FOREScan software installed
Elder User
Joined: Sep 2016
Posts: 781
Likes: 6
From: Edmonton Alberta Canada
Would a mod or the OP mind editing the first post to include what has been learned? What you can change and all. Tire pressure warning and double honk leaving would be welcome mods for sure.
Post Fiend
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 5,158
Likes: 35
From: North of Salt Lake City
I created a spreadsheet with the features that can be changed so far. There's only three items on it now but I intend to add new mods as soon as we learn them. Here's the thread with a link to the spreadsheet on the first post.
https://www.ford-trucks.com/forums/1...readsheet.html
https://www.ford-trucks.com/forums/1...readsheet.html
Cargo Master
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,117
Likes: 8
From: Over Yonder, MN
I’ve been reading a lot about Forscan on several forums, and see what I consider to be a lot of misinformation about what is going on. So, I’m writing this not to discourage people from using it, clearly… I’ve used it myself, but so people know what they are getting into.
Forscan isn’t merely changing “factory options”, which sounds fairly benign, although that may be the ultimate outcome in some cases, that’s not what forscan is doing. Forscan is changing memory blocks at the bit level. This is about as down and dirty as you can get when it comes to computers, and potentially very dangerous. Forscan itself even warns you about some of the dangers. This is borderline hacking, entry level maybe, but it qualifies by the strictest definition of the word. I say potentially dangerous because only the input parameter blocks (depending on how much you trust forscan itself, but that’s another discussion) are being changed and any good programmer knows to validate their inputs. The question is, was the programmer at Ford who wrote that particular modules software a good programmer? You hope, but you don’t know. Unchecked inputs produce unpredictable behavior, which is where the dangerous part comes into play.
The Ford modules are black boxes, we can give them inputs and see how they react. This is how a number of options have been found. But exactly what it’s doing with those inputs is a mystery. Take for example the double honk, we’ve learned that changing a particular bit disables it. We’ve learned this through observation, but observations aren’t complete. What if for example changing that 1 bit not only disables the double horn honk, but also disables all of the airbags without any warnings? I’d like to stress this is an extremely unlikely scenario for several reasons, but it makes a good point. How do you know? Chances are good you certainly haven’t tested the airbags.
Even if we assume that Ford has great programmers and that no module will accept any values it wasn’t specifically designed to, there could still be potential parameters that are valid and would be accepted by the modules, but were never intended to be used outside the design lab. What they may be or do doesn’t really matter, what does is that they weren’t intended for production vehicles and their use puts the vehicle outside it’s deigned operating parameters. If ford can trace a failure back to this, say goodbye to your warranty. But as we all know, even if they can’t specifically point to that causing the failure, the simple transgression of treading on their holy ground may cause them to want to make an example of you and now you, in turn, will have to fight it.
I chose to accept these risks for the few changes I made, there are other changes I may not be willing to risk making. Bottom line, you pay to play. If it goes bad on you you’ve got no one else to blame.
Forscan isn’t merely changing “factory options”, which sounds fairly benign, although that may be the ultimate outcome in some cases, that’s not what forscan is doing. Forscan is changing memory blocks at the bit level. This is about as down and dirty as you can get when it comes to computers, and potentially very dangerous. Forscan itself even warns you about some of the dangers. This is borderline hacking, entry level maybe, but it qualifies by the strictest definition of the word. I say potentially dangerous because only the input parameter blocks (depending on how much you trust forscan itself, but that’s another discussion) are being changed and any good programmer knows to validate their inputs. The question is, was the programmer at Ford who wrote that particular modules software a good programmer? You hope, but you don’t know. Unchecked inputs produce unpredictable behavior, which is where the dangerous part comes into play.
