Jump to content

Silverado won't consistently power trailer's rear camera

J-Stroke
 Share

Recommended Posts

J-Stroke Enthusiast

J-Stroke

Posted
Posted (edited)

I have a rear facing camera (not a backup camera) on my travel trailer. It communicates via bluetooth with a monitor plugged in to the truck's cigarette lighter receptacle. The camera is powered with the trailer's running lights and, thus, the trucks lights (headlights, fog lights or running lights) must be on. The system works fine on my 2002 Silverado, my 2012 Enclave, and three other vehicles I've tested. But with the 2019 Silverado (mine and two others my dealer tested it with) I get a "no signal" message on the monitor 95% of the time or more. By that, I mean 15-30 seconds of no signal and then 2 seconds or less of perfect video. My Chevy service center can't figure it out, GM's tech support blew off my service manager once they heard the camera wasn't a GM product, my trailer manufacturer has no answer, and the camera/monitor maker's answer is that it clearly isn't their problem. The one thing they have in common is that none of them have heard of anyone else having this problem. 

 

Any ideas? Any solutions? 

Edited by J-Stroke
  • Replies 120
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

duke3k
duke3k

If anybody's interested here's a Before and After electrical comparison when using the ASA -"at the camera" fix to the Trailer light circuit:   (A) Before:   The oscilloscope is confirming t

Jack D
Jack D

I may be facing the same issue with our trailer next month. We have a Lance trailer with rear-facing camera and dash monitor that plugs into a power outlet. Works well in our 2012 Silverado, but we're

J-Stroke
J-Stroke

Phil, you are sort of correct; a) is the key factor. With the trailer connected to any other vehicle, the system woks perfectly. With the trailer connected to the Silverado, the system won't work even

Posted Images

Jack D Enthusiast

Jack D

Posted
Posted

I may be facing the same issue with our trailer next month. We have a Lance trailer with rear-facing camera and dash monitor that plugs into a power outlet. Works well in our 2012 Silverado, but we're supposed to take delivery of our 2019 LTZ this coming week.

 

One thing that we have learned is that when you have multiple electronic signals (OnStar, XM, WIFI, GPS, etc.) within a concentrated area, it can block other over-the-air signals, such as EZ Pass. Try turning some of those features off in the truck, and see if that allows the camera signal to come through. Just a thought. May be worth trying.

  • Like 1
bshort Enthusiast

bshort

Posted
Posted

It's an interference issue.  They don't make a signal booster for the Furrion cameras, but I did have to by a booster for my TST tpms.  

J-Stroke Enthusiast

J-Stroke

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Jack, I suspect you will have the same problem given that you, like I, are the proud owner of a Lance. Mine is a 2019 1985 with the Voyager WVOS43 observation system. If you do suffer the same issue, please let me know, AND Lance AND ASA Electronics, AND your Chevy dealer. Seems that thus far I am the only human on the globe who knows about the issue.

 

By the way, a fellow on the Lance Owners' Association (LOA) forum sent me this tech article that helped out on some other issues I thought I had and might give some clues as to this issue:  https://gm-techlink.com/?p=11176

J-Stroke Enthusiast

J-Stroke

Posted
  • Author
Posted
2 minutes ago, bshort said:

It's an interference issue.  They don't make a signal booster for the Furrion cameras, but I did have to by a booster for my TST tpms.  

I don't think that's the problem, though I wish it were because it would be a simple fix. 

bshort Enthusiast

bshort

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, J-Stroke said:

I don't think that's the problem, though I wish it were because it would be a simple fix. 

It absolutely is an interference issue.  System works great in all vehicles except multiple 2019's.  The 2019 is broadcasting something different than before and it's interfering with your cameras signal.  I don't recall my camera having a channel switch, but if so, maybe try that.  

J-Stroke Enthusiast

J-Stroke

Posted
  • Author
Posted
5 minutes ago, bshort said:

It absolutely is an interference issue.  System works great in all vehicles except multiple 2019's.  The 2019 is broadcasting something different than before and it's interfering with your cameras signal.  I don't recall my camera having a channel switch, but if so, maybe try that.  

