AGRR™ magazine/glassBYTEs.com™ Message Forum

AGRR Magazine
AGRR™ Magazine

glassBYTEs.com

AGRSS

NWRA

Key Media & Research
Privacy Policy


ATTENTIONThe glassBYTEs.com forum is being retooled and will return with a new look and functionality that will hopefully help our readers even more. Watch for an announcement when it will be ready, it will be a few months.

You can still stay up on daily news and comment on stories by signing up for the glassBYTEs daily e-newsletter at glass.com/subcenter. There is no charge. Hope to see you there!
General Forum
This Forum is Locked
Author
Comment
FW2525 PAAS Story

So let me get this right, If you install a windshield without PAAS and use an underside molding instead, This renders a vehicle unsafe?? Sooo this means all the G6's and Cobalts are not safe installs?
I have seen these windshields before that dont have the PAAS or molding. They are not that much cheaper and the quality is really bad. A properly applied urethane set install should be fine though, Even without the PAAS.

Re: FW2525 PAAS Story

“We discovered that we have products identified as a PAAS product that are not indeed a PAAS product,” writes the manufacturer. “Those products will be re-identified as a non-PAAS product if a proper NAGS number exists. In those cases where a NAGS number does not exist, [we] will request a new NAGS non-PAAS number that we can properly use to identify our glass replacement products.”

“We were very pleased to see the AGRSS® Standard work in such a positive way. It requires that any unsafe conditions be brought to the manufacturer’s attention for correction,” says AGRSS® Council Inc. president Debra Levy. “This safety-conscious manufacturer was appreciative of the notification. The system worked.”

I have questions:

I presume the "unsafe" windshield to be considered "unsafe" due to the fact that the underside molding robs the urethane of contact area. If so, I agree.

However, isn't the "unsafe" windshield going to be distributed tomorrow with a different NAGS number?

Are the old/other "unsafe" windshields using the PAAS number being "recalled"?

How have we "solved" the safety issue if the same windshields will be out there tomorrow?

How will the "safety conscious manufacturer" redistribute a non-PAAS part, and begin to claim it is safe if it has the same problem?

Finally, and last, but not least, in that NAGS compares "the attributes of the parts" how did this escape their attention for so long?

(Ok one more:)

How has "the system worked"? I mean to say, won't the "unsafe" parts still be out there, and won't they still be being installed, because without the PAAS, won't it be obvious that they will be cheaper? Let me rephrase that last one: Won't they be "the most competitively priced part", to quote a major insurer?



JMHNLO

Re: FW2525 PAAS Story

It seems that the focus on this one has been misdirected/misplaced, to parts incorrectly identified by NAGS as PAAS parts/adhesive system, vs. parts that are TRUE PAAS parts, and are being represented as such, but instead are being supplied/delivered with underside moldings rather than PAAS.

Indeed, the focus by AGRSS in the article was on TRUE PAAS parts. (well, at least one, anyway)

So, I thought/hoped I would clarify and kick this back to the top.

JMHNLO

"The AGRSS® Council Inc. recently learned that while the NAGS catalog notes that the FW02525 should be available with a pre-applied adhesive system (PAAS), at least one manufacturer has been distributing this windshield without the expected PAAS. "

Re: FW2525 PAAS Story

Dude... just like the primer issue with the 40 degree temp..... just wait another 10 min. It'll be just fine. lol

Copyright © AGRR™/glassBYTEs™ All rights reserved.
20 PGA Drive, Suite 201, Stafford, Virginia 22554
540-720-5584 (P) 540-720-5687 (F) info@agrrmag.com
www.agrrmag.com / www.glassbytes.com