Ziggmeister

I think I know which way I want to go, but I would appreciate some insights. I'm in my 3rd year of HPDE, so early intermediate ish. So far I have a fairly amateur data setup, phone app + BT GPS + BT OBD, GoPro mounted behind me. This has worked well for reviewing lines, braking points, etc., and also for the "I just messed up T1 a little bit, why did this lap end up 2s slower" types of questions. I'm considering where I want to go from here. The Catalyst is definitely popular, and I can see the appeal of getting real-time feedback and suggestions of things to try. But I think what I really want to see is how I'm doing with my braking, especially when there's a downshift involved. In sim racing, I really like being able to see brake / throttle / steering traces together, what I'm doing through that whole transition vs. what the pros are doing, and then try to match minimum speed through the corner, have the car pointed the same way at the apex, get back on throttle at the same spot, etc. So I feel like I would benefit more from the AiM route vs. the Catalyst. I just like analyzing data, I feel it helps me learn better. But I could be missing something fundamental here.

"Why not both" is also an option, but more $$.

Matt Romanowski

I think you answered your own question when you said that you like to analyze your brake, throttle, and steering traces. That decides on an AiM system. You would also be able to use RS3 for your sim data, so you have one package to work with.

IMHO, the Garmin is great when someone wants to put in minimal effort. It will tell you things based on your driving. You don't have to put any extra effort into learning data, seeing what to do, trying things. it will just tell you "brake later" etc based on the laps you've done. If you are willing to put some effort in, you can get far more from the AiM system with the drivers inputs, but that takes extra work and effort.

Ziggmeister

Thanks for confirming what I was thinking. I also see that there's a phone app for quick visualization, so I don't need to take a laptop with me to be able to see the data between sessions, right? Obviously RS3 will be more powerful, but for me that would mostly be offline/after I get back home.

Matt Romanowski

It's a third party app called LapSnap. Lots of people use it and like it. I'm more of a lap top guy, so I just download and then dig in. With profiles, you can see what you want really quick.

ProCoach

Just about every purpose-built system records roughly the same things with good enough accuracy to make good decisions for most drivers.

As a coaching professional who’s used data analysis for more than two decades as a cornerstone for extending driver performance and to study how drivers self-coach and learn most effectively, my perspective is going to be somewhat different from a single-line logging equipment dealer.

The best data system is something the driver will use. While you will gain from performance review of driver control inputs, simply looking at that data doesn’t tell you a whole lot unless you’re a student of analysis interpretation and know WHAT TO LOOK FOR and HOW WELL you’re looking to do THOSE things.

A lot of drivers “look at their data,” but the key is developing an action plan to put in place for the next session. Like this:
Or this:
By all means, buy an AiM. Commit to learning RS3. Insist on the addition of video. You can make this as simple or as involved as you want to.

But just adding the capability to “look at your throttle and brake,” by itself, won’t make you quicker.

Matt is right when he talks about the need for those factors mandating AiM.

But, if you put in the work to learn how to “interpret” the AiM, your can get a lot out of looking at the simple accelerometer inputs of all systems, including the Garmin, in order to identify WHERE and HOW the recommendation to “brake later” comes from.

“Based on the laps you’ve done” is the crux of a performance benchmarking methodology that allows you to progress incrementally and safely towards your goals, without simply mimicking what other drivers do without the firm track record of doing the fundamentals well FIRST.

The Opportunities review of the Garmin is actually a targeted, aggregated summary of the successful methodology most top pro coaches like Ross, me and many others use to “find time” for drivers, or help them to find time. It’s designed for drivers like you, in response to the shortcomings of legacy “logging” systems.

Each prioritized Opportunity (from the greatest potential gain to the least) offers four drill-down tabs for analyzing speed at entry, minimum speed, minimum speed for how long, exit speed, turn-in track position (turn in early/good/late), apex track position (same) and exit (a great steering analysis tool).

Basically tells you HOW and WHY you made the potential improvement that you did over your fastest three-lap average so you can do more of that, going quicker with no more effort.

