Re: {Chrysler 300} power front windows , C , D , maybe E?

hi ,

more data on this , whole thing out of car going to get to bottom of it ( literally)

Ed and Ron had a very good point ; now we see two things are going on. The aftermarket U with flocking we are often using is i think made for much thinner glass or even a metal thin rub strip on a glass edge maybe for brand x .

if you put bare 300 glass into it on a bench it literally snaps on hard , and then trying to slide it at vent is close to impossible .

So we need to look into — is what Gary / Quirey etc is shipping / used to ship correct stuff ? Simple test , place it over glass edge see if it slides freely . .

This side of U friction does not cause the binding at top , but adds a very high drag at all times . Way way too tight . Ron was right , Ed was right . I grossly underestimated that impact . Sorry .

Second the vent window frame does in fact bolt hard against door end with a bolt by design ; there is no end to end adjustment with door possible at vent window end , only tilt in and out . This says gap at windshield frame is a hinge adjustment issue ( only) as is overall angle of door in 3 D and fit at windshield post .

The idea of shortening window tab might work but that part is really smooth now for slipping easily and chromed . Better left alone is our reaction . And window will hit painted edge if carried very far . May impact fit to rear window too . Better left alone

We have two old run channels they had very thin or no flocking at bottom of U and almost zero flocking now ,if they ever had any at bottom . OEM tape at bottom has longitudinal features not flocking , maybe some plastic slide bearing attempt ? in any event it was in my car now , on rear strip I think the original piece was reused . It is ok to reuse . So front vent U thick flocking both pushed it back to jam it and caused a bad friction drag as width opening in U is too small . Ron had it right .

But at bottom of U in front and back the sliding motion brings to mind double sided teflon rub tape we used in industry , might make the fit ok along long axis and slide ok too , with something like the thinner “ velcro” flocking on only two sides of old U , much closer to oem factory thickness .

Bottom line the thick flocking in the replacement channel has a pile of negative impacts . ( hah a joke) ( sad one)

Ron do you have info on your velcro

I am going looking at teflon tape

I could not get flocking out of repro U but stock flocking on tape came out very easily . so save the metal U for reuse till we get metal U with thin flocking hopefully ( Jamie?)

Thanks to all , report later !

looks like you can fix your old U along lines Ron was discussing

John

On Sep 10, 2024, at 12:15 PM, John Grady <jkg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Thanks Henry, I know that problem about getting top aligned with rubber seal, brings up where it hits seal too, as resto seals seem stiffer and tend to drag a LOT more via simple friction as windows move forward..A huge hassle on 57 hardtops, one dodge in particular drove us crazy.Without getting all off into another subject, some (? original) weatherstrips at roof rail have a transition in cross section in the rubber right where two windows meet as if rear part is resting on inside rubber and an outside (?) rubber flap, while front only touches--- no flap (to open door ). But retro weatherstips are the same profile end to end. Each/both windows are outside the weather strip. Converts seem even a third way of adjusting all that; convert top linkage adjustments get into all that too. Many 57 dodges for sure that outer lip kind of dries up,cracks and soon is ripped off missing imho, and was flocked inside too ;

Is anyone making flocked weatherstrips?

Even more on Dodge and maybe original 300 weaterstrips, the back section of roof rail weaterstrip on hardtops was flocked when new, apparently to let window slide forward, free of friction as it finishes moving without grabbing. New rubber has no flocking here ----as a result if you adjust for a nice seal the friction is so high the window won't slide forward. Unless left looser than it ought to be against your new unflocked strip. A lot of this is for sure that resto parts are not made 100% correctly, ------but I am not at all critical, grateful we have anything at all .Silicone is NOT a good answer for reasons we know well.

That whole friction/ seal problem at top comes later for me , but agree related. . Right now the window is for sure jammed front to back along the long axis as it goes up past half way . Front adjustment ,if there is one, is all the way forward, I think it was designed like that to fit against the windshield post,and also tight against door front panel --a bolt there pulls it that way, unless you shim it inside(impossible) --3D shape,(right?) Can't mess much with that.....and it's not too bad on acr right now. That vent gap to windshield frame adjustment rests mostly with hinges as much as within door?, But within the door, rear is now all the way back, but wants to go back more. I guess I am saying even not on a car, it would jam. But moving it back soon hits the door tab at the slot.

So more and more thinking--- U strip in front is pushing the window back more than it ought to, maybe to Ron's point the metal flocked U is not deep enough and not right for our cars. But it is nice stuff. Any way out of the woods is a path now. Just want window free in tracks top to bottom in front to back sense , so it goes up at full speed without drag. Side flocking is not the issue. ; it is free until half way up, or a little less than that ,when amps raise up, so beyond question now, the longwise fit at top gets tighter...so top of back guide wants to go back,as front guide is straight top to bottom (!) . But another thing comes up , if you modify the top of the rear guide you can gain a little maybe .060 , it IS better but still dragging, But now finish chrome around glass starts to hit the outer door body tab ; that is an indication something in front at vent is pushing it back farther than design had planned for. And that cannot be adjusted out . Window has to get smaller or front U groove deeper. ....tbd

On Tue, Sep 10, 2024 at 11:16 AM Henry Schleimer <henry.schleimer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Hi John

I don’t recall window jamming as an issue but the fuzzies are tight. Before you do anything drastic, give me a day or so to look again at the clearance issue you seem to have. But at the moment, my door is fully assembled but with no power. Don’t know if I can help much without dismantling.

My main problem was getting the glass to meet the top rail in/out along its length. It wanted to stick out at the top rear and would not fit neatly to rear glass. Rear glass vertical angle does not have any real tolerance to adjust. Has to meet top rail and bottom slot is narrow. Had to align the rear run channel at the extremes of its adjustment.

Question: Does the top of your glass meet the top rail evenly as it comes near? If the glass gets cocked it would tend to jam on the way up. That is, does the lift arm run smoothly in its horizontal guide?? It has been a long time since I did this so I forget that part of it. I think the glass should follow the vent frame track evenly the whole way (pushed into it by the lift arm going up) and that will determine how it aligns with the top edge. That’s why my vent frame sort of tilts forward a bit. The rear track shouldn’t have to be a tight fit all the way. It’s really there for the in/out guide of the rear of the glass while not allowing the glass to kick back crooked when the window goes down. You will have to excuse me if I don’t remember this clearly.

I seem to recall I had additional factory instructions possibly for 2 door Imperial that gave the alignment sequence to follow. Looked for it earlier but couldn’t see it. Will look again.

Henry

From: John Grady [mailto:jkg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Tuesday, 10 September 2024 11:24 PM
To: Henry Schleimer
Subject: Fwd: {Chrysler 300} power front windows , C , D , maybe E?

fyi ,,, going to see if i can narrow window slightly , no room to do anything else .

don’t like just lining sides of U

or maybe Ron is depending on no metal in there to gain space , and he is able to line factory U and the bottom?

i wonder if stock had Secund metal U — now ? Goers screwed up took away space ? auugh

Begin forwarded message:

From: John Grady <jkg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: September 10, 2024 at 8:51:21 AM EDT
To: Jean-Yves Chouinard <jymopar@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: john begian <r2gthawk@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: {Chrysler 300} power front windows , C , D , maybe E?

hi as i sort of mentioned to John , this all the way toward windshield now as it sits it is hitting front of door metal and also seems about right , (the gap .)

so nothing there to be had .

I like your idea of possibly narrowing window edge at back , going to look into that . Very direct way of solving jamming if it will still clear minus some metal off top if tab

good thinking ! thank you

On Sep 10, 2024, at 7:00 AM, Jean-Yves Chouinard <jymopar@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Yes like John B. and Henry mentioned, gap fit between windshield post and vent window frame is usually not even...that gap should give you an indication of where you need to have it( as close to post as possible) so glass can slide easier...Go John!! If nothing works, take a chocolate break! Smile...

JY

From: John Grady <jkg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: September 10, 2024 12:35 AM
To: Jean-Yves Chouinard <jymopar@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Ed Cornish <ncrdawgn@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: {Chrysler 300} power front windows , C , D , maybe E?

good point maybe narrow tab on bottom of window at rear 1/4” at the bottom back place !

really good thinking from JY

i do not think chrome width wrong as all the chrome parts around window fit tight no gaps , but will check ..

good thinking !

thank you ,

John

On Sep 9, 2024, at 8:14 PM, Jean-Yves Chouinard <jymopar@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Just thinking here, can you measure length of glass including chrome end trim on said door glass? Compare that with other C-D door glass measurements on other cars you have?? Maybe that chrome trim is somehow wider than it should?? Or not pressed all the way into glass, making glass longer front to back? Why bottom of U channel is beat up and worn?? Also , there's the possibility of having the wrong channel in the door...again, check with another car you have to compare?

One thing I do remember is this: vent window frame to windshield post gap is almost never even...most of the time, the upper part is closer to the windshield post than the bottom part...to allow for parallelism to be achieve with both front and back glass channels...how is that gap on the car you are working on? An uneven gap is ugly , but if the glass goes up and down easier, it's a compromise you have to live with...smile.

Let me know...

JY

From: chrysler-300-club-international@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <chrysler-300-club-international@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> on behalf of John Grady <jkg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: September 9, 2024 10:33 PM
To: chrysler 300 club <chrysler-300-club-international@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: {Chrysler 300} power front windows , C , D , maybe E?

Hi all
Maybe others have been down this road, I have lots of road ( time !!) into trying to understand this hassle already — but to cut right to where we are after all that ( beyond frustrated) , the drivers side widow seems to mechanically jam or fit very tight near top half of travel ;

Have see slow up motion on other 57-58 but sort of live with it .

