Data Manager experience?

[jasonp]

I have been looking at data acquisition/management in an effort to improve my driving abilities and monitof my cars performance. Does anyone have any experience with the following:

Traqmate
http://traqmate.com/index.php

or DL1
http://www.actdigital.com/DL1.htm

and
http://www.g2xtreme.com/hardware/components.htm

Judging from the websites, the nicest sites are the G2x and Traqmate. G2x seesm to have alot more options for extra data plugs and the Traqmate has a video interface.

Tough to decide because I would also like to be using what everyone else is using or going to be using so data can be compared and shared. I'd like to monitor a number of different parameters engine-wise as well as gauge my own performance.

Anyone have any experience with any of these systems or a comparison or recommendation?

[jlucas]

Been where you are at, tested multiple units, went with the DL1 and became a DL1 evangelist which eventually tunred into a business. I think you'll find that most people have not tried multiple units so you may have a hard time getting comparitive answers; everyone seems to think that the one they have is the best. If you do a search for "acquisition" in this and other forums you'll find some other discussion.

For the DL1 and all it's options, you probably want to look at race-technology.com for a complete listing. Al's old page that you've referenced above doesn't have any info on it. On my website I have an 8pg PDF so anyone can get a feel for the analysis software with some simple examples that don't require extra inputs to be added.

Each brand has plusses and minuses. If you going to be using a bunch of inputs the summary looks like this:
TM: lap timer only display, optional module for 4 analog/2digital/RPM inputs
G2X: std basic display with 2 display fields & shift lights, std RPM input, $60 cable to add up to 12 inputs but each input requires purchasing a VNet adapter for each one ($99)
DL1: std 7 analog inputs, std RPM inputs (high & low), std 4 wheel speed inputs, 2 optional programable DASH units that include predictive lap timing/multiple screens/shift lights/warnings/etc....

Download and use the software from each one that your are interested in, that's where you will extract the benefit of having the logger. This is probaby one of the most important things about your data logger choice, and you will see that each company has taken a decidedly different approach to the analysis software. The user's manual for the DL1 & analysis software is all in the help files of the software.

Feel free to email or post with any questions. I can send you sample DL1 data if need it.

ps. The video overlay software from trackvision.net mentioned on the TM site works with any of these loggers not just TM. On my video page you can see an overlay of ITForum hero/2006 AARC ITA champ Greg Amy setting the pace at Watkins Glen this year. Fast Tech Videos

[Greg Amy]

I'll have more to say once I catch up with life, but I've found the DL-1 to be an invaluable tool. I have 7 wins in 11 races this year, plus the ITA win at the ARRC, and three track records.

I sincerely doubt I could have been as successful this year without the DL-1. In fact, all three of those track records were set during the sessions immediately after I reviewed my data and said "I need to do this, and this, and this."

At this year's ARRC Jeremy let me borrow a DASH-1 display. I absolutely love the predictive lap timing; it helped me to ration valuable track time for best effect. There's a DASH-2 in my Christmas wish list...

Like I said, more later, but to summarize in one sentence: "I'd spend money on a DL-1 long before a new set of tires." It's that good.

We're going to look into Trackvision software to overlay the data onto my in-car from this year's ARRC and we'll make it available online for download... - Greg

[Knestis]

I'd totally agree with the DL1 endorsement. I'm by no means ARRC-winning material but I always find time when I look at the data. It helps to focus on making the improvements with the biggest return first, rather than getting all wrapped around your axle about "you can go flat through there..."

K

[Jeremy Billiel]

I have been watching Greg all season long breaking records and looking at his DL1 constantly. Greg has convinced me to buy and I will be talking with Jeremy shortly to buy a DL1 this offseason. I would love the Dash2, but not sure the wallet agrees. The video overlay is great. Jeremy what is the cost on that overlay?

[JIgou]

The data gurus may have a more extensive answer, but I've been eyeballing the TrackVision software for integrating data and video. (Even though I don't have a data system yet...)

http://www.trackvision.net/ - $125

From that homepage: Data Loggers supported in V1.2 include AIM, MoTeC, Stack, Race Technology DL series, Traqmate, Racepak G2Extreme, and more.

Jarrod

[jlucas]

What Jarrod said is correct.
Sorry for the late reply, I couldn't reply yesterday due to some ITforum server issues with not sending a validation email when I updated my profile.

Let me know if you have more questions.

[chumpy36]

one more vote for the DL-1. I think all the hardware is good but the DL-1 software is better than the rest...

While we're on this, I'm considering a dash display this year.

Any comments from DASH1 or DASH2 users? I had heard of problems with DASH2. Trying to decide which I want.

Thanks much

Jason

[Greg Amy]

Jason, I ran the DASH1 at the ARRC. I like it, but it is not satisfactory as a primary display IMO.

[chumpy36]

In what ways?

I'm not sure I need for it to be primary. I just would like predictive lap timing and maybe a few more gauges...



Congrats on your win BTW...

J

[Greg Amy]

Thanks Jason!

