I am interested in a new data and video system. I have narrowed it to three choices with my current ranking as below:

1.) VBox Lite

2.) Vbox HD

3.) Aim Solo with HD Smartycam

From the research I have done, all will do instant overlay for quick and easy lap reviews, but the Vbox units will also allow you to run video and data side by side on one screen, were the Aim will not (anyone dispute that?). I feel like this is a useful feature, which is why the VBoxes are #1 and #2. The one thing I really like about the Aim is the large user base, which seems to create an advantage of sharing files for comparison sake (do people really do this? Is it easy? A big value add?)


So, unless I am surprised by responses to the above, it's VBox time, then it's just whether to go with lite or HD, and I don't see the big advantage of HD for real learning purposes. Isn't it just the novelty of showing your friends your cool video in HD on a large screen??? Isn't the lite resolution very good on a laptop screen at the track? Why spend the extra $1k for HD?

Finally, my car is PDK, so why have the 2nd camera. Is it really a good learning tool? What do you look for/at on the driver-facing cam?

What else am I missing?

Thanks in advance for your insights.

 

I have the VBOX Lite and have used the Circuit Tools software to do very basic analysis. I can say that the side-by-side analysis capability is very valuable. It will show you exactly where/why/how two different techniques can affect your lap times. The VBOX files (video and data) are ready to play (or analyze) right out of the box - no messing around with formatting or merging files. To me that's another big plus. If it's easy to use, then you'll use it... if it's difficult to use, then you won't use it.

 

i think for someone who needs the digital dashboard, it's hard to beat AIM. But for a DE'er or someone learning, I think VBOX has the killer feature set right now.

Read this - good summary of the difference between AIM and VBOX.

https://rennlist.com/forums/data-acq...d2-review.html

Another example of side by side compare...

 

Not to mention that with AIM there are TWO files to separately pull off from different devices, i.e. not on one flash card. That might have changed, but it was that way with the SoloDL and SC HD.


...
Also, I would not consider the regular VBOX HD. It does not do real-time overlays and has been sunsetted and replaced by the HD2. The HD2 does real-time overlays.

 

I'm going to chime in, not only because I'm one of the largest VBOX dealers in the country (and have been since 2011) or because I've just crossed the million dollar sales figure for AiM Sports products (more than fifty percent of it Solo DL/SmartyCam combos for every type of car), but mainly because I use each of these tools almost 180 days a year at the track helping drivers learn how to coach themselves.

There are pros and cons for each, and it's helpful that you've done the survey that allows you to define clearly what is important to you and what is not.

The newer the car, the more features each of these systems integrate within them, to help you visualize what you're doing in the car. Many people want to monitor aspects of the car's operation and some even are looking for a instrument cluster replacement, which the AiM dashes do very well, for a reasonable price.

But we're talking about analyzing driver improvement here. And taking the information collected and turning it into an ACTION plan within a normal turnaround time during a typical DE, track day or club race. Then, measuring and comparing to see if you actually DID better, and if so, WHERE and HOW.

AiM's footprint is WAY larger than VBOX. I see small groups of drivers that go to the track together compare files, be it the Boston DE crowd or a bunch of Spec E46 BMW racers, but sharing is not widespread, and in my opinion and experience, not particularly valuable. Mostly because it's comparing one variable with another!

While the Solo DL serves as a good logger for a PDK equipped car, it translates that info to be written real-time onto the SmartyCam video for useful review. If all you want to do is review your video with performance measures, then dig in deep to a variety of different ways to slice and dice the Solo DL generated data, AiM is a great choice. Especially for the SAME money as the Video VBOX Lite 2-camera with OLED. With mounts, the Solo DL/SCHD combo is within 22 dollars of the VVBL 2-camera with OLED, so from a cost standpoint, it's a wash.

However, you've pointed out that AiM does not (and will not for the existing Solo DL hardware, AFAIK) combine the video within the analysis window, or allow side by side comparisons WITH auto-synced data. While Joris Mans solution is good for looking at SmartyCam videos side by side, it has none of the functionality of Circuit Tools 2 and VBOX, and is an interesting comparison exercise only.

So, let's talk about VBOX. I've sold north of fifty HD2's in about ten months, and about two hundred VVB Lites in six years. I have a few demo (discontinued) VBOX HD's and a HD2 demo that I put in EVERY car that I coach, no matter WHAT they have in the car. Why? Because I can "find time" for drivers faster with this system than anything else, by a BIG margin. More importantly, I can SHOW and teach folks who use this how to do it themselves with FAR less effort and a MUCH shorter learning curve.

As far as the VVBL and HD2 differ, I spoke to someone today who said the same as you. They said they'd buy a VVBL IF they thought that it wouldn't be obsolete soon, because the high def 1080p picture in picture (both streams 1080p) in the HD2 wasn't that important to them. I told them that Racelogic is still developing all the current software, in Windows, Mac and iOS, for the VVBL as well as the HD2, so no worries there. A few more comparisons and observations...