The Ford modules are black boxes, we can give them inputs and see how they react. This is how a number of options have been found. But exactly what it’s doing with those inputs is a mystery. Take for example the double honk, we’ve learned that changing a particular bit disables it. We’ve learned this through observation, but observations aren’t complete. What if for example changing that 1 bit not only disables the double horn honk, but also disables all of the airbags without any warnings? I’d like to stress this is an extremely unlikely scenario for several reasons, but it makes a good point. How do you know? Chances are good you certainly haven’t tested the airbags.
Even if we assume that Ford has great programmers and that no module will accept any values it wasn’t specifically designed to, there could still be potential parameters that are valid and would be accepted by the modules, but were never intended to be used outside the design lab. What they may be or do doesn’t really matter, what does is that they weren’t intended for production vehicles and their use puts the vehicle outside it’s deigned operating parameters. If ford can trace a failure back to this, say goodbye to your warranty. But as we all know, even if they can’t specifically point to that causing the failure, the simple transgression of treading on their holy ground may cause them to want to make an example of you and now you, in turn, will have to fight it.
I chose to accept these risks for the few changes I made, there are other changes I may not be willing to risk making. Bottom line, you pay to play. If it goes bad on you you’ve got no one else to blame.
Freshman User
Joined: Apr 2016
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
From: Connecticut
Very good read sir.
I would like a few things changed also. The sales department made an error on my order from April. These are the four things I would like done on prep form the service department. This is a quote from our correspondence.
There are some software options I would like done during prep.
1. Set the power mirrors to close when the truck is shut off.
2. Set the tire pressure sensor monitors to 60 lbs all around.
3. Disable double horn honk when walking away from truck.
4. Enable fog lights to stay on while high beams are on.
Will be interesting to hear there response.
I would like a few things changed also. The sales department made an error on my order from April. These are the four things I would like done on prep form the service department. This is a quote from our correspondence.
There are some software options I would like done during prep.
1. Set the power mirrors to close when the truck is shut off.
2. Set the tire pressure sensor monitors to 60 lbs all around.
3. Disable double horn honk when walking away from truck.
4. Enable fog lights to stay on while high beams are on.
Will be interesting to hear there response.
FTE Stories
Ford Trucks for Ford Truck Enthusiasts
AEV FXL Super Duty - the Super Duty Raptor Ford Doesn't Make
Brett Foote
Lobo Vs Lobo: Proof the F-150 Lobo Should Be Even Lower!
Michael S. Palmer
Ford's 2001 Explorer Sportsman Concept Looks For a New Home
Verdad Gallardo
10 Best Ford Truck Engines We Miss the Most!
Joe Kucinski
2026 Shelby F-150 Off-Road: Better Than a Raptor R?
Brett Foote
2027 Super Duty Carhartt Package First Look: 12 Things You NEED to Know!
Michael S. Palmer
10 Most Surprising 2026 Ford Truck Features!
Joe Kucinski
Top 10 Ford Trucks Coming to Mecum Indy 2026
Brett Foote
5 Best / 5 Worst Ford Truck Wheels of All Time
Joe Kucinski
Senior User
Joined: Oct 2013
Posts: 131
Likes: 2
From: Sanger
I’ve been reading a lot about Forscan on several forums, and see what I consider to be a lot of misinformation about what is going on. So, I’m writing this not to discourage people from using it, clearly… I’ve used it myself, but so people know what they are getting into.
Forscan isn’t merely changing “factory options”, which sounds fairly benign, although that may be the ultimate outcome in some cases, that’s not what forscan is doing. Forscan is changing memory blocks at the bit level. This is about as down and dirty as you can get when it comes to computers, and potentially very dangerous. Forscan itself even warns you about some of the dangers. This is borderline hacking, entry level maybe, but it qualifies by the strictest definition of the word. I say potentially dangerous because only the input parameter blocks (depending on how much you trust forscan itself, but that’s another discussion) are being changed and any good programmer knows to validate their inputs. The question is, was the programmer at Ford who wrote that particular modules software a good programmer? You hope, but you don’t know. Unchecked inputs produce unpredictable behavior, which is where the dangerous part comes into play.
