360 Camera Addition

[rugedraw]

the biggest issue now is the unknown of whether or not a different vehicle's IPMA will be accepted into TRON. in theory, it should be fine, especially if work has already been done to change the module's VIN. however, since we need TRON in order for it to work, we are now limited to very recent versions of the IPMA, like 2022+ F-150, 2023+ Super Duty, and so on, otherwise it seems that the messages from the IPMA will go ignored because the GWM does not see it as an actual, authorized message.

21-23 F150 does not use TRON; it is 2024 & 2025 that first got it. You can replace the module; TRON does not do a part number check, so as long as the VIN is changed to match the vehicle, the TRON part should not be an issue. The problem will be software compatibility.

Sponsored

 

[roket]

21-23 F150 does not use TRON; it is 2024 & 2025 that first got it. You can replace the module; TRON does not do a part number check, so as long as the VIN is changed to match the vehicle, the TRON part should not be an issue. The problem will be software compatibility.

thanks for correcting me, not sure why i said "2022+". it has been edited to reflect this correction

 

[GrabThatBlue]

I don't want to be a smartass since I have no technical clue about this, but can't we just go further where @A4techpl left?

He already has the 360 camera working but said he only needs to find out how to get the sound work.

 

[roket]

I don't want to be a smartass since I have no technical clue about this, but can't we just go further where @A4techpl left?

He already has the 360 camera working but said he only needs to find out how to get the sound work.

this is a completely different thing. they have added the front parking sensors, which the current IPMA can do mostly fine. the 360 camera requires a new IPMA due to missing physical connectors on the module itself at the very least

 

[Viscosity6 5]

You need an IPMB that would connect between the rear camera and the apim to switch video from what I've seen and read. Also camera has to be a digital one compatible with sync 4 .

 

[roket]

You need an IPMB that would connect between the rear camera and the apim to switch video from what I've seen and read. Also camera has to be a digital one compatible with sync 4 .

nope, IPMB is for the older IPMA setup where the computer was in the same housing as the camera. newer vehicles combined both into the IPMA

 

[Viscosity6 5]

What do you mean newer vehicles? All newer fords have both.
IPMA handles advanced features like lane-keeping, traffic sign recognition, pre-collision warnings—leveraging the forward-facing windshield camera.

IPMB aggregates multiple camera inputs (front/rear/side) and feeds video to the infotainment system—enabling 360° or front-camera display in SYNC 4.

 

[Viscosity6 5]

Well, all except the mustang.

 

[LouG]

It's not 360, but 5.0 ALM has a video showing installation of a reversing camera as a front cam. It seems to work well when aimed down to show the front of the car.
I couldn't get the same wireless cam, but did get a wired version which I'll put in when the weather improves.
Report to follow.

 

[roket]

What do you mean newer vehicles? All newer fords have both.
IPMA handles advanced features like lane-keeping, traffic sign recognition, pre-collision warnings—leveraging the forward-facing windshield camera.

IPMB aggregates multiple camera inputs (front/rear/side) and feeds video to the infotainment system—enabling 360° or front-camera display in SYNC 4.

this is an example of the older IPMA + IPMB system

the orange "19H405" module is the IPMB, the purple "19G490B" is the IPMA. there is exactly two US market Fords that still uses this, being the Bronco and the Transit. every other one uses an IPMA with a green plug for the four surround cameras and a brown plug for the ADAS camera and image output to the APIM. Explorer, Maverick, and Bronco Sport got it for 2025MY, Escape, Super Duty, Expedition for 2023MY, F-150 for 2021MY, Mach-E has always had it, Ranger got it 2024MY, but didn't have a 360 camera until then, and Mustang got it for 2024MY, but never had a 360 camera.

here is an example of the current IPMA only system

 

[Viscosity6 5]

Thank you for explaining.
How does ford have it work for the vehicles that offer the front park-assist camera without the 360?
Is it just a matter of replacing the harness and enabling it on the apim or is there another module?

