Development of DIY Electronic Upgrades

Beat the remote start first. Can’t stand having to crank twice. Came from a Ram 2500 with remote start that stayed on. My GF Subaru crosstrek also shuts down when opening door. She hates as well!

 

On the head unit, first you have to find hardware that can take the environment. On a hot sunny day, it may be 170 farenheit. When the windows fog up you have condensing humidity.

This is not an indoor embedded systems environment.

You have to find hardware that can deal with that. Then see what OSs are appropriate for that hardware.

 

My 2017 beeps several times (then stops beeping) if you get out of the running vehicle with the keys in your pocket. The truck remains running. I do this fairly often when swapping cars around in the driveway.

 

This is a good thread, keep this stuff to the stickies they already exist in. Might even delete these posts, as they offer zero value to the conversation at hand.

 

Man, I hate that too! I start the truck, get out to wipe the windows, etc, and the beep goes off several times. It is really annoying to me too!

 

I have Fortin remote start and cell module. The other day I remote started it and something went wrong because it didn't die when I opened the door. I was able to get in close the door and sit down. I had my key in my pocket but as soon as I hit the brake the car died.

I also wasn't able to restart it. I had to get out lock the doors wait a minute and it started like normal. That's only ever happened once. Tested it a bunch since then and it hasn't happened again.

Long story short I think it also dies when you but the brake. As it should like every other system if the restart process hasn't taken place.

 

I'm not surprised. I think that trying to use the traditional remote start procedure without it shutting itself off will be a lot of work, and may not succeed in the end. We'd be trying to circumvent security in a closed system we don't understand.

That's why I think the way to go is by starting with a cell based fob range extender. Then the vehicle things you are sitting in it starting it.

 

Yes I was standing in the trucks doorway with the key fob.

I just tried the remote start in the steps exactly as you wrote and when opening the door the engine cut off and the alarm went off.
Note: I have the Fortin Evo-all system.

 

@TacoSportTRD
Ok, it was a long shot. I wanted to see if it changed anything. Thanks for doing the test.


@ksJoe
Yes, due diligence on the operation temperature. Everything needs to be tested and researched. For withstanding the heat, the option that 'would' work is the bare metal option of making a UI from scratch using microcontrollers. However, I think this option negates the 'ease of use' of having a bigger pool of people that can tinker with the system. I still think the first problem that needs to be solved is the GPS integration issue. This can dictate which option we decide to test first. For example if we can integrate the Garmin, bare metal/win10/android is an option. If Waze is the only one that works, only android is an option, etc.. Remember I want the nav cues integrated into the vehicle audio system with nicely timed mutes.


With regards to other niceties of the head units. I think we need to keep in mind that the priority right now is the remote start. Let's not go too overboard and instead work through problems one at a time. I think the remote start is actually the biggest issue and once that can be cracked, other things can fall into place.

 

"...I think the remote start is actually the biggest issue and once that can be cracked, other things can fall into place..."

Crack that nut and I think you'll have high uptake on DIY kits. Have you determined if this would be a standalone remote start kit, or if it would be compatible with existing remote start kits which have an existing user base.

I see two demographics out there that would buy:
1) The people that haven't bought because they don't want to deal with the double start
2) The people that already bought, but would buy an add-on for an acceptable price

There are of course probably other groups, but those are the two I would focus on.

 

I have not thought about making it into a product. The first step is to actually solve the problem. This could go absolutely nowhere.

I can tell you that it would 99% not be option 2. The reason is that the remote start I am envisioning is fundamentally different than existing remote starts, as far as I know. This makes anything existing incompatible.

Think of this way:

• Existing remote starts just try to brute force start the engine by manipulating some signals close to the ECU and touching the CAN bus. The key fob does not need to be anywhere near the vehicle.
• This remote start manipulates the "human" element signals to make it look like a human is actually trying to start the vehicle. To get by the key fob / immobilizer issue, we use @ksJoe 's proposed re transmitter system to integrate the key fob into the equation. In this case, the vehicle should have no clue it was started remotely and think it was started by a human.

The proposed remote start needs to 'spoof' various signals such as the door jamb sensor, the lock button switches, the brake switch, and the PTS switch. The wiring and functionality required for this remote start is completely different than a COTS remote start system.

For experimental testing, I think the required monetary commitment will be low. As a first step, I think the user could just plop the re transmitter into a seat and the wire up the remote start into the vehicle. There are ten different ways we can go about doing this.

IFF the system ends up working, I think then it could just be integrated into a standalone module or even the proposed head unit with any required additional wiring.

 

It's possible this wouldn't have to be a total 'not compliant' build. The current remote systems send out a 'start' signal that sources from a different place than the PTS. It ends up at the same place, but originates differently. If you could intercept that 'different' source, then you could cascade your proposed sequence from there.

Just spitballing. Could be wrong. It's definitely happened before.

 

Be nice to have the remote start not turn off when you open the door. Do it like other cars, lock doors, start engine. If you put it in drive without keyfob in, it turns off. But then again I only use it at home and if someone gets in the gate and goes for truck they are asking for lead.

 

The PTS / start signal is just one small piece of the puzzle. I would imagine that the PTS switch is just wired all the way back to the ECU and a COTS remote start just breaks the connection in between and either passes the original PTS press or spoofs it for a remote start.

