Darren Madams wrote:
> Not Geez' fault, but a consideration if you're buying the
> product for the mapping feature (i.e. trying to see where to
> brake or which line to take).
I often see differences in line on GEEZ, and almost always
use braking point references from GEEZ. The big thing is
here that the differences in braking point or in line
choice, are usually on the order of what, 10 feet or so?
When we are drawing a course that is 3000 feet long, that 10
foot difference is just plain hard to see. And of course
there are no cones on our maps, so the markers that we might
go by are harder to find. A good example of this is a
slalom. On most courses, a slalom is so straight on GEEZ as
to be almost not recognizable because the line we use to
draw the course is wider than the car would be if drawn to
scale! So the slalom looks visually like a straight. If
you zoom in on it you can more clearly see the weaving, but
in the whole map view, especially on a large course, there's
just not much difference in 10 feet.
I'm not saying that GEEZ is accurate to within 10 feet in
it's mapping either, of course. But GEEZ is accurate to
better than 10 feet over a few seconds. So when you map a
single turn, the lines are drawn quite differently. But
because of speed and other errors along the way, I would not
rely on just the size of the radius, for instance, because
it can vary more from the speed drift than from the choices
made by the driver. Instead look at the *shape* of the
curve. At El Toro last weekend for instance, Yvonne and I
ran a tight line on the turn around for most runs, but we
both had a run where we tried 2nd gear and a "smoother,
rounder" approach. This is clearly visible on the maps just
at a glance.
Same for braking points. Look at where the red (in a
red-green brake-accel color scheme) starts in relation to
the turn. Ten feet is still hard to see, but only because
of scale. Try zooming in to get a better view.
> I would
> still like to see what Byron could do with Geez data combined
> with a wheelspeed sensor.
Maps would be much improved with a wheel speed sensor.
However, I'm still mostly opposed to the idea because it
requires the device to be wired into the car in a much more
intrusive way. And of course there's the cost of the
hardware for the ws sensor, though I bet those are pretty
cheap these days. Let me ask it this way...would people be
willing to pay, say, $800 for a GEEZ model with wheel speed
if it produced maps that were generally 90% accurate with no
adjustments?
I don't know the answer, I'm really asking...
--Byron
///
/// geez@autox.team.net mailing list
///
|