I would not even weight that in the concern overall. Really, your wife's Honda civic has a better chance of being stolen than your vette these days.....and for that reason.....I love ricers !

 

AMEN!!!

 

Let's see, there are a few techical things to overcome:

1) Bypassing the VATS (easy-one resistor)
2) RFID transmitter/reciever (relatively easy)
3) Having something that mimics the Start/run positions of the normal ignition switch. (this is the magic part)
4) An override for the neutral safety switch on Manual car and a way to make sure the car is in Neutral. (should be able to tap somewhere to determine this)
5) AND, it probably would not hurt to have a CLB installed.


My 08' Grand Prix has factory remote start-this would be a MUCH nicer option than a silly C6 type setup. It's nice to have the car cool on a hot day (or warm for those that drive in the winter). It uses the FOB to start the car, you still have to present the key to the car to actually put it in gear and it will shut itself off if you don't turn the key in 10 minutes.

 

I don't think you understand how the system works, or how simple it really is. The fact that you don't think you need it is totally fine, but I don't see why you feel the need to continue on bashing it and trying to push your incorrect notions about the downfalls of the system on others.

There is no need to bypass the clutch safety switch, get in push the clutch and push the button just like the factory setup.

The button/rfid system activates the same systems that the start/run positions would. There is nothing magic about it. You think it's hard to mimic the same action that spinning an ignition switch 1/2 inch does?

Factory remote start is nice, but it has NOTHING to do with this system that you insist is "silly". I hate to break it to you, but in 10 years almost every new car will come standard with this system, and manual keys will simply be a backup system. It's already to the point where more upscale cars come with this system than not, they have been switching over for almost 10 years now and are at the stage where it's as cheap to use when the car is manufactured as putting in manual lock cylinders and a manual ignition switch.

On cars with an electronically controlled column lock, it takes a whole 5 more minutes and two wires to make the system lock/unlock the column if you wanted to maintain a column lock. Of course, that's not going to work on the vette, cause the column lock doesn't work right and is removed on otherwise stock cars anyways.

It's simple electronics, there is nothing at all insecure or complicated about how it works.

 

So if you're standing near the car or leave the fob in the car someone else can walk up, start your car and drive off? Putting a key in once everytime I drive the car doesn't seem that inconvenient to me. I guess I'm letting the technology age pass me by.

 

I have to agree with SDPC, like fuel injection, eventually it will be standard equipment on all cars.

 

This is true, but what's being discussed is how to retroactively outfit a car that's 4-11 years old (depending on what year C5 you have) with a system that it wasn't originally outfitted with. Nothing really wrong with that if that is what you want to do and can afford it. However, IHMO (just expressing an opinion here) it is a waste of money and a bit on the poseur side to give a C5 a push-button start capability.

Remote starting is one thing (easily acheived and there are systems available) but I put push button starting for C5 in the same category as fixed HIDs for a C5. IT DON'T BELONG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (IMHO of course)

 

remember that it is only your opinion, not law. If someone wants to update their c5 with newer and usually better technology so be it. If you don't like it don't do it and move on.

 

No, if you are standing near the car they can not just get in it and take it.

Yes, if you leave the fob in the car they can take it. If you leave your keys in the car can they not do the same thing?

 

If they drive off, within 30 seconds the module continuously checks that the FOB is still in the car. If not, it cuts the ignition.

 

You are missing the point completely. No one is trying to make their car a c6. A c6 isn't the only car out there with this push button technology. Hell the 2008 Nissan altima has the same setup. That doesn't mean someone is trying to make their car into an altima.

 

If the fob stops working or the battery goes dead in the fob while you're driving, does the ignition still cut off?

 

No. You can view the video where I demo the whole thing.

 

If you had a clue as to how the C6 security system is integrated into the vehicle along with the fobs and START button you'd realize that it is not as simple as just installing a button and some wires, as the C5 security system is also an integrated system.

Given your kind response, I won't offer insights into the CTD and VTD functions of the BCM which will definately cause problems when you remotely unlock a door without using the RFA/BCM interface ....

If you actually understood how the Corvette computers work together to protect the car, and to operate functions like the door locks, you wouldn't be so quick to think this is a "good" idea .....

Let me know when "clever" guys have this working ..... but I'm not holding my breath .....

 

Also forgot, the current system recognizes the FOB to set the seat/steering wheel/mirrors to the user of that FOB-another feature to integrate.

 

BlackZ06 stop trying to tell the "smart kids" that this isn't a Honda

 

On the supras, if you use the key to unlock the door, that will disable the OEM alarm. Is this the same on the C5? If so, this system would hook up identically such that by it automatically unlocking the doors, it will mimic your key doing the same. Unless, the key's resistor value must also be present in that area...

 

Go back and read BlackZ06's posts. Trying what you want to try is LOT more involved than you think. My opinions of it aside, it would pose more problems than you realize. I'm sure it can be done, but if it were that easy, a vendor would have a kit for it by now.

 

Okay we get it; some of you don't like the idea. For those of us who do how about you excuse yourselves to some other thread - perhaps in OT and dump on it. Some of us actually are interested and care to learn more even if YOU think it's a dumb idea.

-RR

 

Way to ruin a thread.