Re: Disable DRL'S on 2002 S-10

Page 1 of 2  
wrote:


I think with that year S-10 you need a unique code (that only GM will provide upon receipt of the proper "military or law enforcement DR exception" paperwork...and is unique to the VIN) to "deprogram" the DRLs.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 29 Apr 2005 18:30:45 -0400, "James C. Reeves"

On my 2001 S10 I can push the dome lamp disable button 4 times in a row and it will then turn off the DRL.. It's been a while since I used that "feature" though. I don't remember if it turns them off until the next 4 presses or until you start the truck again....
Not Dead Yet
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

It resets at each ignition cycle. So it would be a "routine" one would have to do at every startup.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
It is no posible way to disable DRL on a civilian auto or truck. Only Police and Fire vehicles have that option. It is a program already preloaded on the factory when the vehicle it is order. The other way will be trhough a dealer but the Vin# , Ro# and last 4 of the Social security # of Tech working on vehicle that calls Tech assist to get a software issue to that particular vehicle. Thats GM rules. Now if you don't mind the warning light in youre ipc you could remove the relay and fuse but remember depending on the vehicle for example cavalier a check engine light will come on. so it is up to you. GM Certified Technician.
wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
That is a fact. Since you're close to the action as a GM tech...any idea why GM imposes these things and alienates their customers with them when US law doesn't require them? It makes no business sense whatsoever to not have the customer decide if they want them or not. Why would a company just completely write off that segment of the customer base (that doesn't want them)? It's just stupid, stupid, stupid!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

US
have
Most buyers are not upset about it. I only wonder why people who hate them so much buy those vehicles in the first place.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Other than the miniscule fuel consumption they incur (that other people CLAIM and it's not even an issue to me), I see NO issues with the DRLs on my truck. I'm not looking at the front of MY truck while I'm driving it.
The other side of it is that GM doesn't have to make 2 wiring harnesses, one for Canada with DRLs and one for the US without. All it is now is a slight software change since the US version allows the disable trick I've explained, Canada wouldn't allow that.
Now, the AHLs, I really couldn't care either way, but I also can disable those with the same trick as the DRLs. I DO see where some people have a valid complaint about that feature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Ah, read the public comment dockets over the past 8-9 years at the NHTSA. The ratio is 96%+ of comments submitted in opposition to DRLs. That seems to tell a different story from your assumption. But even is it was only 10% of the public instead of 90%...why even write off 10% of the public from buying your product when it's totally/completely unnecessary to do so?
Regarding you question. Beats me. I would guess most don't, actually. Those that do simply put up with them. But ask Harryface why he bought a car recently with them after stating many times he doesn't like them. He's already planning some way to black them out with some sort of shield when on camping trips (separate thread here). It would be easier on the customer if GM simply provided a switch...don't ya think?! ;-) There is a real "DUH" factor here on GM's part.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
JCR,
Maybe I can get those headlight decals NASCAR Monte's have that look like headlight asseblies and stick um over mine.. LOL
Building the Red Oak center console is the first project. I need storage space & no tip cup holders.
Harryface 05 Park Avenue 91 Bonneville LE, 303,149 miles
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I like that idea! ;-)

Sounds like you've been having way too much fun these past few days working on that new Park Avenue Haryface! I wish I was there with you!

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I've had it a week and haven't done anything except rotate the tires today. I didn't even wash it yet. Dealer cleaned it good. I wiped some protectant on all the weatherstrips. Its going to Tennessee on Thursday. I've only put like 400 miles on it so far.
Harryface 05 Park Avenue 91 Bonneville LE, 303,149 miles
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
3 amber lights behind the tiny holes in the portholes might look nice.
Harryface 05 Park Avenue 91 Bonneville LE, 303,149 miles
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 29 Apr 2005, James C. Reeves wrote:

I'm pretty sure the code isn't VIN-specific, but GM does require the VIN for their records, and yeah, you have to be municipal, military or law enforcement, and sign all kinds of disclaimers and promises to reconnect them, blah blah blah.
DS
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Daniel J. Stern wrote:

Why is that? They're not REQUIRED by law, although GM would seem to like to require them. Seems to me that GM doesn't have any right whatsoever to restrict anyone from disabling DRLs. Or was the OP in Canada and I missed it?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Mon, 2 May 2005, Steve wrote:

Right. They're required by GM.

GM, with all the financial doo-doo it's in, is still pushing NHTSA *very hard* to mandate DRLs in the US.

You're right, of course, which changes nothing.

Nope, we're talking about the US.
DS
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Daniel J. Stern wrote:

Every so often, I begin to admire something GM is doing- the Northstar engine, the Gen-III V8, etc. Then they go and painfully remind me why I'm a 3rd generation Mopar/Ford guy...

One can hope that since GM is preaching DRLs with their financial pants down around their ankles, the response will continue to be laughter.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Mon, 2 May 2005, Steve wrote:

Don't bet on it.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

It is a laughable (more like idiotic) position GM management has put themselves in regarding this topic. But they don't see it...and will keep loosing sales because if right into bankruptcy (or so it seems at the moment).
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
news:3d2dnecVBZprA-vfRVn-

There was an early morning commentary about GM and Ford this past week. It is a bit hard to understand. The 'expert' said that both companies had suffered from failure to advance technologically as they should have done, and this caused part of their problems. Secondarily, they have so many legacy obligations that they almost have to stay in business, even running at breakeven or a slight loss, to avoid the consequences of these contracts, agreements, etc.
He said they have no alternative but to run at a loss or near loss. Dvs, they are in such bad shape they cant afford to go out of business.
Employee health care costs of approaching $2000 per car is a big problem. But I guess we all know that the USA has the best health care in the world that few can afford.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote in message

Can't afford to go out of business? Never heard that one before! My guess is that they can't afford not to seek bankruptcy protection (at some point), which bankruptcy *may* give them their only relief from these contracts you speak of.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.