winders

So, it is because of the smarts in the SmartyCam that it is able to do what it is able to do with video. Is that right?

What about video inside of the data analysis software?

ProCoach

That is correct. It is a self-contained, small and extremely powerful graphics rendering computer with a 720P CMOS sensor (camera) that costs about $400 alone. It has flash memory to "remember" automatically, based on GPS position, the start/finish line of hundreds of tracks. It has a high speed SD card writer (has to, a LOT of info has to be transferred very quickly to that card) and a battery that keeps the videos from being corrupted when people lift power to it while recording. It's a serious piece of kit, plus you can run over it with a car and not damage it too badly (don't recommend that!). Try that with a GoPro...

The MAJOR reason why AiM has not prioritized having a video window within a data analysis window is because unlike other video systems, the information has already been written to the video. I think there are ways to manually do this, but it takes too long for me.

So, my workflow is to review the fastest lap of the video (easy to do because the best lap number and best lap time are already written to the video) then open the data file to dig deeper.

Unfortunately, AiM is really the last major vendor that doesn't have this feature (a video window synced with the data in the analysis window).

Hopefully rectified next year.

ir_fuel

Make that 2017.

ProCoach

I thought long and hard before I posted "next year."

I think they're much closer than you think. But, like every release, it takes longer than we (and they) want...

They really can't afford to wait too much longer with other, easy to use, synchronized video and data solutions coming out every quarter. It's a pretty large feature deficit compared to other systems that it affects purchasing decisions, for some.

But no system does everything we want in one package. Not one.

The AiM ECU protocol list and real-time production of finished video is not available from any other vendor. For Club and entry level pros, not to mention the tens of thousands of track day participants, this is the feature set that makes these systems outsell the others I offer by ten or hundredfold...

Synced video, automatically with Race-Keeper, Video VBOX and with work, MoTeC, Race Technology and Traqmate, WITHIN the analysis window IS helpful, no question. Is it mandatory? Probably not.

The greatest benefit of all of this technology is ease of use, and this is a key feature that enhances that. They are aware of how important this is...

ir_fuel

I talked to the guy who is developing this stuff and he said that IF it is ready in 2016 it will be winter 2016. They still have lots of work to do.

winders

Anything new from Motec on the camera front? New features? Better integration? Etc.?

ProCoach

Have to say that MoTeC has the least user friendly video solution in the VCS and now the VCS-HD. That's why a fair number of MoTeC users are buying SCHD's and an ECU Bridge to translate the CAN output from the MoTeC displays into information written on the video. For a little more than a third the money... Doing three MoTeC logger equipped car SCHD video upgrades right now.

Matt Romanowski

Yup. Talking to Emiliano and Enrico at PRI, they confirmed it is still a ways out. I'm not sure how much I can share, but the other new products coming out are pretty great. The programming for the GPS updates and WiFi took longer than expected, but also produced better than expected results.

mglobe

Now if they could just understand the urgency in addition to the importance. Much as I like my AIM setup (SCHD/EVO4/G-Dash), I think I'd jump to something else comparably priced in a heartbeat if it did all the AIM solution does PLUS integrated video in the analysis software. So close.... IMHO this should be THE highest priority for them.

Matt Romanowski

The challenge is that they are not a huge company, so they can only do so much at once. They do their best to balance hardware and software developement. Some things like the new GPS08 working with not only the US satellites but the Russian ones too took a lot of development. Same with making a secure, fast wireless setup. They are working on the video integration but it takes time.

ProCoach

I don't buy that excuse, Matt. While I appreciate everything they do, they've had plenty of time to fix this. Heck, DaVID was a pioneering system and we see where that went. Linearly to the SmartyCam...

This dates back, fellows.

The programming language and structure for AiM .drk files was built in 2002-2003, long before video integration was available, from any vendor. The first few video systems used alphanumeric characters overlaid on separate videotape recorders carried in the race car.

In 2005-6, AiM introduced DaVID in the US, a way to separately (as an add-on to the MXL, which had been introduced in 2004) or together (an all in one DaVID/logger) put the data on top of the video in simple characters.

At this point, mid-decade, data analysis was STILL the province of professional teams, and while Pi Research was offering the club level Pi System 1 and System 2, there was really no perceived need for the "pro logging" companies to "dumb down" their systems for a club level need.

Also, there were, by this point, several "interpreter" boxes from a variety of manufacturers like AiM (DaVID) and CDS (Interpreter, fancy that) that saw only SEPARATE standalone video as being valuable for the DRIVER, because no self-respecting engineer needed to look at any "movies."

So while ChaseCam, the first solid-state video recorder, which came out in 2004 and became widespread in 2006-2007, to the point of becoming the de facto add-on for MoTeC by 2008, really pushed forward the idea of creating a time base corrected synchronized video that could be easily coupled with the data, it was up to the manufacturers (in this case MoTeC and, oddly enough, the budget Traqmate) to write software to make this happen, which they DID. In short order and without changing their file structure and coding!

