General Motors Rejected Improved Ignition Switch Design In 2001, Documents Reveal
8
Sponsored Links
Recent documents reveal General Motors opted for a cheaper, substandard ignition switch when presented with two different design options for the part, which was to be installed on the 2003 Saturn Ion. Autoblog reports one drawing submitted of the switch contained a longer detent spring and plunger with greater torque, while another showed a shorter spring and plunger, which made it easier for the switch to move between “run” and “accessory” positions.
The documents don’t tell what motivated executives to decide against the first design, but the consequences of opting for the lower quality switch have hit GM hard in recent months. The part has been linked to at least 32 crashes which have resulted in 13 deaths. The spring in the shorter switch was 9.6 millimeters in length, while the spring in the longer one was 12.3 millimeters, the documents revealed. The Center for Automotive Safety, which first realized the differences between the two drawings, has since sent a letter GM CEO Mary Barra, asking if she had been briefed about the differences in the parts prior to Congressional hearings on the matter held earlier this month.
Clarence Ditlow, the executive director of the CAS, along with former head of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Joan Claybrook, have requested Barra release all documents that might reveal why the decision to select the switch utilizing the shorter detent spring and plunger was made.
In the letter, the pair said that the documents “paint a tragic picture of the cost culture and cover up at General Motors. The conclusion we draw from examining the two different designs of the ignition switches under consideration in 2001 is that General Motors picked a smaller and cheaper ignition switch that cost consumers their lives and saved General Motors money.”
GM spokesperson Greg Martin told Autoblog Wednesday that all of the questions presented by Ditlow and Claybrook will be addressed once the internal investigation on the matter, being conducted by former Lehman Brothers investigator Anton Valukas, is complete. The investigation is expected to conclude within 45 to 60 days.
Sponsored Links
Not to be insensitive, but I wonder how much extra stuff those people had on the key chain? I did a Google search and seems like many auto companies have had the same problem with the ignition switch over the years. Honda did a huge recall because the switch. Found this
American Honda Recalls Vehicles to Replace Ignition Switches
Certain 1997 to 2000 Honda and Acura Vehicles Affected
5/23/2002 7:01:39 PM
American Honda Motor Co., Inc. today announced a voluntary recall of certain Honda and Acura models to replace an ignition switch which may cause the engine to stall.
This is what I have been saying all along. This is nothing new as worn ignitions have been common for years on many cars makes and models due to heavy key rings.
When I was working in the bad part of town it was amazing how many were using screw drivers for keys in cars that were not stolen.
Heck – I didn’t even need a key on my 1987 Cavalier Z24.. the key was so worn it slid right out. Ignition would turn with no issue.
The difference between GM and Honda is that GM waited 10 years to do anything about the ignition switch recall. Honda took two years.
Oh yeah, The Honda recall was voluntary on their part and no one died from the part failure.
GM MUST HAVE PERFORMED QUALITY TESTS BEFORE THIS IGNITION DEVICE IS
ACCEPTED.
ABOUT THE KEY CHAIN, THAT MATTER IS A CUSTOMER DECISION WHETHER TO HAVE
JUST THE NEEDED KEYS FOR THE CAR OR TO ADD MORE KEYS TO THE KEY CHAIN.
COMMON SENSE.
I wish they would just put it back on the dash where it was
So was 2002 too early for the ‘bad design’ then?