The Ford modules are black boxes, we can give them inputs and see how they react. This is how a number of options have been found. But exactly what it’s doing with those inputs is a mystery. Take for example the double honk, we’ve learned that changing a particular bit disables it. We’ve learned this through observation, but observations aren’t complete. What if for example changing that 1 bit not only disables the double horn honk, but also disables all of the airbags without any warnings? I’d like to stress this is an extremely unlikely scenario for several reasons, but it makes a good point. How do you know? Chances are good you certainly haven’t tested the airbags.
Even if we assume that Ford has great programmers and that no module will accept any values it wasn’t specifically designed to, there could still be potential parameters that are valid and would be accepted by the modules, but were never intended to be used outside the design lab. What they may be or do doesn’t really matter, what does is that they weren’t intended for production vehicles and their use puts the vehicle outside it’s deigned operating parameters. If ford can trace a failure back to this, say goodbye to your warranty. But as we all know, even if they can’t specifically point to that causing the failure, the simple transgression of treading on their holy ground may cause them to want to make an example of you and now you, in turn, will have to fight it.
I chose to accept these risks for the few changes I made, there are other changes I may not be willing to risk making. Bottom line, you pay to play. If it goes bad on you you’ve got no one else to blame.
Forscan isn’t merely changing “factory options”, which sounds fairly benign, although that may be the ultimate outcome in some cases, that’s not what forscan is doing. Forscan is changing memory blocks at the bit level. This is about as down and dirty as you can get when it comes to computers, and potentially very dangerous. Forscan itself even warns you about some of the dangers. This is borderline hacking, entry level maybe, but it qualifies by the strictest definition of the word. I say potentially dangerous because only the input parameter blocks (depending on how much you trust forscan itself, but that’s another discussion) are being changed and any good programmer knows to validate their inputs. The question is, was the programmer at Ford who wrote that particular modules software a good programmer? You hope, but you don’t know. Unchecked inputs produce unpredictable behavior, which is where the dangerous part comes into play.
The Ford modules are black boxes, we can give them inputs and see how they react. This is how a number of options have been found. But exactly what it’s doing with those inputs is a mystery. Take for example the double honk, we’ve learned that changing a particular bit disables it. We’ve learned this through observation, but observations aren’t complete. What if for example changing that 1 bit not only disables the double horn honk, but also disables all of the airbags without any warnings? I’d like to stress this is an extremely unlikely scenario for several reasons, but it makes a good point. How do you know? Chances are good you certainly haven’t tested the airbags.
Even if we assume that Ford has great programmers and that no module will accept any values it wasn’t specifically designed to, there could still be potential parameters that are valid and would be accepted by the modules, but were never intended to be used outside the design lab. What they may be or do doesn’t really matter, what does is that they weren’t intended for production vehicles and their use puts the vehicle outside it’s deigned operating parameters. If ford can trace a failure back to this, say goodbye to your warranty. But as we all know, even if they can’t specifically point to that causing the failure, the simple transgression of treading on their holy ground may cause them to want to make an example of you and now you, in turn, will have to fight it.
I chose to accept these risks for the few changes I made, there are other changes I may not be willing to risk making. Bottom line, you pay to play. If it goes bad on you you’ve got no one else to blame.
Tuned
Joined: Sep 2016
Posts: 389
Likes: 24
The first person to get into an accident needs to report back and let us know if their airbags deployed. Problem solved.
New User
Joined: Sep 2016
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
LOL. Hopefully they aren't hurt enough to not use their hands.
Posting Guru
Joined: Aug 2015
Posts: 2,399
Likes: 12
I’ve been reading a lot about Forscan on several forums, and see what I consider to be a lot of misinformation about what is going on. So, I’m writing this not to discourage people from using it, clearly… I’ve used it myself, but so people know what they are getting into.
