Get creative challenge. Bye bye push to start button.

[sharpsicle]

So I start by deconstructing the trucks programming at multiple points. Now we are getting somewhere.

I'm not being sarcastic at all when I say that if you really are going to go down that route, you're probably better off buying a different vehicle.

Sponsored

 

[kevman65]

Hard disagree.

The conversation has been had and op even posted a link to it.

Want a car without this feature I have a simple solution.

But one without this feature.

Problem solved.

You're welcome.

The conversation he started wasn't settled in that thread. No one that has attempted it and satisfactorily succeeded posted up in it.

He's looking for a solution, not people that are against his idea shooting him down with shitshow comments.


He doesn't want a car without the feature, He wants a Jeep without it. Just because all of the tech hungry people think that anything tech is good doesn't make it true.

A simple RF transmitter hooked to a code generator hooked to a lap top and your tech is defeated. Used against you to steal your vehicle.

Throw this tech back at the manufacturer and make them come up with something better. In the meantime return to tried and true way of doing it. What is stupid, a company that has some of the best technology for this exact issue used to own Chrysler but the tech never crossed over.

 

[Professor_Chaos]

I hear you, I really do. But this is going to be one of those things that you're going to need to let go of. This is how modern vehicles are. Your only hope here is to strip the thing down and try and reprogram a bunch of control modules and hope that it works in the end. But that's going to cause more problems than it solves. Everything talks to everything else and critical systems like this aren't optional.

Even in the past, cars that offered push-to-start as an upgraded option still has RF chips in the keys themselves for the lower-trimmed models. It was just a tactile change, the security function was still the same. You might be able to do that, but it will still require the RF security system to function. But you said you don't want that at all, and that's where you're out of luck.

If it were possible you wouldn't be getting so much resistance. But the reality is that it isn't without significant and heavy modification, reprogramming, and R&D testing. Assuming any kind of reprogramming on this level wouldn't brick something else in the Jeep.

Consider that this is a theft deterrent system, and that the people "asking" for this are really in the massive minority, and that disabling it is a liability concern, you won't find some company that has a kit for this. Even if you signed some kind of waiver, you'll probably be hard pressed to find a shop that will even attempt this without incurring heavy costs (both in time and dollars) due to the issues above.

In the end, it isn't worth it, because it's really not possible without deconstructing the truck's programming at multiple points. Especially when there's nothing broken.

Naa. I appreciate the talk off the ledge and I understand what you wrote but i still want to get rid of it.

If it is a life pursuit that is never accomplished then oh well. I'm still going to find a way eventually or die trying.

Do not want proximity start. Looking to discuss this issue with like minds.

 

[JeepTaco]

My ideal solution... two switches. One hidden for the fuel pump one to start. If I could get there I could do whatever I like. Just don't know how to get there.

No cares if it is the easiest rig in the world to steal.

Agreed and good luck!
Only if someone on here knew the theory on the start process for the JT's specifically. Once that is known, it would be a matter of reading a schematic to determine next steps.

Good luck once again!

 

[Professor_Chaos]

I'm not being sarcastic at all when I say that if you really are going to go down that route, you're probably better off buying a different vehicle.

I'm sorry but seriously, you are telling me there is zero way to start an engine that happens to have proximity keys without them?

That is just nonsense. Hard yes, I agree. That is why I am here. Hoping to find like minds where we can discuss the hows, not the whys.

Appreciate you still and your thoughts but naa.

 

[kevman65]

OP, the biggest hurdle is no one outside of Chrysler engineers know how many systems have to be satisfied with the transmitted RF code in order for the vehicle to operate.

Depending what all needs that code, the entire truck maybe disabled without it.

The next issue is, how many codes are generated by one FOB in order to enter and start the truck? If more than one then the work just multiplied.

Personally, I mounted a kill switch inline for the push button. Even if a thief gets all the code(s) they need, no power to start the truck.

 

[Professor_Chaos]

I know this doesn’t answer your question, but nothing can “go wrong” with it, as long as you don’t lose it. Even if the battery dies it has a special magnet in it that you can hold up to the push start to start

Incorrect. Any ignition system can stop functioning at anytime. This is what I want to get around.

I would prefer crank start over proximity.

 

[Challenger85]

I don't know. Hyundai and Kia are being sued for being basically the only manufacturer to have no chips in the keys at all, due to the ease of theft, and how many are being stolen. I think every car I've owned 2004 or newer has had a chip. I know because it means I can't just copy my keys like on old cars.

At least with chips, in theory, a software update can help out once an exploit is found. Of course, dodge has been promising an update on the Charger/Challenger issues for a few years now.

Dodge changed that last year with the unconnect code putting the vehicle in valet mode. They have 2 other things they’re going to do as well. https://[Banned Site]/dodge-offers-trio-of-software-updates-to-prevent-charger-challenger-thefts/

 

[Professor_Chaos]

OP, the biggest hurdle is no one outside of Chrysler engineers know how many systems have to be satisfied with the transmitted RF code in order for the vehicle to operate.

Depending what all needs that code, the entire truck maybe disabled without it.

The next issue is, how many codes are generated by one FOB in order to enter and start the truck? If more than one then the work just multiplied.

Personally, I mounted a kill switch inline for the push button. Even if a thief gets all the code(s) they need, no power to start the truck.

