[HN Gopher] BMW F Series Gear Selector, Part Two: Breakthrough
___________________________________________________________________
BMW F Series Gear Selector, Part Two: Breakthrough
Author : VeXocide
Score : 141 points
Date : 2022-06-29 13:27 UTC (9 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.projectgus.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.projectgus.com)
| spaceywilly wrote:
| This makes me realize how easy it would be to hack a car like
| this. All you would need to do is sneak into the car and plug in
| a low profile OBD reader-like device with a cellular modem, and
| you could send these messages from anywhere.
|
| Just with the information in these articles we now know how to
| spoof the shifter mechanism, I'm sure similar processes could be
| used to determine steering and throttle controls. All these
| Hollywood plot lines and conspiracy theories suddenly don't seem
| so far fetched.
| BoorishBears wrote:
| This is wrong on more than a few levels.
|
| First off, you learned how to send messages _to_ a gear
| indicator (after it 's been ripped out of the car)
|
| That's not the same as being able to spoof messages _from_ the
| gear indicator to other components in a real vehicle, and then
| getting them to affect the transmission.
|
| Realistically even if you could somehow send the transmission
| an instruction to shift in a way that would cause an issue
| (like telling the transmission to go in Park at highway
| speeds), there are multiple layers that would stop you in your
| tracks. At the lowest level the ZF8 most of these GWS shifters
| came with would never follow that instruction to start with.
|
| -
|
| I hate fear mongering around vehicle security because it leads
| to things like Mazda locking down their infotainment Linux box
| because news reports saying "Mazdas can be easily hacked", when
| the component in question had no tie in at all to anything
| safety critical.
|
| The reality is physical access to the car is game over. I feel
| like your comment is intentionally worded to retort "oh well
| you just need quick access to the inside, vs getting under to
| cut the brake lines", but if you stick some random custom OBD
| II device with remote C&C you're making a much larger target
| for attention.
|
| People are stealing entire catalytic converters off cars with
| noisy angle grinders, getting more intimate access to a vehicle
| is really not that hard.
| bri3d wrote:
| This was true in the mid 2000s, but isn't true on most modern
| cars. Most modern cars have a Gateway module which sits between
| the OBD port and the Powertrain CAN busses which the OP is
| reverse engineering.
|
| These Gateway modules only allow specific diagnostics-related
| messages through to the various backing buses.
|
| Now, generally the security on the Gateway module itself isn't
| great, and diagnostic protocols also aren't very well secured,
| so there's certainly havoc to wreak. But it's not as simple as
| "plug in a dongle and send commands" - to do what OP is doing,
| you need to tap into a wiring harness that's usually buried a
| bit higher up in the dashboard, at least :)
|
| Usually either the Gateway or the control module itself will
| disallow sensitive UDS commands like the Hard Reset from the
| article, as well as adaptation / basic settings and output
| testing commands which are not safe given the current
| parameters, as well - for example, I doubt you could send UDS
| Hard Reset to the gear selector module while the car is moving.
| bonestamp2 wrote:
| I do consulting for one OEM and all of their new vehicles
| over the past couple of years use encrypted bus traffic. So,
| it is getting much harder for third party tools to
| communicate with anything that is not mandated by law (most
| things other than DTCs and Emissions related APIs).
|
| The sole purpose is security. Trust me, the engineers don't
| want to introduce any more complexity than necessary, and
| that's why it has been so open for so long. But, in light of
| hackers exposing these security vulnerabilities, there is
| pressure to close them. I'm sure there will be conspiracy
| theories about making it harder to repair cars so you have to
| go to the dealer. But, that's also not true -- because of
| Massachusetts' right to repair laws, OEM tools are available
| to anyone (or any shop) that wants to pay for them (in and
| out of MA).
| [deleted]
| bri3d wrote:
| > because of Massachusetts' right to repair laws, OEM tools
| are available to anyone (or any shop) that wants to pay for
| them (in and out of MA).
|
| At a price that's meaningless to a hobbyist and steep for
| an independent shop, sure.
|
| Also, the actual implementation of these rules has been
| stalled for years by Alliance for Automotive Innovation v.
