Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
1 hour ago, GTPprix said:

Not weird, normal ;) If you want the Chevrolet startup logo etc (e.g. you have a Silverado) it will have the SUV icon as its all tied together. 

Honestly, I might not of even noticed had Chris not told me ahead of time. 

Posted

@GTPprix

Chris, you think this will be the fix for the cluster we did for my 2015? Don't know what year it came from but it's the same problem.

Posted
[mention=130449]GTPprix[/mention]

Chris, you think this will be the fix for the cluster we did for my 2015? Don't know what year it came from but it's the same problem.

 

Given the cluster you used yes this likely would, please contact from the website and we can set that up.

Posted

That would be great. I can send it in whenever you want, although I should probably wait until you see if there is a way to suppress that steering notification in getting.

Posted
That would be great. I can send it in whenever you want, although I should probably wait until you see if there is a way to suppress that steering notification in getting.


May have a lead on that as well actually but please email so we can discuss ; thanks!
Posted
1 minute ago, GTPprix said:

 


May have a lead on that as well actually but please email so we can discuss ; thanks!

Will do. About to head out with the family for a few hours. I'll email you either later today or Monday night your and you're regular hours. Thanks Chris

Posted

Im just curious, I missed what the actual fix was. And I cant find it. Is it in the program, or settings, or a jumper? 

Posted
On 4/18/2019 at 3:07 PM, GTPprix said:

So the small number of you experiencing this issue owe @Jchoi a big thank you :) We were able to confirm the work around to the GM bug does indeed work on the 2018 units (and likely the 2019 units) to my knowledge only one person with a late 2017 has this bug but I'm hoping it should work as well. Contact us from the site to schedule a patch application :) 

@RACERX7775, it's programming.

Posted
On 4/13/2019 at 3:19 PM, GTPprix said:

 

Was hoping to make an official post after there was a confirmed fix however very long story short there is a bug that seems to have been introduced into the late 2017 Firmware that carried into the branch used for the 2018-2019 units as well. Basically The clusters ignore ANY configuration for a rear park assist only even though they are configured as such; the bug even allows for the display of the park assist on/off state messages but not the actual sensor data. 

 

This would never have been an issue for GM as they never built any trucks that used these clusters in that time frame that DIDN'T have UD5 (Front and Rear Park Assist). I have spent a metric ton of time recently benching up a mockup to test this and indeed was able to see no matter what data frames were sent (or emulated) from a park assist unit the clusters would not display anything for rear park assist. Jchoi is testing a third revision of a work around that hopefully should work as we were able to display park assist information on his unit on the bench, I was even able to replicate this situation in my own 2018 Denali. 

 

Hopefully will have something to report here very soon, it should be noted since the discovery of this we have stopped taking any orders for 2018 trucks that have rear park assist only but again hope to reverse that the second we have good feedback. 

@RACERX7775

  • Like 1
Posted

I am really wanting to to this switch to a denali IP but have been looking for a 2014 cluster with no luck.  Am I correct that the Denali cluster must come from same model year as my Slt.  Also was wondering does the Denali cluster from 2014 come with the off road page?

Posted
10 hours ago, Payton34 said:

I am really wanting to to this switch to a denali IP but have been looking for a 2014 cluster with no luck.  Am I correct that the Denali cluster must come from same model year as my Slt.  Also was wondering does the Denali cluster from 2014 come with the off road page?

Do you mean.... whether it's in 2  or 4wd? 

Posted
3 hours ago, Jchoi said:

Do you mean.... whether it's in 2  or 4wd? 

there is an off road page on later model trucks showing wheel angles and vehicle angles plus it shows if it is in 2wd or 4wd

Posted
21 hours ago, Payton34 said:

there is an off road page on later model trucks showing wheel angles and vehicle angles plus it shows if it is in 2wd or 4wd

Payton, you'll need to source a 2016 red cluster (your gmc cluster is red, right?) along with the HMI/Radio modules.  Pretty sure you have to do this at the same time as the cluster, as these things all need to talk together to work, but you'll get android auto and carplay too.  If you havent contacted WAMS for part numbers and checked the other thread on upgrading, please do so.

 

I did the full upgrade, and I have the off-road page on my cluster.  Its fully functional.  Since you have a GMC, you might be able to get the cluster to show the off road page as a truck.  On mine, since there was no silverado denali cluster, I get to look at a tahoe/suburban on the off road pages and door open icons, etc where it previously showed a truck.  You'll probably have to enable the off road page in settings as I dont think it comes enabled from the get-go.

 

 

 

 

Posted

Just got my cluster back from Chris after having his patch done to correct the back-up sensor graphic "disappearance" issue.  It works great now!  Thanks Chris and thanks @Jchoi for being the guinea pig.  

  • Like 2
Posted
On 5/5/2019 at 1:03 PM, lapoolboy said:

Just got my cluster back from Chris after having his patch done to correct the back-up sensor graphic "disappearance" issue.  It works great now!  Thanks Chris and thanks @Jchoi for being the guinea pig.  

