Deere and right to repair

Just stumbled on this on arf.com of all places.
https://www.bbc.com/news/business-64206913

I guess this is a step in the right direction. Ag first, maybe yellow iron next? Maybe.

If that's Deere's opinion on their equipment, that's enough reason for me to never purchase another one. I still have a couple of their Powertech engines in other makes but I did not realize that they had this "intellectual property" type of situation going on. That's a really good way to turn off a customer base for people like me who refuse to take anything to a dealer. Kind of reminds me of the Woke = Broke saying.

And then no matter what the machine is, they are loaded with the secret black boxes AKA ECU's and Controller modules and what ever else there is, that demand the big bucks at the parts counters.
There are some folks with the electronic back ground that could replace the small $3.00 component that is shutting the machine down if they only had the correct schematics etc. but no that will never be released. All they have to do is say it is not user serviceable. Yes having the proper software and devices to look for certain problems is nice. But knowing what makes those black boxes tick is way more important and opens up competitive rebuilding of such items.

Yanmar appears to be the same

funwithfuel said:

I guess this is a step in the right direction. Ag first, maybe yellow iron next? Maybe.

Click to expand...

Cat already has that setup.
Bad Bob

This topic is a BS grinder. All the diagnostic software should be in the machine and accessible by all. Lock out the power settings, safety stuff and emissions and then there are no issues. Been that way on Komatsu and Caterpillar construction stuff for a long time. There is probably some way to do it on Deere ag stuff to.

Funny the story has to come from a British News Service.

There are farmers that don't care, they stop at routine maintaince. Something dies in the field it gets fixed with a phone call.
Not saying I agree with what Deere has been doing, it isn't right.

Ed

It is really bad for us indies way back in the hills. Something Deere, Cummins, Isuzu starts acting up and we have to pull all kinds of strings to figure out what is wrong with it.

With propane or natural gas fueled equipment, it is much different. Software is easily available and easy to use and understand. The interface does not cost very much.

The JD issue was especially concerning to farmers and think that's where the right to repair started. JD are the biggest AG suppliers in the US and were trying to get a monopoly on repairs. They were basically saying farmers were leasing the software and that's why it had to be serviced by a dealer tech. Farmers started fighting back and it's great they succeeded. If you need to get a crop in and your $500K combine dies, you can't wait until the JD tech can get there in 3 or 4 days because there are 4 or 5 customers ahead of you. If JD would have prevailed would have opened the door for even more restrictions on what customers could repair on their equipment.

Here is the agreement.

https://www.fb.org/files/AFBF_John_Deere_MOU.pdf

For Deere, it is an attempt to stop state and federal legislation that will force their hand. This move takes the Farm Bureau Federation off the opponent list.

It’s summed up in section II, A, 5. Deere wants to prevent liability if someone wants to override safety features, delete emission controls or raise the horsepower of a machine.
How many folks have done something as simple as bypass the seat switch on their lawnmower? Features like this are put there to limit the chances the operator or others can be hurt or killed. Think what a machine such as a combine or a forage harvester could do.
All manufacturers are required to design engines to limit harmful emissions, and the laws can make them financially liable even after the machine is sold and out of their hands. Admittedly, all of the manufacturers have made and sold engines that have failed to perform as they accumulate use, and not all have effectively dealt with these problems, but they have to make every effort to keep their products in compliance. A “simple” thing like an EGR delete and the ability to insert a chip or a programming change to emulate a properly functioning emissions system exposes the owner, the technician, and the manufacturer to liability for pollution.
Manufacturers also design their machines to work at a certain power level for a reasonable amount of time. Just because several models of a tractor appear to be identical except for horsepower isn’t always true, and there maybe some power train components that are upgraded for higher power levels. It has been said that some manufacturers “sell horsepower”, and that may have been true in some cases, but in reality, that tractor has been designed as a system. The engine, transmission components,and the stuff that puts power to the ground, as well as the emission system are all designed to deliver optimum life, fuel economy, and reasonable cost of operation. And yes, the manufacturer wants to limit as much as possible any warranty claims.
Owners deserve to have the “Right to Repair”. Uptime is critical in any business; perhaps none more so than agriculture, where the window to put a crop in the ground or to harvest it may be painfully short, and a critical machine that is broke down can result in large financial loss. The ability to diagnose, and to have repair information readily at hand, is critical.

