TurtleBoy wrote

No, not at all. The issue is that you can't enable the full feature Anti-Dazzle using bimmercode since VO needs to be used and there are ECUs that Bimmercode does not have access to. You were insisting that you did but finally after overwhelming evidence and various people telling you that you were wrong did you give up.

AGONXF30 wrote

You are comical.

I never insisted that BC had access to KAFAS, what I insisted was that you can get all the features as seen in the videos with no light bleed (as you kept insisting).

Such is life. The posts are evidence of your foolishness.

AGONXF30 wrote

So easy to trigger. Once again, you can do the lines needed to make it work with BC.

I strongly recommend doing it with BU so the VO can be accessed. Without the VO a DTC error will appear and cannot be erased.

If one can live with the error (no indications other than during a scan) BC can absolutely do the anti dazzle wihtou accessing the KAFAS, no FLM coding needed in the G05.

The BC coding gives you a 99% solution with no light bleed, which was your concern, and you were adamant and pedantic about it yet you had never done the code.

Now that you have done the code, I invite you to buy BU and do the full code and you can see they are nearly identical in behavior.

TurtleBoy wrote

This coding here is fairly widely used and seems to work pretty well. It should get you the tunneling and allow the HB's to remain on and not get flashed buy other drivers for blinding them.

You may want to try G05_Laser_ECE for LUT_AFS_DRV_HOR since the code below is from someone coding the G20. Obviously you want to use the ECE values and not the US.

samvora wrote

So from these two images which lines am I exactly changing using BC to get this and get the 99% functionality of this feature? If I go this route through BC then will it throw a DTC error?

TurtleBoy wrote

If you do the coding that I posted earlier in the thread, that you quoted that line from, you will get the tunneling and so far no one has reported getting flashed due to the high beams. Can't say it is 99% of the full feature but you will not get DTC errors.

samvora wrote

Ok so the only line I change is the one you wrote in the verbiage of that post? Nothing else, correct? Where in BDU would this be?

TurtleBoy wrote

Your question isn't clear/can be interpreted two ways so I will answer this way, you need to code all of the lines that are in those images and the one in my verbiage replaces the value that is in the image. Does that make sense? Use the search function to get them rather than scrolling to find.

samvora wrote

Understood. Thank you. I will basically make sure that all the values at my end are the exact same as the values in the images including the line you have given for the coding.

samvora wrote

Understood. Thank you. I will basically make sure that all the values at my end are the exact same as the values in the images including the line you have given for the coding.

halfbent wrote

Any luck with this?

TurtleBoy wrote

I have since used the coding on my M340i and it seems to be working well. Plan on doing the X5 shortly. I would imagine having it VO coded provides a better overall product but this shortcut provides better lighting than standard.

Almaretto wrote

Make sure you are not using the same coding for different vehicle types as you will have bad, glaring results.

sparksk wrote

Has anyone been to code this correctly on a 2019 X5 (I have a Canadian Excellence Package)?
I have been unsuccessful on a couple of attempts. The high beam indicator (blue light) shows that it is on and the lights move with oncoming traffic but as soon as it detects a car approaching from far away it turns off the high beams (but continues to tunnel the low beams for the approaching car).

Eclimax13 wrote

How exactly should this be working? I had my car coded to full euro spec. Went for a drive and the high beams don't stay on with oncoming vehicles. It would go to low beam and every once in a while I'd see the left light separate and come back to normal. Not sure what I should be seeing.

TurtleBoy wrote

Sounds like it is not coded correctly. When it is, the the high beams should stay on and tunnel around the oncoming vehicle or the vehicle you are approaching.

Eclimax13 wrote

Are the lights moving physically? Seems like something that will cause failure prematurely.

starlights wrote

I have a quick question regarding anti dazzle coding and didn't want to start a new thread.

I had my car coded for Anti Dazzle (using eSys) a few months ago. Unfortunately that got wiped due to software update while at dealership. Since the VO code was already done at the time of original coding can I bring back anti dazzle through BC code above in the thread? Possible or not worth wasting time on?

TIA