| Healy.
|
| Point me to where I can legally, in a "clean" way, download
| ODIS for VW, or INPA for BMW, or DAS for Mercedes, at a
| reasonable price for a hobbyist.
|
| IMO the only reason that manufacturers aren't under even
| more pressure is that these tools are so widely pirated.
| bonestamp2 wrote:
| > At a price that's meaningless to a hobbyist and steep
| for an independent shop, sure.
|
| I agree, they're pricey for hobbyists, and I can't speak
| for all but the I work with is well priced for
| independent shops. This is not exclusive to automotive
| though, professional tools in most industries are not
| priced for hobbyists -- it's easy to lose money on
| enterprise software if it's priced for hobbyists.
|
| > Also, the actual implementation of these rules has been
| stalled for years by Alliance for Automotive Innovation
| v. Healy.
|
| You're thinking about the newer "expanded rights" law.
| I'm talking about the original 2012 law that the newer
| law is trying to expand upon:
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_Massachusetts_Question
| _1
| Czarcasm wrote:
| What you can do instead, is slip under the car and splice
| into the wire harness that is running under the car to the
| transmission or differential.
|
| The transmission controller and differential speed sensor (or
| even differential controller on some cars) will be post
| gateway on the CAN bus.
|
| I've done this on GM vehicles to spoof different vehicle
| behaviors while evaluating traction control systems.
| mschuster91 wrote:
| > All you would need to do is sneak into the car and plug in a
| low profile OBD reader-like device with a cellular modem, and
| you could send these messages from anywhere.
|
| As the article states, modern cars employ CAN-bus gateways that
| act as data brokers. The OBD port usually only gets access to
| the buses that are relevant for emissions certifications and
| ordinary shop work and that's it.
|
| The movement to separate and gated CAN buses started with
| people manipulating their engine controllers, initial exploits
| targeting the radio and then the avalanche of thieves using OBD
| to disable alarms and reprogram keys.
| potatochup wrote:
| Usually there is a whitelisted set of messages available
| through the OBD port, it doesn't give you unfettered access to
| the CAN bus.
| tjoff wrote:
| Enough for https://comma.ai/ to work so can't be that
| restricted?
|
| Edit: thanks to responders, I misremembered how it worked.
| bri3d wrote:
| Comma.ai plugs into the vehicle's "backing" CAN busses
| (Powertrain, Sensors, infotainment, etc.) _behind_ the
| Gateway, not the OBD port. This requires the removal of at
| least a few trim pieces and connectors. For example, the
| Giraffe module taps in at the high-mounted camera module on
| many cars, requiring the removal of ceiling trim and the
| installation of a custom connector / tap onto the CAN bus.
| jaywalk wrote:
| Look at the installation procedure for that device. It
| requires removing the rearview mirror and plugging the
| device into the existing camera's wiring harness. It's not
| controlling anything via the OBD-C port.
| HeyLaughingBoy wrote:
| If you wanted to kill someone, car bombs are even easier.
| neuralRiot wrote:
| I'm not sure with what purpose would anyone do that. Tracking?
| Assassination? Stealing? There's simpler an more effective
| methods for any of that.
| londons_explore wrote:
| Hooking it up to a real car and sniffing the message bus where it
| connects would be by far the easiest approach to this...
|
| Then you don't even need to understand all the messages - just
| replay what the car sends and figure out which byte in the
| response is the current gear.
|
| You probably wouldn't even need to figure out the checksums!
| Rychard wrote:
| The messages include an incrementing counter ID, which has to
| be accounted for when calculating the checksum. The purpose of
| this is specifically to prevent "replay attacks". If the
| counter doesn't increment on subsequent messages, it raises an
| error. If you increment the counter but do not recalculate the
| checksum, it raises an error.
| londons_explore wrote:
| The counter is only one byte though - record 256 messages and
| you have the whole set.
|
| No need to understand the protocol or anything - just record
| a few minutes of data, find when a message repeats
| (indicating whatever counter mechanism is in use has rolled
| over), and replay that loop repeatedly.
