Get creative challenge. Bye bye push to start button.

[19Comanche86]

A stand-alone system like the Holley terminator could most likely do this. Give Holley a call and see what their take is on it. I know people that do LS swaps love the Holley set ups. You can run an engine on a pallet with a battery and bucket of fuel when using a stand alone set up.

Sponsored

 

[SpeedNeed]

Long Shot Idea - thanks Nacho Ruby!

In that case (removing battery from Key Fob) we have disabled Proximity etc. while still being able to simply start the vehicle. Isn’t that the elusive objective, or 95% of it here?

OP, Is the actual plastic key fob objectionable if it has to be held to the car manually, like a key would? I mean, you could disguise it. I‘m thinking glue the fob inside rubber duck, leaving end of FOB uncovered. Leave duck on dash, start car with duck butt. If not duck, plastic banana or rubber chicken. Then valet park.

 

[Professor_Chaos]

It would be easier to take an old vehicle of some sort, Jeep/light truck/etc., and replace the entire body with a JT body than it will to replace the wireless FOB + push-button and all the associated hardware/software changes that would require.

I accept your thoughts but don't accept that would be easier. Maybe it would but I feel like this hasn't actually been explored beyond "why bother" why do you say that? Perhaps your reasons may give me a place to start?

Long Shot Idea - thanks Nacho Ruby!

In that case (removing battery from Key Fob) we have disabled Proximity etc. while still being able to simply start the vehicle. Isn’t that the elusive objective, or 95% of it here?

OP, Is the actual plastic key fob objectionable if it has to be held to the car manually, like a key would? I mean, you could disguise it. I‘m thinking glue the fob inside rubber duck, leaving end of FOB uncovered. Leave duck on dash, start car with duck butt. If not duck, plastic banana or rubber chicken. Then valet park.

My objective is to remove the ignition system that requires the fob and replace it with anything else.

The fob itself is not objectionable to me but to be specific it is the need for the fob I object to. Hope that makes sense.

 

[19Comanche86]

Thinking more about it, the stand alone system would also require you to get the Holley digital dash unless you could figure out how to wire your factory gauges in to the Holley ECU. Which would require emulators for the tach to work. You would also have to use Holley transmission computer as well. I think the terminator system with digital dash is around $2600

 

[Professor_Chaos]

Well. What fun.

Still love you all. No joke.

Still open to ideas and collaboration if anybody is interested hmu.

Thanks.

 

[Jeeperjamie]

Just press the button and turn it off, there's your solution. This topic has been worn out

 

[dcmdon]

the OP wants to rid his jeep of "tech".

I suggest he read about what a CAN bus is and he will see the futility in this. There really is no way.

The start button no longer closes a switch that closes a relay that spins the starter. The start button tells the ECU via the can bus that a start is requested. The system then checks many parameters and if the requirements are met, closes the relay for the starter.

Putting a key in front of the CAN bus achieves nothing.

What you want is a simple vehicle. I get it. But to do that you would need to rip out the CAN bus and go back to the days of olde. When the window stitch actually closed a circuit between the power window motor and the battery.

The push button start is actually easier and smarter. Though I do love the olde schoole key in my '66 Chevy.

 

[Professor_Chaos]

Just press the button and turn it off, there's your solution. This topic has been worn out

? What button friend?

 

[Professor_Chaos]

the OP wants to rid his jeep of "tech".

I suggest he read about what a CAN bus is and he will see the futility in this. There really is no way.

The start button no longer closes a switch that closes a relay that spins the starter. The start button tells the ECU via the can bus that a start is requested. The system then checks many parameters and if the requirements are met, closes the relay for the starter.

Putting a key in front of the CAN bus achieves nothing.

What you want is a simple vehicle. I get it. But to do that you would need to rip out the CAN bus and go back to the days of olde. When the window stitch actually closed a circuit between the power window motor and the battery.

The push button start is actually easier and smarter. Though I do love the olde schoole key in my '66 Chevy.

No what I am asking for is people with ideas of how to achieve the goal regardless of the feasibility.

I am in pursuit of knowledge I do not possess, not "don't bother it is to crazy"

Cool. Let me decide if it is too crazy. I seek the knowledge.

All I am being told is "well gee whiz it is built in and crazy to even consider."

Cool, so it is crazy and stupid. Still interested in figuring out how to do it.

Thanks.

 

[JLMOPARMAN]

The thing is an entire module that is on the BUS. Bypass the entire module?!?!

 

[dcmdon]

OK. This is a hypothetical question with the sole purpose of learning.

I can get behind that 100%. Then let me explain further. The development of the CAN bus by Robert Bosch changed the way automobiles were built and how they managed themselves more than almost any development in the history of the automobile.

No longer would a switch, any switch, actually close a circuit and make a motor turn or a solenoid move. It would send a request to one of the computers in the car which would decide what to do.

So to have any level of simplicity would require pulling out all the wiring, and putting in new stitches that could take the current necessary to directly make things move, turn, or spin.

It would be an interesting and irrational project. ha.

 

[dcmdon]

To the OP. Give this a read.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CAN_bus

 

[WILDHOBO]

He wasn't asking for opinions. He's asking if anyone has done it because he wants to do it.

The only shitshow would be people coming in and offering their opinions on whether they think he should or shouldn't or people offering no opinion but calling it a shitshow because they don't agree with the thought process.

Then the answer is simply, no. It isn’t possible, to our knowledge. My only suggestion would be to keep the frame of the JT, the body, the suspension, but install your own aftermarket wiring harness for a buggy or TJ, your own dash cluster, transmission, engine, ECM, etc. Essentially you’d need to build a basic old style vehicle starting with a JT shell. It probably wouldn’t pass emissions in many states though. I know this may have sounded sarcastic, but it isn’t. It’s what you might need to do if you want 2020-2022 Jeep Gladiator without an RF keyfob. No opinions. I personally do plenty of things people find silly. I still do them if I want to, as long as it hurts no one in the process. If you do this, PLEASE do a build thread. You’ll be a hero to many I’m sure.

 

[CivilJeep]

Still trying to hone in on an acceptable solution. Is it strictly the "proximity" part that gives you heartburn? If the fix was to use the JK keyed ignition with the chip in the key, would that satisfy?

 

[Professor_Chaos]

Then the answer is simply, no. It isn’t possible, to our knowledge. My only suggestion would be to keep the frame of the JT, the body, the suspension, but install your own aftermarket wiring harness for a buggy or TJ, your own dash cluster, transmission, engine, ECM, etc. Essentially you’d need to build a basic old style vehicle starting with a JT shell. It probably wouldn’t pass emissions in many states though. I know this may have sounded sarcastic, but it isn’t. It’s what you might need to do if you want 2020-2022 Jeep Gladiator without an RF keyfob. No opinions. I personally do plenty of things people find silly. I still do them if I want to, as long as it hurts no one in the process. If you do this, PLEASE do a build thread. You’ll be a hero to many I’m sure.

Probably not willing to go to that extent.

I get computer control etc... but at the end of the day it is a mechanical engine that can be started in a mechanical way.

I'm not saying it is easy or smart or won't effect things or this that or the other.

I get the objections and all. I really do.

Really.

I am simply looking for others who share my thoughts and would like to work towards the goal.

If it is just me. Cool. I get it.

Can we please stop pretending that an engine can't be started without a wifi signal though?

I get it is programmed for such. I get it is nonsensical to you all.

I'm just looking for discussion on the topic that advances the discussion rather than halting.

I'm not asking anybody to do anything other than if the topic interests you, please discuss, if it doesn't than please FO and stop saying its too hard.

Yes I get it is hard and it hasn't been done. Neato.

Sponsored