Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

 

I have a 2017 Silverado 1500 LTZ that came with factory LED tail lights.  I recently bought a set of Morimoto XB LED tail lights that are not intended for factory LED trucks.  

 
I also purchased a set of tail light harness for a non-LTZ Silverado (GM Part #’s 23295977 and 23295978) so it would be a plug and play installation.
 
Everything works (running lights, brake lights, reverse) but I have hyper flash on the turn signals.  I have more pics and video of the issue on my instagram - @pgsulins 
 
Here is a list of the things I unsuccessfully tired to correct the issue:
 
1.  Using the non-LTZ wiring harness, I installed 50w 6 ohm resistors with no luck
 
2.  Using the non-LTZ wiring harness, I disconnected the Morimoto resistors that came on the tail lights and installed 50w 6 ohm resistors with no luck
 
3.  I hacked into the LTZ wiring harness with and without added resistors keeping the Morimoto resistors plugged in with no luck
 
4.  I hacked into the LTZ wiring harness with and without added resistors disconnecting the Morimoto resistors with no luck
 
5.  I disconnected the Morimoto tail lights and installed incandescent bulbs into the non-LTZ harness and still get hyper flash
 
6.  I tried wiring the Morimoto tail lights directly to the trailer hook up and still get the hyper flash 
 
7.  I connected the factory LED tail lights using the correct harness and then wired the Mormimoto tail lights to the trailer hook up and the hyper flash stopped
 
8.  I called Morimoto and they were not helpful
 
9.  I called two Chevy dealerships and asked if they could eliminate the error code but they were unwilling to touch it
 
Attempts #5 and #7 lead me to believe there are some electronics in the actual factory LED tail lights that the computer needs to read in order to avoid the hyper flash.  
 
I say this because there should be no hyper flash with attempt #5 because I am using a stock set up and attempt #7 eliminates the hyper flash but requires the stock LED tail lights to be hooked up.
 
I realize my issue is self-inflicted due to these lights not be intended for my truck but I love the look of these tail lights and was willing to give it a try.
 
I know Recon sells tail lights that are intended for trucks that came equipped with factory LED tails so someone has been able to get working equipment on this truck but I’m out of ideas.
 
Does anyone have any info that could help?  Thank you!
 
Paul
 

IMG_0489.jpg

IMG_0490.jpg

IMG_0492.jpg

IMG_0494.jpg

Posted

Your BCM is set to read “X” number of amps on each circuit. Your factory LEDs were say 1amp. Your BCM was looking for 1amp plus or minus a little bit. 

 

The new XB tail lights are made for the non LED trucks to work right so they have resistors added so they are within a non LED vehicles BCM specs. Say 5amps +/- 10%

 

so now your BCM is seeing 5 amps and thats out of its 1amp range, so it throws an error. 

 

Im in exact opposite situation.  

 

I wish I knew if we could swap BCMs and that would fix both our issues :-)

Posted
42 minutes ago, pgsulins said:

 

I have a 2017 Silverado 1500 LTZ that came with factory LED tail lights.  I recently bought a set of Morimoto XB LED tail lights that are not intended for factory LED trucks.  

 
I also purchased a set of tail light harness for a non-LTZ Silverado (GM Part #’s 23295977 and 23295978) so it would be a plug and play installation.
 
Everything works (running lights, brake lights, reverse) but I have hyper flash on the turn signals.  I have more pics and video of the issue on my instagram - @pgsulins 
 
Here is a list of the things I unsuccessfully tired to correct the issue:
 
1.  Using the non-LTZ wiring harness, I installed 50w 6 ohm resistors with no luck
 
2.  Using the non-LTZ wiring harness, I disconnected the Morimoto resistors that came on the tail lights and installed 50w 6 ohm resistors with no luck
 
3.  I hacked into the LTZ wiring harness with and without added resistors keeping the Morimoto resistors plugged in with no luck
 
4.  I hacked into the LTZ wiring harness with and without added resistors disconnecting the Morimoto resistors with no luck
 
5.  I disconnected the Morimoto tail lights and installed incandescent bulbs into the non-LTZ harness and still get hyper flash
 
6.  I tried wiring the Morimoto tail lights directly to the trailer hook up and still get the hyper flash 
 
7.  I connected the factory LED tail lights using the correct harness and then wired the Mormimoto tail lights to the trailer hook up and the hyper flash stopped
 
8.  I called Morimoto and they were not helpful
 
9.  I called two Chevy dealerships and asked if they could eliminate the error code but they were unwilling to touch it
 
Attempts #5 and #7 lead me to believe there are some electronics in the actual factory LED tail lights that the computer needs to read in order to avoid the hyper flash.  
 