Right on. I guess my concern is in the muck of offroading while alone, I don't like the idea of an ignition failure.

Maybe I am a fossil but it doesn't make sense to me how if power is applied to a starter how the engine wont turn. I get chips and codes etc... but those I would think simply stop the starter. Why would it be more complicated than that?

So to me, it is how to replace the ignition system with a switch.

Thanks for the explanation to everyone else about what I thought was pretty clear. Nuts to me I guess, lol.

Good thinking on the kill switch.

 

[sharpsicle]

Maybe I am a fossil but it doesn't make sense to me how if power is applied to a starter how the engine wont turn. I get chips and codes etc... but those I would think simply stop the starter. Why would it be more complicated than that?

Simply put, because an engine doesn't run on a starter. You can crank it all day long, if injectors aren't firing and plugs aren't sparking, you get nowhere. These are the systems you need to consider. These are the systems that are computer-controlled and won't work if you try and bypass the immobilization system. They're all computerized these days.

These systems are infinitely more complex than they were 15 or 20 years ago, but you seem to often be talking in terms that are equally as old. I think there's a misunderstanding you might have for how vehicles work today. Many of your posts seem to point to an understanding of vehicle systems from the late 90s or early 2000s. Maybe this is where the disconnect is.

Right on. I guess my concern is in the muck of offroading while alone, I don't like the idea of an ignition failure.

RF technology as a security device has been around for decades. Technology-driven immobilizers even longer. They are proven and reliable. To try and go backwards and retrofit your Jeep with custom devices and unproven programming is going to make it significantly less reliable. So if reliability is your goal, this is not the way to get there. I think your bias against technology, along with an imperfect reference point for how things work, is getting you mixed up a bit here.

 

[Professor_Chaos]

Simply put, because an engine doesn't run on a starter. You can crank it all day long, if injectors aren't firing and plugs aren't sparking, you get nowhere. These are the systems you need to consider. These are the systems that are computer-controlled and won't work if you try and bypass the immobilization system. They're all computerized these days.

These systems are infinitely more complex than they were 15 or 20 years ago, but you seem to often be talking in terms that are equally as old. I think there's a misunderstanding you might have for how vehicles work today. Many of your posts seem to point to an understanding of vehicle systems from the late 90s or early 2000s. Maybe this is where the disconnect is.



RF technology as a security device has been around for decades. Technology-driven immobilizers even longer. They are proven and reliable. To try and go backwards and retrofit your Jeep with custom devices and unproven programming is going to make it significantly less reliable. So if reliability is your goal, this is not the way to get there. I think your bias against technology, along with an imperfect reference point for how things work, is getting you mixed up a bit here.

Not mixed up.

So can modern jeeps with a manual transmission not be push started?

That wouldn't make any sense.

They can right? So....

 

[kevman65]

I know this doesn’t answer your question, but nothing can “go wrong” with it, as long as you don’t lose it. Even if the battery dies it has a special magnet in it that you can hold up to the push start to start

This is completely false and thinking this can get you hurt or worse.

Something is already wrong with it. Check all the threads and posts about dash lighting up like a Christmas tree, truck dying, losing power steering, power brakes, and coasting on an Interstate. If you're doing 70+ MPH and your truck dies because some electronic doodad hiccuped and semi runs you over, you'll not have time to rethink this.

It's not just the FOB, no matter what anyone wants to think, it's everything tied to it and it's entirely too much. You're not getting the best there is of these systems, you're getting lowest bidder.

 

[Professor_Chaos]

Simply put, because an engine doesn't run on a starter. You can crank it all day long, if injectors aren't firing and plugs aren't sparking, you get nowhere. These are the systems you need to consider. These are the systems that are computer-controlled and won't work if you try and bypass the immobilization system. They're all computerized these days.

These systems are infinitely more complex than they were 15 or 20 years ago, but you seem to often be talking in terms that are equally as old. I think there's a misunderstanding you might have for how vehicles work today. Many of your posts seem to point to an understanding of vehicle systems from the late 90s or early 2000s. Maybe this is where the disconnect is.



RF technology as a security device has been around for decades. Technology-driven immobilizers even longer. They are proven and reliable. To try and go backwards and retrofit your Jeep with custom devices and unproven programming is going to make it significantly less reliable. So if reliability is your goal, this is not the way to get there. I think your bias against technology, along with an imperfect reference point for how things work, is getting you mixed up a bit here.

You are right though. Much of my understanding ends in the 90s.

I still refuse to believe no way exist.

That is why I started this thread. Not to talk about how hard it is or why bother but to link up with like minds and solve it. Hard as it is.

 

[Chestnut]

Wouldn't it be possible to basically remove all jeep computers and run a standalone system? You could then run the ignition how ever you like. I'm really only familiar with this on 4cyl hondas but i've driven a few where nothing computer/wiring wise was stock and they started with a couple toggle switches and a $2 red button. You'd probably loose the radio, backup camera, and a few other features.

You'd need to find a tuner to tune all the engine features but as far as running the engine there isn't a ton there. Probably looking at 2k for the ECM, quite a bit for the wiring and probably 1k for tuning.

 

[sharpsicle]

Not mixed up.

So can modern jeeps with a manual transmission not be push started?

That wouldn't make any sense.

They can right? So....

Not without the computers receiving the RF signal from the FOB and being in the "Run" position. It's no different. Still needs to be there.

Sponsored