The FSM shows you rear door of a 4 door , that’s all . Nice , zero relevance

the front window run channel location , which is a part of the vent window assembly — ( location in a front to back of car sense ) — is set , by design I think , to fit the windshield post contour via vent window frame etc ,

and therefore where it goes front to back has little or no leeway . Note how this issue has zero commonality with the 4 four sedan window they do show you

adjustments on the vent side window slot or guide , although slotted , are for in and out primarily , and i believe now the front slotted mount points are to adapt to the crummy body tolerance / fits these 57 mopar cars were known for- specifically the fit to the front window post . It is Not a window gap adjustment the long way despite any long slots ,,as that will move vent . So front to back of the front channel in door is absolutely set by where vent frame meets front window . And a bolt goes in near hinge pulling it tight that way to front panel of door metal

It is a convert , that adds a lot to
all the fun , but here is the issue :

The rear vertical guide at door handle is all the way back in its adjustment slot ,
no more to go , yet window is jammed along its front to back dimension between the guides near top of travel , from mid point on up . You might just say , well lengthen adjusting slot to rear , but top of the guide is already touching door lock side sheet metal , right below painted “ tab “of door metal ,at rear of window slot = no go . Hitting already —

bottom slot is also all the way back , but that could be slotted more . , if you do , it pivots around top adjustment , actually tightening the top half of fit longwise , making it worse

This is an old trouble— as bottom of U at top of guide looks beat up

The design is a little weird as the front vent guide slot positions the window angle in and out , the rear guide of metal window frame tab in the guide helps , follows front angle , adjusts in and out , but window itself has only a tab a few inches long at bottom that stays in the rear guide , not the whole top / rear of window that you might expect at first

so
fit is ok when window is down , Amp draw is ok at bottom as it starts up , about 12 amps

if you look down into door with window down the guide (at top ) is not touching the tab or the window — an inch or so away to rear till window is all the way up . At first you think rear guide is bent to rear at top or something but it works as described .
windows sort of goes toward back of car to seal against quarter window as it comes up , why that gap is there at top of guide when down

The result is a bind at top — as window rises , it often slows down a lot , as the long axis gap front to back gets tighter .

I have seen this on many CD , windows slow down drastically at they travel last few inches up .. Why all this detail ???

there is a widespread problem here .

So I made a 50 amp ammeter with shunt , — a good working power window ( the rears in this car ) take 10-12 amps up or down with some minor variation ,fairly fast too You can see it is not binding up to any degree .

this front starts at that same 10-12A ( normal I think) but as it tightens near top it hits 20 A gets very unhappy You wonder of it’s going to make it .You can help it by hand and it gets up there, but circuit breaker in motor opens at 20 A or so in about 5? seconds . So this whole thing is very unhappy , as torque a motor makes is linearly proportional to amps , force to move window up or down near top has doubled nearing top

To twice the design load imho . This can confuse you into thinking motor or lift is weak/ no good . The breaker may open / reset giving a jittering pulsing move , looks like a bad motor NO — it is poor fit of this part , causing overload — I think compounded by new run channels that may have thicker felting in bottom of U (??)
Some old U I have still on stock vent windows seem to have no felt in lower part of front guide ? is that right ? but that is not the problem here . Problem is at top half of travel

So at this point i think the fix is lengthen top adjustment slots of rear guide another 3/16” or 1/4” , to free up travel when up , but to allow that you would have to grind top of guide or shorten it to get it to tuck back under painted tab .Obviously don’t want to shorten painted tab — that shows and is finish painted , but if in process of restoration i would cut that back some — maybe 1/4” .

We did grind top
of guide , but then window will hit edge of painted tab that covers bottom of U if all this had fit right . I have one car ( the one Gregg Leggatt restored , a regal lancer ) whee the power window zooms up and down fast and free . Not sure what he did , or it was just ok . Point is it works great if this fit was not bothering it .

Slightly drastic move on a gorgeous car , even to grind guide — but many of them do exactly this , and such overloads will burn out motor , strip worm gear etc And wear out lift rollers etc . I think it should move totally freely at all times in tracks and draw 10 to 14 amps at all times . No real reason — except bind , it should slow down . So , fix bind !!! But how ????

Stalled is about 22-25 A , and breaker in motor opens around 18-20 . Good stuff to know as is if your draw is 12 A that is a great setup working right .
If yours draws 20 and slows , nothing is wrong with motor ( but soon will be) it is dragging mechanically ..

Thoughts / comments welcome ,

and no , the door did not shrink 1/4 “ ( not laughing)

but i have shrunk more than that , this contributed to it
thank you
John G

--
For archives go to http://www.forwardlook.net/300-archive/search.htm#querylang
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Chrysler 300 Club International" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to chrysler-300-club-international+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/chrysler-300-club-international/E6A359DB-A830-42E3-82E3-7D6E52CC5DA2%40gradyresearch.com.