Ban the check engine light!

[LeakySeals]

Toyotas throw a P0420 catalyst efficiency code when the cat loses 5% efficiency, meaning 95% good!. Thats a $800 CEL inspection fail for nothing, because the emissions still pass! I learned to take mine off and clean it. Turns out Toyota was fearful of California sales, made all the US cars California emissions capable. Thanx!

 

[HerrStig]

I agree that the growth of onboard automotive computer power would should it easy to have a display which would read code translations rather than just a letter/number combination. That might make it less likely that a stealer would be able to get away with a 50 dollar charge for "fixing" a loose gas cap. Scanners, however, are cheap, (check Amazon, or Chinese Freight) and in self defense you ought to buy one. Otherwise the "repair center" can tell you almost ANYTHING - and charge for it)
The really annoying part about this is the number of codes (which prevent passing inspection in many states) which result from FAILURE of sensors, rather than engine operation problems. Your vehicle may be running clean as can be, but if a sensor heater, for example, fails, ON goes the light. In Florida, you don't need any of that stuff - no "emissions inspection" required.

 

[HerrStig]

I have one Toyota in the fleet which shows the PO 420 code about twice a year. I use the reset provision on the scanner to clear it, and it's good for another 6 months, including passing the PIMA state inspection.

 

[Burt]

Interesting feedback. I would have thought BITOG readers would be more pro do-it-yourselfers and less "people are too stupid to do anything with information anyway".

 

[david_ES2]

I think they should of made more cars have a secret procedure to lookup the codes for CEL on the dash readout, it would save many gear heads like us a great deal, epecially if we are on the go and cannot get to a proper scan tool.

I guess i should be thankful that here in usa they made obd2 mandatory sooner than later

 

[rjundi]

The check engine light in my Acura MDX actually displays the code and text message for each inside of the navigation display. You can go back and see the history of them also.

My wife's 05 Subaru you can get the codes by simply plugging two loose plugs under the dash into each other. The Subaru I could not figure out which plug was which so my nice independent mechanic just read them for me.(free)

 

[JOD]

My Freestyle can display the DTC's from engineering mode on the cluster display. It's just hard enough to keep the riff raff out! I like it!

 

[calvin1]

As an enthusiast and shade tree mechanic OBD1 was better. I don't need a scanner for either the BMW or Ford. With the Ford I can even get it to run through its 3 different test modes. Unfortunately the market and regulations aren't written for people like us. OBD2 is like the lowest common denominator of all the various OBD1 setups that were out there pre-1996.

OTOH, I read as much of the article as I could stand when they first posted it and found most of it to just be an idiotic rant. The vast majority of people really do need a "Go Get a Mechanic" light as they couldn't handle anything more sophisticated.

 

[07Wolfie]

I think more information being available is surely better for the consumer (but worse for the service industry). All the new vehicles that use a CAN bus or similar network have computers that are communicating and monitoring with much more sophistication than simple OBDII codes. Of course the technology exists to display more detailed messages to the driver- take GM's "Tighten Gas Cap" message, for example- in some cars, this evap emissions code just throws a CEL. The industry's attempt to control the diagnosis information with OBD went a little too far, and now so many people just ignore the CEL. For example, take a P0115 fault (coolant temp sensor)- if the car flashed a message like "Attention: Electronic sensor fault detected that will cause poor fuel economy and possible engine damage...", don't you think the average person would be more likely to take care of it? With a simple CEL, the average person is more likely to ignore it and complain that they get bad mileage and can't pass smog. Sure, some people would still ignore the information, but that's no reason to withold it.

Also, how many people do you know that think "Service Engine Soon" means oil change? That's a huge misconception, IMO. Every time I ask someone how long that light has been on, I hear "Oh, I just got the oil changed. They forgot to reset the light." Ugh.

 

[UNC017]

Originally Posted By: calvin1
As an enthusiast and shade tree mechanic OBD1 was better.


As an enthusiast and shadetree mechanic (and one who started out on points, carburetors, and oil-bath aircleaners I might add), I disagree.

This is a case where this old phart actually likes the latest tech much better.
Granted, SOME OBD-1 implementations were fine... but others were practically useless. OBD-2 is at least standardized, which helps a lot. And while its true that OBD-2 has the disadvantage that you can't get to its greatest powers without a scanner, WITH a scanner the car can do so much better at "telling you where it hurts" than any OBD-1 car ever could. In my opinion, a shadetree mechanic like myself can invest in a scanner (~100 bucks if you look for deals on Amazon), and then pretty quickly save that back because there's so much less shotgunning parts at the car to see if it fixes a vaguely-described OBD-1 code.