|
| The only time this technique doesn't work is when a
| challenge-response algorithm is in use, but car stuff doesn't
| tend to do that except for some lock/security/firmware update
| type functionality.
| phkahler wrote:
| A lot of the complexity here is because the gear selector is
| considered a safety-critical part. They may also consider LED
| indicators on it as safety-critical information to the driver.
| Those two things - is the transmission receiving the real intent
| of the driver, and is the driver being told the actual state of
| the system - are just the top level. Security is also starting to
| be a concern, though I think there is room for debate about how
| far they need to go with that. It's common to have all drivetrain
| components on a dedicated CAN bus with a gateway between it and
| other stuff. Your infotainment system is not going to put the car
| in Park regardless of what you run on it.
| Prcmaker wrote:
| I recall driving a borrowed Mercedes in early 2020, the car was
| maybe two years old, two door coupe, nice but not super sporty,
| automatic. As is my habit, one of the first things I did was
| put it in to manually shifted mode. I found with acceleration
| and braking, coupled with the inertia of the gear knob, gears
| could be shifted inadvertently. Insult to injury, that
| inadvertent shift could be enough to trigger a second shift,
| resulting in some extremely unpredictable vehicle dynamics. A
| stronger set of centring springs would have been all that was
| required to easily filter the noise from driver intent.
| rconti wrote:
| Yup. Bad Things can happen:
|
| https://money.cnn.com/2016/06/20/autos/jeep-recall-anton-yel...
|
| I absolutely hate stateless switches on automotive stuff. Why
| can't I tell that my turn signal is on by 'feel'? Why do I have
| to rely on a (too quiet) clicking, or a (too hidden) indicator
| light?
|
| I have an E70 X5 with the "new style" transmission selector, as
| well as a Tesla 3 that replicates it on the right side of the
| column. Thankfully most cars seem to have stuck with the
| "forward = reverse", "Back=drive" convention; confusing as it
| sounds, at least it replicates a move from neutral on an
| automatic with a traditional PRNDL lever.
|
| Both cars also have stateless signals. The E90 and newer BMWs
| seem to have indicator clicks that are almost inaudible, and in
| almost every car I drive, the indicator lights are hidden
| behind the steering wheel, so you never know if the indicator
| has cancelled or not. On my "bad old world" BMW, at least you
| can feel the lever click down when it cancels.
|
| The Tesla also has a stateless signal switch, but it doesn't
| give me the same issues. I think the audible "click" is a lot
| more distinctive or something. Alas, the green flashy light is
| way over in the middle of the car instead of conveniently
| hidden behind the rim of the steering wheel.
| smilekzs wrote:
| Fortunately, G20 onwards have returned to a mechanically
| latching turning signal stalk design.
|
| Unfortunately, ZN8/ZD8 Toyota GR86 / Subaru BRZ (the new
| ones!) have regressed to the dreaded mechanically momentary
| (non-latching) turning signal stalk design.
| hatware wrote:
| Neat how modern car systems turned into microservices.
| waiseristy wrote:
| It is interesting how it evolved that way. As individual
| components were computerized (ABS, TCS, TCM's, ECM's, etc.),
| there was no real point at which it made sense to centralized
| things.
|
| Now, with the silicon shortages, and the ever increasing
| complexity of vehicle networks, I think things are going to hit
| a crossover point. Instead of a vehicle full of
| "microservices", we will probably see more vehicles with some
| centralized compute unit controlling dozens of sensors and
| "edge" processors.
|
| It's impossible to fully centralize an automotive computer, but
| there is a lot of work that can be done to move away from
| "microservices" to something that is easier to define, develop,
| and validate
| Cthulhu_ wrote:
| I kinda wish, as it stands it feels like decades of different
| protocols and technologies awkwardly stitched together. In
| theory everything would be connected on a central bus to a
| centralized RTOS computer able to read every sensor and adjust
| everything that needs it 1000x a second (or more), so that
| anyone could easily hook up a new device or software and
| subscribe to an event bus, but alas.
| replygirl wrote:
| isn't that just the can bus?
