Remote Start on Manual

[Jd17usmc]

Maybe this is just more a complaint than a comment, or topic. but I don't fully understand the restriction or limitations that lead to remote start not being available on a manual transmission, given the level that technology is at these days.

I do understand the hurdles and issues associated with adding remote start.
I also know that aftermarket offers some solutions to those issues. which... lets be honest, seems to still be clunky at best. Things like, having to first set the break, put the vehicle in neutral and then set the system before turning the vehicle off in order to prime the system to work when you come back to it.
That's just more complicated than unlocking your vehicle and starting the engine yourself. I get the benefit in colder states of being able to preheat your vehicle, but that's still a lot of work, and not so much a convenience option.

I also understand that part of the reason for not offering this option from the factory is liability, and the other is the cost of developing a safe system that actually works.
But my stance to that is, we have technology that does all kinds of things especially when it comes to safety. we cant solve this issue? And if the problem were solved, and offered as a factory option. from a marketability stand point wouldn't that give ford realistically even just a feather in their cap. it may just be fan service to the customer at this point, but isn't that what a lot of the marketing for the Bronco is anyways. and its supposedly a throwback to heritage with the benefit of leading edge equipment and innovation...

why not solve this issue, and offer it as one more shot across the bow of all the "competition".

we have lane keep assist, we have auto stop start, and adaptive breaking, we have cars that practically drive themselves, all these off-road modes and adaptive shocks and clutch cancels, and electric parking breaks. at the very least there could be sensors to disengage the system if all the circumstances aren't correct. but at best, the vehicle could engage the parking break, and cancel the clutch in order to allow the vehicle to start. then you could also only allow the vehicle to override the clutch cancel, or release the break etc. if the clutch petal is pressed, or the shifter is in neutral.

that's what I don't understand, how there's not a workable solution to that. in the day and age we live in that even some issues that didn't need to be solved, are being solved.

Sponsored

 

[Raptor911]

No OEM will offer it. BUT any stereo/alarm install shop will install one for you.

 

[Used2jeep]

Remote start a manual? In order to do that you would need to verify that the clutch is disengaged (currently done with a clutch safety switch). Yes this machine has a Crank In Gear technology but not sure why you would want to over complicate the clutch (currently hydraulic, if not only mechanical) with sensors and relays and solenoids. Seems like far too much to go wrong from a safety aspect. Heck Audi had issues back in the 80s with their automatics jumping out of park.

 

[toughtoaster]

As with everything in business, this simply comes down to cost. There aren't enough people who drive manual to warrant the R&D dollars to implement a system like this. Could they? Absolutely. Will they? Most likely never as the manual dies off and becomes a unicorn.

Which makes me sad I might add because something like that would be nice here in Chicago and I am getting the manual.

 

[Migs1313]

Its not worth the time to invest in the technology for it nobody buys manuals anymore.

 

[Big Boss]

As with everything in business, this simply comes down to cost. There aren't enough people who drive manual to warrant the R&D dollars to implement a system like this. Could they? Absolutely. Will they? Most likely never as the manual dies off and becomes a unicorn.

Which makes me sad I might add because something like that would be nice here in Chicago and I am getting the manual.

This ^

They absolutely could but there isn't enough demand for MT vehicles to develop a system that would pass all OEM safety regulations

 

[Jd17usmc]

I know that’s the easy argument, and probably the most accurate and correct one.
but I get the feeling more manual purest’s are showing up to buy this vehicle than market research from other vehicles can help predict. Maybe those numbers will be better known once orders start getting locked in.

But even still, their competition is really only other trucks that still offer a manual. Which at this point is what? The wrangler and Gladiator obv. The Tacoma is still offered. Wouldn’t implementing something like that give them just that much more of an edge...? Im thinking the intangible market value of it, the “feather in the cap” as well as just the number of u it’s sold. The fact they were willing to make that effort. When a lot of their marketing is based on, what they’re willing to make the effort for, in order to serve the customer. I understand it’s still a business though. I’m not trying to sound like a spoiled brat, not getting my way.
I guess I just see this time, in this vehicle the perfect time to remedy that problem. There may not be any other venue that it even makes “remotely” pun intended, as much sense As it does now, with the Bronco. And with the marketing team and development they are putting behind this, and how much they are listening to customers.

 

[Jd17usmc]

But then again, I guess you could add to the argument against. They are building an off-road capable vehicle first and foremost.
so adding more systems adds weight, and complication.

 

[SevenT]

Do it yourself and be good with it. It will be user liability if you leave it in gear and try to start it.

 

[Cookieck]

Remote start a manual? In order to do that you would need to verify that the clutch is disengaged (currently done with a clutch safety switch). Yes this machine has a Crank In Gear technology but not sure why you would want to over complicate the clutch (currently hydraulic, if not only mechanical) with sensors and relays and solenoids. Seems like far too much to go wrong from a safety aspect. Heck Audi had issues back in the 80s with their automatics jumping out of park.

