4 ms·

My car currently has no way to deactivate the passenger seat airbag, so a $200 option would be better than nothing. Besides, I get offers from the dealer all t

by bzzzt 6y ago

My car currently has no way to deactivate the passenger seat airbag, so a $200 option would be better than nothing. Besides, I get offers from the dealer all the time for an engine computer upgrade (+30hp for about 700 euro), so it's not unheard of. For features requiring continued support (like Carplay or better Bluetooth connectivity with modern phones) a yearly payment makes sense. The really small features not so much.

bozzcl 6y ago
So are you telling us they charge you €700 for a measly 30HP, which the car can already do safely? I'd be interested in knowing what manufacturer this is so I can steer clear from them. Save your money, get yourself an ECU flash utility like a Cobb AccessPort. They're still expensive, but at least you get to control what your car can do.
- vetinari 6y ago
  Multiple manufacturers do artificially limit the performance of their engines as market segmentation; they do have physically identical ones with different software and thus different performance. The customer is not being cheated, they get exactly what they paid for. The manufacturer will never offer re-flashing the ECU to get more performance; that would be problematic from the paperwork side, so I suppose that the offer was an aftermarket one. If someone is willing to go this way, he might just heed your advice as well.
  - bozzcl 6y ago
    >Multiple manufacturers do artificially limit the performance of their engines as market segmentation I don't think it excuses it, TBH, especially if they offer it as an "upgrade" later. If I own a car, I want to be able to access all its physical features, which includes all the performance I can squeeze out of it. Software stuff, like satellite radio or even Tesla's self-driving updates? I can understand the model, though I believe those should be tied to the car instead of the user like they are now. That way you'd be able to sell the car and those licenses are not wasted money. But if all you get is a software update that tweaks some numbers to unlock something the car could already do... then we have a problem. I really hope the "right to repair" movement picks up, so car software modding becomes more commonplace.
    - vetinari 6y ago
      > TBH, especially if they offer it as an "upgrade" later. Well, the point was, that it is not manufacturers that offer the upgrade later. They can't, even if they wanted to, because the different software results in different CO2 (for example), thus different "fine" that is paid at the time of sale. If they were able to offer such a thing, it would be a workaround against the environmental fees. It is being done by some guy in a garage with a suitable cable and firmware image. Of course, you are losing warranty when he does that. It's no different than the chipping that was done 20-30 years ago.
nix23 6y ago
That's not the problem, the problem is that your car already has that function, but it's just activated if you pay and unlock a function (also already implemented in software). Let's say in the future with self driving cars, you can pay a premium and all other cars have to go on the left side to left you thru..oh damn, if give them ideas.

by bzzzt 6y ago

bozzcl 6y ago

So are you telling us they charge you €700 for a measly 30HP, which the car can already do safely? I'd be interested in knowing what manufacturer this is so I can steer clear from them. Save your money, get yourself an ECU flash utility like a Cobb AccessPort. They're still expensive, but at least you get to control what your car can do.

vetinari 6y ago
Multiple manufacturers do artificially limit the performance of their engines as market segmentation; they do have physically identical ones with different software and thus different performance. The customer is not being cheated, they get exactly what they paid for. The manufacturer will never offer re-flashing the ECU to get more performance; that would be problematic from the paperwork side, so I suppose that the offer was an aftermarket one. If someone is willing to go this way, he might just heed your advice as well.
- bozzcl 6y ago
  >Multiple manufacturers do artificially limit the performance of their engines as market segmentation I don't think it excuses it, TBH, especially if they offer it as an "upgrade" later. If I own a car, I want to be able to access all its physical features, which includes all the performance I can squeeze out of it. Software stuff, like satellite radio or even Tesla's self-driving updates? I can understand the model, though I believe those should be tied to the car instead of the user like they are now. That way you'd be able to sell the car and those licenses are not wasted money. But if all you get is a software update that tweaks some numbers to unlock something the car could already do... then we have a problem. I really hope the "right to repair" movement picks up, so car software modding becomes more commonplace.
  - vetinari 6y ago
    > TBH, especially if they offer it as an "upgrade" later. Well, the point was, that it is not manufacturers that offer the upgrade later. They can't, even if they wanted to, because the different software results in different CO2 (for example), thus different "fine" that is paid at the time of sale. If they were able to offer such a thing, it would be a workaround against the environmental fees. It is being done by some guy in a garage with a suitable cable and firmware image. Of course, you are losing warranty when he does that. It's no different than the chipping that was done 20-30 years ago.

nix23 6y ago

That's not the problem, the problem is that your car already has that function, but it's just activated if you pay and unlock a function (also already implemented in software). Let's say in the future with self driving cars, you can pay a premium and all other cars have to go on the left side to left you thru..oh damn, if give them ideas.