Notices
Racing & Drivers Education Forum
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by:

Did they solve the AIM SOLO accelerometer problem?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 11-26-2013, 03:15 PM
  #16  
mglobe
The Penguin King
Rennlist Member
 
mglobe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Houston
Posts: 9,834
Received 118 Likes on 84 Posts
Default

My preference for Traqmate is primarily based on the ease of use of the software. It's simple and straight forward and as a result gets you to the 80% solution very quickly. When I've played around with the AIM software I've not found the same to be true for it. It may be more powerful, but I prefer the simplicity and ease of use of Traqmate. My previous post was a bit flippant, and I don't mean to imply that there isn't value in the AIM product. I just prefer traqmate, and think it's the better solution for the OP.
Old 11-26-2013, 03:34 PM
  #17  
Matt Romanowski
Rennlist Hoonigan
which cost no drachmas
Lifetime Rennlist
Member


Rennlist
Site Sponsor
 
Matt Romanowski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Manchester, NH
Posts: 12,681
Received 1,005 Likes on 600 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by mglobe
My preference for Traqmate is primarily based on the ease of use of the software. It's simple and straight forward and as a result gets you to the 80% solution very quickly. When I've played around with the AIM software I've not found the same to be true for it. It may be more powerful, but I prefer the simplicity and ease of use of Traqmate. My previous post was a bit flippant, and I don't mean to imply that there isn't value in the AIM product. I just prefer traqmate, and think it's the better solution for the OP.
Same here. I think the most important thing is that people get a system that works for them. We are pretty lucky that there are 5+ good systems out there for people to use and they will all help improve the driver. You just have to find which system and interface you like, then get driving!
Old 11-26-2013, 03:54 PM
  #18  
TXE36
Drifting
Thread Starter
 
TXE36's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: TX
Posts: 2,943
Received 191 Likes on 128 Posts
Default

The Lally event and the AIM data that Doug007 provided are the primary reason I asked the question today. I was impressed at how quickly I was able to look at the AIM data. I went from downloading the SW to actually analyzing data in less than an hour. I do have a technical and scientific background, but I'd never analyzed track data before beyond simple lap times.

It did help that I had some people advising me about the idiosyncrasies of the SW as some of it does come across as inverse Polish notation, but it is pretty effective nonetheless. The SOLO at its $400 MSRP is an impressive package, the DL, not so much for those of use with older cars. IMO, once prices are north of $600 and the install is more complicated then there is more competition from the likes of Traqmate.

AIM's fumbling of the SOLO's accelerometer data hurt them with people like me. Firmware updates are the bain of embedded devices and ones that seem to disable features are the worst.

The discussion has been interesting.

-Mike
Old 11-28-2013, 03:12 PM
  #19  
JarmoL
Racer
 
JarmoL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Finland
Posts: 383
Received 11 Likes on 7 Posts
Default

This is very interesting information. Thanks for posting this!

At the time I bought my Solo AIM actually advertised it as having the accelerometers in it. I was very disappointed when I found out they weren't functional.
Old 11-29-2013, 03:14 AM
  #20  
fatbillybob
Drifting
 
fatbillybob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 2,134
Received 175 Likes on 100 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Doug007
I have had a different experience.

I read online that you could "unlock" the accelerometer by configuring your SOLO as a SOLO DL in place.
I'm dumb. What is/ how do you configure a solo as "soloDL in place"
Old 11-29-2013, 08:57 AM
  #21  
ProCoach
Rennlist
Basic Site Sponsor
 
ProCoach's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Durham, NC and Virginia International Raceway
Posts: 19,149
Received 3,327 Likes on 1,890 Posts
Default

Download and install the latest version of Race Studio 2 (2.53.00) from the AIM SPORTLINE website.

Connect the Solo to your computer and turn it on.

Open Race Studio 2 and select Device Configuration from the left side.

Select Solo DL and click OK.

Then, from the drop down menu next to the measures, select 20 Hz instead of the default 10 Hz for long g and lat g, at least.

Then click "Transmit" on the top of the dialog box.

To finish the job, mount the Solo as it will be oriented in the car.

With the laptop connected and Solo turned on, open Race Studio 2 and select Device Calibration.

Select Auto Calibrate All and click OK on the bottom.

Done!
__________________
-Peter Krause
www.peterkrause.net
www.gofasternow.com
"Combining the Art and Science of Driving Fast!"
Specializing in Professional, Private Driver Performance Evaluation and Optimization
Consultation Available Remotely and at VIRginia International Raceway






















Old 11-29-2013, 11:59 AM
  #22  
fatbillybob
Drifting
 
fatbillybob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 2,134
Received 175 Likes on 100 Posts
Default

Extremely cool! Thanks!
Old 11-29-2013, 10:10 PM
  #23  
ShakeNBake
Rennlist Member
 
ShakeNBake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 5,660
Received 961 Likes on 555 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by TXE36
The Lally event and the AIM data that Doug007 provided are the primary reason I asked the question today. I was impressed at how quickly I was able to look at the AIM data. I went from downloading the SW to actually analyzing data in less than an hour. I do have a technical and scientific background, but I'd never analyzed track data before beyond simple lap times.

