All,

My daughters 91 240 has an intermittent glitch, whereby the Auto shifter "lock" will not release, and the car is stuck in PARK.

The previous owner told me this problem was so bad, he made his daughter park the car in neutral & lock the P-brake!

Since my wife & daughter are driving this brick to school/work, I need to solve this problem for good. Is there any way to permanently disable this feature? I do not yet own a copy of Bentley for this fine machine....

TIA,

DET
91 240 189K

"The previous owner told me this problem was so bad, he made his daughter park the car in neutral & lock the P-brake!"

I was just going to suggest the same thing.

It won't harm the tranny, and if your parking brake is adjusted properly, the car won't go anywhere.

That's what the parking brake is for actually. You really don't want the tranny holding the car in place when it's parked. When you park your car, apply the parking brake FIRST, then put the car in Park. ALWAYS, and I do mean ALWAYS park with the parking brake. I don't know why, but for some foolish reason, people these days never seem to apply the parking brake. It's there for a reason, use it everyone!!!

Anyway, the problem with your car is the shift lock out relay. There's a switch that is suppose to only let you shift out of park when your foot is on the brake in these later 240s with autos. Often times, the switch contacts go bad, or the relay goes bad.

Lots of people just remove the system to have it function like the earlier auto 240s did.

In the mean time, just park in Neutral with the parking brake set. If the parking brake isn't set properly, it's a very very easy fix. Search the Archives for more info, or pick up a Haynes or Bentley manual.
--
If you listen to the radio in Portland, OR, you may know me as 'Portland's Favorite Soul Brother!'

I've seen you suggest this before, and apparently you've never seen a parking brake cable fail. I have, and it caused a standard transmission car that was left parked in neutral with the brake set to roll down a hill and smash into a new pickup, totalling it. The insurance company denied the claim for negligence, because the car wasn't parked in gear. A parking brake, even properly adjusted will not hold a car under all circumstances, especially if the rear of the car is pointed downhill.

It amazes me the number of people who are willing to sacrifice a built-in safety feature in their car because it's "easier" than fixing the problem in the first place.
--
1991 245, 61k miles, looking for a 5 speed 92-93 245 cheap.

I've seen a parking brake cable fail, but rarely - and only on abysmally-maintained cars. What I can't understand is why anyone would trust the better part of two tons to a teeny piece of steel about 0.2" thick, and NOT set the parking brake. Don't that teach the use of the parking brake in driver ed any more???

And speaking of parking brakes, a friend is on extended assignment in the UK. While there, his AZ license expired so he had to take a British driver's license test. He failed the first test, in part because when he set the parking brake he let the ratchet go click-click-click-click all the wway as he pulled the lever up. Seems the Brits consider this unrefined... the proper technique is to engage the release button, pull the lever up, and then release the button so as to make no ratcheting noise. Amazing.

Defeat a built in safety? I don't think that is what I said...

If an automatic car already has (1) the trans in Park, (2) the Ebrake,
and (3) a solenoid/relay gadget to lock the shifter, that seems anal to
me. 2 deep safety is probably double most systems on any car, but 3
seems overkill.

If you understand this relay gizmo, please explain where it is located.

The PO told me to reach my hand inside the shifter housing and flip some small
trigger on the rear side...so I presumed this is (3) above.

Defeating safeties & endangering my daughter...not if I can help it.

I wasn't referring to the relay in my post, I was criticizing the suggestion that you park the car in neutral using only the parking brake to hold it.

BTW, for those who don't remember, the automatic interlock was mandated after the Audi "unintended acceleration" witch hunt of the mid to late 80s. People started suddenly driving their automatic transmission equipped Audi 5000s through garage doors, over pedestrians, etc, immediately after putting them in gear. 60 Minutes ran an almost totally bogus "expose" on the story, and it almost singlehandedly killed Audi in the US, and even worldwide. As it turned out, Americans were planting their big feet squarely on the accelerator instead of the brake, and the car would take off at full throttle when they put the it in gear. When the investigators finally realuized that the problem wasn't a mechnical one, but a case of "mistaken pedal application", the shifter interlock was mandated by the government.

BTW, if you ever manage to pull this stunt yourself, you'll understand. I did it once myself (after 10 years of driving experience), and it was almost impossible to convince myself that I didn't have my foot on the brake. Fortunately, I had an empty field behind me, and I did no damage. My mother did the same thing, and wasn't so lucky. About a year and a half ago, she started her 1986 Mercedes 560SL and put it in reverse. Her foot had to have been on the accelerator, which she denies to this day. The car took off at full throttle in reverse, and crashed into a tree across the street, totalling it. She still has practically no short-term memory, and has a great deal of back pain. She swears that she looked and made sure that her foot was on the brake (physically impossible in that car), and refuses to listen to suggestions to the contrary. Her car was built before the starter interlock system.

You'll never catch me bypassing one on my own car.

--
1991 245, 61k miles, looking for a 5 speed 92-93 245 cheap.

I haven't driven an automatic in quite a while, believe it or not.
So, correct my if I'm wrong, but don't all automatic cars have an
interlock which prevents the car from being started in any gear
other than Park or Neutral? If the driver has his/her foot firmly
planted on the gas after starting the car (in P or N), wouldn't the
revving of the engine be very noticible? The brake interlock
is an additional level of safety - true - but anyone who's even
a little bit attentive should notice something wrong is he is using
the wrong pedal after starting the car.


