Jump to content

Push-to-start & keyless entry: Has anyone added these features?

BlackOps

By BlackOps
in Modifications & Accessories

 Share

Recommended Posts

MikeNH Senior Enthusiast

MikeNH

Posted
Posted

Not a fan of keyless entry/ignition. I don't want it on my vehicle. I can deal with the Ram shifter. It's weird at first but you get used to it. 10000000% opposed to autonomous vehicles. Not giving up freedom of movement.

  • Like 1
Jernik Enthusiast

Jernik

Posted
Posted

10000000% opposed to autonomous vehicles. Not giving up freedom of movement.

 

Before moving to the Houston area I'd have agreed with this. Traffic and stoplights pretty much negate any freedom of movement around here... :sigh:

MikeNH Senior Enthusiast

MikeNH

Posted
Posted

 

Before moving to the Houston area I'd have agreed with this. Traffic and stoplights pretty much negate any freedom of movement around here... :sigh:

 

Not what I'm talking about. In the event of some sort of disaster, someone will be able to flip a switch to tell all those autonomous cars to stay put. Right now they can close roads all they like but there's not enough manpower to block everyone so a smart person can still move around. The kind of car you describe puts your mobility in the hands of others. No thanks. Not ever.

  • Like 1
newdude Senior Enthusiast

newdude

Posted
Posted

Can you add push to start and passive entry? No. There is somewhere between 4-6 antennas for the system, all the wiring, different door handles with the little push button and their wiring, different theft and body control modules, and different keyless entry module. Not plug and play for sure.

moosehead1 Enthusiast

moosehead1

Posted
Posted

^Dunno about inability to PNP yet. These trucks already have the fob antennas to lock/unlock, and fob antennas to remote start. There's just the mechanical key override to drive away at the moment. Feels like the last inch is pretty easy and cheap..

 

I'll go ahead and say it, the F150 has keyless entry/ignition feature and they are moving more trucks despite first year alum body and eekobeater. The feature exists in a multitude of GM vehicles. It aint expensive or hard, it's evidently just that us Neanderthal truck people want yesterday's stuff.

MikeNH Senior Enthusiast

MikeNH

Posted
Posted

^Dunno about inability to PNP yet. These trucks already have the fob antennas to lock/unlock, and fob antennas to remote start. There's just the mechanical key override to drive away at the moment. Feels like the last inch is pretty easy and cheap..

 

I'll go ahead and say it, the F150 has keyless entry/ignition feature and they are moving more trucks despite first year alum body and eekobeater. The feature exists in a multitude of GM vehicles. It aint expensive or hard, it's evidently just that us Neanderthal truck people want yesterday's stuff.

 

Keyless entry is far more complex than you seem to think. The existing hardware is nowhere near what is needed. 2-3 proximity transceivers (each door, the ignition switch) would be needed as well as all the wiring and programming to make it work. It won't happen. And Ford doesn't outsell GM combined.

  • Like 1
moosehead1 Enthusiast

moosehead1

Posted
Posted

^Bet you $20 it happens in 2017 for the GM truck twins. Hell, the relaunched Jeep Grand Cherokee did so in 2011, if Mopar can do it, GM can do so.

 

Hardware swap is the ignition/key/harness for four door handles and a harness. GM already has the hardware.

 

GM should also take the three off the tree, I'd rather have electronic manual shift in a more natural place for driving in the mountains. Can you imagine paddle shifters in a truck? Gasp, the horror.

 

Completely understand the resistance, I'm probably older than most of the posters on this board. I've just been spoiled by other great vehicles, some inexpensive some not.

 

IIRC, in 2014 the GM twins sold roughly 500k+ units to the F150's 700K+ units. Would be interested in seeing the unit data for 2015.

MikeNH Senior Enthusiast

MikeNH

Posted
Posted

They might do it for 2017. I don't know. But considering Ford and Ram offer proper keys on most trims still I'd happily buy one of theirs. Numbers are already available. And sales aren't broken down by class, it's F-series as a whole vs Silverado, etc.

chancyrudd Enthusiast

chancyrudd

Posted
Posted

The compustar ez-go hands free keyless entry can give you everything you need for the keyless portion minus needing a module to interface the door locks which is made by idatalink (my favorite) or various other immobilizer bypass solution companies.

 

There are also several other companies making push-to-start kits that work pretty well. Some require you to physically disable the steering and shift locks but my preferred method of install is to unplug the ignition harness and install a shaved key turned to on and cover for ignition switch on. I will not modify the steering or shift locks for my customers due to liability.