It did help that I had some people advising me about the idiosyncrasies of the SW as some of it does come across as inverse Polish notation, but it is pretty effective nonetheless. The SOLO at its $400 MSRP is an impressive package, the DL, not so much for those of use with older cars. IMO, once prices are north of $600 and the install is more complicated then there is more competition from the likes of Traqmate.

AIM's fumbling of the SOLO's accelerometer data hurt them with people like me. Firmware updates are the bain of embedded devices and ones that seem to disable features are the worst.

The discussion has been interesting.

-Mike
Mike, you should check out the traqmate since you can't get CANbus data in your car. I agree with Globe, the software is the most intuitive and quickest to get oriented with. They also have some visuals that are pretty neat, and I've yet to find them in the AIM software. The AIM software is probably the least intuitive of the units I've tried (G2X, Vbox, AIM, Traqmate), but their maths channels (if you need them, I don't) seem to be pretty killer/unique feature.

My only issue with the original traqmate/chasecam I had was that the unit was defective and traqmate couldn't figure out what was wrong/refused to replace. I also could not easily sync up video to the data, it requires you to go through a calibration step for each session. I thought the AIM unit would be better in this regard, but you can't watch video and data at the same time. The AIM hardware is very nice though.
Old 11-29-2013, 10:29 PM
  #24  
Cogito_Ergo_Zoom
Pro
 
Cogito_Ergo_Zoom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 708
Received 25 Likes on 17 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by ShakeNBake
Mike, you should check out the traqmate since you can't get CANbus data in your car. I agree with Globe, the software is the most intuitive and quickest to get oriented with. They also have some visuals that are pretty neat, and I've yet to find them in the AIM software. The AIM software is probably the least intuitive of the units I've tried (G2X, Vbox, AIM, Traqmate), but their maths channels (if you need them, I don't) seem to be pretty killer/unique feature. My only issue with the original traqmate/chasecam I had was that the unit was defective and traqmate couldn't figure out what was wrong/refused to replace. I also could not easily sync up video to the data, it requires you to go through a calibration step for each session. I thought the AIM unit would be better in this regard, but you can't watch video and data at the same time. The AIM hardware is very nice though.
I'm shopping for my Sp996 build right now. Is the video sync issue still a problem with the Traq system. I'm looking at the Traqdash.
Old 11-29-2013, 10:39 PM
  #25  
ShakeNBake
Rennlist Member
 
ShakeNBake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 5,660
Received 961 Likes on 555 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Cogito_Ergo_Zoom
I'm shopping for my Sp996 build right now. Is the video sync issue still a problem with the Traq system. I'm looking at the Traqdash.
I can't comment, it didn't work on my triggered chasecam 3 years ago. I'm sure they have fixed it by now. The only system I have seen work amazingly well is the VBOX. AIM may overlay data onto the video in realtime (which is cool for about 5 minutes, until you try to compare two laps), but it will not sync video (nor will it play it) with their analysis software.
Old 11-29-2013, 10:55 PM
  #26  
ProCoach
Rennlist
Basic Site Sponsor
 
ProCoach's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Durham, NC and Virginia International Raceway
Posts: 19,149
Received 3,327 Likes on 1,890 Posts
Default

The Traqmate TraqSync cable controlling the ChaseCam PDR-100, Sony HDR-CX100, GoPro Hero 2 HD and Replay XD 1080 works reasonably well. The TraqStudio video sync software works really well. The TraqDash is great.

I would say that in 90% of the cases, it works without a hitch, although there have been issues with GoPro f/w versions breaking the synchronized start on the GoPro and some odd issues that I have had (though few others have reported) with the Replay XD 1080. There also is no CAN interface possibility, at all.

I still think the video TBL feature (stitching together your best individual corners from all the laps in ONE session to make a "theoretical best lap" in video) is worth the trouble I have with the other aspects of the system.

Someday, AiM will offer synchronized video window within the analysis window, most likely in Race Studio 3. When that happens, that will be cool. AiM's vehicle-specific CAN and GPS interface is REALLY good, better than all the others and matches or exceeds MoTeC, IMO. The flexibility and power of the AiM software is both good (really great to take analysis to a level FAR beyond TM, VVB and R-K) but also requires a steeper learning curve to learn how to configure the myriad of display variables. The new HD camera is very nice and the MOST robust and shake-free solution I have seen. Now, if I can get it to work with MoTeC, I'll be set!

