BILL

Hi,

I have an idea i wanted to run past you guys. I have a 2005 Santa Fe
GLS AWD. I am concerned that I will have trouble this winter getting up
my long, steep, snow filled, Connecticut driveway with the traction
control turned on. ( this is due to experience with a Chevy Uplander
this past winter, worst vehicle in the snow I have ever driven. I had to
turn off traction control on the uplander to even hope to get up the
drive). Anyway I understand that the Santa Fe Limited comes with a
switch to turn off the traction control, while the gls doesn't. What
are the chances that I can order a switch and panel from my local
Hyundai dealer and replace the blank panel next to the driving light
switch with the new switch and panel? (I'm guessing that the wiring
harness will have a connector for the switch..... Is the proper
circuitry already there? is a switch all I need?

Thanks, Bill

hyundaitech

I just checked and couldn't find the schematic for traction control. I'm
not familiar enough to know which Santa Fe's even have traction. I'll
repost when I do some more checking.

hyundaitech

I just checked and couldn't find the schematic for traction control. I'm
not familiar enough to know which Santa Fe's even have traction. I'll
repost when I do some more checking.

hyundaitech

I just checked and couldn't find the schematic for traction control. I'm
not familiar enough to know which Santa Fe's even have traction. I'll
repost when I do some more checking.

hyundaitech

Okay, I've located a schematic. Turns out the 3.5 has the switch and the
2.7 and 2.4 don't. I'd suspect the wiring for the switch isn't even
there. The wiring from the control unit to the cluster is different
depending on whether the vehicle has 2.7 or 3.5, leading me to believe
there was no attempt to make the harnesses the same. Even so, this point
is probably moot because the control modules are different also, meaning
that the control module on the 2.7 probably doesn't even expect to see an
on/off toggle.

hyundaitech

Okay, I've located a schematic. Turns out the 3.5 has the switch and the
2.7 and 2.4 don't. I'd suspect the wiring for the switch isn't even
there. The wiring from the control unit to the cluster is different
depending on whether the vehicle has 2.7 or 3.5, leading me to believe
there was no attempt to make the harnesses the same. Even so, this point
is probably moot because the control modules are different also, meaning
that the control module on the 2.7 probably doesn't even expect to see an
on/off toggle.

hyundaitech

Okay, I've located a schematic. Turns out the 3.5 has the switch and the
2.7 and 2.4 don't. I'd suspect the wiring for the switch isn't even
there. The wiring from the control unit to the cluster is different
depending on whether the vehicle has 2.7 or 3.5, leading me to believe
there was no attempt to make the harnesses the same. Even so, this point
is probably moot because the control modules are different also, meaning
that the control module on the 2.7 probably doesn't even expect to see an
on/off toggle.

bill

Ahhhhh, my great idea has been smashed.... I didn't realize the
difference was engine size, thanks for the fast info. I appreciate it.

Bill


hyundaitech wrote:
> Okay, I've located a schematic. Turns out the 3.5 has the switch and the
> 2.7 and 2.4 don't. I'd suspect the wiring for the switch isn't even
> there. The wiring from the control unit to the cluster is different
> depending on whether the vehicle has 2.7 or 3.5, leading me to believe
> there was no attempt to make the harnesses the same. Even so, this point
> is probably moot because the control modules are different also, meaning
> that the control module on the 2.7 probably doesn't even expect to see an
> on/off toggle.
>

bill

Ahhhhh, my great idea has been smashed.... I didn't realize the
difference was engine size, thanks for the fast info. I appreciate it.

Bill


hyundaitech wrote:
> Okay, I've located a schematic. Turns out the 3.5 has the switch and the
> 2.7 and 2.4 don't. I'd suspect the wiring for the switch isn't even
> there. The wiring from the control unit to the cluster is different
> depending on whether the vehicle has 2.7 or 3.5, leading me to believe
> there was no attempt to make the harnesses the same. Even so, this point
> is probably moot because the control modules are different also, meaning
> that the control module on the 2.7 probably doesn't even expect to see an
> on/off toggle.
>

bill

Ahhhhh, my great idea has been smashed.... I didn't realize the
difference was engine size, thanks for the fast info. I appreciate it.

Bill


hyundaitech wrote:
> Okay, I've located a schematic. Turns out the 3.5 has the switch and the
> 2.7 and 2.4 don't. I'd suspect the wiring for the switch isn't even
> there. The wiring from the control unit to the cluster is different
> depending on whether the vehicle has 2.7 or 3.5, leading me to believe
> there was no attempt to make the harnesses the same. Even so, this point
> is probably moot because the control modules are different also, meaning
> that the control module on the 2.7 probably doesn't even expect to see an
> on/off toggle.
>

Zeppo

Bill,
I wouldn't worry too much. My Santy has been absolutely perfect in ice and
snow. I was able to negotiate some icy streets in the Manayunk section of
Philadelphia (think San Francisco with real narrow streets) last winter that
I would never have attempted in my previous front-wheel drive cars.

Jon


"bill" <bukk@snit.com> wrote in message
news:g_jmg.70218$4L1.53039@newssvr11.news.prodigy. com...
> Ahhhhh, my great idea has been smashed.... I didn't realize the
> difference was engine size, thanks for the fast info. I appreciate it.
>
> Bill
>
>
> hyundaitech wrote:
> > Okay, I've located a schematic. Turns out the 3.5 has the switch and
the
> > 2.7 and 2.4 don't. I'd suspect the wiring for the switch isn't even
> > there. The wiring from the control unit to the cluster is different
> > depending on whether the vehicle has 2.7 or 3.5, leading me to believe
> > there was no attempt to make the harnesses the same. Even so, this
point
> > is probably moot because the control modules are different also, meaning
> > that the control module on the 2.7 probably doesn't even expect to see
an
> > on/off toggle.
> >

Zeppo

Bill,
I wouldn't worry too much. My Santy has been absolutely perfect in ice and
snow. I was able to negotiate some icy streets in the Manayunk section of
Philadelphia (think San Francisco with real narrow streets) last winter that
I would never have attempted in my previous front-wheel drive cars.

