Toyota Charging A Subscription Fee For Remote Start?

If the World Economic Forum has there way. Thats the first goal on there list. We we all own nothing and be happy by 2030.

 

Back to this RF remote start thing. I am old school and haven't moved past a traditional key start on my rigs.

I can only come up with a few practical uses for close range remote start, but can't seem to dial in a practical need for anything further than maybe half a block.

What do you guys see as a practical use for long range remote start?

 

Remote start has never really appealed to me. I think I used it once, just out of curiosity. When I started driving, cars didn’t have remotes.

Today’s vehicles have a lot of features that are new to me. Some I enjoy, others don’t make a hill of beans to me.

 

I work in a large building in the secure area of an airport. When it's time to go home I can remote start from my phone and have the truck warmed up or cooled down by the time I make it out there. I cant do that with the standard remote start using the fob.

 

The only reason I would consider keeping the subscription is because I have a kid turning 16 and I like the ability to remotely oversee their driving if they use my truck.

Other than a few unique scenarios, I’m not certain long distance remote start, lock, and unlock is all the useful.

 

Don’t be so naive…

 

Have you ever started it via the keyfob? As long as you have setup remote connect thru the app , no need for anything else.
Its finicky and countless people here just assume it doesn’t work . Then after a few tries are completely surprised when it works. Even I get tripped up occasionally when I havent done it in a while..

Try this:

Press and release lock button slowly 2x.
Then Press and hold lock until you see parking lights flash, then release and the sequence will begin.

Can’t do it too fast , cant do it too slowly. If you have SOS button in your truck it will work.

 

So, it's more of a luxury item then?

I realize that is a thing for some folks to have their rig be at a happy temperature before arriving and loading up.

The unnecessary fuel consumption, and low rpm idling are bigger detractions to me than a few minutes of allowing me and the vehicle to acclimate in just the first few miles of driving.

But, I hear ya.

 

Installed Start-X, so I got no subscription, but I got remote start!

 

I haven't opened the app or downloaded the app. will do that. Thanks.

 

Not to threadjack here, but adding to this my annoyance that while the remote start is a usable feature (especially like @Absolut_Boost mentioned), Toyota decided (unlike my older F150) that when you unlock the truck it shuts down the engine so you have to restart it once inside. Why?

 

I do remember reading something along the lines that the remote start feature had to be “initialized” via the app, giving Toyota an ok from the owner to enable the Remote Start feature.
My dealer set mine up for me so I don’t know more than that.

 

Although I hoped that Toyota would do something about the huge backlash they saw with the whole "we will only give you the secret key fob remote start but only while you have an active subscription" bulls**t, this right here has turned me off from using the remote start even while I'm still on my trial period. The whole system is garbage.

 

I felt that way back in 2013 about bluetooth. I worked for Boeing and one of the young engineers (from FL) helped me do valve adjustment on my '82 Suzuki GS750. He tinkered with lots of things including bluetooth in his car.

I felt just like you describe...and here it is almost 10 years later, I'm using the bluetooth in my Sport: AppleCar Play, my iPhone/Air Pods.

Our kids are adults and their husbands are both somewhat savvy with technology.

So, it kinda helps when your adult daughters & their husbands can provide some guidance with technology...all it takes is some interest and enthusiasm.

 

Don't be stupid. Read the entire bill, yes those are in there. No that isn't reasonable. Maybe we just get rid of cars. If it saves just one life right?

 

It says nothing about Government or Remote capability to shut the vehicle down or disable it in any way. The bill is just an outline for a proposed Federal Safety Standard. IF the bill passes and is signed into law, it would eventually require that vehicles have a system onboard that can monitor somehow the BAC of the driver and be able to prevent or limit vehicle operation if it determines that the BAC is above the limit in the jurisdiction of vehicle operation. It is just an outline and gives no specifics about how this would be done. In fact, the only thing that it does specifically say is that it would be part of the vehicle at manufacture. Nothing about government control of said system, nothing about capability of remotely operating said system.

I pasted the language of the bill here so that others can read it for themselves instead of reading some fear mongering BS posts. You can give your reading comprehension one more try. Don't hurt yourself.

 

@GrundleJuice
“To require the Secretary of Transportation, acting through the Administrator of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, to prescribe a Federal motor vehicle safety standard for advanced drunk and impaired driving prevention technology, and for other purposes”….
clearly you’re smarter than me and read the bill but can you help us dummies out and define “other purpose’s”? My little tiny brain reads this and automatically thinks government overreach.

 

Leaving proposed outlines for federal standards open to expansion or change is pretty standard. Regulatory bills that affect private citizens and are not National Security related would have zero chance of leaving an open ended definition of scope like that. Still it says nowhere anything about remote or gvt capability to do anything to the vehicle. There are also proposed systems that would monitor vehicles around one another and communicate speed, acceleration, yaw angle, etc so if the driver next to you starts veering into your lane it could warn you or react before you even know the other driver is doing anything. That is one reasonable guess at what "other purposes" could mean, but it probably doesn't mean anything specifically and is just there to allow for change/adjustment of the proposed safety standard if necessary.


... or it could mean that the govt is going to shutoff your vehicle so that they can screw you over somehow. probably come take your guns while you are stuck on the side of the road, too...

 

I

I’m sure you’re right. The government would never deceive us….