diaoblo sport tuner

[Sierkonblazer]

Scanners will not change anything. The Tech 2, HP Tuners, EFI Live, and most handheld tuners like DiabloSport, HyperTech, Edge, etc will because they are hacking the programming within the ECM

 

[JennaBear]

The ONLY method that GM instructs technicians to follow in identifying any tuning is outlined in the TSB that has been posted 1,001 times now. Flash history is tracked and used on 2007.5+ diesel and Global A vehicles, none others.

Whether or not there is mileage logged, runtime, "key counts", mileage since code last cleared, etc etc that can be used to determine a tune is not at issue. NONE of those factors can be conclusively used to identify whether a vehicle presently is or was tuned at some time. Show me someone that has had a warranty denied by some method other than the official process by GM and I will retract my statement. We have dozens of GM Technician customers (many of whom have had to ask US how to identify a tune) and we own a Tech 2 and identifying a tune is not a trivial matter.

To go one step further, the magnusson moss act will absolutely protect you, provided the warranty denial claim is unjustified. GM encourages the use of the better business bureau to ensure that and while lengthy, the process will work as it did for a customer who recently had a faulty cam phaser cause engine damage.

 

[Sierkonblazer]

Maybe they've technology has changed a bit to now it all that stuff can be backdoored, but 5-6 years ago when I was selling tuners, Edge and BullyDog kept getting into heaps of shit from their customers for voided warranties. I had three customers in particular I still remember I went to bat for at the dealership and they showed me the key count method of finding modified ECMs... The tech that showed me was also a customer of mine..

 

[Zed 71]

I still do not see how key count method can positively identify modified ECMs. My wife drives all over for kid activities and errands, and those key counts must be off the charts .

IMO the owners/tuners in your case should have elevated the issue above the dealers and onto corporate. Just curious how the dealership voided the warranty.

 

[JennaBear]

If they cannot conclusively say that a tune was installed, they're not going to risk litigation on some random variable such as that. Even if they can say that a tune was installed via their standardized methods, it is largely a charade on a gas engine. When the one situation I know personally of regarding a warranty denial went down, GM provided no proof nor evidence that the tune was the cause of the engine damage when the cam phaser failed. They merely stood by the claim that a tune may have caused the failure and therefore it did. They lost since the conditions of the Magnusson moss act were not met.

 

[Sierkonblazer]

The key count has been the most sduccessful way OEMs has used to identified a hacked/modified tune. Like I mentioned earlier, key counts are (or were) reset whenever certain parameters inside the software were changed. Zed, in your case, your wife drives around, and probably cycles the key alot, which is fine. If she has 20,000 key counts on a 30,000 mile vehicle, thats normal. If you had a tune, and took it to the dealer and they see that you have 2 key counts on that same 30,000 mile car, (because you reset your tune to stock just before taking it in) then the dealership is going to figure theres no way you drove 15,000 miles before turning the car off..

---------- Post added at 10:20 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:17 AM ----------

Im not saying thats a definitive defense for an OEM, but it will definitely throw a red flag up and they will investigate to a certain point. If they're going to replace something that costs them $100, they they probably wont give a hoot, but if it involves a $12k motor and transmission, you better believe they will spend some time finding out why it failed..

---------- Post added at 10:25 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:20 AM ----------

If they cannot conclusively say that a tune was installed, they're not going to risk litigation on some random variable such as that. Even if they can say that a tune was installed via their standardized methods, it is largely a charade on a gas engine. When the one situation I know personally of regarding a warranty denial went down, GM provided no proof nor evidence that the tune was the cause of the engine damage when the cam phaser failed. They merely stood by the claim that a tune may have caused the failure and therefore it did. They lost since the conditions of the Magnusson moss act were not met.

You're right, the MM act would have come into effect there. But now what do you think would happen if there was a hole in a piston... No dice, warranty would be voided because they can say (and more than likely prove) that the tune leaned out or over timed and caused detonation.
Im simply stating that alot of people think the MM act is an automatic for them and there mods no matter what. Alot of people dont realize that the MM act only protects you if its know the mod did not cause the malfunction.. (I hope I phrased that correctly)

 

[JennaBear]

The key count has been the most sduccessful way OEMs has used to identified a hacked/modified tune. Like I mentioned earlier, key counts are (or were) reset whenever certain parameters inside the software were changed. Zed, in your case, your wife drives around, and probably cycles the key alot, which is fine. If she has 20,000 key counts on a 30,000 mile vehicle, thats normal. If you had a tune, and took it to the dealer and they see that you have 2 key counts on that same 30,000 mile car, (because you reset your tune to stock just before taking it in) then the dealership is going to figure theres no way you drove 15,000 miles before turning the car off..

---------- Post added at 10:20 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:17 AM ----------

Im not saying thats a definitive defense for an OEM, but it will definitely throw a red flag up and they will investigate to a certain point. If they're going to replace something that costs them $100, they they probably wont give a hoot, but if it involves a $12k motor and transmission, you better believe they will spend some time finding out why it failed..

---------- Post added at 10:25 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:20 AM ----------



You're right, the MM act would have come into effect there. But now what do you think would happen if there was a hole in a piston... No dice, warranty would be voided because they can say (and more than likely prove) that the tune leaned out or over timed and caused detonation.
Im simply stating that alot of people think the MM act is an automatic for them and there mods no matter what. Alot of people dont realize that the MM act only protects you if its know the mod did not cause the malfunction.. (I hope I phrased that correctly)

It could be a red flag... IF they looked for it. They don't. As soon as I return home, I will have Justin take a picture of all of the parameters available in the Tech 2, which is what a GM technician uses, to show what is available.

There have been claims of dealerships using vehicle mileage with swapped computers, but that is not stored in the PCM. There have been claims of engine hours used, but that has been known to reset randomly. There have been claims of history tracking, but that works with a select few vehicles only. None of these have been used in a directive by GM to verify warranty status. Perhaps other manufacturers use a key cycle counter, GM does not.

They can claim all they want that the tune was to blame, but until they PROVE it, they will lose, just as they did with this recent customer. Gm did absolutely NOTHING to look at the tune data. They examined hard parts and verified that a tune was installed to work with the customer's headers, that is it. In this case, there was scoring on two cylinder walls and "burn marks" on one piston. This happened at exactly the time that the cam phaser failed and it went into GM's limp mode. GM stuck by their claim that the tune was to blame, the BBB Arbitrator found their case uncompelling. With the vehicle in the shop for over 5 weeks, GM was not able to provide any evidence, just a statement.