FrogginAround
New member
Has anyone wired a master switch, for the windows, on the passenger side?
Last edited:
Passenger Side Window Master Switch
- Thread starter FrogginAround
- Start date
Register to hide this ad
FrogginAround
New member
Bump. Has no one installed a window master switch on the passenger side? It would be nice to be able to control all the windows from that seat as well as the child/dog lock.
brillo_76
Elite Member
Not that I am aware of as the drivers has all the windows controls. Being a driver has to be in the vehicle to drive it. It's the logical place to have those controls.
To do what your wanting to do your going to have to parallel the driver to passenger circuits you want to mod. So they are identical. Then verify the circuits dont clash as what if the driver is putting the passenger window up at the same time the passenger is putting the passenger down etc. May not be as simple as one would hope.
Sent from my SM-J337V using Tapatalk
To do what your wanting to do your going to have to parallel the driver to passenger circuits you want to mod. So they are identical. Then verify the circuits dont clash as what if the driver is putting the passenger window up at the same time the passenger is putting the passenger down etc. May not be as simple as one would hope.
Sent from my SM-J337V using Tapatalk
TheDurk
Elite Member
I don't see how it could work. The master switch operates over a pair of wires to each remote switch. It sends poitive on one side and negative on the other to raise. Send them in reverse and it lowers.
As Brillo_76 correctly guesses, the problem comes when mama bear wants the window up and papa bear wants the window down. Mama will send negative to the same motor terminal that papa is sending positive to and the reverse on the other terminal. Result, two direct shorts on a 30A motor power circuit, resulting in immediate circuit incineration, certain component damage, and possible vehicle fire.
It gets worse. In the steady state, the master switch is sending negative (ground) over both wires to each remote. These grounds are needed for local operation. So you not only need to keep the two masters from operating at the same time, you have to disconnect one entirely from the remote before the other can operate at all.
You would have to build some logic that one master could disable the other whenever it is operating. So you would have to detect the operation of each of four switches that have two positions and have a relay cut the ground to the master on the other side in each of eight positions. There is probably feedback on those wires from local operation so you would need diodes to zero that detection out, except diodes won't work because you need to send signal in reverse for up/down operation. Further, each master is not set up to have its own window controlled from outside. This makes it even more complicated to protect against conflicting commands causing disaster.
Even if these issues can be overcome, probably by someone smarter than I am, you would need to run a whole lot of new wiring, including several pairs through the pax door loom, and from there to the driver cowl panel. Doable, but definite PIA.
I can't believe it would be worth it.
As Brillo_76 correctly guesses, the problem comes when mama bear wants the window up and papa bear wants the window down. Mama will send negative to the same motor terminal that papa is sending positive to and the reverse on the other terminal. Result, two direct shorts on a 30A motor power circuit, resulting in immediate circuit incineration, certain component damage, and possible vehicle fire.
It gets worse. In the steady state, the master switch is sending negative (ground) over both wires to each remote. These grounds are needed for local operation. So you not only need to keep the two masters from operating at the same time, you have to disconnect one entirely from the remote before the other can operate at all.
You would have to build some logic that one master could disable the other whenever it is operating. So you would have to detect the operation of each of four switches that have two positions and have a relay cut the ground to the master on the other side in each of eight positions. There is probably feedback on those wires from local operation so you would need diodes to zero that detection out, except diodes won't work because you need to send signal in reverse for up/down operation. Further, each master is not set up to have its own window controlled from outside. This makes it even more complicated to protect against conflicting commands causing disaster.
Even if these issues can be overcome, probably by someone smarter than I am, you would need to run a whole lot of new wiring, including several pairs through the pax door loom, and from there to the driver cowl panel. Doable, but definite PIA.
I can't believe it would be worth it.
Last edited:
FrogginAround
New member
Ya I kinda figured it wasn't really possible or worth it since I haven't seen another thread on it. Thanks for all the information though.
4Reak Show
New member
I wouldn't think it would be that difficult. Time consuming as all hell, but not terrible overall. Like mentioned, have passenger switch parallel to output of original master switch, essentially duplicating the operation. This would include what 8-12 wires going from passenger door to driver door? That's a hearty about of time.
Alleviation of redundant circuits' potential fires is easy with a self resetting circuit breaker. But you would need one on every window motor wire since polarity reverses so that would be 8 circuit breakers... Plus maybe a couple for initial power feeds just to be safe.
Again, doable. But agreed on ridiculous.
What's the purpose of the second switch? I don't think I've ever heard of this idea.