The issue is that we need to follow a sequence of several different sensor / switch spoofs:

1. Spoof lock button switch press
2. Spoof door jamb sensor
3. Spoof brake depresion
4. Spoof PTS depression

In order for this to happen, we need to be able to time and program this sequence to initiate each step. To do that I would need access to the firmware of the remote start (which wouldn't be exposed). Additionally, the remote start would also have to already tap into these sensor / switch signals, which I also do not think it does.

I could be wrong, I have not done extensive research / testing to see how COTS remote starts wire into the vehicle. Therefore, something could be made in the future. However as the initial step, I wouldn't be focusing on trying to get something to work with people's already integrated remote starts.

being in the industry, I have seen this issue all too many times where the marketing people want to shoe horn new features into a product that it was not designed for. Sometimes we end up doing it begrudgingly, but other times we say no. The effort for integrating into such a system is a huge hassle and can actually take much more time than just doing it from scratch.

I understand the monetary value in using the existing remote start such that people won't have to rebuy it and spend more money. On the other hand, it's not my fault that COTS remote starts have this issue. Also please note that me trying to shoehorn this system into existing COTS solution will require a lot of time and money on my end. Since I am not planning on selling this to make money right now, its more of a DIY thing, there is no payback to me in this scenario.

 

Fair enough, it’s a complex system for sure. At least for the uninitiated.

 

Got it. Please, maybe I should have explained myself better?

OP writes:

My first post with all the links is meant to be popular examples of DIY improvements that other members have done to simply show that there is a high demand for this type of stuff. And, to point out the items already in development, so OP doesn't "overlap" anything that's already out there. Also, quoting the other developers may even result in a collaboration.

The second post 1) directly relates to user programming of the head unit. For example, when you place the vehicle in park and shut off the engine, you automatically lose Bluetooth if you happen to be on a phone call. Super annoying. If OP is discussing development of a user defined head unit, then maybe he can include an option to keep the unit on until the phone call is over.

2) OP, There is another way to start the truck without putting your hand on the brake. How about instead of spoofing the normal remote start system, you spoof the tip #63 above? Have something that emulates "PTS button once and release, then push the PTS button and hold it till the truck starts (Approximately 10-13 seconds)". Is there any chance this could be a workaround for the door, brake and shift sensors? This may require a second fob...

Thanks for hearing me out!

 

Yep I thought Shane was being a bit of an ass.

Most of the information (links) you posted yesterday are relevent to any modification thread such as this one.

There were a few that I was unaware of and I appreciate that input.

 

Any time, let me know if you need any more tests.

 

Easy to do. I've done it. I had a video somewhere of it, but people starting hating on it when I said "just for fun" to demonstrate that we can solve and application if it's humanely possible on this earth and to show boat our dorky/nerd side a little . I will tell you one thing though, your approach about the immobilizer is correct, but I will give you a small warning...anyone who adds such a thing to their vehicle when the manufacturer did not intend on it being that way is not in compliance in terms of intended operation and as a 3rd party integration/integrator or device user.

What does that mean? If you sell this, you are now legally liable for injury, theft, warranty, etc...If Toyota catches wiff of it, they will not back you up or your product user, neither will insurance. Even worse, you would be named primary on a legal law suit and held responsible and accountable...the reason all 3rd party remote manufacturers can sell without voiding warranty, is because the product falls in line with how the vehicle manufacturer wants it to be, no matter whether we get it or not, it's silly or not; meaning the manufacturer wants your product to be compliant and pass all validation. Even all OEM Toyota remote start (the very few they had prior to 2020 Tacoma), PTS acted the same way.

Don't get me wrong, there IS a market for it. But no company owner or remote start brand wants to assume liability. There is too much to lose. You mention "spoofing" quite a bit. Spoofing will work if done right, but the word itself means "deceiving" or "faking" the vehicle's intended system operation...EVEN if you add the fail-safe method of requiring the fob to drive off or add key override...because Toyota could've done that themselves and there is a reason why they did not when other manufacturers do as it would not have been that hard. Boggles the mind, I know.

What I don't get is why Toyota didn't go all the way and make the system completely fool proof because as someone mentioned previously, I can still start a PTS vehicle, toss the fob and drive off...then I'm screwed. OR, start the vehicle manually, run in to grab something and come back to a vehicle that's been stolen/driven off...that makes no sense to me. I would say this is a security exploitation that Toyota wouldn't be too mad at ya for, but folks would have little interest in this unless it's actually happened to them. Folks do want your concept, but they don't know that they just voided warranty on all accounts, product, vehicle and so on...so you would have to have a lot of legal disclaiming to set you free from liability like install at your own risk, and you can't be held accountable for improper installation or actual use, proper or improper.

I too am a electrical and computer engineer by degree. I've written my serial protocols, TCP/IP protocols, created my own logic boards, programmed Micro-controllers/PLCs to automate, and so on to do cool stuff...but it's one thing to do it for yourself and give the idea away/publish it at others' own risk, and another to sell it.

My advice, look into the legal aspects first before going too far as this would be the only major hurdle before wasting time if your intention is to sell a solution to a major pain point, and it WILL sell. However, if you're going to potentially get in trouble and lose it all, including your assets because of something that started off as a challenge, and a moron that finds a way to intentionally or unintentionally use this concept maliciously, I'd highly reconsider a mass produced solution over livelihood. Just my opinion, please do not take it the wrong way, I love stuff like this. I love inventing and innovating. That's part of the reason why we're the first and only ones to offer plug n play for the manual transmission (with all the fail-safe procedures and fool proof steps for operation).