 

[mechanicx]

GM's and Chryslers OBD1 and to a lesser extent Ford's would give you the code if you jumpered the ALDL connector (or cycled the key on Chryslers). What good does a code do the average owner or DIYer? They just throw parts at it. You still need more in depth values from a bidirectional scanner, a voltmeter and an understanding and ability to diagnosis the problem. The check engine life does tell you when the issue is critical, when it's flashing and you have a current misfire.

It's not hard to get codes with a cheap OBDII scanner or for free from an autoparts store. Like I said even if the car spit out the codes it would not help much.

What really needs to change is for the body function and brake codes to be fully open to the aftermarket like the powertrain codes are. It's all about the money. The low end aftermarket scanners are generic coverage and don't have in depth vehicle specific coverage or display values the automaker use. The OE scanners are ultra expensive. You either pay a lot maybe too much and get what it takes to fully diagnosis modern vehicle. Or you go "cheap" and get some of the codes and data and throw parts at the problem.

It's just ignorance to think that getting the code and even its description is going to benefit average drivers much. It usually takes some diagnostic equipment, factory service information and some knowledge and skill to diagnosis modern electrical problems.

 

[2Fast4U]

They shouldn't ban cel but all companies should make it easy to retrieve codes to dash display.

 

[MrRPM]

my 01 wrangler will display the code if you cycle the ignition on and off 3 times.
I have all the codes saved on the computer so its pretty convenient

 

[Kestas]

I agree with Herrstig. For all the (sometimes useless) electronics put into cars, they should integrate a code reader into the car. High volume production would bring the cost of code readers per car down considerably, and eventually pay for itself when check engine light interpretation is needed.

 

[mechtech2]

Why hide the information that is there?
Of course they can and should incorporate a real reader.
$20-50 more per car?

 

[The_Jeff]

The separation of code and reader reminds me of the dairy-state legislation in the 1950s. Margarine had to be sold pasty white, with a packet of orange the end user had to mix in himself. This was so it wouldn't accientally be mistaken for butter.

Or how about a television set with a "simulated wood grain" cabinet?

Or how about getting linux then getting the "nonfree" codec pack?

I have to disagree with "change oil soon" lights being yellow in color; yellow is the color of moderate danger, like the CEL. (The brake failure light is universally RED.)

OnStar gets your codes, they seem to, in the ads, reassure drivers that they can make it the 12 miles to Mr Goodwrench, 2nd exit, then a mile on the left.

 

[ron917]

Originally Posted By: mechtech2
Why hide the information that is there?
Of course they can and should incorporate a real reader.
$20-50 more per car?


It's all software. Many cars already have a usable display, such as the trip odometer.

My 2007 Outback can display the DTCs by performing the proper incantation with the headlight switch and trip odometer button.

I posted instructions at:
http://www.subaruoutback.org/forums/99-d...codes-dtcs.html
NOTE: I stated that it works on 2005-09, but apparently it does not work on 2005s.

 

[mechanicx]

Having full scanner diagnostic built-in onboard along with service information wouldn't be a bad idea. Maybe if they came out with OBDIII with this requirement for every car the cost could be low spread out over millions of vehicles.

 

[mopar_monkey]

Originally Posted By: strongt
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Originally Posted By: bepperb
I think Chrysler vehicles would still blink the CEL on startup into the early 90's. The oldest foreign cars I can remember would be late 80's/early 90's and they never gave any info. I agree it would be helpful especially since most new cars come with a lcd info display.

On the other hand, an OBDII reader can be had for 20~30 bucks.


If you key my Jeep on and off, 3 times fast w/o starting it, it will display the code/codes. No scanner required.


X2 My Jeep's the same.

most chrysler vehicles do the same, kinda handy.problem it a code these days isn't conclusive, you still need to be able to diagnosis the issue, just because the code says o2 sensor 1 slow to respond doesn't always mean the o2 sensor is the problem, so there no point in giving the average driver the code. people would end up wasting a lot of time and money replacing parts that happened to be mentioned in a code description.

 

[MrHorspwer]

I would expect nothing less from Jalopnik: The automotive journalism version of the National Enquirer.