Perhaps you are right; I've been wrong before, often in fact.  But my bet is it's a voltage drop of some sort. As the article I posted states:

 

"Vehicles equipped with a Trailer Lighting Control Module cannot drive as much current on each circuit when compared to the non-Trailer Lighting Control Module trailer lighting system. The Trailer Lighting Control Module drives four trailer circuits using four solid state drivers that are fed from one 30A lighting fuse. If the total current on the four circuits overloads the fuse, it will fail. If any single lighting circuit exceeds the driver threshold, it will deactivate the output for the balance of the key cycle and a reactivation of the lamp load is required. Individual DTCs are activated for each circuit and that load is turned off due to high current. If a trailer draws too much current, it may be helpful to change some or all of the trailer lighting to LEDs."

 

But, as I also said before, I'm not tech savvy.

bshort Enthusiast

bshort

Posted
Posted

The trailer lighting control module has nothing to do with your aftermarket bluetooth camera.  It gets its power off a 12v source separate from any trailering equipment and communicates over the air.  The trailer receives it's 12V power from the truck in tow, but 12V is 12V.  

J-Stroke Enthusiast

J-Stroke

Posted
  • Author
Posted
1 hour ago, Jack D said:

I may be facing the same issue with our trailer next month. We have a Lance trailer with rear-facing camera and dash monitor that plugs into a power outlet. Works well in our 2012 Silverado, but we're supposed to take delivery of our 2019 LTZ this coming week.

 

One thing that we have learned is that when you have multiple electronic signals (OnStar, XM, WIFI, GPS, etc.) within a concentrated area, it can block other over-the-air signals, such as EZ Pass. Try turning some of those features off in the truck, and see if that allows the camera signal to come through. Just a thought. May be worth trying.

Jack, my Chevy service manager and I tried shutting off everything we could -- hotspot, OnStar, GPS, etc. with no luck. I even plugged the monitor in to my Enclave while the trailer was connected to the Silverado, backed it around to the camera, held the monitor 2 feet from the camera, and no change.

J-Stroke Enthusiast

J-Stroke

Posted
  • Author
Posted
5 hours ago, bshort said:

The trailer lighting control module has nothing to do with your aftermarket bluetooth camera.  It gets its power off a 12v source separate from any trailering equipment and communicates over the air.  The trailer receives it's 12V power from the truck in tow, but 12V is 12V.  

Okay, maybe I don't understand the concept of interference. Help me out. If I can hold the monitor less than 2' from the camera and over 25' from the Silverado and I'm having the same issues, where could the interference be coming from?

PhilB Enthusiast

PhilB

Posted
Posted

You tried powering the monitor with a separate power source and it didn't work.  Have you tried powering the camera with a separate power source other than the trailer wiring?  Could be that the Silverado is sending some type of interference on the trailer wiring.  There is something different with the trailer wiring that lets the truck know when you plug a trailer in.  Do you have the keyless entry system?  Maybe the geofencing for the keyless entry system is blocking the signal?   Just some thoughts...

J-Stroke Enthusiast

J-Stroke

Posted
  • Author
Posted
3 minutes ago, PhilB said:

You tried powering the monitor with a separate power source and it didn't work.  Have you tried powering the camera with a separate power source other than the trailer wiring?  Could be that the Silverado is sending some type of interference on the trailer wiring.  There is something different with the trailer wiring that lets the truck know when you plug a trailer in.  Do you have the keyless entry system?  Maybe the geofencing for the keyless entry system is blocking the signal?   Just some thoughts...

I have tried powering the camera with a separate source in the form of another tow vehicle, actually a few other tow vehicles, but that was always through the tow vehicle's  trailer harness and the trailer's wiring. System works like a dream on those.

 

I do have keyless entry, and maybe there's something new there for 2019. Unfortunately, my Chevy service center has given up and GM tech support won't even begin to look in to it, so I'm kinda between a rock and a hard place when it comes to doing something to test these theories.

