Right to repair - we WIN!!

[mo1]

My $0.87 (used to be $0.02, but adjusted for inflation) is that this ends up going nowhere or nearly so. One, the tools and software are reported to be very expensive even to dealers, so even if you as a third party were allowed buy a $10,000/year subscription to a diagnostic program or pay $10,000 for a piece of diagnostic equipment, the price is so high that few can/would do so. Secondly, one of the big things the OEMs are trying to keep people from getting into is ECUs. They don't like people who buy the least powerful tractor in a model line to go turn up the fueling rate and boost on a tractor to make it essentially identical to the most powerful tractor in that line without paying the OEM more. However, the EPA really doesn't like it when people go into the ECU and tell it to ignore the fact that they've removed the DPF, EGR, and SCR and run normally instead of throwing reams of error codes and derating to 2 HP. I guarantee you somebody will do an emissions delete using the now-available diagnostic/technical software/equipment, and the OEMs will run to the FTC saying, "See! This is why we prevented them from doing this before!" and they'll be allowed to either encrypt their ECUs and/or prohibit access to diagnostic tools/software.

I can basically see this allowing the big time operators with equipment costing several hundred thousand dollars in "unlocking" some of the electronic monitoring features on their equipment that they would have normally had to pay more to enable. What the OEMs will thus do is just unlock this on all new units and raise the price the amount that the activation used to cost, essentially making everybody pay for these features regardless if they wanted them or not.

About the only good outcome from this is it may make some independent repair shops be able to work on newer equipment, but again, the large number of pieces of equipment and software they would need to service various pieces of equipment and the enormous amount it will all cost will severely blunt the benefit from the access.

 

[sunandsand]

I just Googled "OBD II pinouts" and found that while the socket is the same and most of the pins are in the same places (but not always), there appear to be three different protocols for the data. Inexpensive scanners (Harbor Freight $20 specials) likely don't have what you need. Some of the more expensive ones do.


"You may also tell which protocol is used on a specific automobile by examining the connector socket carefully. If the dash connector has a pin in the #7 position and no pin at #2 or #10, then the car has the ISO 9141 protocol. If no pin is present in the #7 position, the car uses an SAE protocol. If there are pins in positions #7 and #2 and/or #10, the car may use the ISO protocol."

As to Kioti specific codes, I have no idea, but Google is probably your friend ;-)

Best Regards,

Mike/Florida

 

[sunandsand]

You can't reprogram the ECU using a scan tool. All the tool does is read fault codes and clears them (which is all we really need).

Reprogramming an ECU involves changing code. About 1990, this was being done by reading the code off the original equipment's EPROM (Electronically Programmable Read-Only Memory chip), saving it to a disc, modifying it, then writing it to another EPROM, which was then installed into the ECU. This was practical when the EPROMS were socketed and only had 32 or so pins. I still have the reader/writer, it runs on Windows 3.1.

You could also get an EEPROM, which was an erasable EPROM. It had a quartz window which you shined a UV light onto for a minute or so to erase it, then you could reprogram it again.

This mostly isn't possible any more. EPROMS now have many, many pins and are usually surface mount parts (no pins through the PC board or sockets), which means they are difficult to remove and replace without wrecking the PC board.

It is possible to buy hot-rod chips anyway, but they are expensive and advertised as for off-road use only (which is usually ignored). You send off your ECU and a bunch of money, and (if the company doesn't go out of business) eventually you get a modified ECU back. The power increases are often marginal and driveability suffers, as do emissions. All in all, it is a pretty bad idea, the engineers at the factory know what they are doing.


Incidentally, the reason I keep this antique device is that it also has a "what are you?" function. You put a chip into the socket, press the button, and it reports back "I'm a 74LS00" or similar. This saved me quite a few hundred dollars on an aircraft radio which decided to talk but not listen. Turns out there were four identical socketed chips on one board and they had "house numbers" so there was no way to tell what they were, as in "send it to us for service along with all your credit cards".

Chip #1 was a 74LS00, chip #2 was a 74LS00, chip #3, same number printed on it, was dead . . .

I pulled a 74LS00 out of my junk box and the radio was fixed. The chip costs a dime, new. The manufacturer wanted $250 to "look it over".

Best Regards,

Mike/Florida

 

[k0ua]

This mostly isn't possible any more. EPROMS now have many, many pins and are usually surface mount parts (no pins through the PC board or sockets), which means they are difficult to remove and replace without wrecking the PC board.

Well actually..... SMD chips are fairly easy to remove and replace. I have successfully removed and replaced a 100 legged CPU chip on a radio that the entire chip was about the size of a thumbnail. It is much easier than thru hole chips to replace. You need some proper tools and you need the proper techniques, and you need some practice. But the overall bottom line, is that it is easier to replace multileg SMD devices than thru hole devices.