Bottom line, these tools are fantastic. AiM is a good one but as Matt points out, it “takes extra effort and work” to get there. Catalyst works fine for those who want the easy button and is used by many Driving Clubs headed by professional driving coaches for their members simply because there is little learning friction to get maximum and immediate benefit.

But just like all systems, there’s SO MUCH MORE analysis available. With the AIM/VBOX/MoTeC/Cosworth/Bosch, you do it. The Catalyst actually does some of the lifting for you, even useful for Petit LeMans winners with all those systems in their cars.

It’s fun. Enjoy the journey. More questions? PM me off-line.

Ziggmeister

Thanks, those are very good points to think about. I'm going to watch those videos this weekend, and then I might reach out with some questions.

Matt Romanowski

The issue where I've seen the Catalyst fail a user is when they are good at executing something that is suboptimal. It will give you the best suboptimal approach. For instance, someone did a lap where they were passing someone and entered the corner on the inside, but drove faster. The Catalyst then told them to keep driving the wrong line as they had done that the fastest, but it was not the best. There is no way it can account for camber grip changes due to track wear/patches, etc.

It really comes down to how much effort you want to put in and what you will use.

m3bs

For sure. I have used an original Solo for years with an ancient GoPro, and recently picked up a 2DL and SC3. I’ve been studying Peter’s CAN install doc for my GT4 and dabbling around in RS3, but haven’t even powered them up yet. I’m already wondering if I’m in over my head…. Maybe I would have been better off with the Catalyst.

Ziggmeister

I watched the two videos Peter posted. My main takeaways:

• I can get a lot more out of speed and G force traces than I am right now, before I get to actually needing to look at driver inputs
• I should be doing more work comparing my own laps. Simple things like identifying where I don't have good references, which corners have the most variability, etc., I'm not doing that

Also, I need to do more research into the Catalyst. All I've seen are lap videos on YouTube. The stuff Peter mentioned about reviewing opportunity areas after a session, I had no idea it did that. I'm more familiar with squiggly lines because I've done that a lot with sim racing. But "do I even know what to look for" is a very valid question. I get the concern about the Catalyst simply trying to optimize an incorrect approach, that is a risk. I would hope that I can keep an eye out for that though? I only drive 3 tracks near me, I've had 2 years of sessions with instructors, and I've only just started a) driving solo, and b) experimenting with different lines through certain corners. So hopefully I have a decent mental baseline of how I drive a track, and will be able to tell "nope, that didn't work at all" vs. just blindly following what the Catalyst is telling me.

Need to do more research.

Matt Romanowski

Intermediate level drivers often end up creating bad habits when no one is with them.

Speed is the ultimate measure, G forces are very important, but I would also argue that steering, brake, and throttle traces are just as important. The speed trace is the result of the driver's inputs, so measuring the actual inputs is also very important. Also, when you get better and better, it's the inputs that you work on improving. The amount of an input along with the speed you use to do it are critical. You can not see that in just a speed or g force measurement.

Now, when it's a budget issue it's different. In an older car with no electronics, you have a $459 or few thousand dollar problem. In newer cars with great CAN connections, you can get all the input data and more with a Solo 2 DL for $799.

ProCoach

You are not alone, and I can sympathize completely. A lot of people have either added or switched.

I think Matt trivializes the fact that it is a steep climb for casual users to turn squiggly lines into action plans relying on primarily data with, or especially without, video.

The ever-increasing myriad of configuration and display options for AiM, MoTeC and Cosworth are powerful, but what good is this if it complicates learning?

This is why people choose or migrate to simpler, more express and equally effective solutions like VBOX and the Catalyst.

Reach out if I can help with anything.

Ziggmeister

The budget would be similar, right. Solo DL 2 is 799, Catalyst is 999 but I think it sometimes goes on sale. Adding a SmartyCam would increase the AiM budget. That would make it a lot easier to view video at the track. For my vanity YouTube uploads / offline analysis, I'm reasonably confident I can combine GoPro video with AiM data and align it, I've been doing that with TrackAddict data for a while now. But, I probably have fractional-second errors there, since I'm using track position / RPM / engine sound / etc. to align the data sources, and that would matter when figuring out what to change.

I redid one of my lap videos, removed the 'fun' overlays, put in what I think are the useful data channels from the GPS / accelerometer / OBD2. Not sure this proves anything one way or the other, but I found it interesting to look at.


For example, I know I can carry much more speed into T1 - T2, I'm doing most of my braking going into T1 and basically coasting till T2. Shortly after this session, I rode with an instructor in a similar Cayman (i.e. not GT4 / Clubsport, same Ohlins coilovers, tires are currently a difference but I'll be getting some 200TW tires soon once my PS4S run out) and looked at their data in RS3, so I know what the car is capable of through there. My goal for my next time here is to build up the confidence / speed in small steps. To your point, the Catalyst would probably not tell me that I can carry 10mph more through T1, coming into T2 faster / braking more / trail braking more into T2 will help rotate the car, etc. But, neither would RS3, if I hadn't done the ride-along and looked at the instructor's data.

ProCoach

Fantastic realization! It’s all about a purposeful analysis methodology.

You know, NO driver is consistent enough not to have some isolated moments of “flowing brilliance,” or at least better, more optimal performance, in some corner or corner complex on a lap OTHER than their best lap.

This idea that the Garmin device can coach you to do the “wrong things more” is why Matt is shackled to technology, instead of leveraging it.

Do you know what I do with drivers from black/red HPDE to Petit LeMans and two-time Sebring 12-Hour winners?

Together, we pore over their information, every lap, every session, to FIND and FOCUS on their best individual performances to UNEARTH the GEMS.

Then, we figure out what they did better than on their best lap and do MORE of THAT, resulting in going faster with less effort and less risk.

Continual winnowing and attacking the one or two pieces of lowest hanging fruit, or greatest opportunities, whatever you want to call them.

The Garmin can do this for you in the post session review of those. It can give real-time feedback while you’re doing it, or not.

I’ve made a tremendous living and had a LOT of fun studying how people learn and improve their driving at all levels, and I’m not done yet.

Is the Catalyst the be-all, end-all? No.

Is there information I NEED from VBOX, MoTeC, Cosworth or AiM to go beyond what 90% of club HPDE and racing drivers normally “look at” in order to help them extract the last bit of performance? For sure.

But honestly, every driver I work with only wants to improve.

And that’s what I want, too.

ProCoach

If you put more work into anything, you’ll get better results.

AiM will guide you towards the same conclusion in a straight comparison between TBL and best lap, and still be wrong. It often does. There’s no discrimination.

What you don’t seem to get is that the same kind of differential analysis that REQUIRES you to look at more than one, sometimes several, measures in AiM to validate a conclusion is needed in any performance data review, with any device..

Because you’re not familiar with the power of the Catalyst, you diss it. That’s a mistake.

ProCoach

Great demo, and you’re already thinking the right way.

No. The budget is not similar. Integrated data and video (S2DL/SC3 Corsa) from AiM is almost $2400 with mounts.

Catalyst is a little more than a third of that on sale, but it’s also apples to oranges, seems to me.

On the last, correct. It doesn’t know how much faster you can go, but if you are successful making incremental progress and go 2 mph+ more, it’ll show you that part of the lap video, entry speed, point of/rise time/amplitude/length of braking, whether you’re turn in point was earlier/later, whether your apex was earlier/later, what your vMin was, how soon/how much you accelerated and what the exit radius was of your track out, PLUS the percentage of the width of the road you used (not off the GPS, but off the video generated field assessment).

For me to unearth and compile JUST that data in RS3 would take longer than you have between sessions or perhaps all day, and it’s ready for review before you get out of the car on the tablet.

Just to be clear, there are things the tablet won’t do anywhere near as slick as the AiM and others will do, but the goal here is to go quicker.

We now can easily in AiM give a formerly subjective driver skill execution (throttle aggression/brake regression/steering “panic” or smoothness, for example) a NUMBER and SEE if you ARE getting “smoother,” or not… Pro tip, smooth is not necessarily fast.

I use as a tool anything the client has in the car because I prefer REQUIRE objective information. There are plenty of good ones out there. The best is the one you will use.

Video is MANDATORY.