Jack D Enthusiast

Jack D

Posted
Posted

My guess is that the truck is not supplying enough current to the trailer lights to power the camera and the lights. You may try wiring the camera directly to your trailer batteries. Our Lance trailer is a 2018, and I've been using it for two seasons. At first, I used the rear camera all of the time, but after a while, I found that it was more of an annoyance than it was beneficial. Someday I may want to use that camera again, but I have no immediate need for it, so I have time to watch and see how things turn out.

PhilB Enthusiast

PhilB

Posted
Posted

OP, I was thinking along the lines of having your system installed on the Silverado, but powering the camera through a different source.  There are a lot of variables involved with your issue.  When you move your system to another vehicle you eliminated those variables. 

The variables seem to be: 

a) power to the camera via the trailer wiring and silverado

b) monitor reception while in the silverado

c) monitor reception when outside the silverado

d) power to the camera via an independent power source

 

You know that your system doesn't work with a) and b).  You know it works with c) and d).  Have you tried a) and c), or b) and d)?  I wonder if the Silverado's bluetooth is overpowering the monitor's bluetooth?  

 

Keep us posted with what you find out.

J-Stroke Enthusiast

J-Stroke

Posted
  • Author
Posted
28 minutes ago, PhilB said:

OP, I was thinking along the lines of having your system installed on the Silverado, but powering the camera through a different source.  There are a lot of variables involved with your issue.  When you move your system to another vehicle you eliminated those variables. 

The variables seem to be: 

a) power to the camera via the trailer wiring and silverado

b) monitor reception while in the silverado

c) monitor reception when outside the silverado

d) power to the camera via an independent power source

 

You know that your system doesn't work with a) and b).  You know it works with c) and d).  Have you tried a) and c), or b) and d)?  I wonder if the Silverado's bluetooth is overpowering the monitor's bluetooth?  

 

Keep us posted with what you find out.

Phil, you are sort of correct; a) is the key factor. With the trailer connected to any other vehicle, the system woks perfectly. With the trailer connected to the Silverado, the system won't work even if I plug the monitor in to another vehicle and bring the monitor and camera within 2' of each other. The only thing I haven't done (I think), is connect the camera to another 12V source while the trailer is connected to the Silverado. I may do that and if it works just connect the camera directly to my trailer's battery and be done with it. I will definitely keep you posted.

  • Like 1

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

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • Grumpy Bear
      Some Assembly is Required

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      www.enginelabs.com/news/what-i-learned-today-bearing-clearances-vs-oil-viscosities/     www.enginelabs.com/news/oil-viscosity-can-the-numbers-be-misleading/ The Big Lie… Coming full circle to the reason Lake discusses the Porsche engines in particular. Based on the 2000 samples in the SPEEDiagnostix database, increasing the oil viscosity in these engines, even those run on the track, showed no significant difference in results.   The smoking gun was in the oil chemistry. That is where the data shows higher instances of more wear. Molybdenum was the key; the higher the amount, the less the wear. Speed postulates that higher viscosity oils have more thickeners to artificially inflate their viscosity numbers. These thickeners lose viscosity under shear, and the result is that not all oils of the same viscosity have the same shear stability.   Having enough viscosity is the most important characteristic, but according to Speed, once that required viscosity level is reached, additive chemistry matters more than additional viscosity. Speed also states, oil pressure problems on the racetrack aren’t a viscosity problem; it’s an oiling system problem. Running a thicker oil is just a band-aid for an underlying oiling system problem.
    • Grumpy Bear
      Some Assembly is Required

