Homepage Garage Wiki Register Community Calendar Today's Posts Search
#Camaro6
Go Back   CAMARO6 > Engine | Drivetrain | Powertrain Technical Discussions > Tuning / Diagnostics


Phastek Performance


Post Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 02-17-2020, 08:13 AM   #15
TJay74


 
Drives: 17 Camaro SS 1LE & 16 Sierra AT CC
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Norman, OK
Posts: 2,424
Quote:
Originally Posted by cmitchell17 View Post
If it wasn't for the government, the EPA, liability, and lawyers I think GM would completely open everything up.

I think GM wants the customer to be able to do most things, minus stuff like air bags and other things to minimize liability. They know a lot of the sales come from people who want to make them better and faster.

The EPA has required "security" ever since ODB2 in 1996 so this is not new and it has always been "illegal" to modify your vehicle and drive it on roads that we tax payers pay for. The manufactures then had to implement this security but it is easy to get around. I think GM is doing just enough to satisfy the government and EPA and maybe in some cases intentionally not fixing backdoors in the system.

However, unfortunately this whole situation is changing. With the do gooders pushing this driverless car fantasy we will now see a complete lockdown of all systems. There won't be any more backdoors. If this fantasy happens (which I actually don't think, at least in my lifetime, we will see a true, the way everyone thinks of, driverless car) GM wants to be sure they don't open themselves up to liability.
I agree, I see GM and the other manufactures only allowing access to legit race teams who need access to the computer modules and only then after a hefty "license fee" along with it only being able to be used on that 1 VIN provided to the manufacture.

GM was one of the manufacturers who said the ECM/TCM programming is their intellectual property and the end consumer should be locked out of it.
__________________
2019 Corvette Z06 2LZ A8 - Halltech CAI, AWE non-catted X-pipe, Mamo V2 ported TB 592rwhp, bone stock 566rwhp

2017 Camaro SS 1LE - Procharger D1SC w/ Tial 2" BOV & Race intercooler / ARH full length catless headers / Alky meth injection system - 650rwhp on conservative tune SOLD
TJay74 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-19-2020, 01:41 PM   #16
cmitchell17

 
Drives: 17 2SS, 8L90, Cam, Heads, E85
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: US
Posts: 1,200
Quote:
Originally Posted by TJay74 View Post
I agree, I see GM and the other manufactures only allowing access to legit race teams who need access to the computer modules and only then after a hefty "license fee" along with it only being able to be used on that 1 VIN provided to the manufacture.

GM was one of the manufacturers who said the ECM/TCM programming is their intellectual property and the end consumer should be locked out of it.
Did any of the manufactures say the programming was the customers property? or they just had no comment? I always though European and Japanese cars were harder to get into but after I saw the amount of aftermarket tuning ability for BMW I was really suprised.
cmitchell17 is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Post Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:04 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.