| themitigating wrote:
| Mostly every component on modern cars uses the CAN bus for
| communication https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CAN_bus
|
| Many third party companies have made accessories to read
| information or control devices using it. Cars also have a
| standard diagnostic port called the OBD2 which you can
| purchase $10 readers that use bluetooth with your phone.
|
| Cars may have much more electronics but with all the sensors
| it's very easy to know what part of the system is broken. For
| example on my mom's 2011 Honda Civic (about 100k miles) her
| check engine light came on. I read the codes and it was the
| transmission pressure switch. I purchased one for about $30,
| replaced it, and everything is running fine.
|
| As to all these new electronic systems and their value:
|
| A 1964 Pontiac Tempest GTI has a 6.4 liter v8 engine that
| makes 348hp[1]. It goes from 0 to 60 in 4.6 seconds and does
| the 1/4 mile in 13.1 seconds. It gets 11mpg~
|
| A 2022 Volkswagen Golf R has a 2.0 liter i4 engine that makes
| 315hp. It goes from 0 to 60 in 3.9 seconds and does the 1/4
| mile in 12.5 seconds. It gets 23mpg[2] (26city 30hwy). It
| also has all modern emissions requirements.
|
| [1]HP numbers were overrated pre 1990s because manufactures
| would remove accessories during testing.
|
| [2]They changed how cars were rated in the 2000s so the 23mpg
| would be higher if rated back in 1964
| jjtheblunt wrote:
| The Golf is a 2 liter turbo, i think
| systemvoltage wrote:
| A lot of things in the interior uses LIN bus.
| bri3d wrote:
| Saying "most cars use the CAN bus" is kind of like saying
| "the network uses Ethernet," though - the higher layer
| protocols are usually proprietary and one-off for a
| specific vehicle lineup.
|
| Even the standard diagnostic protocols like UDS rapidly
| become non-standard once you get to the "what's what"
| level. For example, $22 readLocalIdentifier is standardized
| as "read local identifier," but what each identifier means
| is again 100% proprietary.
|
| About the only thing that's completely standard is what's
| mandated by law: OBD-II required parameters and trouble
| codes. When it comes to trouble codes, even the set beyond
| the OBD-mandated basics are _also_ usually proprietary,
| requiring dealer tools or their clones to decode.
| themitigating wrote:
| You are correct, I was only thinking of diagnostics.
| paywallasinbeer wrote:
| It's important to note that just because a CEL is on for a
| sensor, it doesn't mean that sensor is bad and needs to be
| replaced. For example, it's possible for a camshaft
| position sensor to be on for a timing system that is out of
| sync. It would be a mistake to replace the cam sensor in
| that scenario. Shotgunning parts isn't always the answer...
| Gordonjcp wrote:
| Ooooh, I've got a great story about that. My neighbour's
| car was at the garage for about three weeks with a No-
| Crank No-Start fault. The diagnostics said that the crank
| position sensor was faulty, but the garage said they'd
| tried two new sensors and a new cam position sensor for
| good measure, and it still wouldn't work. Their next plan
| of attack - and bearing in mind they were already about a
| grand into it - was to spend even more of my neighbour's
| money speculatively on a new engine ECU.
|
| Tell you what, not to be a smartarse guys, but let me
| take a look, just for a second opinion, okay? It's not
| cranking, that should be the first clue. No, I bet the
| sensor is a red herring.
|
| Why? Well, we'll get to that.
|
| First off, why isn't it cranking? I hear a relay in the
| fusebox clicking when I turn the key, let's swap this
| conveniently labelled starter motor relay with a spare -
| rob one from the heater blower in my car - plug it in,
| contacts look manky and burnt, never a good sign. Oh
| look, starts, runs, perfect, nice as you like.
|
| No, don't worry about the relay, they're a couple of quid
| new and I have huge box of spares at home, just keep it.
|
| Oh, but the sensor? Well, the ECU was commanding the
| relay on to pull in the starter motor solenoid, right?
| But then after a certain amount of time it wasn't seeing
| crank position sensor pulses, so it guessed (wrongly)
| that the sensor was faulty, because why would it guess
| that the starter motor wasn't spinning?
