LoJack Hits Milestone in Vehicle Recovery

December 13, 2004

  • December 14, 2004 at 8:44 am
    Brian O'Neill says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    What about Onstar, where does that stack up againats lo-jack.

    I just brought a new 2005 Chevy Silverado, Why pay for the same thing twice, The New York Dealer didn’t even mention it

  • December 14, 2004 at 11:50 am
    Chris says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Unless I am mistaken, the GPS system that the thieves were able to disable by cutting wires and removing fuses was the OnStar system.

    OnStar was not designed, from what my buddy at GM tells me, to be a theft locating device. That turned out to be a bonus use. Thus, its installation and means to disable are easy to discern from the shop manual.

    LoJack has been around since I was in law enforcement in the early 70’s. To my knowledge, its sole concept, and continuing development, is the location of stolen vehicles. While I am sure that it has been done, I have never heard of a thief being able to locate and disable the LoJack transmitter.

    So, while there may be some overlap between OnStar and LoJack, the original concepts are actually different.

  • December 14, 2004 at 3:24 am
    Thomas M. Laquercia says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    To show you how bright a person I am, it only took me years to figure out that LoJack was the opposite of “hijack.” I live and work in NY City, happy to have it in my cars but grateful nonetheless that I never had to use it.



Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*