I say this because there should be no hyper flash with attempt #5 because I am using a stock set up and attempt #7 eliminates the hyper flash but requires the stock LED tail lights to be hooked up.
 
I realize my issue is self-inflicted due to these lights not be intended for my truck but I love the look of these tail lights and was willing to give it a try.
 
I know Recon sells tail lights that are intended for trucks that came equipped with factory LED tails so someone has been able to get working equipment on this truck but I’m out of ideas.
 
Does anyone have any info that could help?  Thank you!
 
Paul
 

IMG_0489.jpg

IMG_0490.jpg

IMG_0492.jpg

IMG_0494.jpg

If you add 1 ohm resistors in paralllel it should work. Resistance in parallel adds such that 1 ohm resistors will keep the numerator the same but keep adding one to the denominator. 

  • Thanks 1
Posted
7 minutes ago, EpicLT said:

If you add 1 ohm resistors in paralllel it should work. Resistance in parallel adds such that 1 ohm resistors will keep the numerator the same but keep adding one to the denominator. 

I really appreciate the info!  Are these what I need? https://www.amazon.com/uxcell-Mounted-Aluminum-Wirewound-Resistors/dp/B008IDAD76/ref=sr_1_5?crid=2DMLCLB01AYXA&keywords=1+ohm+resistor&qid=1551666831&s=gateway&sprefix=1+ohm+rei%2Caps%2C191&sr=8-5

Posted
5 minutes ago, pgsulins said:

It would be helpful to know if @rah7777777 numbers are accurate. If those are indeed the correct numbers, we can calculate the number required

Posted

We need either the current or the resistance for each scenario (LTZ and non) to be able to determine the equivalent resistance. 

Posted

I don’t see how adding resistance in his case would help at all. In my head, he has too much resistance to begin with. 

This if fully assuming the new tail lights have built in resistors already (in preparations for a non LED truck)

  • Like 1
Posted

I was quoted $175 for dealer to flash my BCM to eliminate the bulb out indicator feature. This would most likely solve your case as well. 

 

The bcm is looking for the correct amperage and if it’s not within its specs it goes into hyperflash to warn you. Disabling that warming feature should solve the problem. 

 

Or send me your BCM and if it works in my truck, I’ll send you line. HAHA

Posted (edited)
On 3/3/2019 at 10:03 PM, rah7777777 said:

I don’t see how adding resistance in his case would help at all. In my head, he has too much resistance to begin with. 

This if fully assuming the new tail lights have built in resistors already (in preparations for a non LED truck)

The important distinction is you are adding in parallel, and only 1 ohm. If you could find resistors that we’re even less than 1 ohm it would be better even. 

 

@pgsulins

 

The Veq is equivalent resistance of the entire system. Multiplication by 1 on the top keeps the numerator the same, while adding 1 each time to the bottom increases the denominator. Thereby decreasing overall number. If you had resistors less than 1 ohm, you would actually DECREASE the top while still increasing the bottom - lowering it much faster with fewer resistors. Hope this makes sense :) 

image.jpg

Edited by EpicLT
  • Thanks 1
Posted
The important distinction is you are adding in parallel, and only 1 ohm. If you could find resistors that we’re even less than 1 ohm it would be better even. 
 
[mention=198338]pgsulins[/mention]
 
The Veq is equivalent resistance of the entire system. Multiplication by 1 on the top keeps the numerator the same, while adding 1 each time to the bottom increases the denominator. Thereby decreasing overall number. If you had resistors less than 1 ohm, you would actually DECREASE the top while still increasing the bottom - lowering it much faster with fewer resistors. Hope this makes sense [emoji4] 
image.thumb.jpg.2c7e735397b31afad87e28112b1435ab.jpg


This reminds my of circuits class (and the smell of burnt resistors)....


Waterfowler 41’s Youtube channel: https://www.youtube.com/user/brittmork
  • Haha 1
Posted

I don't know how to do the math you pictured, but I do understand how resistance works haha.

 

2 resistors (loads) in parallel will have a lower resistance reading than the lowest resistors (or loads) value. 

 

2 ohm and 2 ohm in series is 4 ohm total circuit

2 ohm and 2 ohm in parallel is 1 ohm total circuit

 

So here, you are just adding another load (parallel) as close to zero ohms to help bring down the total load on the circuit and hopefully hit that special threshold in the BCM to work correctly. 

 

I gotta say, I wouldn't have thought of that! Smooth thinking!

  • Like 1
Posted
33 minutes ago, rah7777777 said:

I don't know how to do the math you pictured, but I do understand how resistance works haha.

 

2 resistors (loads) in parallel will have a lower resistance reading than the lowest resistors (or loads) value. 

 

2 ohm and 2 ohm in series is 4 ohm total circuit

2 ohm and 2 ohm in parallel is 1 ohm total circuit

 

So here, you are just adding another load (parallel) as close to zero ohms to help bring down the total load on the circuit and hopefully hit that special threshold in the BCM to work correctly. 