It actually wouldn’t take that much to make this viable. Really all that’s needed is a neutral light/sensor and clutch sensor, similar to what every motorcycle already has to verify it’s either in neutral or clutch is pulled so won’t start in any gear unless the clutch is pulled(most new manual cars just won’t start at all unless you press the clutch pedal). For liability could take it one step further and put a lockout around the shifter, so whenever remote start is activated it locks it into neutral until you get in the car and hit the start button(which automatics already do, they lock it into park until you’re in the car). Some manuals already lockout gears in certain situations(my camaro has a skip shift where under certain conditions it will force you to shift from 1st to 4th and locks out all other gears, for gas saving purposes or whatever, same lockout concept could be implemented to keep it in neutral). Already has a clutch sensor, so one more sensor and a lockout for liability is all it would take. Not even much extra cost there, all the technology exists and is used in some manuals for other things, just nobody putting it together for a remote start. Arguably the remote start doesn’t even need the clutch sensor, as it would only activate in neutral anyways. Clutch sensor is just another liability thing manuals have added to keep people from accidentally starting in gear.

 

[KJR50]

But then again, I guess you could add to the argument against. They are building an off-road capable vehicle first and foremost.
so adding more systems adds weight, and complication.

Because people will pay for capability of a product. How many Ferrari owners drive their cars on the track?

 

[Mattwings]

Maybe this is just more a complaint than a comment, or topic. but I don't fully understand the restriction or limitations that lead to remote start not being available on a manual transmission, given the level that technology is at these days.

I do understand the hurdles and issues associated with adding remote start.
I also know that aftermarket offers some solutions to those issues. which... lets be honest, seems to still be clunky at best. Things like, having to first set the break, put the vehicle in neutral and then set the system before turning the vehicle off in order to prime the system to work when you come back to it.
That's just more complicated than unlocking your vehicle and starting the engine yourself. I get the benefit in colder states of being able to preheat your vehicle, but that's still a lot of work, and not so much a convenience option.

I also understand that part of the reason for not offering this option from the factory is liability, and the other is the cost of developing a safe system that actually works.
But my stance to that is, we have technology that does all kinds of things especially when it comes to safety. we cant solve this issue? And if the problem were solved, and offered as a factory option. from a marketability stand point wouldn't that give ford realistically even just a feather in their cap. it may just be fan service to the customer at this point, but isn't that what a lot of the marketing for the Bronco is anyways. and its supposedly a throwback to heritage with the benefit of leading edge equipment and innovation...

why not solve this issue, and offer it as one more shot across the bow of all the "competition".

we have lane keep assist, we have auto stop start, and adaptive breaking, we have cars that practically drive themselves, all these off-road modes and adaptive shocks and clutch cancels, and electric parking breaks. at the very least there could be sensors to disengage the system if all the circumstances aren't correct. but at best, the vehicle could engage the parking break, and cancel the clutch in order to allow the vehicle to start. then you could also only allow the vehicle to override the clutch cancel, or release the break etc. if the clutch petal is pressed, or the shifter is in neutral.

that's what I don't understand, how there's not a workable solution to that. in the day and age we live in that even some issues that didn't need to be solved, are being solved.

Because it is a relatively large investment on a minuscule slice of the market. That being said, if remote start were available, a few more people would likely buy manuals.

 

[lowmpg]

Maybe this is just more a complaint than a comment, or topic. but I don't fully understand the restriction or limitations that lead to remote start not being available on a manual transmission, given the level that technology is at these days.

I do understand the hurdles and issues associated with adding remote start.
I also know that aftermarket offers some solutions to those issues. which... lets be honest, seems to still be clunky at best. Things like, having to first set the break, put the vehicle in neutral and then set the system before turning the vehicle off in order to prime the system to work when you come back to it.
That's just more complicated than unlocking your vehicle and starting the engine yourself. I get the benefit in colder states of being able to preheat your vehicle, but that's still a lot of work, and not so much a convenience option.

I also understand that part of the reason for not offering this option from the factory is liability, and the other is the cost of developing a safe system that actually works.
But my stance to that is, we have technology that does all kinds of things especially when it comes to safety. we cant solve this issue? And if the problem were solved, and offered as a factory option. from a marketability stand point wouldn't that give ford realistically even just a feather in their cap. it may just be fan service to the customer at this point, but isn't that what a lot of the marketing for the Bronco is anyways. and its supposedly a throwback to heritage with the benefit of leading edge equipment and innovation...

why not solve this issue, and offer it as one more shot across the bow of all the "competition".

we have lane keep assist, we have auto stop start, and adaptive breaking, we have cars that practically drive themselves, all these off-road modes and adaptive shocks and clutch cancels, and electric parking breaks. at the very least there could be sensors to disengage the system if all the circumstances aren't correct. but at best, the vehicle could engage the parking break, and cancel the clutch in order to allow the vehicle to start. then you could also only allow the vehicle to override the clutch cancel, or release the break etc. if the clutch petal is pressed, or the shifter is in neutral.

that's what I don't understand, how there's not a workable solution to that. in the day and age we live in that even some issues that didn't need to be solved, are being solved.

There is no reason at all to build that option and have it safety tested when aftermarket shops are happy to have you risk it. There are numerous reasons a factory vehicle wouldn't want that as an option and there are so few manual even available from Ford, let alone sold, it definitely doesn't warrant any additional cost.

 

[Jd17usmc]

I'm honestly really glad to see these responses, because I agree completely. I've been hearing that for years now, that its not commercially viable.
but isn't it....? you have a situation here, with what seems like a good market for the manual transmission. People who would like to have that functionality. And it seems as though technology has caught up now, that it wouldn't be that difficult to implement..

Sponsored