| paywallasinbeer wrote:
| Step 1. Replace sensor
|
| 2. Replace ECU
|
| 3. ???
|
| 4. Sell car for scrap
|
| Haha.
| themitigating wrote:
| It was a 2007 Honda Civic, the 3rd clutch pressure switch
| measures fluid pressure. P0847 was the code. This means
| the sensor was sending a voltage value below the
| acceptable range.
|
| The car shifted fine, the fluid was at the proper level,
| and there were no noticeable driving issues. This would
| also not continuously read a low voltage reading while
| changing gears. This led me to believe it's the sensor,
| which is very inexpensive and easy to fix. The car is
| working perfectly now.
| paywallasinbeer wrote:
| I'm glad it was straightforward for you!
| Hellbanevil wrote:
| quarantaseih wrote:
| Im currently renting a BMW with this gear selector.
|
| In fairness, I throughly hate the car (an X1). Terrible lag,
| awful throttle response, terrible steering, unpredictable brakes,
| etc.
|
| But the two candidates for worst feature of the car are
|
| 1. The gear selector 2. The indicator lights
|
| Every time I have to engage one of the two I let out a little
| curse.
|
| I driven stick shifts, autos, rear wheel drive cars, trucks,
| front wheel drive cars, uHaul trucks, and manual motorcycles.
|
| Ive off-roaded in CA, driven through blizzards, Mediterranean
| traffic.
|
| This is by far my most hated driving experience.
| dang wrote:
| Recent and related:
|
| _BMW F Series Gear Selector, Part One: Failures_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31883951 - June 2022 (87
| comments)
| h2odragon wrote:
| Makes me want to go out and hug my truck, whose gear selector
| consists of metal sticks and pins.
|
| I'd be leery of using this device, with all that complexity, as
| an input for video games. The latency makes me ugh. Certainly
| don't want that much "systems" stuff between me and the
| transmission of a car I'm piloting.
| wolrah wrote:
| > Makes me want to go out and hug my truck, whose gear selector
| consists of metal sticks and pins.
|
| If it's a manual transmission or an ancient automatic, sure,
| but manual transmission trucks basically haven't existed for a
| decade or so and every automatic since the mid 90s has an
| electronic gear selector of some variety.
|
| Somehow the world keeps working just fine. The biggest problem
| that's come up with them has been when manufacturers decide to
| screw with the physical interface and make it more likely to
| inadvertently miss Park, like the Chrysler design that killed
| Anton Yelchin.
|
| > I'd be leery of using this device, with all that complexity,
| as an input for video games.
|
| It's less complicated than a force feedback joystick or even a
| lot of modern gamepads.
|
| > The latency makes me ugh.
|
| The latency is coming from the transmission, not the shifter.
|
| > Certainly don't want that much "systems" stuff between me and
| the transmission of a car I'm piloting.
|
| Again, it has been this way for literally decades. My 1993
| Crown Vic with an AODE transmission had a shift lever based on
| the computer interpreting ranges of resistance from a
| potentiometer. The lever was literally a joystick with notches.
| And as the name suggests, that was a classic AOD transmission
| with the mechanical valvebody replaced with solenoids and an
| IBM PC grade processor.
| thescriptkiddie wrote:
| > manual transmission trucks basically haven't existed for a
| decade
|
| That might be true of pickup trucks, but commercial trucks
| are virtually all manual.
| asciimike wrote:
| 2021 Tacoma Manual owner here (one of the reasons I got it).
| Gladiators and Broncos are also available with a manual!
| brk wrote:
| What about your steering, braking, and throttle controls?
| bonestamp2 wrote:
| Throttle is definitely computerized.
| waiseristy wrote:
| For the Tacoma, you made a good decision. The auto in that
| thing is the single worst programmed automatic transmission
| I have ever encountered. But that doesn't just
| automatically apply to all OEM's. There are plenty of autos
| that are great & responsive. Fords 10 speeds are quite
| good.
|
| And you only got rid of 1 of the dozens of computerized
| components in your drive train. Your engine, transfer case,
| rear differential, and hubs are all computerized
| throwaway0a5e wrote:
| I'm very familiar with EEC-IV era Fords. If you want to have
| this debate I am very much down.