Thank you for your patience! :) 

 

FYI for anyone just tuning in the fix has been built into all of the clusters that had this issue now so its all good in da hood :) 

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
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Forum Statistics

    250.4k
    Total Topics
    2.7m
    Total Posts
  • Member Statistics

    342,758
    Total Members
    8,960
    Most Online
    Randy Ginoza
    Newest Member
    Randy Ginoza
    Joined
  • Who's Online   3 Members, 1 Anonymous, 1,864 Guests (See full list)


  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • I thought I would use your thread and add to it as I just did my first longer drive with my truck in the last couple of days. I drove from the Grande Prairie area of Alberta down to Edmonton and most of where I drove in the city was the ring road so fairly free flowing but a bit of stop and go as well in the city. Stayed the night and returned home and not too many stops along the way each way but every restart and certainly every cold start sets it back for fuel mileage. Why I say that is I see some people will cherry pick a fuel mileage leg after the vehicle had been warmed up driveline wise before hand and its a forgiving ( easy rolling drive leg for example ) and call that their fuel mileage which can give a false perception of reality. I was not heavily loaded at all but never the less the flip bak cover, rubber bed mat, various tools etc and extra jerry cans of fuel all way up to a few hundred pounds of dead weight so its not an empty truck. The cold inflation tire pressures are set more near the freezing point so once they are warmed up driving I was showing 45 front and over 40 rear and realize high inflation pressures would help a little in fuel mileage but certainly not the ride on our crap sections of highway. The weather was good so was not raining as that can really drag mileage down, in fact I had a bit of a tail wind on average driving home. Most people on here would never have driven on that freeway to visualize it but its got a fair bit of rolling type of landscape with numerous river valleys. For the most part I had it on cruise set to 62 although kicking it off if I caught it in time before it started down shifting and self braking going down the grades. Most of the more substantial grades its shifting into 7th I believe as 8th just doesn't have it. Total distance round trip was 643 miles and my overall average and I did refuel three times in all, figured out to 17.65 miles per US gallon. My best fuel mileage section refuel within all of this figured out to 18.46 and these are all hand calculated figures. I find if anything that the trucks computer can be over optimistic, sometimes its pretty close but other times its stretching it. On paper persay in theory the truck would have just about made it on fumes for that whole drive without refueling once.    Which made me think of the topic thread of the wonder if these trucks could do 20 mpg and that is a good question, certainly would have to be on an easy going flat highway, no head wind, the right temperature, not packing around a bunch of dead weight and puttering along even slower than I was I would suspect and going steady and not stopping to smell the flowers or take a piss !. It probably is possible but not without effort to attain that with the wind resistance and weight of these trucks. Of course on my drive most people are passing me if they have the power as per loaded highway tractors, never mind a lot of speedy vehicles but the speed limit is 68 and most are at or well over that. 
    • Monday looks like a good day for the dealer to test an ac issue. Hopefully it all turns out good.
    • Paid $2.72 for E85 today.
    • Welcome back! No, it definitely doesn't pass the sniff test. Even "ceasefire" needs an alternative definition these days.    $5.29 at Kroger today
    • That makes sense, and I think you are describing the real product problem. Capturing data is the easy part. If the owner or technician has to manually dig through five minutes of millisecond-level logs, the product has already failed. The device would be at the ECM harness, not at the OBD port, so I agree that data retrieval and event marking need to be thought through carefully. The way I am thinking about the architecture is: The recorder itself should not depend on a phone, app, Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, or cloud connection to capture the event. It should always keep a local rolling buffer and lock the event locally. A button, phone app, or small cabin device would only act as an event marker. If the driver feels a stumble and presses the button 10–30 seconds later, the pre-buffer has to already contain the useful data. For data retrieval, the practical options would be a sealed service USB lead, Wi-Fi download, or a phone/cabin companion device. I would not expect the owner to remove the ECM-side module or work with raw files directly. The cloud or AI side would be for interpretation, not for capturing the event. The truck may have no connection when the issue happens, so the evidence has to be saved locally first. After that, cloud processing could help decode the data, compare it against baselines, and generate a readable report. For the first version, I would keep the automatic triggers conservative and objective: driver event marker bus-off error passive voltage drop / brownout device reset FIFO or queue overflow a normally periodic message disappearing side-to-side communication mismatch, if the topology supports that For “learning normal,” I agree with your point, but I would not want to overclaim it as automatic root-cause diagnosis at first. A realistic first step would be learned baseline comparison for that specific vehicle and operating condition. For example, a value would only be compared against similar conditions: RPM range load / MAP throttle position gear / vehicle speed coolant and oil temperature battery voltage AFM/DFM state, if decoded and validated Then the report could flag things like: this periodic message disappeared compared with its normal timing this value deviated from this vehicle’s normal range under similar conditions the same abnormal pattern repeated after the same type of event the anomaly occurred together with voltage, oil-pressure, misfire, or communication changes But I would still call that “abnormal pattern detected,” not “replace this part,” unless there is enough validated repair data behind it. So the intended product would not be “here is a huge log.” It would need to be an event package: what triggered the capture how much pre/post data was preserved what changed before and after the event whether the device itself reset, overflowed, or saw a bus error selected graphs around the event raw data only as supporting evidence From your perspective, what would make this kind of report useful instead of just another datalog? For example: What are the top 5 parameters or events you would want highlighted first? Would you trust a learned baseline for that specific vehicle, or would you prefer fixed thresholds? How much false-positive flagging would be acceptable before you stopped looking at the reports? What would a one-page report need to show for an independent shop to take it seriously? For misfire, AFM/DFM, oil pressure, or U-code complaints, what would you want the tool to flag automatically?
  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...