Jon


"bill" <bukk@snit.com> wrote in message
news:g_jmg.70218$4L1.53039@newssvr11.news.prodigy. com...
> Ahhhhh, my great idea has been smashed.... I didn't realize the
> difference was engine size, thanks for the fast info. I appreciate it.
>
> Bill
>
>
> hyundaitech wrote:
> > Okay, I've located a schematic. Turns out the 3.5 has the switch and
the
> > 2.7 and 2.4 don't. I'd suspect the wiring for the switch isn't even
> > there. The wiring from the control unit to the cluster is different
> > depending on whether the vehicle has 2.7 or 3.5, leading me to believe
> > there was no attempt to make the harnesses the same. Even so, this
point
> > is probably moot because the control modules are different also, meaning
> > that the control module on the 2.7 probably doesn't even expect to see
an
> > on/off toggle.
> >

Zeppo

Bill,
I wouldn't worry too much. My Santy has been absolutely perfect in ice and
snow. I was able to negotiate some icy streets in the Manayunk section of
Philadelphia (think San Francisco with real narrow streets) last winter that
I would never have attempted in my previous front-wheel drive cars.

Jon


"bill" <bukk@snit.com> wrote in message
news:g_jmg.70218$4L1.53039@newssvr11.news.prodigy. com...
> Ahhhhh, my great idea has been smashed.... I didn't realize the
> difference was engine size, thanks for the fast info. I appreciate it.
>
> Bill
>
>
> hyundaitech wrote:
> > Okay, I've located a schematic. Turns out the 3.5 has the switch and
the
> > 2.7 and 2.4 don't. I'd suspect the wiring for the switch isn't even
> > there. The wiring from the control unit to the cluster is different
> > depending on whether the vehicle has 2.7 or 3.5, leading me to believe
> > there was no attempt to make the harnesses the same. Even so, this
point
> > is probably moot because the control modules are different also, meaning
> > that the control module on the 2.7 probably doesn't even expect to see
an
> > on/off toggle.
> >

Zeppo

Actually, that was a pretty dumb response. I have no idea how steep your
driveway is or how much snow you are talking about.

I was able to drive up a twisty unplowed street that is a 12% grade at its
worst in about 7 inches of fresh snow.

Jon

"Zeppo @hotmail.com>" <zeppo<nospam> wrote in message
news:4g0006F1kop7qU1@individual.net...
> Bill,
> I wouldn't worry too much. My Santy has been absolutely perfect in ice and
> snow. I was able to negotiate some icy streets in the Manayunk section of
> Philadelphia (think San Francisco with real narrow streets) last winter
that
> I would never have attempted in my previous front-wheel drive cars.
>
> Jon
>
>
> "bill" <bukk@snit.com> wrote in message
> news:g_jmg.70218$4L1.53039@newssvr11.news.prodigy. com...
> > Ahhhhh, my great idea has been smashed.... I didn't realize the
> > difference was engine size, thanks for the fast info. I appreciate it.
> >
> > Bill
> >
> >
> > hyundaitech wrote:
> > > Okay, I've located a schematic. Turns out the 3.5 has the switch and
> the
> > > 2.7 and 2.4 don't. I'd suspect the wiring for the switch isn't even
> > > there. The wiring from the control unit to the cluster is different
> > > depending on whether the vehicle has 2.7 or 3.5, leading me to believe
> > > there was no attempt to make the harnesses the same. Even so, this
> point
> > > is probably moot because the control modules are different also,
meaning
> > > that the control module on the 2.7 probably doesn't even expect to see
> an
> > > on/off toggle.
> > >
>
>

Zeppo

Actually, that was a pretty dumb response. I have no idea how steep your
driveway is or how much snow you are talking about.

I was able to drive up a twisty unplowed street that is a 12% grade at its
worst in about 7 inches of fresh snow.

Jon

"Zeppo @hotmail.com>" <zeppo<nospam> wrote in message
news:4g0006F1kop7qU1@individual.net...
> Bill,
> I wouldn't worry too much. My Santy has been absolutely perfect in ice and
> snow. I was able to negotiate some icy streets in the Manayunk section of
> Philadelphia (think San Francisco with real narrow streets) last winter
that
> I would never have attempted in my previous front-wheel drive cars.
>
> Jon
>
>
> "bill" <bukk@snit.com> wrote in message
> news:g_jmg.70218$4L1.53039@newssvr11.news.prodigy. com...
> > Ahhhhh, my great idea has been smashed.... I didn't realize the
> > difference was engine size, thanks for the fast info. I appreciate it.
> >
> > Bill
> >
> >
> > hyundaitech wrote:
> > > Okay, I've located a schematic. Turns out the 3.5 has the switch and
> the
> > > 2.7 and 2.4 don't. I'd suspect the wiring for the switch isn't even
> > > there. The wiring from the control unit to the cluster is different
> > > depending on whether the vehicle has 2.7 or 3.5, leading me to believe
> > > there was no attempt to make the harnesses the same. Even so, this
> point
> > > is probably moot because the control modules are different also,
meaning
> > > that the control module on the 2.7 probably doesn't even expect to see
> an
> > > on/off toggle.
> > >
>
>