|
| Your 1993 Crown Vic may as well be a 1980s toaster over
| compared to the 2010+ cars being discussed. The only digital
| electronics are in the ECU and for the display on the radio.
| There is a huge difference between a 90s Ford style lever
| position sensor and the BMW stuff. If the computer doesn't do
| the right gear for what you want you just move it until it
| does. The BMW will spit error messages at you.
| h2odragon wrote:
| Mine is the last manual v8 Dodge dakota sold, possibly the
| last made. 230k miles and still have a sliver of the original
| clutch.
| Hellbanevil wrote:
| speedgoose wrote:
| Does your car use electronic injection or a carburettor?
| h2odragon wrote:
| Injection, so yes; there's still more fly by wire than i
| like.
| mike_pol wrote:
| I appreciate where you're coming from but experiencing the joy
| of dual clutch automatics and their shifts in BMWs and Audis
| that I had the joy to diving might change your mind. The
| latency you mention is really not there. Admittedly I could not
| service it if it broke but aren't cars consumables now?
| Nullabillity wrote:
| In what deluded world are items that cost tens of thousands
| of dollars consumables?!
|
| > I appreciate where you're coming from but experiencing the
| joy of dual clutch automatics and their shifts in BMWs and
| Audis that I had the joy to diving might change your mind.
|
| Yeah, no thanks. A good manual transmission is a core part of
| the driving experience.
| bonestamp2 wrote:
| > In what deluded world are items that cost tens of
| thousands of dollars consumables?
|
| I don't think consumable is the right word, but I assume
| they meant in the sense that many cars are leased, so the
| drive never really owns a car -- they just "consume" cars
| as they move from lease to lease.
| gambiting wrote:
| >>Yeah, no thanks. A good manual transmission is a core
| part of the driving experience.
|
| Yeah, no thanks. A good dual clutch automatic is my choice
| when it comes to actually driving in a sprited way.
|
| But you know what? To each their own.
| [deleted]
| Gordonjcp wrote:
| > Yeah, no thanks. A good manual transmission is a core
| part of the driving experience.
|
| I learned to drive in manuals (because they're more common
| in the UK). I currently own two automatics and drive a
| variety of manuals, automatics and EVs that are kind of
| inherently "automatic".
|
| I don't see any difference in "driving experience" between
| manual and automatic. What do *you* think the difference
| is?
| jjtheblunt wrote:
| Not what you were thinking, I guess, but I push-started
| my manual Saab and Honda many times, could my manual
| Mercedes but never needed to, which you can't do with an
| automatic.
| CraigJPerry wrote:
| >> A good manual transmission is a core part of the driving
| experience.
|
| Which cars have those today or in the time-frame of the
| F-series BMWs from TFA?
|
| Every fiat/chrysler gearbox is sloppy gooey junk thing,
| even their performance models have horrific manual gear
| shifts.
|
| I'll cut to the chase instead of listing Ford, Peugeot,
| etc. etc.
|
| The Porsche Cayman 982 manual shift _feels_ awesome to use,
| it 's a delight but that only opens up a new can of worms,
| the gear ratios are farrr too long (emissions targets i
| suppose), utterly ruining the experience. The PDK is the
| better choice (and it even has shorter ratios to boot!).
| replygirl wrote:
| try splitting the difference with like a miata or a brz
| foobarian wrote:
| I'm not a car nerd by far, and I never drove a manual
| shift before my Focus ST, but I am completely in love
| with it. I'm heartbroken that Ford stopped manufacturing
| those models.
|
| Edit:
|
| Reflecting more on what I like about it. I saw a number
| of articles or videos, like that 80s Porsche, where the
| shifter is wiggly or won't go into gear because of long
| linkages, or falls out of gear. The Ford shifter is
| nothing like it. My favorite thing about it is that there
| seems to be (maybe) some torque-induced flex between the
| gearbox and shifter that makes it naturally slide and
| "fall" into the correct next gear; I absolutely love this
| feeling. You just push the stick and it falls from 2nd to
| 3rd, for example. But if you're slowing down it feels
| like it's harder to put into 3rd but more easy to push it
| back up into 1st. And then the way the reverse gear is
| protected with a hefty spring-loaded ring is very nice.
