Remote Starter for Manual
 

I have a couple questions for people that have installed Remote Starter for their cars.

Care to share the cost and how your specific one works? Is there any reliability concerns to the rest of the vehicle or the actual starter itself?

Thanks.

There will be zero reliability differences with a remote starter vs going out to the car and starting it yourself.

Cost will be pretty high compared to older cars, I priced it out for my wife's car (2017 Corolla) and it was going to be about $800 taxes in. Modern cars with immobilizers and security systems really add to the cost.

One thing to remember with a manual car, you HAVE to remember to leave it in neutral. The remote starter won't know if it's in gear or not and will try to start it even if you leave it in gear. Depending on how/where it's parked, it could roll the car into something or burn up the starter.

the official connection diagrams state that you're supposed to connect a clutch switch to the remote starter. so you press the clutch while using the remote starter, to verify that it's not in gear before starting it...

I dont get the appeal of remote starters? Maybe Im biased, a few years ago some asshole whos garage was just below our bedroom would remote start his stupid ass mustang at like 6am every weekday, it would vibrate our entire apartment and the dude would take so long to come out of his apartment (yes he would remote start it before even leaving his apartment) the car would auto shut off after 10 mins. Thse annoying mustangs would rumble and make so much damn noise early in the morning to what... warm the engine?! In northern California where the temp only gets to about 60F in the garage. Drives me crazy, save your money and walk out and start your car like humans have been doing for years. Also nearly all mustangs are getting to the point where they are as annoying as harleys.

Also FYI remote starting your car to warm up is not even the best idea for engine wear, unless your in a super cold climate where you need to heat the cabin there is no reason and your just causing additional wear on your engine at a time where your engine takes the majority of its wear. Start your car yourself, wait for the revs to start to fall then set off with a slight load on your engine, it will warm up faster and reduce wear for a longer engine life.

Why would anyone want a remote starter if they have to be sitting in the drivers seat pushing the clutch for it to work? That defeats the entire remote part of it.

I think you might be misreading the diagram? Usually a remote starter will bypass the clutch switch to allow it to start without having to push in the clutch.

The level of extra wear is so small it is meaningless really. People like to make a big deal out of it but in the overall scheme of things it is just a blip in the life of the engine. You are causing as much or more wear every single time you do a hard acceleration and nobody worries about that.


You nailed it with the regional differences though. A guy in California saying that remote start is a waste of time is correct since they do not have to sit in a car at -20 for 10 minutes while the ice and frost clears up enough to see out the windshield. Try doing that and you will understand why people want it. It isn't a matter of warming the engine up so much as making the car even slightly drivable. I don't have it in my car and when it is really cold or iced up just go out and start it and go back in the house until it starts to melt enough that it isn't rock solid. The wife has it (on her car) and on the nasty days it is a slice of heaven to push a button from in the warm house and 10 minutes later go out to an easy to clear and at least tolerably warm car.

This ^
The higher quality (expensive ones) also include a sensor that will not let the car attempt to start if the shifter is not in neutral even with the clutch switch bypassed.

Would installing a remote starter affect warranty since it's technically a third party install

depends on what parts it screws with.