Auto enginuity is one that you can do a lot with. Including Bi-directional controls.
https://www.autoenginuity.com/wordpress/products/oe-level-coverage/toyotascionlexus-ei03/
https://www.autoenginuity.com/wordpress/products/oe-level-coverage/chrysler-and-dodge-family-ei04/
https://www.autoenginuity.com/wordpress/products/oe-level-coverage/ford-family-ei01/
https://www.autoenginuity.com/wordpress/products/oe-level-coverage/gm-family-ei02/
Wow, that set of Mazda stuff is WAY beyond what I had to work with using Actron and Torque. That looks much more comprehensive.
I remember reading stuff like, now set this bit using your scan tool, ,then watch for the solenoid to move. Well, it never moved, cuz I never could find the bit.
I bet those kits are not real cheap, are they? Or does the 250 cover everything?
Best I remember you have to buy the base scan tool package then update the packages as needed. A few years ago when I was looking at it, buy the basic scan tool then get the basic pack that comes with the American Mfg then buy Asian pack. Best thing is to call them Tuesday as it looks like their website has changed some.
Maybe look into getting a bundle initially to cover most types of vehicles…
https://www.autoenginuity.com/wordpress/product-category/bundles/
It looks like all updates for the first 12 months is included for free… After that, updates must be paid for, but are optional so may not be needed
Updates
The enhanced interfaces come with free updates for the first 12 month period, and you can transfer your license to another PC if necessary. Another 12 months of updates the cost is 50.00 USD (Item #AC-Single) for one enhancement; 150.00 USD (Item #AC10-1) for up to three enhancements, or one region (Domestic, Asian, or European); 300.00 USD for 4 to 10 expansions (Item #AC10-2), or for a ProLine Bundle; and 450.00 USD for a ProLine bundle with any additional coverage (Item #AC10-3), per 12 month period. You are not required to purchase updates and can continue to operate the existing enhanced version for as long as you’d like. To keep our tools competitive against our factory scan tool competitors, we release an average of 4 updates per 12 month period.
@Brandon_Green / @Team_Automotive ~ any input?
The procedure with my E36 involves a paperclip.
Edit: I’m in favor of getting specialized scan tools that can be used across a few brands
A PC based scanner is not something that someone could just walk up and use.
Guys,
If have register map for the vehicle (all the specifics for that make/model), I can most likely cook something up in LabVIEW that can utilize a generic bluetooth device to drive diagnostic port, and receive responses from diagnostic port.
And I have a good reason to work on this anyways.
So do you think we can get this data, or is this data what we would be purchasing?
OK, HOLD ON…
Before spending any DMS $, I highly recommend considering what I just discovered strolling down memory lane on this website I used to frequent called www.natinst.com, er, I mean, www.ni.com.
Well, it seems NI is into just about everything that matters anymore, and they have even taken over the RF world. It appears that NI and Microwave Office are one and the same, and they have all the good RF equipment anyways, with the best stuff most popular in PXI form-factor. I remember NI’s arch enemy some 20 years ago, Agilent, they called themselves after HP changed the name of the instrumentation department, now Keysight from Agilent today. Anyways, during an NI company meeting, one of NI’s muckety mucks read an article out loud to everyone where Agilent had made some pretty hateful quoted public statements saying that NI’s tools just didn’t have the bandwidth needed to be worth much, and that the PXI form factor was a joke. Nobody would ever buy those things…well here we are today, and that form factor has pushed them right out of their dominant spot in the RF instrumentation world, and down the hill some.
And while I was not looking, NI snuck into the CAN bus and OBDII world as well,. And why not, automobiles are BIG business. Its how we get to work, the world over. So it seems they have a suite of CAN and OBDII hardware devices AND toolsets designed for use with each. Furthermore, it appears that some of this software, if not all (hopefully) was written in LabVIEW. I think I see a group project for the LabVIEW class participants coming up.
So I might make this suggestion…prior to spending dollars and potentially getting DMS into an obtuse solution for utilization of diagnostic port on auto, I say let me contact some of my old friends and see if they can point us to the right equipment and let us evaluate that equipment for a while and see how it feels. I can tell you already from the look of ni.com coupled with the number of calls for jobs I have gotten in 2016 from auto manufacturers needing a LabVIEW expert for CAN bus, this is the solution that we want long-term.
So Brandon, if you give me green (ha!), I will make that call and see what they offer in the form of auto evaluation gear and evaluation period. This way, we can get a good look at this option for free. And getting a yes here can also get us more leverage asking for an eval from the other scan tool crew. Just be careful never to make the promise that DMS will keep it if they give up the eval… cuz they are gonna try real hard to get you to say it…lol…
Um, no.
1st of all, we’re talking about going up to your auto, grabbing the scan/diag tool, and following step-by-step procedures in the factory service manual to perform some diagnosis or maintenance. This is not the time to go craft up your own crap in LabView.
2nd of all, $$$$$$$$$$$. Doing anything with NI is a huge money sink. We’d be better served by a few, dedicated $500 tools than the “infrastructure” that NI sells.
Am I a bit biased against NI? Yeah, probably. Only because I’ve been there and survived the experience to know better.
No, I con’t expect folks to program LabVIEW when they need diagnostics. You are correct in that they need to run something pre-existing. You have no idea how many step by step instruct the technician applications I have written in LabVIEW, and also how many countless dollars lined my bank accounts as a result.
