Gotcha, I never think of the lemon law as being a state law for some reason.

However, it really isn't safety related because when the system detects a fault it disables the "one touch" feature. The "one touch" feature is why the anti pinch system is required. So, without a "one touch" feature there is no need for anti pinch. The one touch is a convenience feature and I would be absolutely amazed if there was any state that would consider this car a lemon. Of course with the way laws are these days maybe I shouldn't be surprised!

 

Actually I think you will find that anti-pinch is required period due to strangulation deaths and injuries. One feature that few may recognized is the difference in how the newer window switches function. On older switches pushing a switch would typically roll the window up. On most newer designs it is the opposite which originally came into effect in 2006 but is now amended to be required in 2010. The original provisions have been in effect since 1971 long before the auto-up features were present in autos. Trucks were added more recently. I think the switch change is probably the most benefit since that is what initiated many of the injuries (other than children being left alone). A kid would stand on the seat or even the arm rest and hold the window switch down with their foot or a knee and up the window would go. I even saw a video of this happening to a dog, damn near killed it.

On some older cars it was as simple as a bi-metalic strip (which also was a major failure point of older window grinders) which I have fixed a few. Never worked well and was originally designed for simply cutting the power if a switch failed (common as well).

 

there are a very large amount of new cars that don't have anti pinch on all windows - it is only a requirement if a "one touch" feature is present. I was just looking at a 2010 Nissan Cube yesterday and it only had anti pinch on the drivers window. There were several years of the G35 sedan that only had anti pinch on the front two windows unless you had the convenience package. Many owners thought it would be as simple as swapping out the switches from a conveniece packaged vehicle only to find out they didn't have any of the anti pinch components in the motor.

 

Now the part that looks like 'We' may be correct is in part S4. Note the modern 'G' fails the exclusion in a couple of areas.

Here is the Federal standard (Excuse the formatting it was a PDF):

[Code of Federal Regulations]
[Title 49, Volume 5]
[Revised as of October 1, 2002]
From the U.S. Government Printing Office via GPO Access
[CITE: 49CFR571.118]

[Page 362-363]

TITLE 49--TRANSPORTATION

OF TRANSPORTATION

PART 571--FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARDS--Table of Contents

Subpart B--Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards

Sec. 571.118 Standard No. 118; Power-operated window, partition, and roof panel systems.

S1. Purpose and scope. This standard specifies requirements for
power operated window, partition, and roof panel systems to minimize the
likelihood of death or injury from their accidental operation.
S2. Application. This standard applies to passenger cars,
multipurpose passenger vehicles, and trucks with a gross vehicle weight
rating of 4536 kilograms or less. The standard's requirements for power-
operated roof panel systems need not be met for vehicles manufactured
before September 1, 1993.
S3. Definition. ``Power operated roof panel systems'' mean moveable
panels in the vehicle roof which close by vehicle supplied power either
by a sliding or hinged motion, and do not include convertible top
systems.
S4. Operating requirements. Except as provided in S5, power operated
window, partition, or roof panel systems may be closed only in the
following circumstances:
(a) When the key that controls activation of the vehicle's engine is
in the ``ON'', ``START'', or ``ACCESSORY'' position;
(b) By muscular force unassisted by vehicle supplied power;
(c) Upon continuous activation by a locking system on the exterior
of the vehicle;
(d) Upon continuous activation of a remote actuation device,
provided that the remote actuation device shall be incapable of closing
the power window, partition or roof panel from a distance of more than 6
meters from the vehicle;
(e) During the interval between the time the locking device which
controls the activation of the vehicle's engine is turned off and the
opening of either of a two-door vehicle's doors or, in the case of a
vehicle with more than two doors, the opening of either of its front
doors;
(f) If the window, partition, or roof panel is in a static position
before starting to close and in that position creates an opening so
small that a 4 mm diameter semi-rigid cylindrical rod cannot be placed
through the opening at any location around its edge in the manner
described in S5(b); or
(g) Upon continuous activation of a remote actuation device,
provided that the remote actuation device shall be incapable of closing
the power window, partition or roof panel if the device and the vehicle
are separated by an opaque surface and provided that the remote
actuation device shall be incapable of closing the power window,
partition or roof panel from a distance of more than 11 meters from the
vehicle.
S5. (a) Notwithstanding S4, a power operated window, partition or
roof panel system may close if it meets the following requirements--
(1) While closing, the window, partition or roof panel system must
reverse direction before contacting, or before exerting a squeezing
force of 100 newtons or more on, a semi-rigid cylindrical rod from 4 mm
to 200 mm in diameter that has the force-deflection ratio described in
S5(c), and that is placed through the window, partition or roof panel
system opening at any location, in the manner described in S5(b); and
(2) Upon such reversal, the window, partition or roof panel system
must open to one of the following positions, at the manufacturer's
option:
(i) A position that is at least as open as the position at the time
closing was initiated;
(ii) A position that is not less than 125 millimeters more open than
the position at the time the window reversed direction; or
(iii) A position that permits a semi-rigid cylindrical rod that is
200 mm in diameter to be placed through the opening at the same contact
point(s) as the rod described in S5(a)(1).
(b) The test rod is placed through the window, partition or roof
panel opening from the inside of the vehicle such that the cylindrical
surface of the rod contacts any part of the structure with which the
window, partition or roof panel mates. Typical placements of test rods
are illustrated in Figure 1.
(c) The force-deflection ratio of the test rod is at least 65 N/mm
for a rod 25 mm or smaller in diameter, and at least 20 N/mm for a rod
larger than 25 mm in diameter.

[[Page 363]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TC01AU91.050

[56 FR 15294, Apr. 16, 1991, as amended at 57 FR 23963, June 5, 1992; 57
FR 28012, June 23, 1992; 58 FR 16785, Mar. 31, 1993; 60 FR 13644, Mar.
14, 1995]

 

Thats all subject to interpretation!

I read that as, according to S4, the power windows can be operated, in any manner, as long as the key is in the ACC, ON, or START position - S4A. It doesn't diferentiate "one touch" from "hold".

The anti pinch stuff (S5) must be required to operate the windows without the key in the ignition.

Even in the S5 stuff, though, I don't see anything that seperates "one touch" from "hold".

As always, I could be way off base here! I honestly would have expected a bit more detail in all that mumbo jumbo!

 

The way it is worded is similar to the many 'performance standards' I am familiar with. In the case of a 'performance standard' the true meaning is located in the Federal Register which includes the arguments by individuals, companies, etc. that formed the standard.

What I see is that S4 is a series of 'and/or' examples and I see S4(d) as one of particular interest as it could apply to the key fob due to the distance. You can operated it in a continuous fashion as long as it can not close the window from a distance greater than 6 meters.

Now if the same device can close it without continuous activation then it would drop to S5, would this pertain to the one-touch? I take remote device to be any device such as a switch, key fob, etc. that can operate the window. If any remote device in the car can operate a window in a non-continuous activation mode then you have to follow S5. Does this apply to what I would see as a non-remote device such as the local switch which only operates the one window it applies to. If not how about if that switch was located in the console like older cars?

Note while I thought the reverse switch operation (pull to close) was already part of the provision it doesn't become part until 2010 (although it looks like it was suppose to be part as of 2006). This appears to have been an effort by Chrysler to get rid of that provision due to the inclusion of the anti-pinch in various applications in its product line. I found this sort of odd since much of the issues around the whole issue of the power window hazard sits in the triggering of the window by pushing the switch. I don't know if I want to trust the anti-pinch device to protect a child (of course the child should not be left alone but we know how well that works).