I believe two cameras is VERY important for any VBOX system in a closed car. The reason why is because the exposure control and FOV of the cameras works very well within a like field, so it's designed from Racelogic to have one camera at the top of the inside of the windshield facing forward, with full view of the road, the edges of the car and objects in the distance, and one camera inside the car, preferably inside the top right corner of the windshield facing BACK at the driver for viewing the driver's head, hands, legs and control inputs. I think that is a fundamental piece of information required to diagnose a variety of opportunities for improvement, and the inside camera just works a LOT better with picture in picture of a large, front facing field. The ONLY time I use a single VBOX camera setup is on an open sports racer or formula car to capture both and the exposure is easily controlled in an open car, much more so than a closed car.

The VVBL is not water proof or even water resistant. You can damage it pretty easily if water gets in the box and you can damage the box due to high temps if you try and seal it up. The cables are consumer grade, meaning you can crush or pull out the cables easily to the cameras and the antenna if you're not careful. The resolution is fine for general review, and I poo-poo'd the HD before it came out, but now I use it a fair bit to pick out important landmarks and other car's activities in the distance, but all in all, the VVBL is still current, still powerful and offers CAN info from PDK equipped cars easily at a very reasonable price for what it does.

In my mind, the HD2 is worth every penny of the extra money, mostly due to the robust construction (water proof with the door closed, Swiss metal Lemo connectors, MUCH stouter cabling), not to mention WiFi and Android/iOS apps for exposure control, camera aiming and other configuration, Bluetooth connectivity for heart rate monitors, remote OBDII dongles and remote on/off switches, et cetera. It's just a REAL quality piece of equipment.

But pay your money and make your choice. I can get as much out of the Lite in a coaching engagement as an HD2, but I feel naked without a VBOX unit of some kind in any car I'm working with as a coach of the client.

I sell for what Racelogic USA does, so call me.

Bingo, that last line nails it. It's GOT to be easy to use, or people won't use it.

I LOVE the justified-to-GPS-position side-by-side video analysis in VBOX! I can see heading, yaw, attitude and results of control inputs without ANY problems. I use the sector analysis to pick sectors of my best lap and compare to even BETTER (green if better than best lap, purple if best of entire session) sector and the video pops up side by side to show me HOW! Awesome!

Matt and I can go back and forth forever about the power, usability and capability of AiM Sports and MoTeC products, but the fact remains that only the TINIEST FRACTION of users actually scratch the surface of the capability of either AiM Sports or even lesser, MoTeC systems. There's no time at the track and the learning curve is steep, no matter what anyone says.

I struggled for the first few years (2010-2013) with VBOX, due to crappy/non-existent CAN templates, crappy software, buggy firmware updates, manual track coordinates entry, poor engineering support from the US office, but Julian and his team have listened. Reid has a great crew with him in Michigan at Racelogic USA, where their major business is to supply the OEMs with testing and validation equipment. They want to grow this part of their business and I am going to do everything I can to help them, just as I do with the other brands I carry.

I enjoy selling four major brands of this type of equipment, and even more so, using it daily at the track helping people improve. There is NO ONE system that does everything people want their system to do, so that's why I carry several lines from mild to wild.

You're on the right track! Let me know if I can help further.

 

Still the same. Likely will take a new Solo DL 2 (with the latest file system present on the new dashes and loggers) to get the video and data to sync within the same Race Studio Analysis 3 window, when that happens.

AiM Sports is the last one without this functionality.

Traqmate, Race Technology, CDS, MoTeC, Race-Keeper, Pi, Stack, VBOX and even OEM apps like GM's Performance Data Recorder and Porsche's Precision Track App do this and have done this for more than a decade...

 

I disagree. While the VBOX HD did not have the processing power to do real-time overlays (that GPU power did not exist at a reasonable price point, in the 2012-2014 timeframe that that unit was in production), the $1000 camera that came with it (only available with one) is the finest in-car optical device anyone has ever made.

Both the 60 degree and 133 degree FOV cameras work fine and make the AiM SCHD Rev2.1 and MoTeC V2 look like a ChaseCam! Only thing remotely close is Race-Keeper's HDX2 cameras, but the Race-Keeper does not do real-time rendering of data overlays either, nor does the Waylens, I've found out!

I don't need the overlay on the video when using CT2 analysis at the track, so these obsolete units work great for me. Plus, they fit in a nylon bag and with a battery, serve as a completely standalone, portable package that I can install in about ninety seconds, unlike the HD2, which is bigger and bulkier.

Nice to have choices.

 

LOL! I resemble that remark! Peter was very generous with his time yesterday and after talking to him I'm onboard for a VVBL system as soon as he gets back from Lime Rock. Ease of use was another deciding factor for me. I go to the track to improve my driving not geek out on a computer getting data ready to analyze.

 

After having used a VVBL for a couple years, and now an HD2 for a few months, I don't see a big enough difference in valuable feature set to justify the 2x cost. HD2 has more CAN channels (which can give you steering direction in a porsche...not that important), higher video resolution, and a live, wireless preview mode to help you aim the cameras. I don't see any market drivers that would deprecate the VVBL that would not also threaten the HD2. The VVBL is a very solid unit and pretty much bug free at this point. It's not the shiniest new toy....but it is still light years better for learning than a SoloDL + SC.

