XC70: Body Seal on windscreen.

[Glassman]

Originally Posted by 40t

When the seal went on mine after 10 years (original Volvo screen and full Volvo history), I called Volvo UK and they very quickly agreed to reimburse their service agent the full cost of removing and re-sealing it (the agent brought in a local specialist). However, had it broken during removal I'd been quoted £700 by the agent - presumably far cheaper replacements are thinner / weaker?

With rare exception, windscreens do not break on removal. Fitters break them.

Re your other point about cheaper replacements: the best available product is the OE 'genuine' windscreen. All the others are similar, but not the same. Even the 'aftermarket version' made by the same manufacturer is not as good as the OEM branded product.

[Tatsfield]

Originally Posted by Glassman

I was hoping you perhaps had some evidence rather than a recycled recital of a tearoom chat at a factory.

That's a little cruel! My contacts with major automotive manufacturers run to a little more than "tea room chats". I am an authorised supplier of products for use on major assembly lines and have attended full production trouble shooting meetings where these problems have been discussed. The problems they have with windscreen installation are very real to them and there is no reason why they would invent the nature of the problem with large windscreen apertures. What would lead you to believe that they don't take the problem seriously or that there is any degree of lack of authenticity in their concerns?

[Glassman]

Originally Posted by Tatsfield

That's a little cruel! My contacts with major automotive manufacturers run to a little more than "tea room chats". I am an authorised supplier of products for use on major assembly lines and have attended full production trouble shooting meetings where these problems have been discussed. The problems they have with windscreen installation are very real to them and there is no reason why they would invent the nature of the problem with large windscreen apertures. What would lead you to believe that they don't take the problem seriously or that there is any degree of lack of authenticity in their concerns?

Recycling appears to be your thing. You've very conveniently tailored your response to suit. I simply asked for facts but again, you've skirted around providing any other than to recite chats you've had.

[Tatsfield]

I'm only going to make one more reply to this as this disagreement detracts from the topic but I still say your responses are cruel and becoming derogatory, as I didn't have "chats" with anyone but was at a briefing meeting of production engineers at one of Volvo's plants. My report of this has to be aural as I would not be prepared to publish Volvo meeting minutes which you are not entitled to see merely to prove that these were not casual chats! Don't understand your hostility but I'm not going to burden others with this exchange any further than this.

[Glassman]

Originally Posted by Tatsfield

I'm only going to make one more reply to this as this disagreement detracts from the topic

We're all here to help the OP, but 'cruel' responses? Asking directly for supporting evidence (twice) does not constitute a disagreement. You claimed in your initial post that, "Missing bonding would allow the screen to separate from the bodywork in the event of a serious accident and for the upper body work to collapse", and that the concern isn't so much about water ingress. I simply asked you to back it up. You won't. Or can't.

My point is, if you don't have the relevant facts about how - or how much - a windscreen plays a part in the event of a front end collision you shouldn't spread information which isn't accurate; it isn't factual.

Your claim that the upper part of the car will 'collapse', presumably in a rollover scenario, is adding to the spread of misinformation. Why would any manufacturer use more glass as a structurally integral part? Someone says 'structural rigidity' in the context of torsional stiffness and the internet becomes panic central for people who think it means that with all the glass holding it together the car is no longer a safe vehicle to be in if it crashes.

Could the correct bonding of a windscreen be paramount in the functioning of a deployed airbag for example? As well as contributing towards the torsional rigidity of the front of the car of course...

[Ant B]

Originally Posted by Tatsfield

Stuff...

Originally Posted by Glassman

More stuff...

Aaaaanyway...

Just had my windscreen replaced today; a stonechip had developed into a foot-long crack over the last few weeks, so had it replaced by Autoglass (via my insurance policy).

Late-2011 V70 on 107,000 miles, windscreen seal had perished / been non-existent on the top edge; I suspected as much as it had been letting in water and misting up in the rain / damp, but didn’t bother approaching Volvo about it as it was cracked anyway, was easier to just get it replaced at home on my insurance.


Next ‘known-fault’ to tackle; intermittent sticking door-lock on one of the rear doors...!!

[Glassman]

Originally Posted by Ant B

windscreen seal had perished / been non-existent on the top edge; I suspected as much as it had been letting in water and misting up in the rain / damp

When you say seal had perished, I'm assuming you mean the bond had failed?

For the benefit of anyone else with a leaky windscreen, the bond usually 'fails' due to one, or a combination of the following:

i) contamination of the substrate(s)

ii) Poor/no preparation;

iii) faulty adhesive (bad batch)

iv) problem with adhesive from extrusion (when changing/recharging product)

v) human.

[apersson850]

Volov has replaced the windscreen on my 2012 XC70 without cost, due to the seal not being correct. I noticed it due to water ingress, but of course it does influence the structural stiffness.

This is about as well known among us technicians today as it is to "ordinary people" that it gets lighter outdoors when the sun shows up.

In my case, I noticed that as soon as I got a new windscreen, the sound made by the chassie, when passing a small ridge diagonally, was suddenly gone. It wasn't there when the car was brand new either, but had evolved over time. I thought it was just the car "settling in", but as soon as I got a new windscreen fitted and the "gnirk" disappeared, I realized the connection.

I've actually had the windscreen replaced twice, at no cost, but that was just because the new window fitted, to fix the leak, turned out to have a fault. They tried to repair that, but it didn't work, so I'm now on my third screen.

[Ant B]

Originally Posted by Glassman

When you say seal had perished, I'm assuming you mean the bond had failed?

Sorry yes you’re absolutely right; it was the bond that had either failed or not been present at all, not the rubber seal (that was still ok). All along the top edge of the windscreen, as per most other V70/XC70 screens of this age, it seems...

[apersson850]

Well, there is no rubber seal nowadays. That's been completely replaced by the bonding.
When Volvo had problems setting their windscreens properly, the issue was the primer used on the windscreen, to prepare for the bond. There was nothing wrong with the bond itself, but the priming was faulty, so the bond couldn't attach to the windscreen as it was supposed to.