| Finally, overall the shifter works smoothly, never gets
| stuck, seems to "know" the gear I want to go into, never
| falls out of gear... just lovely :-)
| tmh88j wrote:
| > The Ford shifter is nothing like it. My favorite thing
| about it is that there seems to be (maybe) some torque-
| induced flex between the gearbox and shifter that makes
| it naturally slide and "fall" into the correct next gear
|
| I also have an ST. I highly suggest replacing the shifter
| with an aftermarket short throw shifter or the shifter
| bracket. I think you'll like it even more. I've owned
| several cars with manual transmissions, and one of my
| biggest complaints about the ST was the stock shifter. It
| doesn't struggle to get into gear, but it felt light,
| soft and mushy compared to my other cars. I replaced mine
| with a short throw from Steeda and it helped a lot, but
| still lacks the solid bolt-action rifle feeling I was
| used to.
|
| The ST is a killer deal with serious performance for its
| price, but if you want a taste for what else is
| affordable out there and a step up try out a car with a
| Tremec TR6060 transmission[1]. They are one of the best
| manual transmissions on the market today and can take a
| beating. You should easily be able to find one on Turo if
| you live near any major city.
|
| [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tremec_TR-6060_transmis
| sion#Ap...
| ry4nolson wrote:
| the BMW F-series M3/4 of the same time-frame have a
| manual gear shift option.
| Cthulhu_ wrote:
| > aren't cars consumables now?
|
| Maybe if you're in the earning high-5 figures a year bracket
| in SF, but for regular people, a car is likely the most or
| second most expensive thing they own (second to a home). New
| cars is something for dual-earners and rich folk, for us
| regular people - and I am a high income earner - new cars,
| even on finance, is just not an option.
|
| (I'm currently driving a used 2009 Ford Focus, <200K Km on
| the dial)
| davchana wrote:
| & to add, some of us rent home, so the car is literally
| anything where we have some equity (& rest the bank owns).
| krallja wrote:
| > high-5 figures a year bracket in SF
|
| Lower class?
| themitigating wrote:
| The latency for doing what? Shifting from reverse to drive? The
| ZF transmissions in BMWs are very fast shifting even though
| they are torque converters and there are paddle shifters on the
| wheel.
| Gordonjcp wrote:
| ZF 4HP22 in my older (4.0 litre) Range Rover, 4HP24 in my
| newer one with the 4.6 engine. Actually they're both the same
| age to within weeks, I just got the 4.6 eight years after the
| 4.0, but anyway - it takes about a quarter of a second to
| change up or down if you manually prod the gearstick coming
| up to some bends. It's definitely faster than the R380 manual
| gearboxes fitted to Discos, Defenders and manual P38s, which
| needs a fair bit of time in neutral to settle out before you
| select the next gear.
|
| This is '80s technology, mind you, with a fairly simple
| computer grafted on to bring it up to the white heat of the
| mid-'90s.
| londons_explore wrote:
| A bit of gear shift latency just makes it all the more
| realistic!
| asciimike wrote:
| I've spent quite a bit of time hacking my own F-Series BMW, and I
| can confirm it's a _huge_ pain in the ass, mostly because there
| is basically zero documentation on how to do it. IMO BMW also
| occasionally makes some bizarre engineering decisions, for
| instance, connect one long wire from an internal switch console
| to the DME unit (engine controller) rather than connect directly
| to an adjacent CANBUS that already went there. German engineering
| -\\_(tsu)_/-
|
| I've found the following tools helpful: - newtis.info (has
| literally all the wiring diagrams as well as a bunch of info on
| how systems are built and work together, though unfortunately the
| protocols aren't documented) - Esys (be able to flash new
| firmware to a control unit or modify settings within a control
| unit, plus it often contains helpful comments in a mix of English
| and German that explain what the various acronyms are) - German
| and American BMW forums (bimmerpost, 1erforum.de); aided of
| course by a lot of German <> English Google translate
| throwaway0a5e wrote:
| Exactly. It's one thing to "do it right" but all the people who
| are hurring and durring about how every car has technology are
| forgetting that ze germans in their pursuit of ze perfect
| driving machine often don't "do it right" and unless you get
| lucky and own something a lot of enthusiasts own and have had
| time to fiddle with and document you're often on your own. The
| Americans and Japanese tend to be better because they tend to
| design things to be more tolerant of being used in a way other
| than the factory way but still the knowledge and skill barrier
| to entry is high and you still come across plenty of stuff that
| just won't cooperate unless you exactly replicate the OEM
| conditions.
