Dongle issue

[apptester]

Got Proscan Automotive dongle advertised as Mini ELM327 OBD2 V2.1, however vag dpf free i snot supported as well as protocol goes only to v2, not v2.1 as advertised. Dongle is being returned but I would like to know if version needs to be > 2 to support vag dpf app?
thanks

[admin]

The ELM327 identifier report doesn't tell you if the adapter works with every supported command, it only reports which commands are recognized by the adapter, but during its functioning it couldn't manage well some of them, as usually happens with low cost adapters.

[apptester]

Dongle from ebay description says it supports following:

ISO 15765-4 CAN (11 bit ID, 500 kbaud)

ISO 15765-4 CAN (29 bit ID, 500 kbaud)

ISO 15765-4 CAN (11 bit ID, 250 kbaud)

ISO 15765-4 CAN (29 bit ID, 250 kbaud)

So I guess this is a good case for return because it does not match description.

[admin]

VAG DPF requires at least an ELM327 version 1.3.

If your dongle declares the v2.1 compatibility, you can return it because the support is only partial, watching the ELM327 identifier report.
Support for the 4 versions of ISO 15765 protocol is present since version 1.0 of the ELM firmware, but in any case also if a dongle would supports every AT command, if it works bad you should return it.

[pawel]

Hello
The Chinese use the ELM327 identifier app as a quality feature.
That is why they manipulated the firmware in such a way that AT commands are declared as OK, which in truth are not supported at all.
These dongles can then not work with programs that rely on configuration with AT commands.
These dongles are only optimized for the automatic detection of OBD2 protocols.


Since the ELM327 identifier app does not check the ATPPS command, this manipulated firmware cannot be identified.

Please also read here: https://cvtz50.info/en/elm327/

[admin]

I agree, I always said and written that the ELM327 identifier results aren't an assurance both if ok or not ok. They're only an indication of the adapter quality.

The article you posted is interesting, but why do you think the ATPPS command is the only one that confirms the adapter firmware reliability? Couldn't it be manipulated by a firmware cracker like other commands?

Anyway I can manage to introduce the ATPPS command.

[pawel]

You could expand your log file and show the Elm Response messages.
That would increase transparency.
There is, for example, chinese WiFi Elm with a real 1.4 (1.5) AT command set, which sends a ü in response to ATZ.
This Elm type has problems with software which is ASCII coded and uses this command to configure the protocol.

[admin]

Using your good suggestions, I released now a new version with ATPPS command and raw results in the log.

Thanks

[pawel]

Thanks for your quick implementation.
Can you please add ATSI and ATFI?
These commands are also required for older Renault Ecu in order to select the KWP protocol directly.

[admin]

I can't add these commands because they don't give any answer back so the app can't understand if they're accepted correctly or not.