Panoramic roofs
Discussion
Colleague at work has a peugeot of some sort with one, he has had to have two replaced due to debris damage, insurance paid for the first under his glass warranty but only after a long fight, but they refused point blank on the second after amending his policy.
Only advice i would give is check your insurance covers it.
Only advice i would give is check your insurance covers it.
vikingaero said:
They'll be laminated.
But equally they'll be slightly less safe than a steel roof which is why a lot of cars that have panaramic roofs have plus versions of ESP/VSC - basically earlier intervention.
Really? Are you sure?But equally they'll be slightly less safe than a steel roof which is why a lot of cars that have panaramic roofs have plus versions of ESP/VSC - basically earlier intervention.
Why would a manufacturer want to make one version of a car slightly safer than another because it has a glass roof? Why not give all versions of the car the safer system?
I've had panoramic roofs on loads of cars, and I've read a number of stories of the roofs shattering/exploding suddenly into tiny pieces. Would they not act like this if something was thrown at them in high speed? Plus live leak shows than a brick falling off the back of a truck will happily go through a laminated windscreen with no issues so perhaps the roof would be the same, all be it at a shallower angle.
Panoramic roofs which are bonded to the car structure are invariably laminated glass and will therefore not shatter and break into tiny pieces. Moveable glass panels in the roof are usually, but not always, toughened glass, just like most side glasses. These will shatter if impacted by a sharp object.
We are replacing an increasing number of panoramic roof panels as a result of simple stone impact damage. They are labour intensive in many cases and the panel is very costly to buy, in some instances well over £1K before fitting.
Most insurers currently cover this under the replacement glass clause but I wouldn't be surprised to see it moved under accident damage with a higher excess or even excluded from some types of policy.
We are replacing an increasing number of panoramic roof panels as a result of simple stone impact damage. They are labour intensive in many cases and the panel is very costly to buy, in some instances well over £1K before fitting.
Most insurers currently cover this under the replacement glass clause but I wouldn't be surprised to see it moved under accident damage with a higher excess or even excluded from some types of policy.
Ari said:
Really? Are you sure?
Why would a manufacturer want to make one version of a car slightly safer than another because it has a glass roof? Why not give all versions of the car the safer system?
I think over the last two years I've bought about 20 cars for the business. On reading the specs of 2 of them in the brochure it specifically stated that the panoramic roof had to be optioned with ESP+. One I remember definitely is the Nissan Cashcow. I've read a brochure of an Audi Q model that has ESP which takes into account or has roof rack detection and adjusts the settings accordingly.Why would a manufacturer want to make one version of a car slightly safer than another because it has a glass roof? Why not give all versions of the car the safer system?
i once bought a peugeot 407SW with a panoramic roof for such a low price (due to crack in corner of panoramic roof)and then realised why it was so cheap when i was quoted 1300 to replace the panel. I just stuck some clear silicone over the crack so it wouldnt leak and left it alone. They are brilliant though and flood the cabin with light, deffo worth the money i reckon.
i once bought a peugeot 407SW with a panoramic roof for such a low price (due to crack in corner of panoramic roof)and then realised why it was so cheap when i was quoted 1300 to replace the panel. I just stuck some clear silicone over the crack so it wouldnt leak and left it alone. They are brilliant though and flood the cabin with light, deffo worth the money i reckon.
i once bought a peugeot 407SW with a panoramic roof for such a low price (due to crack in corner of panoramic roof)and then realised why it was so cheap when i was quoted 1300 to replace the panel. I just stuck some clear silicone over the crack so it wouldnt leak and left it alone. They are brilliant though and flood the cabin with light, deffo worth the money i reckon.
entropy said:
I was just wondoring how safe are they considering there are c**ts out who think its fun to lob bricks and what not from bridges.
How many times has your car been hit by a brick lobbed from a bridge?Is this scenario really a criteria that you would judge a cars safety based on? The ability of the roof to survive an impact from a brick thrown from a bridge.
While it does happen it is very rare.
vikingaero said:
Ari said:
Really? Are you sure?
Why would a manufacturer want to make one version of a car slightly safer than another because it has a glass roof? Why not give all versions of the car the safer system?
I think over the last two years I've bought about 20 cars for the business. On reading the specs of 2 of them in the brochure it specifically stated that the panoramic roof had to be optioned with ESP+. One I remember definitely is the Nissan Cashcow. I've read a brochure of an Audi Q model that has ESP which takes into account or has roof rack detection and adjusts the settings accordingly.Why would a manufacturer want to make one version of a car slightly safer than another because it has a glass roof? Why not give all versions of the car the safer system?
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff