Replacing your BMW E92 battery is a common maintenance task, but proper registration is crucial for optimal vehicle performance and battery longevity. Many enthusiasts turn to user-friendly tools like Carly for coding and diagnostics, including battery registration. But how effective is Carly coding for E92 battery registration compared to other BMW diagnostic tools? This article delves into a real-world experience comparing Carly with professional BMW tools like INPA, ISTA+, and Tool32 for battery registration on an E9x platform vehicle.
Recently, I undertook a battery replacement on my E93 M3. Having previously used Carly for battery registration several years ago, I initially considered it again for this task. However, being more acquainted with BMW-specific software like INPA and ISTA+ now, I decided to investigate further into the registration process and compare the effectiveness of different tools.
Before swapping the battery, I checked the battery status using INPA. While INPA correctly displayed the battery capacity, it showed no record of previous battery replacements – the mileage logs for all four previous changes were at “0.00” km. This was unexpected as I had registered the battery with Carly in the past.
After installing the new battery, I proceeded to register it using the latest version of Carly. Despite Carly indicating successful registration, a subsequent check with INPA again showed no updated battery replacement record. Similarly, ISTA+ also failed to show any new registration in its logs.
To further explore, I attempted battery registration using both INPA and Tool32. Both tools reported successful registration. However, upon re-checking with INPA and ISTA+, the battery replacement logs remained unchanged at “0.00” km. Even after turning the car off and waiting, the logs were not updated.
Finally, I utilized ISTA+ to register the battery. This time, ISTA+ successfully registered the battery and, importantly, updated the mileage log with the current mileage. Checking back with both INPA and ISTA+ confirmed that the battery change was now correctly recorded with the mileage.
This experience suggests that while Carly and Tool32 might perform the battery registration function – possibly adjusting charging parameters – they may not reliably update the battery replacement mileage log within the BMW system, at least in this specific E9x case. ISTA+, on the other hand, appears to provide a more complete registration process, ensuring both the functional registration and the accurate logging of the battery replacement history.
For BMW E92 owners and enthusiasts performing DIY maintenance, especially battery registration, this comparison highlights the importance of understanding the nuances of different diagnostic tools. While Carly offers convenience for coding and some service functions, for critical procedures like battery registration, especially when accurate record-keeping is desired, ISTA+ may offer a more comprehensive and verifiable solution. Further investigation and testing across different E9x models and Carly versions could provide a more complete picture of Carly Coding E92 battery registration capabilities.