 

I went for AIM strictly on a combo of price and local install base (the Boston DE crowd mentioned above).
Yes, I've likely sacrificed some simplicity and some comparative analytics in favor of other analytics.
At my current level, the basics will do regardless.
Most importantly, no more messing with apps and third party sensors.

 

I had a SoloDL/SCHD combo and swapped it for a VBOX HD2 so I have experience with both. I'm glad I made the switch on balance.

Some user thoughts...

If you have a source of data from other drivers willing to share that might be the #1 reason to pick one over the other to my way of thinking. Sadly around me I can't seem to find many people that have loggers much less are willing to share. Thus, this factor is a wash to me. With luck you will have more access around you though. Comparing to your own data is helpful; comparing to others' data is even more interesting.

The more you look at the video the more the VBOX is the better choice. The more you lean on the data traces, the more the AIM software starts to look head and shoulders better.

Side by side video synced to the segments and data traces is really, REALLY helpful as Peter points out: advantage RL.

Relatively simple things that make extracting meaning from data easier, for example putting two traces overlaid on a shared set of x/y axes or plotting data for a measure on x axis and a separate measure on y are impossible with RL circuit tools (exception being a G-G plot; that CT does have). Advantage AIM.

I'm an engineer and a physics guy so the data makes sense to me and I enjoy looking for patterns that correlate different measures to give more nuanced conclusions about trends that you can just as easily pick up from a few more obvious measures. For that I miss the AIM software certainly.

On the other hand, Peter will point out that looking at a few measures often is likely more productive. That and just what you can see from video alone gives most amateurs enough to work on without more complex math channels or extensive charting. In one sense, switching to [data-wise] more limiting possibilities with the VBOX has taken away distractions for me and I suspect I'm making more progress on my driving as a result!

 

Bold=bottom line.

 

Can you give me an example of what you mean here? Are you using the iPhone software or circuit tools on a PC? In circuit tools you can overlay 16 laps on on each graphs, and N number of channels of data aligned horizontally by time, position, or distance, all on the screen at once.

CT



AIM

 

I think it's sometimes forgotten that these systems are all tools and you have to learn how to use them. Just like hand tools, some folks end up better at using one or the other, but it doesn't always mean it's the best tool. Even if you only own a hammer, it doesn't make everything a nail!

Data gives you a way to quantify what the car is doing, what inputs are made, and the results of those inputs. Video gives context to those things and can more easily show car attitude and heading, along with other things.

For anyone to say that you need one without the other, well, they are not being honest. When I see people to say to look for things like coasting, brake application, or throttle application on video instead of data, they are certainly not using their system correctly Those things can all be seen in the data traces much faster and easier with less work. They can also be spotted across multiple laps, not just the one being watched in the video.

Now, if you have that data and wonder, where did they turn in? What was their trajectory after the apex? Well, those are much better done though video. The video can fill in some of the how and why very quickly, but it's not a good global review tool, IMHO.

This is all why my methodology is always to review the data first. I can quickly check the car health, then move on to look at the drivers performance in the three major areas that we perform in - speeds (acceleration), cornering, and braking. By selecting not just the fast lap, but many good laps, I can quickly see what the trends of the driver are, not just what they did once. Then I can jump to the video to figure out car position on the track and look for other variables like other cars, track conditions, etc.

To analyze a driver with only data or video is not a complete analysis. You have to use all the tools available to you.

 

Yes, sure. I can't actually post an image right now because the machine that I have RS2 on here at the house is -- ahem -- having some problems (replacement time...it's old...but I digress).

I use Circuit Tools on the PC -- haven't really used the phone version other than to play with for novelty value.

What your attachments show is several graphs each of one measure vertically stacked one on top of the other marching down the screen where more than one lap's data for each of those measures is shown in each of those stacked strip charts.

What I'm saying is that it can be very useful to have more than one measure from the same lap data set on the same chart...instead of having them stacked one above other other on the screen, think of them being stacked on top of each other as you look down on them into the screen.

Aha -- brain wave: look at this post >>here<< -- it has a couple of examples of what I mean that I posted before. When looking at traction control action, I find it useful to see all four break pressure channels superimposed on one x/y axis pair, not 4 stacked charts of each separately. The combined G and long G on one is to me a very intuitive way of seeing where I'm leaving grip on the table for things like corner entry.

I agree that you can get the same for that latter example by using the vertical cursor across two stacked charts of combined G and long G in circuit tools...I just think that's more eyeball-to-cognition work than it has to be/should be in Circuit Tools. That and things like scaling control etc. just make CT's strip charts less moldable for max intuition, MHO. [CT and Comparo are the packages I've used that doesn't have the superposition capability; i2pro, ATLAS and RS2 all have it]

And of course aside from G-G, CT can't do measure-to-measure X/Y charts like in that second example at all.

None of that makes CT a bad tool for the job. For the way I see things it could be better though