Stiff button SOLVED... and how to do it.

[Horseman]

I didn't really want to order a spring from Lee Spring for $25.00 or more, so I dug around until I found a better solution...

Simply to go Ace Hardware, buy compression spring #123 for 99?, cut it in half, and install it.

That's the short version. I do have some details for those that are interested...

Cutting the spring in half creates a sharp end. I did not install this end on the PC board since scratching that might be bad. Instead, I installed that end in the button rather than having it rest on the PC board.

The Ace spring is slightly larger in diameter than the area451 spring. So using a pair of pliers, I bent the very end of the spring towards the spring body a bit (so the end wouldn't be as sharp) and bent it in towards the center of the spring slightly. This had the effect of holding the spring against the button in much the same way the stock spring worked.

Once the spring was installed and the stalk reassembled, I started having trouble with a stuck button. Here's what I did...

I don't know if you know this but the end of the stalk shown below...



... actually ends up inside the button and adds stability to it. Well on my vehicle, there was quite a bit of friction between the stalk's end and the button. So, I used a nail file to remove a tiny amount of plastic around the stalk's end. After making sure friction had been reduced as much as possible and after making sure I had removed all the plastic dust I had created, I squirted a little silicone lubricant into the button (with it separated from the PC board) and reassembled.

The result is a very soft button that doesn't bind or stick! The very next thing I did was post this message for the rest of you.

Craig, do you see any problems with these procedures?

Enjoy folks!!!

Alex

[Cruise451]

Nicely done!  I can't say I recommend everyone start filing plastic, but this seems like a good solution for those that seem to have a tighter fit than you'd like and perhaps a stiffer spring.

I'm going to try to get that spring and do this myself!

Craig

[sparky73]

I originally questioned the button operation in my post in the "Product Installation" section, but I did not receive a satisfactory response from Area451.

Arch responded with this fix:

Yep, had the same problem and Arthur and Steven were kind enough to walk me through few things. Carefully pull the cylinder off of the stalk and use a light to look down into it. See the two tabs? Those hold the "button" on. Gently push them inward and the button will spring off. If yours looks like mine did, the hole in the center of that little circuit board is too small to properly fit over the post at the end of your stalk. So when you push the cylinder on, you're also lifting the circuit board. Use a round file to make everything fit as it should and give it another go. Also, look for excess plastic from the molding process of the button. If there's any of that around its edges, clean it up as well.

Once everything fits together right, I think you'll find joy. I did.

Replacing the spring and filing the end of the stalk are not the answer. The tight fit of the circuit board is the problem and enlarging the hole in the circuit board is the solution. This would be done as a recall from most manufacturers, even if it was the spring.

Since I had to force the cylinder on the stalk, (Yes, the cylinder was lined up with the tabs. I checked that first.) I will pull the switch cable out from under the carpet, remove the wiper switch assembly from the car, and hope I can "carefully pull the cylinder off" to file the circuit board. Maybe this will be a good time to relocate the LED.

I still feel this is a superior product and look forward to your response. Flame on.

[Horseman]

Replacing the spring and filing the end of the stalk are not the answer. The tight fit of the circuit board is the problem and enlarging the hole in the circuit board is the solution. This would be done as a recall from most manufacturers, even if it was the spring.

The issue I was having wasn't the problem you're describing. In my case, I simply wanted a softer button than the stock spring provided. The solution I presented was done so in an effort to modify a non-defect, not to correct an obstruction issue.

I do, however, see where the confusion lies, so I will take this opportunity to be clear.

You are addressing an issue where getting the cylinder on the stalk is hampered, if not prevented, by a PC Board who's hole is too small to fit over the end of the stalk. I can understand how that might also hamper the use of the button during normal operation.

I am addressing an issue where some people (including myself) have expressed desire in installing a softer spring because pressing the button sometimes results in activating washers, signals, or just because it seems harder to press than is comfortable.

Alex

[admin]

I originally questioned the button operation in my post in the "Product Installation" section, but I did not receive a satisfactory response from Area451.

Arch responded with this fix:

Yep, had the same problem and Arthur and Steven were kind enough to walk me through few things. Carefully pull the cylinder off of the stalk and use a light to look down into it. See the two tabs? Those hold the "button" on. Gently push them inward and the button will spring off. If yours looks like mine did, the hole in the center of that little circuit board is too small to properly fit over the post at the end of your stalk. So when you push the cylinder on, you're also lifting the circuit board. Use a round file to make everything fit as it should and give it another go. Also, look for excess plastic from the molding process of the button. If there's any of that around its edges, clean it up as well.

Once everything fits together right, I think you'll find joy. I did.

Replacing the spring and filing the end of the stalk are not the answer. The tight fit of the circuit board is the problem and enlarging the hole in the circuit board is the solution. This would be done as a recall from most manufacturers, even if it was the spring.

Since I had to force the cylinder on the stalk, (Yes, the cylinder was lined up with the tabs. I checked that first.) I will pull the switch cable out from under the carpet, remove the wiper switch assembly from the car, and hope I can "carefully pull the cylinder off" to file the circuit board. Maybe this will be a good time to relocate the LED.

I still feel this is a superior product and look forward to your response. Flame on.

"Flame on" sounds like you're looking for an argument?

If you didn't get a satisfactory response, then I apologize and probably nobody understood what you were describing.