| aeyes wrote:
| When any company designs the electronics for a new car, they
| don't start on a clean sheet of paper. Existing designs are
| reused and adapted. Additional complexity is introduced
| because some of the electronics are from third parties, for
| example this Gear Selector is interfacing with a Bosch
| transmission controller which controls a ZF transmission.
| CraigJPerry wrote:
| I'd go along with that - the first time i saw the rear
| suspension on a mazda rx8 - it looked so familiar, a multi-
| link style setup with the same core components of a
| contemporary BMW E38 or E39.
|
| One key difference - you can access all the bolts on the
| Mazda. Replacing rear shocks was a doddle, i'd done the same
| job on my old e38 and that was multiple days thanks to
| combining rust with awkward UX. The mazda had the same rust
| but was easy and safe enough to access with some heat and no
| need for universal joints which are never great when you're
| using an impact driver.
| posterboy wrote:
| not sure if you are talking electronics anymore or
| mechanics.
| allenrb wrote:
| The usual giveaways for "mechanics" are torches and
| impact drivers, though more than once I've been tempted
| to use those things on electronics...
| CraigJPerry wrote:
| If you're willing to pay for access (it's cheap for rare / one
| off access) bmw provides their AOS portal.
|
| https://aos.bmwgroup.com/web/oss/start - you'll need something
| like an "icom next" to connect the car but it'll do e-sys with
| the ability to install the latest firmwares.
|
| Some stuff (quite limited though) is available through the car
| data api - i think most f-series and all g-series i think have
| telematics. I have a 2018 f15 and that works.
|
| https://bmw-cardata.bmwgroup.com/thirdparty/public/repair-an...
| BoorishBears wrote:
| If you're comfortable with slightly shadier methods, there's
| "grey market" access to most BMW tools.
|
| With the F and G series ISTA is the "gold standard"
| asciimike wrote:
| Esys is available fairly easily: https://f87.bimmerpost.com
| /forums/showpost.php?p=26123409&po... (but as you say,
| there's some megaupload and a cracker involved).
| bonestamp2 wrote:
| Can confirm. I paid a guy on a BMW forum about $100 for the
| vehicle interface, which is ethernet to a J1962 connector
| (aka "OBD II Port"). That also included the e-sys software
| (Windows only). A few years later I needed an update to the
| software and found a guy on ebay who charged me about $75.
| So, those might be some places to look for this kind of
| thing.
| BoorishBears wrote:
| Pro tip for any BMW owners, MHD is a tuning company that
| makes great hardware for this.
|
| Even if you're scared of tuning your engine, their dongle
| originally for that purpose is one of the fastest
| interfaces and supports Wifi.
|
| The difference in speed is large enough I stopped needing
| a battery charger to flash my ECU and TCU (would still
| recommend one though since you are technically playing
| russian roulette doing that...)
|
| Bonus: If you do care about tuning, they have some
| excellent off the shelf tunes to go with it
| asciimike wrote:
| The OBD adapter should be cheaper nowadays; most folks on
| the BMW forums will charge ~$100 for coding services, and
| it's generally "any time you need anything changed, it's
| free."
|
| If you're in the bay area, there are a few local folks
| who are happy to do it!
| hangonhn wrote:
| Whoa! Thanks for sharing that. I've been scared to even
| change my battery myself because it requires interfacing with
| the computer. I didn't realize there was a BMW sanction way
| of accessing the APIs.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-06-29 23:00 UTC)