Forscan isn’t merely changing “factory options”, which sounds fairly benign, although that may be the ultimate outcome in some cases, that’s not what forscan is doing. Forscan is changing memory blocks at the bit level. This is about as down and dirty as you can get when it comes to computers, and potentially very dangerous. Forscan itself even warns you about some of the dangers. This is borderline hacking, entry level maybe, but it qualifies by the strictest definition of the word. I say potentially dangerous because only the input parameter blocks (depending on how much you trust forscan itself, but that’s another discussion) are being changed and any good programmer knows to validate their inputs. The question is, was the programmer at Ford who wrote that particular modules software a good programmer? You hope, but you don’t know. Unchecked inputs produce unpredictable behavior, which is where the dangerous part comes into play.
The Ford modules are black boxes, we can give them inputs and see how they react. This is how a number of options have been found. But exactly what it’s doing with those inputs is a mystery. Take for example the double honk, we’ve learned that changing a particular bit disables it. We’ve learned this through observation, but observations aren’t complete. What if for example changing that 1 bit not only disables the double horn honk, but also disables all of the airbags without any warnings? I’d like to stress this is an extremely unlikely scenario for several reasons, but it makes a good point. How do you know? Chances are good you certainly haven’t tested the airbags.
Even if we assume that Ford has great programmers and that no module will accept any values it wasn’t specifically designed to, there could still be potential parameters that are valid and would be accepted by the modules, but were never intended to be used outside the design lab. What they may be or do doesn’t really matter, what does is that they weren’t intended for production vehicles and their use puts the vehicle outside it’s deigned operating parameters. If ford can trace a failure back to this, say goodbye to your warranty. But as we all know, even if they can’t specifically point to that causing the failure, the simple transgression of treading on their holy ground may cause them to want to make an example of you and now you, in turn, will have to fight it.
I chose to accept these risks for the few changes I made, there are other changes I may not be willing to risk making. Bottom line, you pay to play. If it goes bad on you you’ve got no one else to blame.
Forscan isn’t merely changing “factory options”, which sounds fairly benign, although that may be the ultimate outcome in some cases, that’s not what forscan is doing. Forscan is changing memory blocks at the bit level. This is about as down and dirty as you can get when it comes to computers, and potentially very dangerous. Forscan itself even warns you about some of the dangers. This is borderline hacking, entry level maybe, but it qualifies by the strictest definition of the word. I say potentially dangerous because only the input parameter blocks (depending on how much you trust forscan itself, but that’s another discussion) are being changed and any good programmer knows to validate their inputs. The question is, was the programmer at Ford who wrote that particular modules software a good programmer? You hope, but you don’t know. Unchecked inputs produce unpredictable behavior, which is where the dangerous part comes into play.
The Ford modules are black boxes, we can give them inputs and see how they react. This is how a number of options have been found. But exactly what it’s doing with those inputs is a mystery. Take for example the double honk, we’ve learned that changing a particular bit disables it. We’ve learned this through observation, but observations aren’t complete. What if for example changing that 1 bit not only disables the double horn honk, but also disables all of the airbags without any warnings? I’d like to stress this is an extremely unlikely scenario for several reasons, but it makes a good point. How do you know? Chances are good you certainly haven’t tested the airbags.
Even if we assume that Ford has great programmers and that no module will accept any values it wasn’t specifically designed to, there could still be potential parameters that are valid and would be accepted by the modules, but were never intended to be used outside the design lab. What they may be or do doesn’t really matter, what does is that they weren’t intended for production vehicles and their use puts the vehicle outside it’s deigned operating parameters. If ford can trace a failure back to this, say goodbye to your warranty. But as we all know, even if they can’t specifically point to that causing the failure, the simple transgression of treading on their holy ground may cause them to want to make an example of you and now you, in turn, will have to fight it.
I chose to accept these risks for the few changes I made, there are other changes I may not be willing to risk making. Bottom line, you pay to play. If it goes bad on you you’ve got no one else to blame.