Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • 3 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...
Posted

Ok. I came across this info this past week after picking up a 2020 2500HD Denali with 15kmiles.  An upgrade from my 2003 2500HD Denali @225k miles. 

Wow, the tech in this thing is amazing.  So right away I noticed the bed 7 way/4way plug and the bumper and the 7 way and (what I figured out later) camera plugs were in the wrong freaking places for 5th wheel pulling.

So research lead me to here.  Because, while I bought a truck for more than my first house, I still value...value in DIY.  I will do the bumper to bed swap plug and have the extension cords.  Near as I can tell, light blue is the 'universal' plug, so seems to work for both the factory ends to get things up to the bed location.  I appreciate who put in the effort for the 3d printer files for enclosure.  I have done some 'bumper' testing to confirm the light blue and the amazon camera works.  Now to invest in the cable to get from back of of the camper to the plug or make my own.  

PXL_20240417_054627982.jpg

Posted

When you done can you post the part numbers for the camera and cable you used? I want to add a backup to my enclosed trailer.

Posted
On 2/8/2024 at 11:36 AM, chopjaw said:

 Would it just be easier to buy the GM - Inside RV camera and put in the bed?  But looking at that camera, it's huge.  I'd rather have a small camera under the bed rail.  Just looking for some suggestions on this.

 

Do we know whether the cameras noted in the thread will work with a 2024 HD? I was talking to a guy selling a GM setup that came with his 2023 truck he is not going to use; he says the 2023 is not compatible with the 2024HD.

 

Anybody have any idea? Thanks.

Posted

Great thread, I have done this for my 2022 AT4 HD, and can say everything works great, worst part will be running the cable from the back through the gooseneck on my old trailer 😅

Posted

Through some additional research I found on another forum; the 2024 camera part number is GM Part No: (85573256).

 

 

  • 3 weeks later...
Posted (edited)

Okay, I can confirm the 85573256 camera works for my 2024 LTZ. Need to do the door sequence as mentioned earlier in the thread, kinda strange. 2024 Silverado backup camera

On 4/25/2024 at 10:47 PM, JDP_TOO_TALL said:

Through some additional research I found on another forum; the 2024 camera part number is GM Part No: (85573256).

 

 

 

Edited by DmaxRum
  • 1 month later...
Posted

I have two cameras for sale that would not work for my 2024. I did not realize I needed a different part number. I’ll take $60 each shipped to lower 48 or $100 shipped for the pair. Call me at 319-242-one one 69

IMG_5688.jpeg

IMG_5689.jpeg

  • 1 month later...
Posted (edited)

Hello, this is a long shot, but I am needing urgent help.  I am headed on a trip and having a heck of a time with my rear trailer camera.  I purchased the transparent camera system setup with the camera and cable about a year ago.  Unfortunately I did not get to use it because we ended up taking a different vehicle that did not have the trailer package. 
 

Fast forward to this year and I am trying connect my 12’ cargo trailer and my 2024 Sierra AT4.  
 

Here is what happens, I connect the camera cable and then start the truck, the camera shows connected for about a half second then goes to disconnected.  I have tried everything I can think of, and am assuming it may be software or something on the actual truck.  
- tried a new end on the camera cable, official end/repair kit

- tried a new cable mentioned in the article here 

- tried a second camera (from the front grille of a 2021 Yukon

- tried both the rear and the interior ports

- tried removing the trailer profile, then re-adding

- tried plugging the main 7 pin harness, then camer, then shut the driver door, then start the truck. 
 

All result in the same issue.  I am going to call the dealer tomorrow, but am not sure they can get me in on short notice.  Please help.  
thanks.

Andrew

 

EDIT:

so, I want back through and deleted the trailer profile, removed the camera cable and harness, pulled the f11 fuse and reseated after 30 seconds.  I reconnected the harness then camera and then shut the door and started the truck.  Now I get the new trailer setup.  I setup the trailer and the camera is showing connected now steadily.  But… there is no picture, but the blue hour glass.  Shouldn’t it show something or do I need to go through the calibration first?  Thanks.  

Edited by dawsonar802
Posted

@RonnyR, is this something that you sell, ie… the camera sleeve and mount?  I do not have a 3D printer, but would purchase this if you have an eBay link, etc… The only catch is I am needing it by this Friday.  Thanks in advance. 
Andrew 

Posted (edited)

Andrew,

See if you can find the original GM part number for the kit you got

From the GMC accessory page

https://accessories.gmc.com/search?categoryId=98064

 

85118298 fits 2024

86584184 fits 2022 (mine) and I am using camera 84676845

 

Camera housing looks a little different but that is about it (other than the mentioned needed different camera)

You could also open the camera housing and check the camera number

If you had the 2024 AT4 back when you got the kit you could try and convince the dealer to take it back since they may have given you the wrong one for your year

This is the only help I can add

Edited by JP642
Posted

Thanks for the reply @JP642.  Yeah, I went ahead and ordered two of the 85573256 cameras. I am hoping from @DmaxRum post above this will be correct.  The truck I had initially was a 2022 AT4 and the camera kit did work, although I did not get to do much with it as we ended up taking a different vehicle for that trip.  With this one being a 2024 AT4 it sounds like there were some significant changes in wiring?  
 

At any rate, I think I have the fix down for getting the camera connected and detected now with the door sequence.  I just get the black screen or the blue hourglass when trying to see a picture.  

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

    • Did have to make 1 modification because of the WeatherTech rear mud flaps and that was needing 3 longer screws than what came with the install package. 😄
    • Picked up the liners yesterday. Installed passenger side WITHOUT any modifications. All mounting holes lined up perfectly. Rain is interfering today with drivers side. Very Happy! Will add pics when finished
    • 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.
    • 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.
    • 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?
  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...