Windows

[35th02ss]

Well here is a thought everyone. You forgot about the vert. The rear windows in the vert are going to have to roll down. No question about it.

[Moose]

Originally Posted by 35th02ss

Well here is a thought everyone. You forgot about the vert. The rear windows in the vert are going to have to roll down. No question about it.

GREAT point! hmm..........

[2001ragtop]

Originally Posted by 35th02ss

Well here is a thought everyone. You forgot about the vert. The rear windows in the vert are going to have to roll down. No question about it.

I was going to say the same thing.

Also, I am sure people would revolt that for the high price tag, the window doesn't come down.

[TAG UR IT]

The rear windows on the convertable will roll down. Convertibles receive a waiver in the crash testing scores. There won't be a problem w/ that. But, the coupe is another story...they want a B-pillar for the crash test rating (which makes absolutely no freaking sense to me seeing as though the vert does not need a rating......it can just crumple like a tin can). This is just kind of a let down for me. I want the full "open air" experience.

[ChevyNut]

you could take a hammer and bust it out, however it may be hard to roll it up later. jk I dont care either way i just want one now!!

[TAG UR IT]

Yeah........thinkin about it.

That back window will most likely be fixed. This SUCKS. I wonder how difficult it would be to fix them to roll down....seriously. Shoot...probably cost a cool grand in body work, fabricating parts, etc.

[gurulu68]

Hi guys, I've been visiting this site for a while and I finally had a comment to add. On the case of the rear windows working on the coupe, I would say they probably are going to work because they are going to work on the convertable. And GM is not going to stamp 2 completely different quarter panels for the coupe and conv., when they can slightly modify the stamping machine to put out both quarters. At least thats what I think.

[Mr. Wyndham]

Makes sense - money is every thing...but remember They will be building this thing on a flex line...from what I've read, one of the best in the world...there are others but this one's up there. Anyways it will give them more variation power.

[TAG UR IT]

This is pretty tough for me to say, but I have a very STRONG feeling the coupe w/ have fixed rear windows and the vert will have functional windows.... This is due to safety crash test standards. And I think we'll get a clean look at solid 2 piece glass minus a B-pillar from the outside, while having a B-pillar in place....if you follow.

[Silverado]

Tag, I kind of think you're right. Now, that setup would be fine by me if they use it to their advantage and put t-tops in the thing....I'd be just fine with the fixed rear quarter window if they give it t-tops.

[Al Robinson]

Originally Posted by TAG UR IT

This is pretty tough for me to say, but I have a very STRONG feeling the coupe w/ have fixed rear windows and the vert will have functional windows.... This is due to safety crash test standards. And I think we'll get a clean look at solid 2 piece glass minus a B-pillar from the outside, while having a B-pillar in place....if you follow.

You seem to have some pretty good inside info..you lucky devil. However why is it that the Mercedes CLK 500 AND the CLS 550 have a both front and rear roll down windows and present a true coupe and still retain the crash test ratings that they do? The structural support in the case of the CLS 550 between the front and rear doors below the beltline is just that a structural support, not a "B" pillar. If I remember my automotive terminology, the "B" pillar is the one that separates the front window from the back above the beltline. Any coupe that has both front and rear windows that roll down does not have a "B" pillar.

[Silverado]

Originally Posted by Al Robinson

You seem to have some pretty good inside info..you lucky devil. However why is it that the Mercedes CLK 500 AND the CLS 550 have a both front and rear roll down windows and present a true coupe and still retain the crash test ratings that they do? The structural support in the case of the CLS 550 between the front and rear doors below the beltline is just that a structural support, not a "B" pillar. If I remember my automotive terminology, the "B" pillar is the one that separates the front window from the back above the beltline. Any coupe that has both front and rear windows that roll down does not have a "B" pillar.

But, you're talking about a 50K car (or more) too....they can afford to put a little more in structural rigidity below the beltline and around the passenger compartment when they don't care about things like cost, weight, or even performance (although I know both of those cars perform pretty well). When you're trying to put out a performance/muscle car that needs to perform well, weigh in at a reasonable weight (unlike the Stangs) and cost a reasonable amount (in order price them to sell while still making a profit), you have to worry about those kinds of things.

I agree with Tag, I don't think the coupe's rear windows will roll down. I think there will be a B-pillar, probably covered by glass/black plastic to hide it and that will be it. The convertible's rear windows will roll down (hopefully automatically so you don't see some jackass driving with the top and front windows down, but the back windows up...I hate that....).

And, again, if they have to have to have the B-pillar for structural/crash test ratings, then for the love of God, please put T-tops in the thing.

So far GM, you're doing this right....don't screw it up and not take it all the way....give us those t-tops as an option.

[MerF]

Doh.

Started to post, did some research and luckily stopped myself before sounding too stupid.

However, I can still comment that it bothers me that with all the technological breakthroughs since 1969, somehow GM hasn't figured out how to combat the problem with making it so a window seal doesn't breakdown quickly under normal use?

[AFSNightrod]

Personally I think the big issue is the weight savings of a B-pillar. A true hardtop car weighs 100-200lbs more due to the extra bracing needed in the roof and chassis. I'm sure they are having enough trouble keeping the weight down on the thing without sacrificing reliability. Personally I'll take a B-pillar. I don't want a 3700lb Camaro. If it doesn't break 12 seconds in the 1/4 with a Motor Trend or Car and Driver staffer babying it down the track, I'm keeping my loaded 3480lb TA. I'm sure this won't be the case tough.