16 captured repliesDiscussion pagination complete · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCHKey Remote - Jammed
Leading reported evidence
Use spare
Suggestion or failed attempt
No successful repair reported for this finding.
0
Reported fixes
0
Unsuccessful attempts
1
Discussions
Read evidence and context
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that contain suggestions
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Leading evidence: 'Use spare' (no explicit attributable resolution; this is a reported action or suggestion). Across 1 matching discussions, The most frequently discussed action is 'Use spare' (1 discussions). For that action, 0 discussions report a resolution and 0 report an unsuccessful attempt. No action has an explicit, attributable resolution report under the current rules. These are forum reports and suggestions, not a confirmed diagnosis.
Source reports, not a diagnosis or a success probability. Counts refer to discussions and can overlap.
Counts describe captured discussions, not unique people or a diagnosis. Author identities are not reliably stored. Exact duplicate evidence is counted once across matching discussions; one discussion counts at most once per action/state. Multiple repairs reported together remain a combination. Suggestions and failed attempts do not establish a fix. Matches cover whole discussions and can include related faults, model variants and incomplete threads.
16 eligible posts · 0 unverified posts · 1 discussions match the subject in their title or opening post.
Rennlist: 1 discussions
0 evidence records excluded for query context · 0 excluded by outcome qualification · 0 adjusted by outcome qualification.
1 acknowledgements have no verified action link; they do not establish a repair result.
The one day (of maybe 3 total in over a year) that my wife needs to use my car while her Audi is in the shop something of course goes down.
She called me from her parking garage and all I can hear is the horn howling.
The key remote wouldn't open the door so she had to go in the old school way which triggered the alarm. Then panicked and didn't know you need to get the key in the ignition to shut it down.
Of course I chalked it up to operator error - she seems to get stranded in our Defender from time to time for no apparent reason - but as it turned out I checked out that key remote and the small red diode light is constantly on. And the remote doesn't work. Thoughts? I assume the light won't be on forever as the battery is going to draw down, but what might be causing this jam?
thanks,
dan
The only portion of the key which identifies itself uniquely is the the transponder inside which looks like a glass pill. If you buy a new or used key and the glass pill is still working properly, you can just swap it out. The key works fine without the need for reprogramming after that.
Assuming of course that it's not the battery and that your key malfunctioned because the circuit board was damaged in some way.
I would change the battery first, they are cheap and removing it might allow for the key fob to "reboot". Modern electronics being what they are, a restart is always worth a try. If it's not the battery, keep the new one for a spare.
This has happened to my remote a few times in the past 2 years. I have a one button remote, so I just pop the cover off the key fob, take out the battery for a few seconds. While it's out, I pull the entire little circuit board from the key fob (which just snaps in and out) I push and jiggle the little button on the circuit board, and put it all back together.
-td
This is somewhat an issue of semantics ..... and you probably know already ... but the "key" is not affected by the mating procedure the dealer does. Instead, it is the car's CPU that is taught (or re-taught) to recognize a specific key.
This is for starting and remote lock / alarm operation.
On 2002 and newer, the recognition of specific keys is also tied to memory items such as seat and mirror positions for that particular driver.
The dealer is not always a "stealer" in this process. Hennessy in Atlanta charged me under $50 total for mating 2 keys to my car.
Now, in a year when someone asks the same question, you're required to be the first to post a response. Paybacks and all that, lol
Glad it worked out!
-td
Well, "stealer" in my case, because to re-flash the EPROM in the key took them
less than 10 minutes. 240 is too much.
Several guys in here, like you, had it done for way less.
The price also varies a lot from stealer to stealer. Unfair.
John
^^That's why the invoice should consist of materials and the shop's overhead rate by labour hr. There is no way to justify a $240 invoice on 10 minutes of labour (min might be 0.5 hrs).
Its free enterprise, so "fair" or "unfair", in my opinion, does not enter into the issue. A dealer charges what he wishes, and then accepts the consequences to his commercial success.
In my case, Hennessy's very reasonable charge gained them any future business associated with my car: parts, repairs, whatever. On the other hand, my experience with the other dealer in Atlanta has lost them my business.
" It's free enterprise..."
Well if it is that kind of freedom, why not make your own enterprise and pay each
employee $1.00 per hour... oh you cannot! Unfair, and basically illegal.
Programming a key is limited to dealers and very few others (which are not in my area)
so free enterprise should not allow them to charge us just anything they want.
$240.00 is absolutely unfair, so back to my original post, I stand
correct when I typed "stealer".
John
I don't believe many log in here for political / philosophical debate, so I will make this my last post on this subject.
I certainly acknowledge that there are minimum wage laws. However, with very few exceptions (in the U.S., at least), there are no price controls .... and none that I know of on the price of labor / service for luxury autos. So, legality is not an issue here.
Free enterprise in the U.S. (can't speak for Canada) does
exactly
what you object to .... allows a businessman to charge whatever he pleases. The market place will determine whether or not he charges too much.
You get the last word ....
Fine, however you began the discussion by commenting on my "stealer" expression.
Ok, and here is the last word then: if the stealer is free to over-charge
whatever he wants, I am free to call it as I see it- stealer- because some of them
are obviously overcharging, and our options are limited to get a key reprogrammed- unfair.
This is a source reference. Confirm exact model applicability in the original material.