obd code reader recommendations

Launch c readers are very good general purpose stand alone units. If you can afford it then get the creader VIII (about 200 quid) otherwise they do cheaper ones too, I mainly use a creader 3, it reads most faults on most models and clears them and is cheap enough not to worry if someone loses it.

What car?

Chinese rip offs of ELM don't work for anything but the most basic of functions. Can't read long byte codes.

Ford and associated makes need a modified scan tool (Forscan) with a switch to the 2nd channel that has all the other stuff on it like ABS/ESP, air bags etc. Can't mod cheap Chinese rip offs.

I have no idea how you tell if a stand alone device isn't based on a Chinese rip off.

I bought a Proscan V580 on ebay 6 months ago, it works fine on my 2014 Astr a. A self contained unit that doesn't require batteries. However on looking they are £95 now and I only paid £35 UK company for EU cars and supposedly updates via internet.

Bob

Ford Mondeo 60 plate, 2L diesel.

Thanks, I will have to look into "Forscan"

Thanks, Stephen.

Thanks, I had not heard of that make. I don't think I would use it enough to justify the £200, so may have to settle for one of their cheaper models.

Thanks, Stephen.

Have you tried 'obd auto doctor', I found it was better than torque (no idea about your particular vehicle though)

In message , Stephen writes

I have been, and still am, trying to look at why some of the Chinese bluetooth and cabled-to-a-display devices work and some don't.

My "target" is a European 2004 Jeep Grand Cherokee diesel, which seems to be in a world of its own wrt codes and responses. I haven't been able to find a single garage round here that has a reader that works with the vehicle and this includes the nearest man agent. There is, however, an excellent, free piece of software that does work, but only with that specific vehicle. Torque Pro partly works, but doesn't report faults.

What I have found is that many garages don't trust an amateur coming in saying something like "It's the swirl actuator" when their Snap-On says "No faults", and they don't want to know.

My reason for posting, though, was to say that I'd be more than delighted to compare notes with anyone else trying to look into this. I've been working mainly sending AT codes through PC's ( where the latest W10 version of Microsoft Message Analyser supposedly allows logging of bluetooth (note the word supposedly)) but also via Android. Android 4.4 and up supposedly can log bluetooth, but my one 4.4 phone seems to be one of the ones where this function is flawed. Windows bluetooth to serial drivers are also a real pain to use.

I have a bunch of the Chinese senders, at least one of which works well and reliably. I am not at the moment able to do anything hands on with the Jeep as it's in the one (of 6 tried) garage that is prepared to work on it. It went in a week ago. Last time I went to look at it there was a man underneath and sounds of hammering. Hopefully that's the tracking adjustments being freed off.

In message , MrCheerful writes

Afraid so. It does seem better at connecting than many of the others I've tried (not got that test machine on here now, so I can't remember them all), but none of the mainstream free Windows ones read the Jeep.

At the moment I'm concentrating on trying to find out what responses I can get from the various bluetooth devices when sending them the basic communication codes. This is more or less what is referred to in the site referenced by Peter Hill in his posting above.

That sounds interesting. Where can I learn about AT codes?

Thanks, Stephen.

The references for the serial codes for what I'm looking at are

PC's invoke a Bluetooth to serial driver, which I have always found difficult to use because, if something fails during the connection, the serial port is marked as "in use" and can only be recovered by going into the registry. I have been told (after a lot of moaning on the W10 Insider forum) that work is going on to sort this eventually in W10. At the moment it's all too easy to find that you are using, say Port 75, when the software only understands up to Port 6 or so.

I'm trying, and at the moment failing, to log the bluetooth data so that I can see what is coming from the car with different bluetooth senders before being mangled by the BT to serial driver.

Hope this helps a bit.