OK, I’m gonna put my flame suit on now.
Odie

Deere went way beyond doing this for safety. I think it is disingenuous to even suggest this has anything meaningful to do with safety. The repair shops are the source of large sources of income for both the dealer and the OEM. This is all about extending the income stream for the dealer and the OEM throughout the life of the equipment. ECMs can be locked down to prevent power changes and document the activity if someone was able to override it. This capability has been around for a long time. You can paint it however it is convenient to justify the action, but at the end of the day, Deere pushed this to make more money on each green tractor sold. I get the idea as an OEM, but Deere stepped in it big time over this. The green tractor guys are incredibly loyal, but this shitstorm has created a rift that will be felt for a long time.

The agreement is only a statement and is not legally binding on anyone. Second part is that Deere says they will sell the equipment needed to diagnose. It is like the lady on the street, she finds out what you want and then will sell it to you.

chidog said:

And then no matter what the machine is, they are loaded with the secret black boxes AKA ECU's and Controller modules and what ever else there is, that demand the big bucks at the parts counters.
There are some folks with the electronic back ground that could replace the small $3.00 component that is shutting the machine down if they only had the correct schematics etc. but no that will never be released. All they have to do is say it is not user serviceable. Yes having the proper software and devices to look for certain problems is nice. But knowing what makes those black boxes tick is way more important and opens up competitive rebuilding of such items.

Click to expand...

I see the automotive guys have already started repairing ecm's on the component level. There are some guys even teaching how to do it. Looks like a good idea as some of the cars have ecms that are on back order and dealer has no idea when they will come in.

It's not just JD, Case New Holland has been doing the same thing since computerized tractors became a thing.
A friend of mine bought a brand new New Holland mid-size tractor. About 20 minutes after the warranty expired, it just stopped moving, transmission went into neutral while it was working. I went up there, I have the NH diagnostic tool which you can get, but the dealer doesn't like it. I determined the TCM had failed. This module is about the size of a pack of cigarettes, easily accessible, and held on by 2 Philips screws and a Deutsch plug. 20 minute repair? nope, the module is shipped blank, and must be flashed. The dealer isn't even allowed to own the necessary software, so they can't send out a tech with a laptop. The tractor must be hauled 75 miles to the dealership, where it is plugged into a hardline connection to NH. Supposedly, only one tech at the shop can do this, so the tractor sits, because this dealer is terrible to customers who only own one new tractor, and 8 old ones. 5 MONTHS (entire hay season gone) later the bill is $350 to diagnose what I diagnosed and double checked in an hour, $1100 for the module, and $1200 to install and flash it. Tell me it ain't about making money.

The tractor went straight from the dealer to the auction, he took the money and bought 2 well restored '90s models.

There are all kinds of ways that equipment manufacturer's try to make it difficult for the average person to work on their equipment. Years ago I was working on a D4B Cat and trying to diagnose a problem which was avoiding me, I had purchased the repair manual from Cat for somewhere's north of $500.00 but couldn't figure it out. I finally called Cat and had one of their techs stop by. He checked things out and told me what needed to be done. While watching him I asked how he knew what to look for and where he got his information. I said that I didn't see that in the procedure listed in the manual. He just smiled and said, "They don't put that part in the manual so that you can't figure it out. It's only available to the dealer techs."

Bluox said:

Cat already has that setup.
Bad Bob

Click to expand...

funwithfuel said:

I guess this is a step in the right direction. Ag first, maybe yellow iron next? Maybe.

Click to expand...

Yellow iron is definitely next. Deere runs AG/CE as basically the same unit, so this will apply to CE.

I took a short business class at a community College years ago and one of the business examples was a farm equipment dealer. They spent oodles of money building a super modern shop equipped to handle multiple large machines at the same time. Big mistake. Tractors, combines and other big machines break down in the field and could be 2 hours or more away from the dealer and require special trailers and permits to move them. Most farmers obviously don't have the specialized equipment to haul their machines to and from the dealer so repairs are made at the farm. The dealer went under in less than 2 years.
I agree the safety portion in this agreement is a bunch of fluff. JD wanted a monopoly on the diagnostics so they could get $500 everytime they had to go out and hook up a lap top. It was a way to increase revenues for dealers service dept's. It was all about money but made to look like it wasn't. JD might have realized they could lose customers or face lawsuits because their equipment was down and crops were lost because dealers couldn't get to the machines fast enough. I don't know if it's still a law but in Saskatchewan AG dealers have to have parts for newer equipment with 48 hours because there can be a very small window farmers need to plant or harvest. Pulling codes so equipment can be repaired could be under the same rules.