 

The ones I have installed have worked very well but between the two systems you would be looking at alot of money in parts and labor. I am not sure if the steering and shift locks are electronically or mechanically actuated on our trucks so that would affect my ability to do the install. Basically a PTS kit is a remote start that doesn't shut down until you push the button again.

 

Doesn't really tell you if it's possible on our trucks but you can definitely do a retrofit on most vehicles out there.

mdrew Enthusiast

mdrew

Posted
Posted

I dearly miss the proximity entry my Ram had. How anyone could not like the convenience of simply touching the door handle to unlock the door is beyond me. Especially when carrying things. But to each their own, whatever. Now the push button start.....mixed feelings about that. I never could figure out a routine for putting the fob in the same place every time I got in the truck. I'd often find myself searching for it. My vette has it, and the damn fob has to be in just the right spots in the car, or it isn't detected. That gets iritating.

 

But to the OP's questions, I can't imagine adding this feature. It would be a complex job I think. Just the door handles alone. I'd still do it though.

 

Excuse to buy a new truck in a couple years I reckon.

StinkyCheese Senior Enthusiast

StinkyCheese

Posted
Posted (edited)

My sister's new crossover thing has it and while I was up there that thing annoyed the hell out of me. You had to do some dance or something to get the doors to unlock, fondle the door handles..blah blah blah. Just use the flippin key fob. Took longer to do all that crap than to just use the key fob. Granted they hadn't had the vehicle long, but still. I like having a key fob and no proximity for safety reasons. I like being able to control just unlocking the driver's door or leaving it locked even after I've walked up to it or even unlocking and locking it from afar.

 

Now on the UPS package "cars" we have push button sequences that we use and those work great. Push the button on the fob in a certain sequence and the door to the rear opens up, push it in another way and if the truck has the roll up door in the rear that unlocks, as well as I guess I'll say "priming" the truck to be started. In that scenario push button works because it saves time and when handing packages it's much easier to push buttons than fiddle with keys while trying to open doors.

 

 

Personally if this became a thing I would want a way to disable/remove it.

Edited by Chevyguy85
lsxrx7 Enthusiast

lsxrx7

Posted
Posted

doesnt matter

GM won any way you look at it

 

http://truckyeah.jalopnik.com/the-old-tacoma-crushed-the-new-chevy-colorado-but-gm-st-1751758786

 

 

Any Pickup Truck Total Sales

GM 939,190

Ford 790,434

Ram 451,116

Toyota 298,442

Nissan 74,957

Honda 520

All Brands 2,554,659

 

 

 

Truck Total Sales 2015

Ford F-Series 780,354

Chevy Silverado 600,544

Ram 451,116

GMC Sierra 224,139

Toyota Tundra 118,880

Nissan Titan 12,140

Total Full-Size 2,187,173

  • 5 years later...
Abilene Allen New Member

Abilene Allen

Posted
Posted

So, basically no one can simple answer this question "information not opinions concerning adapting push to start to a 2019 truck that does not come equipped with this feature"...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Forum Statistics

    250.4k
    Total Topics
    2.7m
    Total Posts

  • Member Statistics

    342,759
    Total Members
    8,960
    Most Online
    DM22
    Newest Member
    DM22
    Joined

  • Who's Online   6 Members, 0 Anonymous, 1,554 Guests (See full list)

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • KARNUT
      OCI, not when but why?

      By KARNUT · Posted

      As a matter of amusement I’ll leave this conversation with this. Do you beat the government average fuel estimate? Statistics are a guide to me. Not a rule. Someone once said I have to have the last word. If true and possible may be. I’ll blame that on working in a family business.
    • bluev8
      Intermittent no-code issues on 2022.5+ V8 trucks — what did the shop fail to capture?

      By bluev8 · Posted

      That is a fair point, and I agree that trying to log “everything in the truck” would be the wrong direction.   There are a lot of modules and a lot of traffic. If the product became a full-truck datalogger, the amount of data would get huge very quickly, and most owners would never use it.   I think the first useful version would need to be narrow: - powertrain-side event evidence - selected high-value parameters - communication / voltage / reset events - pre/post event window - short report first, raw log only as backup   One distinction I should make is between active OBD/PID polling and passive bus capture. If you are polling PIDs through OBD, then yes: the more parameters you request, the lower the effective sample rate becomes, and you are adding diagnostic traffic to a vehicle that is already busy running itself. With passive CAN capture, the recorder is not asking all the modules for data. It is listening to traffic that is already on the bus. So it does not consume vehicle bus bandwidth in the same way that a scan tool polling hundreds of PIDs would. But your point still applies in a different way.   Even if passive capture does not add bus traffic, the recorder still has limits: - processing rate - storage rate - timestamp accuracy - decoder workload - event filtering - report size - user attention span   So the answer cannot be “log everything and let the user figure it out.” The product would need to store enough raw evidence to be useful, but only decode, graph, and present the important parts around the event.   A practical report should probably show: - what triggered the capture - how much pre/post data was preserved - which selected parameters changed - how those values compared to baseline - whether the same pattern happened before - whether any voltage, reset, bus-off, lost-message, or communication fault occurred - selected graphs around the event - raw data only as supporting evidence   So I agree with you. More data is not automatically better. The real product is the reduction from raw data into a useful event report.
    • bluev8
      Intermittent no-code issues on 2022.5+ V8 trucks — what did the shop fail to capture?

