A Little Frustrated
I've been trying to get CORE setup at the local track for a while with extremely limited success. I've used two different loops (including a brand new one) and at least 5 different computers. I think there are just too many environmental factors conspiring against me. It's frustrating because I know the CORE software so well and I already have about a dozen CORE transponders for DC racing.
At this point I am willing to consider other options though. I know Giro-Z is out there but I wasn't really impressed with the software. I don't even know if AMBIT is still around but I think that's really expensive. Anyway, if you have any suggestions...I'm all ears.
Also, I don't know if you've seen Beerfest but every time I actually say "frustrated" out loud all I can think of is this scene...then I laugh.
1 comments:
Hi Spoon,
This may be a bit off topic to your post, but I'll plug it in anyway.
I'm looking into purchasing a lap counter soon, and your comments about Core/Giro-Z are timely. I haven't made a decision yet as to which product to purchase, but am leaning toward an infra-red model... so Giro-Z or possibly the I-Lap.
Core is still intriguing, but since it's still uncertain what Kyosho will do with it (change, improve or keep the same technology) it's somewhat of a risky purchase, imho. On the other hand, it could be a great purchase for the 2.4ghz cars... hard to say if it's compatible yet, right? From what you've said, and what I've heard elsewhere about glitching and setup issues, I'm not putting this at the top of my list, although the price is certainly right (both for the system and the transponders). The software sounds really well done too, but it's not an open-source product, and from what I gather, it doesn't integrate with additional hardware, other than printing. You seem to know a ton about it though, so more info would be great to know if you don't mind pointing me in the right direction.
I-Lap/Giro-Z both have the line-of-sight thing going on, but are a little more expensive (especially for a personal purchase, which is my situation).
Giro-Z I find cool since it's software is open-source and freely modifiable, so custom additions, hardware additions and such *could* end up being either very good or very crappy, depending on whether people really start using it and developing for it. The posts of late seem to indicate that people are taking to it a lot better than previous versions, and it's improved quite a bit since it's initial release. Also, they say more and more big races are making use of it (not as much of a concern for me, but may be for some people). Limitations seem to be the cable length to the bridge, the 3-wide bridge width, and possibly immature software which may develop down the road.
I-Lap sounds good to me as well since you can expand it to a larger width track and use it on larger scale cars, plus you can run longer cables to the bridge making bridge placement less of an issue. Using AMB, lots of well-established software already exist, some free, some expen$ive. I'd like to be able to add a starting light-system
and possibly a score-board system to the setup down the road, and I've heard of a few of these already produced for AMB enabled systems...
But ya - I'm really still on the fence as to which to purchase... the few LHS' near me use Core, but I typically stay-at-home and race with friends and my kids, so compatibility isn't a big requirement. I won't be able to afford the purchase for a month or so regardless.
Your thoughts or suggestions would be appreciated!
Cheers,
Kevin.
Post a Comment