So, has anyone actually bitten the bullet and had a Webasto or other make sunroof fitted and if so how did it all go ?
Back in the 1980s I had an electric tilt/slide sunroof fitted to my Fiat Uno (don't laugh). The work was done by a windscreen specialist in the Harrow/Kenton area, who also held franchises for Golde and Webasto Hollandia aftermarket sunroofs. Back then, the fully-fitted prices were around £600 for the Golde and £850 for the Hollandia. Both were solar glass and slid back between the roof and the headlining, with a sliding internal shade. The main difference was that the Golde used a black 'trim ring' frame that sat slightly proud of the roof, while the Hollandia was mounted flush to the roof (like an OEM one). (The Hollandia was also available in metal, but this was well over £1000 as it obviously needed to be painted.)
The fitters advised me that there was little to choose between the two brands in terms of quality, and that the price differences largely reflected the amount of work involved in fitting them. I went for the Golde because the fact that the glass and frame were fitted as one unit made it quicker to fit and less prone to leaks, and as the car was black the frame was barely noticeable. The fact that it was cheaper was a bonus. Installation took a couple of days, and included replacing the moulded headlining with a fabric one of my choice. I was also able to specify that I wanted the switch to be placed on the steering column rather than in the default location by the rear-view mirror.
The roof was fitted as soon as the car was out of warranty at 2 years old, and I ran the car for a further 9 years, alongside others. In all that time, the roof proved 100% reliable and never suffered any leaks as such, although I did start to notice some watermarks on the headlining after about 8 years, indicating that there must have been some minor seepage somewhere.
Also, I don't really get people who try and compare having air-con/climate control with having a sunroof, especially those who poo- poo the latter – they're just not that similar, imho !
I think this originates from the idea that when air con first became popular here, driving around on a hot day with all the windows closed became a way of thumbing your nose at lesser mortals who had to suffer the indignity of actually letting fresh air into their cars to keep cool. In fact, there was an episode of
Only Fools and Horses where Rodney accuses Del of making him swelter in a car just to give other people the impression they had air con.
The received wisdom now seems to be that the sunroof is the poor man's air con, bringing with it the disadvantages of reduced headroom, poor aerodynamic performance and potential mechanism woes. However, as a long-time owner of convertibles, I agree that we're comparing apples and oranges here.
When I ordered my W168 back in 1998, I kinda went mad and ticked nearly every box on the options list, ending up with both air con and the louvred sunroof (and the rest...). If I'd had to choose between them, I'd have gone for the former over the latter every time, but the full-length louvred sunroof appealed because it seemed to be a defining feature of the then-novel A Class. To be fair, I tended to open the roof at every opportunity for the pseudo-convertible feel, and despite reports earlier in this thread I never had any problems with it, which is more than can be said for the car in general.