For simply predictive lap timing and additional gauges, it's probably fine. However, note you'll have to do the math to convert the sensor input to the DL-1 into people-usable information on the DASH-1.

Some advantages:
- Real-time raw data frequency and analog input from the DL-1 easily displayed.
- Warning limits of above info can be set, to bring to the fore if there's a problem
- Sequential shift lights (although they lag quite substantially)
- Not so difficult to setup, once you get the hang of it. I had a 17-hour tow down to figure it out, but there's no PDF or written instructions (it's all in the F1/Help files of the program).

Disadvantages:
- Small rectangular LCD display not really large enough for primary display
- No graphical representation of data (numerical only)
- Time lag on displayed values; probably not adequate for accuracy on rapidly-changing data like RPM and speed.
- Dash-2 is mucho cooler. http://www.race-technology.com/conte...?pcat=2&cat=31

Here's a pic of the Dash-1 temporarily installed in my car; look in the center of the dash panel (copyright Tom Hoppe, 6Gunracing.com):

http://www.6gunracing.com/pictures/2006%5F...es/IMG_4306.htm

[Bildon]

Here's another for the DL1.
We ran it for a while as simply a lap timer however this year we added a few more channels and began to actually alter our setup/driving based on this info.

I can say that for many the DL1 appears to be much less than it really is upon first glance. The website is far less "salesy" than others because R-T are a bunch of engineers who expect you to READ! :P

If you DL the software and go through the extensive help document, you'll find a lot more info than is on the website. The DL1 is so configurable that it may be a bit much for some..but it sure is powerful.

Now one area that I have to disagree with is the software being better that most. I think the R-T software could use some work as MoTec and Stack do a much better job. I've tried setting up the DL1 software to emulate the functionality of Stack or MoTec and it's tough. I think the DL1 software has the capability to be great but they need to give us some more built in functionality and not require a new user to go through and setup so much on his/her own. Are you listening R-T? We talked about this at PRI last year and it still hasn't happened.

R-T also allows video/data integration and video export for a little bit more than Trackvision.

[almracing]

Anyone using the Traqmate?

I spent the early spring looking seriously at a datalogger and my impression from downloading the trial software was that the Traqmate software was much easier to use and more intuitive.

I ended up scrapping the datalogger from the budget and used the $$ to avoid scrapping my racecar (yes... still ranting about the May crash... lol)

I agree that datalogging is a great tool. The addition of a simple Hotlap timer in my car gave me great feedback for laptimes. I look forward to seeing more details as to why a particular lap was faster than the rest. (And it may show me I need more coffee for morning qualifying sessions!)

How intuitive and simple to use do others find the DL1 software? I will have to see if I can sneak a datalogger into the 2007 racing budget.

[Bildon]

>> How intuitive and simple to use do others find the DL1 software?

http://www.race-technology.com/conte...?pcat=2&cat=72

Try it out... There are data files from various tracks/teams floating around on the web as well...

[JIgou]

I've compared the TraqMate and the RacePak G2X software packages so far (on a fairly limited basis, so I'm certainly NOT an expert), and to me (a computer guy) I like the data and the functionality behind the RacePak software better than the TraqMate package. I understand what they were trying to do with the TraqMate (make it "simple" for Joe Racer), but that's not for me. I have sample data and have downloaded the DL-1 software, but haven't had a chance to play with it yet.....

Maybe a TraqMate user can chime in 'cause I missed it, but one of the biggest PITA for me on the TraqMate package was something I pictured myself wanting to do regularly: trying to figure out my fastest theoretical lap. The G2X did it automatically, but with the TraqMate I had to pull out a calculator, sort through and add up my fastest segment times.

I also like the ability to swap out CF memory cards (more memory, or individual cards for multiple drivers during an enduro) on the Racepak and DL1 systems, while the TraqMate system has what it has, and isn't expandable. The G2X has a display that is much more functional than the TraqMate, but still is nothing compared to the Dash2 or some of the other higher-end systems out there.

The price of the DL1 + Dash2 + a few sensors is a little more than I wanted to spend (I was leaning heavily towards the G2X), but it's not off my list yet - the ease (and relative affordability) of adding additional sensors keeps it on the list, and the ability to do predictive lap timing is the killer function that I REALLY want.

As far as I've been able to find, the AIM MXL Pista (MSRP $1800) and the DL-1 + Dash2 (MSRP $1950) are the cheapest ways to add predictive timing. With those two side-by-side, I lean to the DL-1 because it has GPS and expandable memory; the AIM unit uses a beacon, and has fixed memory. (They're devloping a GPS unit, but I've heard rumors of a $500 pricetag....and it's not out yet, either.)

BUT, beyond all of those technical items above, I'd ask this question to anyone: Do you have a friendly competitor with a system already? If so, you might consider selecting a system that isn't your "ideal" for the ability to compare data with another driver in a comparable car/class. Even if their class isn't very comparable, they may be able to shorten your learning curve with the software and interpreting the data.