When I began selling VVBOX three years ago, it was a grade-A PITA. But with the track database auto-installed now (I still have issues integrating the CAN information and using the Micro-Input Box for external inputs on older cars) it is, without a doubt, the easiest to just pull the chip and have synced video and data ready to compare real-time, up to six laps (and/or drivers) in data AND video. For side by side video comparison with data already recorded onto the video, it can't be beat.

There is no such thing as a "bad" system. They all have their pros and cons... Video adds complexity, but I cannot imagine using a data system without it on a regular basis.
Old 11-29-2013, 11:13 PM
  #27  
Cogito_Ergo_Zoom
Pro
 
Cogito_Ergo_Zoom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 708
Received 25 Likes on 17 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by ProCoach
The Traqmate TraqSync cable controlling the ChaseCam PDR-100, Sony HDR-CX100, GoPro Hero 2 HD and Replay XD 1080 works reasonably well. The TraqStudio video sync software works really well. The TraqDash is great. I would say that in 90% of the cases, it works without a hitch, although there have been issues with GoPro f/w versions breaking the synchronized start on the GoPro and some odd issues that I have had (though few others have reported) with the Replay XD 1080. There also is no CAN interface possibility, at all. I still think the video TBL feature (stitching together your best individual corners from all the laps in ONE session to make a "theoretical best lap" in video) is worth the trouble I have with the other aspects of the system. Someday, AiM will offer synchronized video window within the analysis window, most likely in Race Studio 3. When that happens, that will be cool. AiM's vehicle-specific CAN and GPS interface is REALLY good, better than all the others and matches or exceeds MoTeC, IMO. The flexibility and power of the AiM software is both good (really great to take analysis to a level FAR beyond TM, VVB and R-K) but also requires a steeper learning curve to learn how to configure the myriad of display variables. The new HD camera is very nice and the MOST robust and shake-free solution I have seen. Now, if I can get it to work with MoTeC, I'll be set! When I began selling VVBOX three years ago, it was a grade-A PITA. But with the track database auto-installed now (I still have issues integrating the CAN information and using the Micro-Input Box for external inputs on older cars) it is, without a doubt, the easiest to just pull the chip and have synced video and data ready to compare real-time, up to six laps (and/or drivers) in data AND video. For side by side video comparison with data already recorded onto the video, it can't be beat. There is no such thing as a "bad" system. They all have their pros and cons... Video adds complexity, but I cannot imagine using a data system without it on a regular basis.
Thank you! Very helpful!
Old 11-29-2013, 11:39 PM
  #28  
Matt Romanowski
Rennlist Hoonigan
which cost no drachmas
Lifetime Rennlist
Member


Rennlist
Site Sponsor
 
Matt Romanowski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Manchester, NH
Posts: 12,681
Received 1,005 Likes on 600 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by ShakeNBake
Mike, you should check out the traqmate since you can't get CANbus data in your car. I agree with Globe, the software is the most intuitive and quickest to get oriented with. They also have some visuals that are pretty neat, and I've yet to find them in the AIM software.
Which visuals have you found can't be done in AiM's RS2?
Old 11-30-2013, 12:31 AM
  #29  
ShakeNBake
Rennlist Member
 
ShakeNBake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 5,660
Received 961 Likes on 555 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Matt Romanowski
Which visuals have you found can't be done in AiM's RS2?
Video+data normalized to distance (vbox)
Video+data (traqmate, vbox)
Acceleration/coasting (traqmate..not sure of others)
Acceleration circle (traqmate, G2X...might not have found it in RS2 yet)
Brake/Accel Zone Map compare (traqmate)
Custom maps - for the life of me, I can't get a TWS map to be accurate in RS2.
Old 11-30-2013, 08:27 AM
  #30  
ProCoach
Rennlist
Basic Site Sponsor
 
ProCoach's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Durham, NC and Virginia International Raceway
Posts: 19,149
Received 3,327 Likes on 1,890 Posts
Default

Actually, you CAN get much of the latter in RS2, just takes time to set up. John Block at Auto Ware with his fine webinars has been a huge help.

Traqmate video does video normalized to distance without an issue. Probably the most used feature of the integration there is.

What VBOX does that is so cool is that it syncs two (and up to six, but that's over the top!) video laps normalized to position, which eliminates the small differences in distance covered by the two cars counting from the start/finish line and altered by different lines taken. It did not USED to be this way, but they DID fix it. This way, you can compare the attitude of the car at entry, exits and at particular apexes!


Quick Reply: Did they solve the AIM SOLO accelerometer problem?



All times are GMT -3. The time now is 10:02 PM.