Because we got tired of writing about these each time we do a review, we centralized our complaints about certain regional or brand habits in this area.
Back in the olden days, Chrysler used one key for the doors and the ignition, and a second for the trunk. This was helpful in the days before fold-down seats, because it meant that you could give the key to a valet without fear of losing valuables in the trunk. Chrysler keys also went into the locks teeth up, because that's how house keys work.
GM and Ford, of course, used "teeth down," for no clear reason.
GM also had one key for opening all the doors with a second key for the ignition - a system I never did, and never will, understand. The Buick Regal continues that insane tradition. What possible use is having two keys if one is to get in, and the other to drive? Don't GM executives find it awkward to constantly switch keys?
Korean automakers have come a long way since the bad old days, when Hyundai was known for underpowered, unreliable deathtraps. Yet, they still have some oddities, the most annoying of which is not engine noise - not power - but poor gas mileage. Second most annoying is the lock design.
The Korean cars we have tested have power locks which are controlled solely by the driver's lock. That means that when the driver locks his/her door, all doors lock. When the driver unlocks her/his door, all doors unlock. Period. No choices.
This is a bit of a nuisance if, for example, you want to put down your groceries in the passenger seat; you have to pretend that you have manual locks, and unlock each door individually. That's not so bad, but if you have a child, you have to (a) unlock the doors, (b) get your child out, (c) keep your child occupied while you open up the passenger door, and (d) lean through the car to lock the driver's door.
This wouldn't be so bad, but like most modern cars, our Korean samples all had locks placed in the side of the door, rather than on top, where they would be easier to reach.
What do Japanese and Korean cars have in common? The number one thing we have noticed is that both tend to have the same inane power window lockout button. People without children probably never use this button, which is designed to prevent passengers from rolling and unrolling their windows without the driver's permission.
On most American cars, when the driver presses this button, the driver can still operate the rear windows. That is useful when your four-year-old has just unrolled the window and you want to roll it back up again. On most Asian cars, when you press the window lock, you cannot move any of the windows, either.
Now, does that make sense?
Do they really have to put every single function on Earth onto a single stalk? Especially when there's no stalk on the right side of the steering wheel?
All reviews at allpar (including competitors) • Past reviews
Five things you did not know about Chrysler and the military
1955 Plymouth Belvedere
All Mopar Car and Truck News
Chrysler 300 Letter Cars
The Engine Cleanup Committee