Fast forward to the beginning of 2011. Two years into the notorious debacle of the original SmartyCam (which was a courageous achievement in itself, basically a self contained computer with OS), AiM had MADE RIGHT all the original failings of the durability of that manufacture but devoted every resource to do it, as well as to introduce the Solo, Solo DL after the EVO4. Lots of ***** in the air. I understand that and appreciate the ultimately positive outcome by AiM.

Not shackled to one vendor, I had been selling Race Technology but achieved the greatest success selling Traqmate with a succession of cameras. Video had truly gone front and center for my club level and DE market. Plus, I HAD to have it for my work!

For the Traqmate, it was the ChaseCam, then the Sony HDR-C100, then the GoPro Hero 2, then was nearly broken by the Replay XD1080 with the latter's 70 per cent failure rate due to broken wires at the internal battery. I began to look for alternatives. And there were a growing number.

By this time (FIVE years ago), synced video within the data window was available from Traqmate (2006), MoTeC (2008), Travinci Systems/Race-Keeper (2010), Racelogic/Video VBOX (2010) and Race-Technology (2011, Video 4). The market liked it, wanted it and they all are still here, progressively adopting HD (which I dismissed as a fad, hah! )

In the end, there is not a supportable reason why this feature should not have been able to be integrated into AT LEAST a reliable, manually adjusted and selectable, lap window that lies within the Race Analysis main field. This has been communicated to AiM SPORTLINE (Emiliano, Enrico, Stefano and team) by the US arm (Mike, Mike, Josh, Cameron, Jordan (to whom AiM owes much for the success of the SC idea) and team.

As front line dealers, I can say pretty confidently that this is a HIGH feature priority for Matt, Jerry and others who deal with this every DAY.

But the difficulty of coding and/or lack of resources has not stopped other companies with equal or far less resources from making this happen successfully. For years...

Mahler9th

I am curious about this:

"A more "older car friendly" Solo/Solo DL ..."

Can you elaborate?

ProCoach

It's wishful thinking, at this point, but hope springs eternal!

The way that cost control was achieved on the Solo and Solo DL was to NOT have connectivity for the Solo and to HAVE connectivity limited to the RS-232 (old ECUs) and CAN/OBD-II (new ECUs) protocols already existing for other AiM loggers and logger/displays for the the Solo DL. They achieved that.

I think it's interesting that usability of the Solo DL extends not only to camera control (SC HD) but also plug and play configuration with AiM's Lamda Control Unit, the AiM CAN based LCU-One. This is a great feature that not a lot of Solo DL users use, but could benefit from. Get all the info from the existing protocols plus add AFR monitoring for performance auditing and tuning validation. But, I digress...

This is a LONG way off, but hopefully, US dealers (and the forward thinking US importer/distributor) have made the point for some time that with SOME sort of alternate connectivity, the Solo DL might not be limited to logging information from JUST modern cars with OBD-II or CAN information.

In no case does anyone envision that the Solo DL will be even remotely close to what the EVO4/4S or logger/display combos offer, but it is our hope that SOME way to assimilate a conventional signal, be it RPM or analog, they could be used in a limited way on old cars.

Obviously, my interest is in historic racing, so I would love to see this. But I have not heard any confirmation that this is imminent or even currently, "in the works."

You are VERY safe with what you have (which is exactly what I have ) in your old car!

Mahler9th

Thanks Peter.

I am very excited about what I have purchased from you (Gdash/evo4), and making progress on my installation.

I think that from a basic capability point of view, newer cars and cars with newer ECU's that can leverage the SOLO DL/SCHD package (OBD or CAN) are in the cat bird seat, albeit with a ~$1.7k investment. I am not sure about margins... but if the costs could someday sustain a $1k ASP for these capabilities then my gut feeling is that the market would take off beautifully (this without the benefit of serious market research).

For older cars, including cars with MFI and carbs, it would be great to see something in that range someday as well.

We'll see what happens-- perhaps someday there will be some Silicon Valley type of disruption in this space.

ProCoach

It really is remarkable. When the Solo DL came out in 2010, then the SC HD later on, and then government mandated stability controls and ABS made manufacturers install sensors required to operate these controls (and that the Solo DL could "sniff") as of the end of 2012, everything needed was in place!

As in all tech, either power and capability goes up at the same price, or the same power and capability costs less (and sometimes both), so the trend line is GOOD! Hah!

I think the old cars are forgotten in the march forward, though... We'll see.

Speaking of SV disruption, it's already happening. RCP, Waylens, Garmin ViRB, even Matt's inexpensive alternative Road Hawk cameras are getting people out of HLT and other phone apps and onto a better path.