Matching diagnostic capability of something like Actron is about 1/2 day programming job, provided you have all the data assembled to decipher the returned bits from the car in question.
I would have to look deeper into the software suite that costs all that money to see how long that would take to tackle a genre of auto in LV. But I sense that there will be a faction at DMS who just wants that software. OK, I"m cool with that. I need the info embedded in that software for my purposes, so I’m cool with that. I want to make $, and this is powerful entry point in automotive, and the look of those pricetages tells me there is enry potential at this very point. So my interest and DMS user’s interest may not coincide.
That is, until a few members put their heads together and crank out a suite, position is cheaper, ad become the industry standard for PC based diagnostics, CAN, & OBDII reading and control. Any business that gets crafted within the space and gives DMS appropriate credit for being the synergistic meeting point where the right juices flow, impacts DMS with a new round of interest from local makers, hence, new rounds of $ for our committees.
So my remarks were not intended to shoot down the software purchase. I just want decision makers to look at the whole picture when making calls for DMS. Right now, it is the manufacturers (GM, Toyota, and friends) using tools like what you see in links below. Perhaps good enough for DMS, at least to evaluate, given that I have strong idea that I could make that eval happen? And then capture 4k video of our evaluation, and subsequent software development?
I say we can have it all. I say the set you want is cool and I want to play with it to. But this does not mean we can’t do what I want and develop a competing software/hardware package at DMS. See links below of NI gear of interest to automotive…
And while it is not intended to affect any software purchase decision, I stumbled upon the results of of other fella’s efforts to talk LabVIEW down an ELM327 (diagnostic port dongle I used on Mazda, and has just found its home there in that socket of that car, likely forever)…
And some older info…these guys are worried about USB? Well, now we can just skip right past USB and go straight to bluetooth, because that is how the new, cheap as all get-out ELM327s work.
https://www.scantool.net/forum/index.php?topic=5186.0
AND THERE SHE IS…I just became the local Mr OBDII for android and windows:
@Brandon_Green – any idea if Automotive will get one or more of these tools? If so, do you have a time frame?
I would like to chime in this way on the topic:
If there is a genre of car that some members have a specific interest in working on, then I say purchase the software for that genre.
It is likely the case that what is being purchased is the codes and digital secrets necessary to gain the full access to all the vendor secret registers that require vendor interpretation to utilize. The secrets will likely be divulged through the tool and bus sniffing.
So as a test, I would be interested in finding a LabVIEW student who wants to work with me and see if we can’t make a DMS homebrew version match from it. Then reappraise from there.
The proof is in the pudding, and this approach gets folks the extended scan capability they need now, and lets me and the LabVIEW guy explore our hypothesis. I see win/win.
So is the plan to drop $400 on one for the GM crowd, another $400 on the one for the Ford crowd, and another $400 on one for the Dodge crowd?
I think this is why we have only generics on hand now; whatever you blow the wad on will be whinged about by the “other camps”.
This doesn’t even go into the Toyota camp, Honda camp, Mazda camp, BMW camp, Mercedes camp, Porsche camp, etc…
OK, rent a tool. Then see what we can figure out.
Money better spent than the sheet-metal roller that Automotive purchased to make Brandon’s pet project^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H the pulse jet. 
(edit: If I can’t convince anyone to buy one, I’ll likely get the $400 tool myself. It is far too useful (looking at YouTube) to pass up for that price.)
I think that’s what should happen. I can’t see blowing that kind of $$ for (manufacturer specific) tools. But you make a salient argument with the point above.
Hopefully the slip roller will be truly useful beyond the pulse jet. No hope of a GM scanner being useful beyond a GM. 
I want a Mazda scanner.
I want a Toyota/Lexus scanner.
More than that, I want a meaningful project for an aspiring LabVIEW programmer who shows significant promise.
Alongside this category of enhanced acquisition desire, I also want:
A project that could grow into a serious business.
A project that can strengthen internal bonds within DMS.
A project that shows everyone at DMS that computerfolk/electronicfolk can be your friends.
A project that can set DMS automotive committee ahead of any other automotive maker facility that may emerge anytime soon…
Please keep this thread on-topic. Your desire, which is admirable if not a bit ambitious, belongs over on the other thread.
I would differ with you on those points, but in the most constructive of sense.
This capability should influence whether or not to purchase the software.
It is not what I consider to be even in the ballpark of ambitious. The communication with a given ECU either works, or it does not. The voltage levels, timings, and input thresholds, setup/hold times for read and write operations will not change during, before, or after use. If the communications work, then they shall for all the registers.
I am not that aspiring LabVIEW programmer. I have already have similar LabVIEW code in play on all sorts of bussess all over the USA for all sorts of companies.
This is ambitious project for someone else, whom I hope takes an interest in it. If not, I will do it.
The reason I feel that this is highly relevant to purchase decision is that I believe we will find that we can create the vast majority of the capabilities you want for your make/model for free as long as we are able to somehow acquire the register/format information that is company proprietary.
So while it may suit someone’s interest to silence this reality, I don’t think relevance is an issue that makes that happen.
However, I have said my piece. Likely, I am going to be working on this application one way or another. And with that, I will poat no more about this topic here. The great minds at DMS wiil have to decide how real and/or important my assertions are, and how seriously to take them.