Interested in an unofficial Apple Watch app?

[Hirschaj]

Can you try to connect again with build 89 and share the error you see? I didn't fix the error but this will help me diagnose what the underlying issue is.

Here you go sir…

Sponsored

 

[electricsidecar]

Oh, that's an odd one. When it's connecting do you by chance see the ELM327 version number momentarily? If you do can you share it here?

 

[Hirschaj]

Oh, that's an odd one. When it's connecting do you by chance see the ELM327 version number momentarily? If you do can you share it here?

I think it flies by pretty quickly so I’ll do a screen recording. Hang tight.

 

[Hirschaj]

Oh, that's an odd one. When it's connecting do you by chance see the ELM327 version number momentarily? If you do can you share it here?

It’s v1.4b. I have a recording of the app trying to talk to the scanner if you want to see it. I assume it’s not very useful but let me know.

 

[electricsidecar]

v1.4b on mine too. Can you share the OBDLink CX identifier and version?

The one I'm testing is:

- Y82-DA14531M0D
- v1.7
- Model CX101

Just tested with mine and was able to connect ok, so I'm wondering if maybe there's different OBDLink CX versions.

 

[electricsidecar]

Haaha so this pretty funny, I guess we're now seeing what people talk about when they mention the ELM327 interfaces being counterfeited. My OBDLink CX is reporting that it's v1.4b but it's responding to commands that were only officially introduced in ELM327 v2.0, so I suspect the OBDLink CX is using unofficial ELM327 chips under the hood.

I'll need to handle this case either way, so I'll add in some fallback behavior so that Electric Sidecar doesn't have to rely on the ATCRA command.

 

[B61]

So, is it time to test MX+ with .89?

 

[d00d]

I have the VEEPEAK (not plus) and never been able to connect, getting ATCRA7XX unexpected response.
Also have the Car Scanner Pro application, it's been very difficult to connect, only twice so far.
What OBD-II scan tool do you find to be the most reliable?

 

[electricsidecar]

Just uploaded v1.4.0-90 that should fix the initialization errors. I’ve implemented some fallback behavior for devices that don’t support wildcard responses. Let me know if this build still doesn’t work though!

 

[electricsidecar]

So, is it time to test MX+ with .89?

Not yet! I need to build in official Bluetooth device support for the MX, which is a bit more complicated than just supporting Bluetooth low energy devices.

 

[Hirschaj]

Just uploaded v1.4.0-90 that should fix the initialization errors. I’ve implemented some fallback behavior for devices that don’t support wildcard responses. Let me know if this build still doesn’t work though!

Works great now. Thank you!

 

[electricsidecar]

Works great now. Thank you!

Amazing! Do all of the monitors load for you now?

 

[Hirschaj]

Amazing! Do all of the monitors load for you now?

Seems like it. There are a lot of them.

 

[electricsidecar]

So, is it time to test MX+ with .89?

Ahh so I looked into this and it seems that it's unfortunately impossible to connect to the MX+ unless I get Electric Sidecar officially registered with the company that makes OBDLink. This is likely something I'll be able to do long-term once Electric Sidecar is launched and in the App Store, but in the short term I'm not sure they'd be open to adding Electric Sidecar to their cleared list of apps just yet.

Unfortunately this means Electric Sidecar won't be able to work with the MX+ at all for now, but there's thankfully plenty of cheap alternatives that work pretty well!

 

[electricsidecar]

Seems like it. There are a lot of them.

Haha yeah I need to implement some kind of grouping for the battery cell signals, as they kind of blew up the list pretty significantly. Now that I've hopefully gotten all of the stability issues resolved I'm going to start working on being able to visualize the vehicle battery pack using these signals.

Sponsored