      By bluev8 · Posted

      That makes sense, and I agree with most of that.   I think the product would need both: 1. a default powertrain template, so it is useful out of the box; 2. user-selected priority parameters, so the owner or shop can choose what they want to see first.   Different users are going to care about different things. One owner may care about oil pressure and voltage. Another may care about misfire trend, AFM/DFM behavior, or U-codes. A shop may want communication events and repeatability first. Your baseline point is probably the most important one. Raw data is not very useful unless the report can show what normal looked like for that vehicle under similar conditions.   The way I would think about it is: - start with a basic known-good baseline - learn normal behavior for that specific vehicle over time - allow the event to be overlaid against baseline - show whether the event was a one-time spike or a repeatable pattern - provide a simple severity level, but with clear limits on what that severity means   For example, early severity could be something like: - Info: event captured, no obvious abnormal pattern - Watch: value moved outside baseline, but not repeated - Warning: repeatable abnormal pattern under similar conditions - Critical: communication loss, voltage drop, bus-off, reset, or severe repeated event   I would not want the first version to say “replace this part.” That would be overclaiming unless there is repair-confirmed data behind it. It would be more honest to say “this pattern deserves inspection.”   On the OBD port question, I think OBD absolutely has a role. OBD is probably the right place for: - DTCs - freeze frame - VIN - calibration information - normal scan-tool parameters - Mode 6 / enhanced diagnostic data if available The reason I am still looking at an ECM-side recorder is that the failure may happen before anyone connects a scan tool. If the owner plugs in a scanner after the event, the pre-event evidence may already be gone unless the ECU happened to save it. So I do not see this as “OBD versus ECM-side.” I see it more like: - ECM-side recorder: always armed, rolling buffer, event evidence - OBD/DLC companion: DTCs, freeze frame, VIN, calibration, normal scan data - phone/cloud: status, notes, upload, report generation, notifications   I agree that phone connection and push notifications would be useful. I just would not want the phone or cloud connection to be required for capture. The recorder should save the event locally even if the phone is not connected. The phone should help with event marking, download, notes, upload, alerts, and report viewing.   For a default GM V8 event report, would this list make sense? - RPM - calculated load / MAP - throttle position - vehicle speed - gear / torque converter state if available - coolant temperature - oil pressure - oil temperature if available - battery voltage - commanded AFM/DFM state if available - actual AFM/DFM state if available - misfire counters / roughness by cylinder if available - fuel trims - relevant U-codes / communication events - bus-off / lost periodic message / module reset / voltage drop events Which of those would you remove, and what would you add?
    • Grumpy Bear
      OCI, not when but why?

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      I went to the county a few years back to dispute my property taxes. To do that I hired an appraiser and a lawyer. The County Assessor wished to argue that the homes in my neighborhood the appraiser used were all 'distressed properties" and not representative of the "Market Average".    My response was," Of the 50 homes in our subdivision 43 of them were "distressed properties" under bank foreclosure and as such "Distressed IS the market". Lawyer about choked on his coffee and handed the Assessor the 'receipts'.    I won that case on the evidence provided by the Lawyer and the Appraiser.    We have the same thing going on here. My statements were based on the GOVERNMENTS NATIONAL DATA and yours on local markets in areas of your interest. They are both correct....   Thing is, this divergence was based on NATIONAL and not on LOCAL. I think you even understand that. But like you said, we are both stubborn and hardheaded.    I do not see any advantage to disengagement.  But that said we can step back to compose ourselves. 
    • revmanii
      Looking at ordering a '26 WT because I want a std cab, std bed

      By revmanii · Posted

      Trust me I appreciate the comments and concerns. It's what I was looking for to help me evaluate the situation and what I want to do. I have decided to move forward with the BORA hubcentric slip on 3/8" (.375") with the extended lugs nuts. Fedex says they should be here Monday :). Meanwhile, the dealer got the remote start and Patriot spray in bed liner done over the last couple of days. Also, I installed an inline stop/start eliminator today. Starts back up in what whatever mode you shut it off in, so you don't have to hit the button every time you fire up.

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...