I remember reading Arch's recommendation about altering the circuit board and I do not agree.  Had someone made a complaint to us about a circuit board obstructing the installation procedure, it would have been dealt with properly.  I don't believe that this is the case.  Circuit board manufacturing is done with extremely tight tolerances (more-so than the plastics) and it is very very unlikely that some people have holes that are "too small" in the little circuit board.  The problem is far more likely to be something else.  The hole in the circuit board is designed to be ever-so-slightly larger than the corresponding hole in the plastic.  In some cases the hole in the plastic will be larger but that is due to shrink in the plastic, not a "defect" in the circuit board.  So if you can see the circuit board when looking up through the cylinder then it means your plastic hole is "too big" not that the circuit board is too small.  In both cases, it leaves ample room for the stalk to fit through.  I am confident that the size of the circuit board is not a problem and therefor no "recall" is required.  Neither Arch nor yourself contacted us requesting a warranty exchange or any such related discussion at all that I'm aware of.  Customers choosing to modify their product to solve a perceived problem without discussing or seeking authorization of course do so at their own risk.

There is a warranty section on this site.  There are no posts in it.  And absolutely no emails have been directed to me in regards to a misshapen circuit board.


A recall for an extremely intermittent, rare, or perhaps non-existent problem is a bit severe.  Recalls are used to address widespread problems/defects and even then usually only when safety is a concern.  Considering over 95% of customers are installing and using the cruise with no problems at all, obviously there is no reason to issue a recall.

If you feel you have a defective switch, and there have been a couple (plastics injection molding isn't an exact procedure and there are ALWAYS defects during production), then by all means please contact us with as much information as you can including photographs and we'll work to resolve the issue quickly.  Publicly suggesting a recall of our product isn't really necessary.

Thank you.

[Arch]

Feel free to "not agree", but the hole in my circuit board needed opening up a bit to make things work properly, as I mentioned in our email exchange - the one where you cleared me to file things a bit in lieu of exchanging parts. Or perhaps I invented the whole thing.

I've never dissed your product here or anywhere else, quite the contrary. I just simply explained what needed tweaking on mine. Not sure why that touches such a nerve.

[admin]

No nerve touched 

Perhaps I missed part of our email conversation or I mistook what you were saying you were modifying.  My understanding, from my recollection, was that the plastic parts were molded out of tolerance and slight modification (filing) solved the problem.  You did mention that the circuit board was "out of round" without any specification to what was really meant by that (it should be perfectly round) but you did not mention modifying the circuit board in our email discussion at all.  Afterward, you wrote on the forum advising others to modify the circuit board to resolve possibly unrelated issues.  I don't agree that people should undertake that without contacting us first.

Let's be clear.  Your feedback is most welcome.  Defects must be dealt with on a case-by-case basis because, especially at this early stage, there is no way to know if two are the same nor is there reason to believe so.  So when I correct or clarify our position on a suggestion you make to others to resolve their potentially unrelated problem, that is in no way a nerve touched.


Incidentally, this was conversation in question.  I now realize I forgot to follow up with that post on manufacturing variance.  Sorry about that.  I was very busy and then ill.

[The Rigger]

Here's a big ol' thank-you to Alex for the how-to. When I got home, I hit up the hardware store for a likely candidate for a new spring and did the do.  Now I have a *MUCH* less "athletic" button, and have yet to accidentally turn on the wipers when engaging the cruise control.

[admin]

Thanks for bringing this thread up.  I re-read everything in it.  Now having moved several hundred units out the door I can comment a little more.

The switch, as it turns out, has been the only pain in the behind about this project, and even then only slightly.  I'd like to mention that Alex's first point addresses something we've since come to realize has been an issue for some and where he points to to file is right on.  What we've discovered through careful measurement, is that our production process had tighter tolerances, apparently, than smarts.  Our button's receiving "hole" is more consistant in size than the original piece's piston (what he's pointing to in the picture).  Regardless of which piece is at fault though, lightly sanding around that tip does solve the problem.

That has nothing to do with an "athletic" button of course, but I wanted to give Alex credit for finding a solution before we even really recognized there was a problem.  About 8% of owners have reported a stiff button and required sanding.

[Horseman]

Here's a big ol' thank-you to Alex for the how-to. When I got home, I hit up the hardware store for a likely candidate for a new spring and did the do.  Now I have a *MUCH* less "athletic" button, and have yet to accidentally turn on the wipers when engaging the cruise control.

Rigger, you're very welcome! I also installed John's LED in my dash which completed the installation with style

[The Rigger]

That has nothing to do with an "athletic" button of course, but I wanted to give Alex credit for finding a solution before we even really recognized there was a problem.  About 8% of owners have reported a stiff button and required sanding.

I readily acknowledge that the spring tension and the production tolerance for the piston and its relationship to the hole in the switch's circuit board are two separate issues. I had purchased a new stalk switch barrel assembly from Steve to replace the one that originally came with my cruise control, although for purely aesthetic reasons - I wanted one that had the cruise control icon printed on it, and the one that originally came with the kit didn't have it.  I also wanted to erase the rear-window wiper icon, as my cabrio obviously doesn't have a rear-window wiper. I said to myself: "Self; as long as you're swapping out switch barrels, why don'tcha do something about that spring..."

It's odd, though, that my rig did require a bit of sanding of the piston after putting the new spring and switch barrel in the car, although the switch that originally came with the cruise conrol worked fine on the non-sanded piston (albeit requiring some force to compress the spring). The second switch did bind up and stick on the piston when pressed. Perhaps there was jst enough slack in the hole tolerances, and the piston was just the precisely-wrong diameter that the first hole slipped just barely, but the second one didn't...

I dunno. It works just fine now.

[admin]

There is variance in both... the piston and the hole.  From the measurements we've taken, ours is more consistent but still not perfect.  It is impossible to have no variance.  So yes, odds are that either the first one was a bit large or the second one was a bit small... or both.  The amount of sanding that is required is very small so you can see how a tiny variance can cause a problem.

We've also since determined that the post isn't doing a lot (functionally speaking) and we would have been fine in making the holes large enough that, no matter the variance, binding would be extremely rare.  Next batch (still hundreds of units away).

Thanks for your feedback.