Keyless Enter-N-Go - Passive Entry

[soco2285]

I have seen this behavior in Toyotas and Lexus' as well.

I wish mine was more consistent, for sure. Coming out of a store yesterday, bags in hand, had to pull on the handle 3-4 times before it recognized me. Annoying. I stood there for probably, like, 6 seconds. Like someone else said, I'm moving my hand all over the handle looking for the sweet spot. I probably look like an idiot over here feeling up my Jeep's handle, lol.

I'm telling ya. Pelvic thrust and grunt.

In a honesty this is a bit of a bummer. Sounds like 60% of the time this works 100% of the time.

My 2007 Suzuki SX4 has had flawless proximity entry for 11 years running. And that car cost less than $17,000 equipped! Simple push button on the driver, passenger and trunk. One press locks or unlocks the door. Two presses locks or unlocks all door.

Sponsored

 

[se7en]

Oh, the buttons work well each and every time. It just doesn't recognize the fact that the FOB is close by. I could stand there for an hour, and it still wouldn't know. Like I said, it's like it needs to be woken up. Once you've done something to get the system active and awake (like grab the handle...and wait for a few seconds), it's immediately responsive. I could lock, unlock, grab the handle...anything. It's immediate once active and for next couple minutes after. Once it sets for a little while, though, you're back to square one.

Oh well, maybe it will get better with system refreshes or something. There is hope because someone on here says theirs works perfectly every single time. Shame as it's currently the only hiccup on an otherwise well executed vehicle.

 

[mergedown]

Oh, the buttons work well each and every time. It just doesn't recognize the fact that the FOB is close by. I could stand there for an hour, and it still wouldn't know. Like I said, it's like it needs to be woken up. Once you've done something to get the system active and awake (like grab the handle...and wait for a few seconds), it's immediately responsive. I could lock, unlock, grab the handle...anything. It's immediate once active and for next couple minutes after. Once it sets for a little while, though, you're back to square one.

Oh well, maybe it will get better with system refreshes or something. There is hope because someone on here says theirs works perfectly every single time. Shame as it's currently the only hiccup on an otherwise well executed vehicle.

I hope there is an update that fixes this in the near future, it's just getting more annoying by the day. Hands full, grab handle, wait...wait..grab handle...wait...grab handle...unlocked. 6 seconds may not seem like a long time, but when you're standing at the door of the Jeep holding the handle waiting for the system to wake up and unlock, it seems like much longer.

Yes, I can default to using the fob to unlock, but that defeats the purpose of having the system. Love remote start because then the doors unlock as soon as you grab the handle.

 

[johnnytaco]

Mine seemed great when I first got it but now (about 2 weeks later) it behaves like what several of you have said. 2-3 pulls of the handle (5+ secs) before it unlocks. And locking with the handle button usually takes a few pushes (I set it to honk at first lock so I'd know it was locked for sure).

My 2008 Lexus' proximity (unlock and unlock) was flawless for the 7 yrs I had it. I paid specifically for this option on the Jeep so I don't think it's unfair at all to assume it will work as advertised!

jt

 

[se7en]

Mine seemed great when I first got it but now (about 2 weeks later) it behaves like what several of you have said.

Yup. Same here. But mine worked for about 3-4 days...not weeks.

 

[$uicide$hift]

I have never had this feature in a vehicle. I am reading that you place your hand on the handle and when it senses this it unlocks the doors? Is this correct? Proximity sensor tells me when the FOB is with X feet it detects it and unlocks the doors. Do we know which of these statements is true?

If you have to touch the handle for it to unlock is there an issue with dirt / film building up on it? Not that this should break it until cleaned unless it was an extreme mind you. Just trying to think what may have caused it to work in the beginning and then slowly degrade over time since more than one has experienced this.

 

[se7en]

The proximity sensor is in the FOB. 2 things: 1. when the system senses the FOB close by, it will allow the doors to be unlocked after you touch the handle or allow the doors to be locked by pressing the button. The handles don't automatically unlock just because it's in the area. 2. the system then senses the FOB close by and allows the vehicle to, then, be started.

It works this way for Toyota/Lexus and, I presume, all other makes....and flawlessly in Toyota/lLexus, I might add.

 

[mergedown]

I have never had this feature in a vehicle. I am reading that you place your hand on the handle and when it senses this it unlocks the doors? Is this correct? Proximity sensor tells me when the FOB is with X feet it detects it and unlocks the doors. Do we know which of these statements is true?

If you have to touch the handle for it to unlock is there an issue with dirt / film building up on it? Not that this should break it until cleaned unless it was an extreme mind you. Just trying to think what may have caused it to work in the beginning and then slowly degrade over time since more than one has experienced this.