Jarrod

[JoshS]

Maybe a TraqMate user can chime in 'cause I missed it, but one of the biggest PITA for me on the TraqMate package was something I pictured myself wanting to do regularly: trying to figure out my fastest theoretical lap. The G2X did it automatically, but with the TraqMate I had to pull out a calculator, sort through and add up my fastest segment times.
[/b]

I have also thought that I'd like this functionality in the past, but the more I thought about it, the more I realized that the premise is bogus.

One cannot add up ones fastest segment times across a bunch of laps and assume that this would result in any time realistically possible. You will come up with an unattainable time.

Take a simple non-continuous track, an S turn. You start going north, turn 90-degrees west, and then back 90-degrees north. Assume that the westerly straight is short enough that you have to "give up" the first turn to maximize speed through the second turn.

Now split this up into two segments, splitting the westerly straight.

On this track, I could have a great time through the first turn (segment), but this would screw up my time in the second turn. Likewise, to get the best time in the second turn/segment, I could go slowly through the first turn.

Now, if I add up my two fastest segment times, I'll get a great time ... but it's not attainable on any real lap.

So is this functionality something that's really desireable?

[Bildon]

>> the AIM unit uses a beacon, and has fixed memory.

AIM has great products and great integration with modern CAN BUS systems which allows Plug and Play = full ECU & vehicle sensor data with no wiring!
BUT, as you say AIM still have not released their GPS system which they have been talking about for far over a year. With the single beacon systems you are also going to have less accurate sector times so I'm not sure how they do predictive lap times on the fly like the GPS units can.

In case anybody has any reservations about the GPS accuracy, my DL1 lap times were within .001 at the ARRC of what T&S had !

BTW, if there are any DAS manufacturers/reps lurking, we're currently evaluating DAS systems for our Grand Am Cup GTI. We'll gladly accept a "demo-unit" and include any positive feedback we have with it in the media events/articles we have scheduled for '07
http://gsm.bildon.com

[JIgou]

Josh, I agree that the best theoretical lap, as you noted, isn't necessarily attainable....but, as with any of the other data gathered, one has to use a bit of common sense to interpret the data that is gathered.

Yes, I could do exactly as you mentioned.....but to what end? So I could "race" the data the same way my fellow SM drivers race their dynos? :P

If the sectors are created sensibly (not splitting tight combinations, etc), this theoretical lap should be pretty close to ideal. Along those lines, it's my job as the driver and data specialist to know what happened during the session and toss out any obvious outliers that skew the data unrealistically.

So, while I agree that matching the best theoretical lap may be impossible, I believe that with careful segment configuration and sensible interpretation of the data that the theoretical lap should be VERY close.

Jarrod

Bill, I agree that the CAN BUS is very cool. But on my 1991 Miata that application is a little less useful than, say, an ODB-II GTI....

Jarrod

[jlucas]

Good stuff in this thread. Some comments in no particular order....

Bill, IIRC they are already working on the v7 software so please do bug them some more about how you'd like to see it improved!!! I don't have any experience with Stack or Motec so I can't make those suggestions to them. You can also share them with me and I can push for them.

Re: DASH2, the only issue I've heard about is slow RPM response. There is a fix to this, it has to do with the frequecy of data going to the unit. More data is actually better (higher frequency on more inputs) because the display doesn't "push" the data to the display until the next batch of data is received. I forget the circuit type that is responsible (BSME not an EE). The GM Performance Division guys that run the GAC Cobalt program are quite pleased with the DASH2, and they recommend the DL1 for all their customers.

Best theoretical lap is a useful tool. You will find the gap gets real small as you improve. It also shows you a lot how consitant you are. In addition to looking at that, the comparision between sectors based on times is really easy on the DL1. I almost always start by comparing any segment on my fast lap that is not also a fastest sector time to that fast sector time; two clicks and your there. Another unique DL1 analysis aid is the time slip variable (in seconds or %) which helps you quickly hone in on where the time differences really are (it may not be as obvious as you might first think). You can see illustration of these items in the example PDF on my website.

The great thing about the CF cards is if you run enduros, just pop in a larger card and record the whole thing. I recorded the whole 25 hour last year.

[chumpy36]

I have also thought that I'd like this functionality in the past, but the more I thought about it, the more I realized that the premise is bogus.

One cannot add up ones fastest segment times across a bunch of laps and assume that this would result in any time realistically possible. You will come up with an unattainable time.

Take a simple non-continuous track, an S turn. You start going north, turn 90-degrees west, and then back 90-degrees north. Assume that the westerly straight is short enough that you have to "give up" the first turn to maximize speed through the second turn.

Now split this up into two segments, splitting the westerly straight.

On this track, I could have a great time through the first turn (segment), but this would screw up my time in the second turn. Likewise, to get the best time in the second turn/segment, I could go slowly through the first turn.

Now, if I add up my two fastest segment times, I'll get a great time ... but it's not attainable on any real lap.

So is this functionality something that's really desireable?
[/b]

Josh, You can minimize situations like you describe by putting the sector marks in straightways and away from corners or braking zones. If you do this you can get attainable laps...

Edit: Jarrod beat me to it