erratically.
>>
>>
>> This isn't unique to the PT. I've replaced the one on my 96 GV as well
>> as my 94 Chevy K1500.
>>
>>
>> Matt
>>
>
> I have never seen a good multi-function switch. They all have problems
> because of all of the functions, and therefore connections and switches,
> required in such a small space.
>
> I have replaced them on Toyota Tercels, Dodge Neons, a Ford Taurus and a
> Ford Escort GT.
>
> Put the damned switches on the dash and reach, once in a while, it might
> be good exercise! |>)
>
> Dan
>
>

The worse is GM. THey must have a contest to decide how many functions can
go on one stalk so it cannot be figured out while driving.


"Dan Gates" > wrote in message
...
> Matt Whiting wrote:
>> SRG wrote:
>>
>>> Another problem that seems to be cropping up more and mo The
>>> multi-function switch, which controls the lights, fog lights,
>>> high-beams, dome (interior)lights and turn signals, fails and works
>>> erratically.
>>
>>
>> This isn't unique to the PT. I've replaced the one on my 96 GV as well
>> as my 94 Chevy K1500.
>>
>>
>> Matt
>>
>
> I have never seen a good multi-function switch. They all have problems
> because of all of the functions, and therefore connections and switches,
> required in such a small space.
>
> I have replaced them on Toyota Tercels, Dodge Neons, a Ford Taurus and a
> Ford Escort GT.
>
> Put the damned switches on the dash and reach, once in a while, it might
> be good exercise! |>)
>
> Dan
>
>

Art wrote:

> The worse is GM. THey must have a contest to decide how many functions can
> go on one stalk so it cannot be figured out while driving.
>

No, I think the European makers won that war hands down back in the 80s.
Some of those cars didn't have a single important control left on the
dash, and have extra stalks added to the column to carry all the
switches :-p

Art wrote:

> The worse is GM. THey must have a contest to decide how many functions can
> go on one stalk so it cannot be figured out while driving.
>

No, I think the European makers won that war hands down back in the 80s.
Some of those cars didn't have a single important control left on the
dash, and have extra stalks added to the column to carry all the
switches :-p

Dan Gates wrote:

> Matt Whiting wrote:
>
>> SRG wrote:
>>
>>> Another problem that seems to be cropping up more and mo The
>>> multi-function switch, which controls the lights, fog lights,
>>> high-beams, dome (interior)lights and turn signals, fails and works
>>> erratically.
>>
>>
>>
>> This isn't unique to the PT. I've replaced the one on my 96 GV as
>> well as my 94 Chevy K1500.
>>
>>
>> Matt
>>
>
> I have never seen a good multi-function switch. They all have problems
> because of all of the functions, and therefore connections and switches,
> required in such a small space.
>
> I have replaced them on Toyota Tercels, Dodge Neons, a Ford Taurus and
> a Ford Escort GT.
>
> Put the damned switches on the dash and reach, once in a while, it might
> be good exercise! |>)
>
> Dan
>
>

Personally, I liked the foot operated dimmer switches better than the
stalk ones. The only downside there was that they tended to corrode
after a few years in our PA winters.


Matt

Dan Gates wrote:

> Matt Whiting wrote:
>
>> SRG wrote:
>>
>>> Another problem that seems to be cropping up more and mo The
>>> multi-function switch, which controls the lights, fog lights,
>>> high-beams, dome (interior)lights and turn signals, fails and works
>>> erratically.
>>
>>
>>
>> This isn't unique to the PT. I've replaced the one on my 96 GV as
>> well as my 94 Chevy K1500.
>>
>>
>> Matt
>>
>
> I have never seen a good multi-function switch. They all have problems
> because of all of the functions, and therefore connections and switches,
> required in such a small space.
>
> I have replaced them on Toyota Tercels, Dodge Neons, a Ford Taurus and
> a Ford Escort GT.
>
> Put the damned switches on the dash and reach, once in a while, it might
> be good exercise! |>)
>
> Dan
>
>

Personally, I liked the foot operated dimmer switches better than the
stalk ones. The only downside there was that they tended to corrode
after a few years in our PA winters.


Matt

"Matt Whiting" > wrote in message
...
>
> Personally, I liked the foot operated dimmer switches better than the
> stalk ones. The only downside there was that they tended to corrode after
> a few years in our PA winters.
>
>
> Matt
>

I remember those too. I don't remember a corrosion issue with them though.
Actually, I don't like controls on a stalk at all. In addition to the floor
dimmer switch, I prefer all controls mounted on the dash. I want the stalk
to only operate the signals.

"Matt Whiting" > wrote in message
...
>
> Personally, I liked the foot operated dimmer switches better than the
> stalk ones. The only downside there was that they tended to corrode after
> a few years in our PA winters.
>
>
> Matt
>

I remember those too. I don't remember a corrosion issue with them though.
Actually, I don't like controls on a stalk at all. In addition to the floor
dimmer switch, I prefer all controls mounted on the dash. I want the stalk
to only operate the signals.

James C. Reeves wrote:
> "Matt Whiting" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>Personally, I liked the foot operated dimmer switches better than the
>>stalk ones. The only downside there was that they tended to corrode after
>>a few years in our PA winters.
>>
>>
>>Matt
>>
>
>
> I remember those too. I don't remember a corrosion issue with them though.
> Actually, I don't like controls on a stalk at all. In addition to the floor
> dimmer switch, I prefer all controls mounted on the dash. I want the stalk
> to only operate the signals.
>
>

Depends on where you live. A few trips across a salted parking lot and
then depress the switch a few times with your salt and water covered
shoes, and after a few years you are ready for a new switch. The good
news is that they were cheap and easy to replace. no need to
disassemble half of the steering column.


Matt