 

I gotta say, I wouldn't have thought of that! Smooth thinking!

Thanks! ??

Posted

Thank you all for the help. I have tried 3 ohm resistors,  1 ohm resistors and .5 ohm resistors with no luck. The only change when adding these were reduced brightness in the hyperflashing blinkers.  I am out of options and am probably going to end up selling the morimotos and getting some recon tail lights painted to get the look I want.  Again, thank you all for the suggestions .

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

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • I hope to high heaven this is wrong. My Chevy farm trucks frame is lasting way longer than a newer Nissan Titan XD I got for a steal, and it only pulls trailers. A decade younger and it's frame is already way rustier than the waxed Chevy I drive across longs and ditches. Also, hasn't Ford been having tones of troubles with rusted frames? 
    • Batteries don’t always show signs of a few years ago my vehicle started fine in the morning and took me to work. After work the battery was completely dead and I needed a jump. No, I didn’t leave anything on and the battery was only a couple months old. It was replaced under warranty. 
    • AFM is confirmed in the Corvette engine, so I'm assuming the higher volume trucks will get it as well
    • If his battery was that bad I would think it would have been showing signs before this that were ignored. Stinks that it happened the way it did in rush hour traffic, but this seems like a pretty fringe scenario. I don't mind it that bad and never turn it off. The only slight annoyance for me is the slight delay between brake to gas, but I have gotten used to it and figure if it can save a little gas why not.
    • That is a good correction. I think “severity” was probably the wrong word for what I meant. What I really mean is closer to event priority, relevance, and actionability — not “this code is severe” or “replace this part.” I agree that a truck can have a lot of trivial or historical communication codes, and if the product starts pushing alerts for every stored or low-value event, people will ignore it very quickly. So the alert logic would need to be filtered. For example, I would not want a random old communication code to generate a push notification by itself. A useful alert would probably need to be based on things like: - new vs historical - active vs stored - repeated vs one-time - duration of the event - whether it happened near the driver-marked symptom - whether it happened together with voltage drop, reset, bus-off, misfire, oil-pressure change, etc. - whether the same pattern repeats under similar conditions So instead of saying “severity,” maybe the product should organize events by affected system and priority. For example: Misfire event: Show misfire counts / roughness first, then fuel trims, RPM/load, DFM/AFM state if available, coolant/oil temp, voltage, and related DTCs. Oil-pressure event: Show oil pressure first, but only in context — RPM, load, oil temperature, coolant temperature, DFM/AFM state if available, voltage, and baseline comparison. Communication event: Show which module/network/message dropped, whether voltage dropped, whether the recorder reset, whether it was active or historical, and whether it repeated. Voltage/reset event: Show battery voltage, crank/wake/sleep state, module reset, communication dropouts, and what came back online first. That also solves the display-order problem you mentioned. The main report should not always show the same fixed list first. It should show the system that appears abnormal first, and then the supporting values for that system. I also agree that the truck already has an oil pressure gauge and MIL. The point would not be to duplicate those. The value would be in showing what else was happening before and after the warning or symptom. For example, if the MIL comes on for a misfire, the truck already told the driver there is a problem. The useful part would be: - which cylinder or bank looked abnormal first - whether it happened after an AFM/DFM transition - whether fuel trims were already moving - whether oil pressure or voltage changed at the same time - whether the same pattern happened previously without a MIL On the OBD port point, I think you may be right for a consumer-facing version. OBD is much easier for the average owner: - easier install - easier removal - inside the cabin - easier phone connection - easier data download - easier to include a pass-through port for another scanner OBD is also the right place for DTCs, freeze frame, VIN, calibration information, Mode 6, and normal scan-tool parameters. The reason I was looking at ECM-side recording is that some events may be gone by the time someone plugs in a scanner, and some powertrain-side network evidence may not be available the same way through the DLC. But I agree that if an OBD-based version can capture enough useful evidence for most owners, that is probably the cleaner consumer product. Maybe the split is: - OBD/DLC version for most consumers - ECM-side version only if it proves it adds evidence that the OBD version cannot get - shop/pro version if deeper powertrain-side event evidence is actually useful So I would not want to force the inline approach if the OBD workflow solves most of the real-world problem. Your last point is probably the key product requirement: the report should be specific to the system showing the abnormality. Not “here are 50 parameters.” More like: “Misfire-related event detected. Here are the misfire/fuel/DFM/context values.” or “Oil-pressure-related event detected. Here is oil pressure compared with RPM/load/temp/baseline.” or “Communication event detected. Here is what dropped, when, and whether voltage/reset happened first.” That is a much better way to think about the report.
  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...