Ask the Car People.SM


Right To Repair - A Hot Issue

576 messages,  Last post on May 21, 2013 at 11:51 PM

You are in the Maintenance & Repair Forum.

What is this discussion about? Electrical

Messages Page 56 of 58

#547 of 576 R2R Getting what they wished for? by thecardoc3

Nov 14, 2012 (4:53 am)

I visited Service Express today and noticed that ISIS
appears to have more functionality than ServiceExpress and
is available only to Massachusetts subscribers at twice the
price of ServiceExpress for S/T subscriptions. RS, Mass.
 
Reality. The information was available for a price, but only a few made the effort to access it. Now legislation is in place and here they go, the price for the information has nearly doubled. ( in Massachusetts that is). Shops who weren't buying it in the past, still won't buy it. Shops that were are going to have to dig even deeper to continue to do so.
 
And the winners are;
Shops that were never buying the information in the first place.
 
The losers are;
Shops that were buying what they needed to in order to the whole job for their customers and of course the customers (consumers).

#548 of 576 Service Express VS ISIS by thecardoc3

Nov 17, 2012 (2:24 am)

https://techinfo.honda.com/Rjanisis/logon.asp?Region=US
 
This is just service information, on top of the expense for services like Mitchell On Demand or Alldata.
 
Remember that the O.E. scan tools, training and reflashing software are additional expenses for each manufacturer that a shop chooses to try and support on top of having scan tools like Snap-On's Solus, Modis, Verus; OTC's Pegasys, Launch, ISCAN, Autel Maxidas etc.

#549 of 576 shaking out the vote by steve_ HOST

Nov 17, 2012 (7:07 am)

"Massachusetts voters resoundingly passed the “Right to Repair” ballot question, meaning the new law requiring automakers to provide independent repair shops as well as dealers with easy access to the computer codes needed to diagnose complex car problems will need to be reconciled with compromise legislation passed after the ballots were approved.
 
Under the ballot legislation, automakers are required to make diagnostic and repair information available to independent shops and dealers through a universal system by 2015. The compromise legislation, passed in July, gives automakers until 2018 to comply with new regulations.
 
Tuesday’s margin of victory proves “that this is something Massachusetts is leading the way [on] and there ought to be access to this kind of information in every state"
 
Voters approve ‘Right to Repair’ ballot question (bostonglobe.com)

#550 of 576 Re: shaking out the vote [steve_] by hpmctorque

Nov 20, 2012 (7:55 pm)

Replying to: steve_ (Nov 17, 2012 7:07 am)
Good! Maybe Edmunds can support passage of similar legislation in the other states.

#551 of 576 Re: shaking out the vote [hpmctorque] by thecardoc3

Nov 21, 2012 (6:02 am)

Replying to: hpmctorque (Nov 20, 2012 7:55 pm)
Good! Maybe Edmunds can support passage of similar legislation in the other states.
 
To what end? I guess you don't see where this is going to raise costs for shops who try to be able to fully serve the publics needs, and therefore cause higher prices to the public? Remember the lowest denominator of shops will simply raise prices when they have the room to without adding any more capability for the public. Or worse they hold their pricing and take an even larger share of the easy work and then the top shops will either be forced to get out of the technology race and join the others at the bottom or they will have to be able to command a much higher price for the more technical stuff. No matter how you slice this the legislation can't and won't make things better. Your only going to see higher costs, and even fewer shops that can do all of the work a consumer may need.

#552 of 576 Re: shaking out the vote [thecardoc3] by steve_ HOST

Nov 21, 2012 (7:23 am)

Replying to: thecardoc3 (Nov 21, 2012 6:02 am)
What I'd hope to see would be cars designed by the factory to be easier and cheaper to fix, with more built-in diagnosis and repair functions. Telematics is getting there already, what with people being able to call OnStar and get their doors opened and codes read.

#553 of 576 Re: shaking out the vote [steve_] by thecardoc3

Nov 21, 2012 (8:11 am)

Replying to: steve_ (Nov 21, 2012 7:23 am)
If you wish in one hand and........
 
What I'd hope to see would be cars designed by the factory to be easier and cheaper to fix, with more built-in diagnosis and repair functions.
 
The factory cannot write trouble trees that can guide a technician through vehicle loss of communication faults. It's up to the tech to have the training, the equipment, and then take a disciplined approach to solve network issues. Your not going to have techs that can do that without them first having a career worth learning.

#554 of 576 Re: shaking out the vote [steve_] by thecardoc3

Nov 21, 2012 (8:16 am)

Replying to: steve_ (Nov 21, 2012 7:23 am)
http://uptimeblog.enigma.com/the-uptime-blog/tabid/50748/bid/91519/Fewer-Mechani- cs-Fixing-Harder-Problems.aspx
 
They recognize the issue, but fail to comprehend that software won't be the answer. Although they do have quite a chance of adding an additional layer to the CODB. Does that really sound like what you want?

#555 of 576 Re: shaking out the vote [thecardoc3] by Mr_Shiftright HOST

Nov 21, 2012 (9:40 am)

Replying to: thecardoc3 (Nov 21, 2012 8:11 am)
perhaps but it would prevent customers from being hijacked every time a check engine light goes on.
 
Right now, the trouble code system is arcane and the explanations so badly written you have to wonder if the authors are born english-speakers.

#556 of 576 Re: shaking out the vote [Mr_Shiftright] by thecardoc3

Nov 21, 2012 (11:10 am)

Replying to: Mr_Shiftright (Nov 21, 2012 9:40 am)
perhaps but it would prevent customers from being hijacked every time a check engine light goes on.
 
How many still think that all they need to do is put a piece of tape over the light?
 
As far as "hi-jacking" them goes when you promote that kind of a perspective it's no wonder nothing that we do ever gets to be "right".
  
There is an 05 Durango with a 5.7l sitting outside the shop that a back-yarder, ( DIY'er), was throwing parts at. If anyone hi-jacked her it was that wanna-be tech. With $900 in parts thrown at it and it still couldn't be driven around the block she finally got it towed out of his yard. So what did I find? It has a bent exhaust valve Cyl #2. Now the way it was running made it tough because it wasn't just that one cylinder that was misfiring, it was shutting down the all four front cylinders, and wouldn't idle at all. It wasn't setting any misfire codes. The diagnostics were all done through experience and by using the most up to date routines. (Compression testing with the O-scope and a transducer)
 
Now we are doing the real dance, she is convinced that replacing the car makes more sense than repairing the engine. So she's prepared to spend $30,000 to fix a $2000 problem........
 
Right now, the trouble code system is arcane and the explanations so badly written you have to wonder if the authors are born english-speakers.
 
Hey if you really don't like the scan tool and trouble code method you could try your hand at the loss of communication problem that I repaired on that 99 4-Runner that had neither trouble code generation or scan tool capabilities.

Messages Page 56 of 58

To POST a message, please Sign In.

Advertisement

Browse by Category

Browse by Vehicle
   View All Vehicles

Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
View All Topics

Edmunds Community

Advertisement