Alleviation of redundant circuits' potential fires is easy with a self resetting circuit breaker. But you would need one on every window motor wire since polarity reverses so that would be 8 circuit breakers... Plus maybe a couple for initial power feeds just to be safe.
Again, doable. But agreed on ridiculous.
What's the purpose of the second switch? I don't think I've ever heard of this idea.
TheDurk
Elite Member
Disagree with bold.
That does not solve the second problem in my post above. The first switch can't operate if the second master is sending ground on both remote wires all of the time it is not in use. It won't burn up with enough breakers, but it won't work, either.
Also the breakers on the window motor wires would be beyond the shorts. They would have to be installed on each sending wire from each switch so that is 2 wires x 4 windows x 2 switches = 16 breakers and then four more in case the local switch and a master conflicted. Local power is separate from the master switch feed. You might avoid this last depending on how you solve the steady state double ground signal issue. I am not seeing how you could wire a breaker to protect a master conflicting with the other master on that master's local window. Sketch that one for me, please.....the EWD is in my post above.
I think you end up just putting the breaker on the main feed just after the relay. Still, not really safe and still does not solve the steady state double ground issue. The only way I can think of to fix that needs 16 NC relays to cut ground to the other master each time one sends positive. I'm not sure relays are fast enough to prevent problems from a momentary short. You might just pop breakers rather than move windows.
Last edited:
4Reak Show
New member
TheDurk
Elite Member
Ok. Good talk.
4Reak Show
New member
DAMN! Lighting fast reply.
Difficulty is a relative term. And I don't think wiring is very difficult. Or running wires. Or playing with switches. So to encompass all of everyone's abilities, despite the lack of knowledge of said abilities, as "difficult" is a ridiculous overreach and assumption. So for that, I disagree it's difficult. Time consuming? Hell yeah. Tricky maybe? Sure. But DIFFICULT? Nope.
As far as your worry about "mama bear pushes down and papa bear pushes up" that's an insane situation. It sounds more like a failing marriage to me. I mean if 2 people are riding in a car, both of which clearly require an innate, high level of control based on the necessity of dual MASTER switches, and they are unable to communicate a preference for a particular window's level, that seems like a bad recipe of humans personally. That being said, did Toyota ever factor in which key fob works first? How does that play into your "both push different buttons at the same time" scenario? One pushes unlock while the other pushes lock? Or door locks for that matter? There are 2 door lock switches already isn't there? For what like 30 years? Seems like they (as well as just about every other manufacturer) would say "well that's an unlikely situation, so we probably don't really need to worry about it." As as for that fact, what currently happens if master switch goes down and then independent switch goes up? Doesn't the window just stay put since all circuits are grounded? I'm fairly certain that's what happens. Go try a real world test and see if it lights on fire. Willing to bet it doesn't. So therefore, hardwiring a secondary master switch would likely produce that same result.
Is that a good enough talk oh great one?
FrogginAround
New member
I'm sick of my lady asking to roll up or down the back windows. It would be awesome if you could control the 4 windows from the passenger side. Unfortunately it sounds like it is rather unrealistic. I haven't been in very many newer cars but they had to have figured this out by now.
TheDurk
Elite Member
No, because it does not address two masters sending two ground signals in steady state. That is fundamental to how it works and very difficult to work around to add a second master without redesigning the whole switch.
Your example about the remote and the master just shows you don't know how the system works. No, it won't catch fire because the remote switch applies power to one motor wire and then the master removes the needed ground and applies power to the other side. So you have 12V+ connected through the motor to 12V+. No fire, and no movement. Two masters is a totally different thing.One will appply ground and the other will apply 12V+ to the same wire. Direct short = risk of fire if the breaker is not fast enough. A 30A short is nasty. Simple as that.
I studied the EWD. Did you? Yes it will short with dueling masters and it will catch on fire. You do it to your car. I sure as heck won't do a test on mine.
The reason the door lock control can deal with all those conditions is there is a computer controlling it that is designed to deal with these easily foreseeable situations.
Last edited:
4Reak Show
New member
Last edited:
4Reak Show
New member
TheDurk
Elite Member
Forgive me when I challenge what I see as bad advice on this forum. I supported my argument; you did not. I am not looking for a win; I am looking to ensure the best information is available to those who ask questions here.
I won't apologize for doing that. If someone can solve the problem, I will stand back and applaud. Someone defeated the sunroof pause. That was a piece of genius. I would never say I am all-knowing, but I certainly put more thought into this than you did.