 

[sunandsand]

Sigh, progress has passed me by . . . I've always had much better luck with thru-hole components. Fine point iron, patience and a solder sucker. If you would, please PM me with some tips on SMD stuff, I'd like to learn that. (Trying to avoid thread drift.)

KK4ITE here ;-)

Best Regards,

Mike/Florida

 

[k0ua]

And if you don't have the proper air solder rework station, you can get by (as I do) with a package of chipquick and a tube of good liquid rosin and a chisel point soldering iron. Yes believe it or not a chisel point that is many times the size of the legs. As you do not solder the legs individually, you use lots of rosin on the board before you lay the new chip, and you "flow" solder the legs on each side. Then carefully inspect with a good magnifying visor and re-rosin and reflow if necessary.

Lots of rosin is the key. As for the removal of the big multilegged chip, the key there is the use of the chipquick metal. This special metal has a much lower freezing point than regular 60-40 solder. So as you run the iron across a side of the chips legs you add chipquick which amalgamates with the regular solder, and lowers the freezing point so that you have much much more time to remove the chip.

Do all sides of the chip, Then you have plenty of time to heat the sides (legs) and take your tweezers and pluck the chip off of the board while the metal is still molten. Then suck up the metal until the board is clean, Then add lots of liquid rosin, and lay out the new chip. Carefully inspecting for leg alignment. Start by tacking down one leg diagonally across the chip on each side (2 sided or 4 sided). Once you are satisfied that the alignment is good, the flow solder all of the rest of the legs with your chisel point iron. Inspect for any shorts and reflow if necessary.

If this old man can do it, anyone can do it. All it takes is a little practice.

 

[k0ua]

There are many good videos on You-tube showing the"" cheap and dirty " Chip quick method (you can get a kit at Amazon). That is how I learned how to do it. Of course the Pro's actually have an SMD rework station, but they cost more.

 

[IndyJay]

My $0.87 (used to be $0.02, but adjusted for inflation) is that this ends up going nowhere or nearly so. One, the tools and software are reported to be very expensive even to dealers, so even if you as a third party were allowed buy a $10,000/year subscription to a diagnostic program or pay $10,000 for a piece of diagnostic equipment, the price is so high that few can/would do so. Secondly, one of the big things the OEMs are trying to keep people from getting into is ECUs. They don't like people who buy the least powerful tractor in a model line to go turn up the fueling rate and boost on a tractor to make it essentially identical to the most powerful tractor in that line without paying the OEM more. However, the EPA really doesn't like it when people go into the ECU and tell it to ignore the fact that they've removed the DPF, EGR, and SCR and run normally instead of throwing reams of error codes and derating to 2 HP. I guarantee you somebody will do an emissions delete using the now-available diagnostic/technical software/equipment, and the OEMs will run to the FTC saying, "See! This is why we prevented them from doing this before!" and they'll be allowed to either encrypt their ECUs and/or prohibit access to diagnostic tools/software.

I can basically see this allowing the big time operators with equipment costing several hundred thousand dollars in "unlocking" some of the electronic monitoring features on their equipment that they would have normally had to pay more to enable. What the OEMs will thus do is just unlock this on all new units and raise the price the amount that the activation used to cost, essentially making everybody pay for these features regardless if they wanted them or not.

About the only good outcome from this is it may make some independent repair shops be able to work on newer equipment, but again, the large number of pieces of equipment and software they would need to service various pieces of equipment and the enormous amount it will all cost will severely blunt the benefit from the access.

I believe that this is the premise of the "Right to Repair" movement. There is no valid reason for the software to be that expensive other than to prevent competition in servicing the tractors or to gouge the consumer for minor repairs that they could easily do themselves. Both are unethical and skirt on being illegal. They could open up the diagnostics portion of the code but block users from tampering with the emissions related settings. Not saying I agree with this, just stating that it would be possible. I had heard that there is someone in CZ that can make your 45 HP Kioti a 55 HP using standard settings (the 45, 50 and 55 engines are identical, it is all software), all the way up to 75 HP. I personally would not feel comfortable sending my ECU to some Czech hacker, even after I am out of warranty. But if I had a buddy that has a DK5510 and a way to download the bits into my DK4510? But that would be dishonest, right? That would be the justification they would use to keep it locked down.

 

[Fixastuff]

Some people will complain about anything! Just because you find self diagnostics impossible to do does not make that the case for everyone. Dang, it's like y'all would rather not even have the option of fixing it yourself.

 

[CobyRupert]

Everybody says this is some of the hughest bigglyest news ever.
Way to go government.