As someone who has wanted to do an LS (now upgraded to an LT) conversion for 2 years, (with a DIY kit) I am excited to see competition in this space. I think talking about the positives of each of the vendors is the way to keep the conversation where it belongs - on the high road.
I agree and would like to keep this thread OT, on our Gen V swap. I have taken no action again RPM nor would ever get a customer involved that is childish. I will comment on your statement though then let's get back OT.
The end result is we all want a fully functional JK so I will try and explain some of the differences in our approaches. We run a full and complete GM network with factory calibrations as required by the USEPA to keep your JK legal and safe, we feel there are no shortcuts. This includes a ECM, BCM and TCM, each has a critical job in the network. Each has its input/output functions and diagnostics. As the LS has become popular in the JK several approaches have emerged to gain functionality, one competitor puts an LS inside a Chrysler network; I think we all know how compliant that is.
Jon is heavily dependent on a CAN interface, we have actually had a CAN interface in our electronics since 2013. Here's the issue we have, bridging networks through CAN is a great idea and can add functionality. Our Gen IV MoTech module will use CAN to bridge some non critical signals and dash displays as you will see.
Most importantly to us is we stay pure to the OE network and it's OS. It is amazing how much money and time go into proper calibrations for safety, performance, emissions.....manufacturers spend millions. I feel I have a different perspective than many newcomers since I have been an emissions diagnostic technition for over 20 years, I have worked with both GM and Jeep and understand many underlying issues that may not be clear on the surface.
We maintain a BCM for many reasons. The BCM has a great deal of effect on engine performance and is required to keep you JK legal. A few examples are: The BCM acts as the power mode module for the network, this means the BCM wakes up and puts to sleep the other modules. If this is not done properly you end up with a small key off draw, you end up with monitors that will not set properly for emission drive cycles, you have KAM-keep alive memory, RAP-Retained accessory power...... Power modes are critical to proper powertrain operation and cannot be mimicked easily. OS's can be hacked and patched to power down but now you are no longer pure.
The BCM is critical in the operation of cruise control and electronic shifting. Years ago we used a Corvette tune and got tapshift and CC functional without a BCM, but it became apparent it was not as safe or functional as a properly monitored system. We simulated brake and CC switch failures which led to runaway throttles. Tapshift in the Camaro's and truck tunes we use are dependent on a BCM for proper function. The BCM receives the signal from the switch gear, whether it be Mux, serial or CAN. The BCM has a important diagnostic capability which keeps you safe. The BCM receives it's own independent brake switch data, the ECM and TCM have their own brake switch inputs. The BCM runs a diagnostic on brake switch data before allowing a CC command. The CC diagnostic is not limited to brake switch(or brake position) data, system voltage, VSS and other data is processed by the BCM to allow CC to go active when it is safe. So while you can receive and transmit a valid CC command to activate CC by bypassing the diagnostics of the BCM it can be very risky.
I just had a customer from Phoenix with an LS3 JK we did a year ago come in with issues. His compass module was fried and the CC was inop and he was going into reduced power. Turns out his electrical system was damaged from welding, shorted battery, etc. Several JK modules were fried and it was the BCM that was putting the LS3 into reduced power. The BCM sensed the CC signals were erratic because the switch electronics were damaged; without a BCM that diagnostic would not have been run and it may have resulted badly. The BCM monitors system voltage and affects engine performance accordingly. When you use the BCM for tapshift a complex series of events happen. the BCM processes the signal, the engine anticipates the shift and rpm matches, the TCM makes the shift with the appropriate feel, it's a coordinated effort. Sure there are work arounds to get tapshift without the pure OS but we chose the pure OS to maintain these diagnostics and safety the manufacturer built in.
IMO there are no shot cuts, the OS and networks must remain pure, all diagnostics must be in network monitoring and functioning as intended or there is a liability. I do not want to risk my customers or families safety. My wife(and kids) have driven a 2008 LS JK since 2010 and have nearly 130,000 miles on it. My wife is reliant on CC virtually everyday. After experiencing throttle runaways I can tell you my wife most likely would not react fast enough and I don't want that burdening me. I feel her JK is as safe as the OE vehicle with multiple redundant brake signals, and full OE diagnostics.
There is a lot more but this is the beginning of why we do what we do, safety, compliance and functionality all must work together. Soon we will bring online some CAN bridging to give you the "eye candy" as I call it, but it will be secondary to safety and a proper pure network. We will maintain all required modules with all proper monitoring, then we will add the fluff. We are even working on an adjustable traction control for the JK so you can go faster than no traction control.
This is an answer to your statement and why we are different then everybody out there. CAN bridging to eliminate components for an easier install and add functionality may have it's place, but it is second place for us at this point, we will stay pure then add the features you want. This is not a criticism just an explanation why we chose to do it the hard way; however, to be fair our swaps today only require about 6 wires be connected into the vehicle. We hope to get down to 100% plug and play soon if we can source or manufacturer some connectors. Doing it the hard way may have a negative affect on us in the end but it comes down to me taking responsibility to do it the way I feel it needs to be done. I can see a place for the other methods, not just Jon's but the others too. I have chosen the same path as GM, to as closely as I can follow their engineering and compliance to get similar results with performance, emissions and safety, again I see no shortcuts going this route. It's too bad the consumers sometimes do not see what goes on behind the curtain but you can trust me when I say I have made the decision to spend the extra money, lose the functionality to stay true to the mission goal of a safe and compliant JK for our customers. We currently have hardware and harnesses in stock, we are shipping the hardware quickly within a week. The electronics must be tailored to each vehicle but we have the components on the shelf and we are shipping them within a couple weeks unlike two years ago when it took 8-12 weeks. We have a few great harness guys that got ahead of the curve and currently there is no wait on harnesses, we have both truck and LS3 in stock.
I suggest if you want to continue the "difference" start one elsewhere I'd like to keep this thread OT.