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      Can it still be Assembled II?   Viscosity on the decline by various means. Heat on the rise making that worse. Engine RPM in the tank. Smaller motors with more boost trying to emulate an electric motor. Full torque, zero rpm. Then we will triple the OCI. Argh.    But wait....there is more. LSPI has pushed a shift from Ca to Mg and as that cost more PLUS the run to lower sulfur compounds the TBN is moving in the wrong direction for the increased OCI's demanded.    That not being enough to placate a demand for a parameter they can't measure the other sulfur bearing compounds are also under attack. That would be zinc and phosphorus sulfonate compounds. To some degree those are being replaced with boron esters and others, i.e. titanium ect. All of which have shorter service lives. And there there is the "Secrete Sauce" marketing for AW adds that 'Can't be detected by UOA's" but trust me because I (the blenders) never ever lie.    Spoiler alert; ALL additives are sacrificial! Smaller amounts of the old blended with less robust versions of the new do not equal longer service lives. So what are the blenders recommending? Wait for it.......   MOVING THE GOAL POSTS! OMG      Let's declare the long standing TAN/TBN crossover irrelevant and tell people that soot is a great 'graphite' based lubricant which can aid tribo films. Wait, what? Let's declare that the standards used for oxidation and nitration were to conservative and can be expanded. Let's tell them that because GDI fuel dilution, although being a VISCOSITY KILLER and an acid generator is actually okay because we have better base oils that limit viscosity failure limits. (Said knowing this is measured in fractions of a centipoise and in bases not commonly used in shelf oils)   Lying from the heart is not just the new normal but we have a public, a very young public, that is so ignorant of the facts and so sure of their "RESEARCH" into AI driven models base in regurgitated  instead of scientific research based unvarnished, peer reviewed FACTS that the incoming guard is loosing their grip on reality and the OEM's are tickled pink while the blends bend the knee.    You have an ever limited set of tools to work with. And sooner or later those will be taken from you as the API and the EPA strangle the last remaining fluids from the system. What you have left is your wits. If you care to use them.    At some point in the very near future it will not longer be possible to do "What is best for the machine", and be replaced with "The best you have access too". You WILL be rewarded with half the life and twice the cost. That isn't that hard to predict.         
    • Chuck FB
      Software Update

      By Chuck FB · Posted

      I trust you saw the other comment where he knew what he was talking about !. Yes, these darned newer vehicles with all their so smart they are stupid technology, goes and drains the battery down. As you might see my other comment, I installed a Noco 5 battery tender under the hood and at this point still have the cord routed so I have to lift the hood and then plug it in but am typically parked in a garage or a shed so its not risking the engine hood in the wind. That way I am assured or hopefully so of not finding I have a battery drawn down and can't even start the truck and that also damages the battery to draw it down too far. 
    • Chuck FB
      Software Update

      By Chuck FB · Posted

      I guess no surprise my guesses were wrong !, at least now I know if I ever happen to see it grayed out in my own truck as to what is going on.    I never happened to catch my truck with it grayed out, it seemed every time I would test to see if there was an update it never found anything and yet more than once I would check to see if there was an update and there was nothing, then a day later or even that same morning I would drive to town and after more than one engine shut down in town as I did my errands it would pop up that there is an update now ready to install and the only place I have a connection to the internet is at home by wifi so its not as if it grabbed the download while driving. I don't trust these new vehicles due to all the crap they can decide to do while sitting for some days not running and run the battery down so most of the time if I know the truck will sit for a few days I plug in the battery tender I have mounted under the hood and so the only time the truck must have downloaded software was when it was sitting in the garage where the signal is awful but I have that tender plugged in and somehow it managed to download it. I honestly detest all this crap, way to easy to leave a person stranded.    Since I don't trust any of it I don't do the install of the already downloaded software until I get home and sometimes have even sat in the truck to watch what its doing as its going through the process to its conclusion as its not like it is set up that it will tell you the next time you fire up the engine that the update that was initialed actually installed or installed properly. Yes I can go into the updates and see the list. After I go through the install where I feel its safe to do so in case it breaks down as a result, I will plug in the battery tender after the fact to recharge as I don't know how much power its taking just to do the install and that can take a while for it to install. 
    • nfisherman
      Software Update

      By nfisherman · Posted

      Thanks for the reply. All settings were correct and the engine was off, as it was supposed to be. It turned out to be something simple. I took a drive for about an hour. I must have had a low battery without knowing it. The voltage gauge on the display looked ok. At the end of my drive, I shut off the engine and the update prompt came up and it updated normally. It’s ironic because one of the features of the update is a reduction of battery drain. 

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...