The Cen-tech Can Obdii Code Reader Model 98614 is a budget-friendly option for car owners looking to diagnose vehicle issues. This review covers a user’s initial experience with the device, including software installation, connection, and test results obtained from a vehicle.
The user reports successful installation of the software and drivers on a Vista Home Premium 64-bit system. The device connected without issues on COM5 and printed flawlessly. Initial tests indicate successful communication with the vehicle’s control module. The data retrieved, however, reveals that the vehicle being tested uses the SAE J1850 VPW protocol, which this particular Cen-Tech model doesn’t fully support. This resulted in several “Not Supported Or Stored No Data” messages. Despite this limitation, the code reader was able to pull some diagnostic information.
The test results show no stored or pending codes in the module, and no freeze frame data was available. Oxygen sensor (O2) data for Bank 1 Sensor 1 was successfully retrieved, providing rich-lean threshold, counts, and values. Bank 1 Sensor 2 data was not supported.
On-Board Monitoring (OBD) tests using Mode $10 data requests yielded mixed results. Several tests, identified by their IDs (02, 66, 36, 60, 62, 72, 21, 71), returned “OK” status. However, tests with IDs 06, 50, 30, 40, and 11 reported a “Fail” status. The specific meaning of these failed tests isn’t clear without further context or consulting the vehicle’s service manual. The measured values and their acceptable ranges (MIN and MAX) are provided for each test. Tests $05 and $0E were not supported.
The user expressed dissatisfaction with the provided manual, describing it as “lame.” This suggests a lack of clarity or insufficient information for interpreting the test results, particularly concerning the meaning of the “$10” identifier consistently appearing in the “MOD” field, which likely refers to a specific communication mode or protocol.
In conclusion, the Cen-Tech Can OBDII Code Reader Model 98614 successfully connected to the vehicle and retrieved some diagnostic data. However, its limited support for the SAE J1850 VPW protocol hindered its ability to provide comprehensive information. The failed tests require further investigation using a more comprehensive diagnostic tool or consulting a vehicle-specific repair manual. The inadequate manual further complicates the interpretation of the results. While functional for basic tasks, this particular model may not be suitable for vehicles utilizing the SAE J1850 VPW protocol.