I'm honestly not sure if it can be unlocked/locked by pure proximity, but I'll look for that feature. But, I'm referencing the feature that unlocks as you touch the handle. I've had the feature in a few other vehicles and it has always been instant, even in rain and snow, it must works. The Jeep just has a horrible delay in waking up and sensing that the fob is nearby.

 

[se7en]

I'm honestly not sure if it can be unlocked/locked by pure proximity, but I'll look for that feature.

It can't. That's not an option for this, or any system, that I'm aware of.

 

[se7en]

Simple fact is it's not working as intended, but not sure why. Like I said earlier, its like it goes into hibernation and doesn't recognize the FOB is close by...until you wake it up. That is when the delay happens.

 

[Craigy]

That is really disappointing.

Particularly for a $495 option, which IMO should come standard on a $50,000 vehicle like this anyway.

For what it's worth, my 2011 Lexus is flawless, instant unlock on the first touch of the handle. The only time it hesitates is if for some reason I lock the car and then immediately change my mind to get back in the car seconds later.

Hopefully Jeep will have some update which takes care of this, soon.

 

[Craigy]

OMG, a whole 6 seconds ?!?!
JK lol #1stworldproblems

Why don't you go buy a new $50,000 jeep, pay the extra $495 for proximity entry, and then see how it feels to have to pull on the handle for six seconds for your jeep to decide to let you in.

Mock that all you want, but people here are paying good money for what is supposed to be a good product.

Seriously, that's embarrassing. In a parking lot with your brand new $50,000 truck with the temp tags on it, and already it doesn't work right. Jeep should be ashamed.

 

[ccarrico29]

Why don't you go buy a new $50,000 jeep, pay the extra $495 for proximity entry, and then see how it feels to have to pull on the handle for six seconds for your jeep to decide to let you in.

Mock that all you want, but people here are paying good money for what is supposed to be a good product.

Seriously, that's embarrassing. In a parking lot with your brand new $50,000 truck with the temp tags on it, and already it doesn't work right. Jeep should be ashamed.

Terrible to hear this and completely made me cross this option off my list. My wife's Grand Cherokee works perfectly, so they totally dropped the ball on the JL.

 

[se7en]

Terrible to hear this and completely made me cross this option off my list. My wife's Grand Cherokee works perfectly, so they totally dropped the ball on the JL.

Someone on here said their's is perfect. But, to the Cherokee thought...maybe it's because the Wrangler's handles are not smoothly painted like all the other vehicles being talked about? IDK, just throwing darts, here...

Maybe we should do a poll to see how wide spread the issue is.

 

[The Great Grape Ape]

The proximity sensor is in the FOB. 2 things: 1. when the system senses the FOB close by, it will allow the doors to be unlocked after you touch the handle or allow the doors to be locked by pressing the button. The handles don't automatically unlock just because it's in the area. 2. the system then senses the FOB close by and allows the vehicle to, then, be started.

It works this way for Toyota/Lexus and, I presume, all other makes....and flawlessly in Toyota/lLexus, I might add.

The thing to remember is that the Toyota/Lexus, and many others are NOT flawless, they just appear flawless, since the flaws in many of the systems aren’t widely exposed, and don’t relate to ease of access, but to level of security. The proximity unlock and the remote unlock fobs have serious security issues that most people are unaware of. As this works fine on the GC , Cherokee and others it’s not a Jeep vs Toyota thing, it’s possible/probable that it’s a new implementation of keyless entry that limits range, and requires certain digital handshake(s) before opening to increase security. The delay seems to fit this problem, and thr wake component may be an issue for a system in sleep mode which wakes and need to do more than a single key check of older fobs.

It is odd though that it worked quickly and then did not, might be around the time of that major Uconnect push, and just another aspect it broke, so there might be hope it will improve once an update reverts back to the prior implementation. Of course that’s as long as the new implementation isn’t intentional, albeit it slower and more of a hassle.

A recent look into the keyless entry security holes will reveal a myriad of manufacturers with know exploits for even current models from Audi to Volvo, including Lexus/Toyota, yet there are fewer FCA products on those lists (often one of the few/only being the rebadged Mazda 124 Spyder) this is likely in part because of FCA’s forced security updates from other prior unrelated hacks.

Improvements include changing radio tech (UWB-SP9 for example) to incorporate proper distance measuring, quicker lower power transmissions (harder to snoop/copy), which when used with multi channel/code authentication improves security, however having to decrypt or complete these additional steps might delay things.

The question becomes if the delay is a fault or a result of a specific implemention/activity that has benefits, but with some drawbacks.

Between speed of entry and security, I would take security... but of course it would still be best to have both, and not notice any exeternal difference to those deeper changes.

Definitely something that should be brought to FCA’s attention, as they may not be aware of the change from the initial/default speed some were initially experiencing, and the only way it gets addressed is if they know it’s an issue.

Sponsored