About the Audi problem, I thought that it had more to do with:
(a) the accelerator pedal being slightly more to the left than in
the average car, so drivers stepped on it instead of the brake
when slowing down in traffic or, worse, during a panic stop.
(b) vacuum hoses falling off, causing air leaks which resulted
in the engine revving and also reducing the vacuum available to
the power brake booster.


-b.

The problem that caused the mandated interlock is one of routine. 99% of the time, the average driver pays no particular attention to anything when they get in their own car. They get in, start it, put it in gear, and drive off. In some cases, the revving of the engine isn't nearly apparent enough, and people get hurt. That was the case with my mother, and with many other people every year.

Yes, the pedal spacing on the Audi was part of the problem, but it wasn't the only car (and still isn't) with that issue. If you look through the NHTSA reports of accidents in almost any automatic-equipped vehicle from before the interlocks, you'll find a significant number of accidents just like those in the Audi 5000. In the case of the Audi, the real "smoking gun" in the investigation was the fact that a couple of drivers had literally bent the firewall pushing on the gas pedal, believing it was the brakes. Your brain doesn't want to accept what's going wrong in that situation, because you're so sure you have your foot on the brake.

The failure of vacuum lines and other mechannical causes was ruled out in the Audi case. Unfortunately, most people remember only the spectacular failure demonstrated by one of the TV news magazines, which was later exposed to have been rigged by a mechanic at the request of that network. They couldn't get the results they wanted through a normal sequence of events, so they dialed the line pressure of the transmission up to a ridiculous level, modified the torque converter to a much higher stall, disabled the power booster on the brakes, and a number of other things that made the brakes fail. In the real world, this scenario couldn't happen.

BTW, if you take any modern automatic transmission car, you can't overcome the brakes from a standing start with the engine. My brother (a Saturn sales manager) didn't believe me, so we took an automatic C5 Corvette out to test it. With the traction control turned off, the car in drive, and a foot planted firmly on the brakes, I floored it. The Vette went nowhere, and that's a car with 350hp.

BTW, on the Saturn issue, I'm wondering how long it'll be before there's a recall on the Vue SUV. I drove one back to the dealership after they had a leather interior installed. It was a brand new Vue with the evt automatic, and 3 times during the drive, my foot came off the brake pedal. It's simply too high for easy and solid application.
--
1991 245, 61k miles, looking for a 5 speed 92-93 245 cheap.

You're right that I haven't seen this problem first hand. I'd be lying if I said I knew as much about 240s made after 1980 as I do about my fleet (a '76, a '77, and a '80). I know even less about automatic transmissions (all of my cars, except the '77 have M-46 trannys).

My suggestion is not one for a long term solution. Only for how to get by.

I always park my cars in gear, but AFTER I've applied the parking brake. After I turn the car off, I clutch in, and put the car in reverse. That way, if the brake cables were to break, the tranny should catch it.

Either way, under normal circumstances, parking in Neutral with the Parking brake set should be safe enough, but it's not ideal by any means.

DET should get this problem fixed sooner rather then later, you are right.
--
If you listen to the radio in Portland, OR, you may know me as 'Portland's Favorite Soul Brother!'

Does putting a car in reverse to keep it from rolling forward any better than putting it in first? Is there any reason why the engine won't turn "backwards" as well as it will "forwards"? I know SAAB's won't give up their keys without the car in reverse...
--
1982 240 Wagon, 157k mi.; 1985 240 Wagon 200k mi.

All winter I manually unlocked my 240 shifter. When the weather's cold, it just won't release by itself. Now that it's warming up around here, it works just fine, which means that I'll ignore it till it gets cold again, assuming I keep the car that long. For me, it's not an issue, since my wife rarely drives my car. If it was hers, I'd have fixed it last fall. There's another reason why I hate automatics... ;)

BTW, the friend who had his car roll and totalled the new pickup was a really sad case. The judge made him carry insurance even though he didn't have a car, and it took him years to pay off the guy's pickup.
--
1991 245, 61k miles, looking for a 5 speed 92-93 245 cheap.

I can't imagine that cold weather is the reason...we are in NC.

The PO's daughter drove the car at Chapel Hill, UNC. If you know our local climate, it rarely drops below freezing here. Monday this week it was nearly
70F, so I am doubting the temp. was a factor.

If anyone has personally repaired this gadget, please advise how it was done!

TIA,

DET

I'm very familiar with the climate there. I lived in Durham for 3 years, and found my 245 abandoned in the parking lot of the Wal-Mart shopping center at 15-501 and I-40 (right behind Swedish Motors) last July. I wish I could get that lucky on a regular basis.

I live in Arkansas, where the climate is about identical. Generally, the problem with the interlock starts showing itself during the winter, then grows to the point that it won't work in any temperature. With mine, I haven't been irritated enough to fix the problem yet, but it'll get done eventually.
--
1991 245, 61k miles, looking for a 5 speed 92-93 245 cheap.

When you said "fix" the interlock...do you mean replace the shift lock relay? I have a 93 245 with same problem, but have not sorted out what needs to be replaced yet. I did an "adjustment" to the shifter that was outlined in the Bentley Manual, but it did not help. I cannot find anything else on this except checking the fuses, which look good.

Thanks!

To "fix" it, you'll probably have to replace the solenoid itself, not the relay. That's what I need to do to my car, but the solenoid isn't cheap. It doesn't bother me to manually release it on cold mornings, since I'm the only one who drives the car.
--
1991 245, 61k miles, looking for a 5 speed 92-93 245 cheap.