 

[roket]

Thank you for explaining.
How does ford have it work for the vehicles that offer the front park-assist camera without the 360?
Is it just a matter of replacing the harness and enabling it on the apim or is there another module?

on the older systems, it still used an IPMB even if you just had a front and rear camera only. on the newer systems, the IPMA is identical to one that has the 360 camera in that it has two 4-pin connectors instead of just one. to explain this, i need to explain how it normally works.

on a vehicle with a rear view camera only, the camera's output goes into the IPMA in a brown connector. this brown connector also has the ADAS camera input and the display output to the APIM. the one exception to this is the Mustang, which has the rear camera directly go to the APIM and there's no display output to the APIM either. (there's actually a few other exceptions like analog cameras, but that's not relevant.)

if there are any non-bed viewing cameras (they're analog and handled differently) on the vehicle, things shift around a bit. there is an additional green connector on the IPMA and the rear camera output gets shifted over to that one, but the ADAS camera and image output is still on the brown connector. that green connector handles all four cameras, even if it's just an additional front camera but no side cameras. if you have a front and rear camera, it's theoretically much easier to add the side cameras for a full 360.

the following is speculation based on what i think makes sense and what i've seen. the APIM should not need to be replaced because of the fact that all new vehicles have at least a rear camera and it makes sure that all of the APIMs nowadays have an input for it. this is backed up by something i noticed Ford likes to do where more universal or widely used parts have the "product line" in their part number as "U5", so something like "PU5Z" for the part prefix, and all of the Mustang APIMs have this U5-line prefix, meaning that it's likely Ford didn't change video input handling for the Mustang.

(these are all different revisions and versions of the Mustang APIM)
plus it just makes sense to leave it be from Ford's perspective, as the Mustang version of SYNC 4 is just a slightly different skin on the one you can find in 2023+ Escapes and 2025+ Bronco Sports and Mavericks. it makes no sense to change video handling for one vehicle.

 

[Viscosity6 5]

I would not be surprised if a new apim is needed due to the lack of support. When I had my 18 mustang and wanted to bypass the anc for a clean bass signal or was determined my guys that the install solder points were missing otherwise the plugs were there.
That particular situation needed to swap the dsp and pin the bass wires and that worked. That was less complex as this but the point being that ford could have done similarly with this APIM and just left out the internal solder points.
Personally I'm trying to determine if there is a feasable way to integrate just the front camera.
And in regards to changing an apim, I have read where someone swapped an apim from an f150 into a bronco and was able to make that work barring some splash screens.

 

[roket]

I would not be surprised if a new apim is needed due to the lack of support. When I had my 18 mustang and wanted to bypass the anc for a clean bass signal or was determined my guys that the install solder points were missing otherwise the plugs were there.
That particular situation needed to swap the dsp and pin the bass wires and that worked. That was less complex as this but the point being that ford could have done similarly with this APIM and just left out the internal solder points.

i guess we will see eventually. my money is on it working just fine, though

Personally I'm trying to determine if there is a feasable way to integrate just the front camera.
And in regards to changing an apim, I have read where someone swapped an apim from an f150 into a bronco and was able to make that work barring some splash screens.

i'm guessing it was an older F-150, because the 13th gen F-150 did use IPMA+IPMB (i'm pretty sure)

 

[rugedraw]

I would not be surprised if a new apim is needed due to the lack of support. When I had my 18 mustang and wanted to bypass the anc for a clean bass signal or was determined my guys that the install solder points were missing otherwise the plugs were there.
That particular situation needed to swap the dsp and pin the bass wires and that worked. That was less complex as this but the point being that ford could have done similarly with this APIM and just left out the internal solder points.
Personally I'm trying to determine if there is a feasable way to integrate just the front camera.
And in regards to changing an apim, I have read where someone swapped an apim from an f150 into a bronco and was able to make that work barring some splash screens.

With the Sync 4 vehicles, replacing things like the APIM, GWM and/or TCU with parts from other vehicles is not a good idea. The process to update modules (whether it is with FDRS or OTA) can easily be broken by doing this. The part number of the APIM will not match what is on the server and when an update is released, it will never install since the files won't match up and create a bottleneck for future updates.

In the case of the IPMA, this is not as big a deal because the IPMA can always be updated sideways if needed. Not to mention, the IPMA is not part of the Sync modules that would break the update process if not updated. On these newer vehicles with TRON, updating the IPMA sideways is a challenge because you still need FDRS to reauthorize the TRON encryption and get everything working again. All Ford is doing is making things more and more difficult for people who want to do things like this.

I can't tell you how many VINs I have checked that have broken TRON after an OTA or after a dealer updates module with FDRS and fails to check TRON and reauthorize it. It's a cluster-fudge.

Sponsored