TargetTalk

I love this! The two systems arguing around the issue. As a (former) scientist, I would say that the control experiment would be for the Trace team to produce a head-to-head video to counter SCATT's. Thousands (hundreds? A few dozen?) of shooters await the result.

Ricardo wrote:I love this! The two systems arguing around the issue. As a (former) scientist, I would say that the control experiment would be for the Trace team to produce a head-to-head video to counter SCATT's. Thousands (hundreds? A few dozen?) of shooters await the result.

Big +1

The ball is rolling... time for Trace to kick it forward!
Based on that video alone I would not buy a Trace system...

Bakerman wrote:

ChipEck wrote:What jumped out at me even more than the speed; is the Scatt drew nice round lines and the other product was horrible. If I want to check my hold I could not do it with the competitor's product.

Chip

If anyone takes a closer look at the video - it's fairly noticable, that the top of TRACE sensor casing is cut wide open for unknown reasons.

Taking this into account and the fact that this video is created and posted by official SCATT representative I think everyone should understand that such test doesn't represent the real comparision of the systems.

Valērijs
TRACE Team

Well, we weren't planning on bringing this up, but since the Trace representative did, then okay: For anyone with a pair of eyes it is evident that TRACE "borrowed" quite a few ideas from SCATT while making their system. So we wanted to see just how closely they copied it. The only way to look inside the TRACE's plastic 3D-printed body is to cut out a few windows. We did. Turned out that TRACE copied many things from SCATT, but the high quality of components and work isn't one of them. Because all it is inside is a cheap $15 Chinese webcam which cannot physically offer the necessary accuracy and quality of data for competitive shooters, no matter how you process it. This finding is what actually prompted us to perform the test in the first place. So don't worry, the TRACE unit we tested is intact inside, pictures attached.

Also, the fact that I am a SCATT representative doesn't make my post any less credible than your posts, as a TRACE representative. Actually, my credibility is supported by 25+ years that SCATT has been developing, and offering industry-leading shooter training systems to world's best shooters. On the other hand TRACE's credibility can be summed up by one year of manufacturing a SCATT imitation.

Anyway, we will soon publish a second, longer and more elaborate test, with another TRACE device, so that the shooters could see more details on the difference between the capabilities of the SCATT system and the TRACE on their own.

Moreover, the SCATT company is ready to perform a series of automated performance, speed and accuracy tests, open to the public, at any major international shooting competition.

rmca wrote:Big +1
The ball is rolling... time for Trace to kick it forward!
Based on that video alone I would not buy a Trace system...

I would very much like to see a formal response from Trace to this video and discussion. Of course I understand it was made by their competitor with the intention to discredit the Trace device and they have opened and possibly tampered with the device or tailored the testing to achieve the desired result, but as an owner of a trace unit I have personally experienced these large sharp wild deviations that I know are not real with respect to the hold. The lag appears to be something that has been greatly exaggerated in the video but I do notice some lag between sights coming on to target and the trace line appearing on screen in my unscientific testing, maybe only a second or two but it is there.
Trace please reassure your customer base and respond to us telling us what is being done to address these performance issues and the expected timeframe involved to to rectify these performance issues. If the only way to rectify this is by hardware replacement I would hope Trace will have the integrity to do that for the customers that have put their trust in your company's marketing and performance claims by purchasing this device as early adopters.
Thank you

rmca wrote:

Ricardo wrote:I love this! The two systems arguing around the issue. As a (former) scientist, I would say that the control experiment would be for the Trace team to produce a head-to-head video to counter SCATT's. Thousands (hundreds? A few dozen?) of shooters await the result.

Big +1

The ball is rolling... time for Trace to kick it forward!
Based on that video alone I would not buy a Trace system...

Last week accidentaly met a friend at Bisley, who is a computer nerd and actually owns a trace trainer. While we discussed the accuracy issues he made some tests over the weekend to show the precision and sent me this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hvmByaHLhHg

From his feedback - he had some struggle with the initial setup, but once the setings are adjusted the system operates well and is happy about it.

TerryHunter wrote:From his feedback - he had some struggle with the initial setup, but once the setings are adjusted the system operates well and is happy about it.

Any chance of a heads up with the scatt system using the same setup?
I'm probably not alone in wanting to see a review of the two systems from an independent source...

Thanks a lot for that link.

TerryHunter wrote:

rmca wrote:

Ricardo wrote:I love this! The two systems arguing around the issue. As a (former) scientist, I would say that the control experiment would be for the Trace team to produce a head-to-head video to counter SCATT's. Thousands (hundreds? A few dozen?) of shooters await the result.

Big +1

The ball is rolling... time for Trace to kick it forward!
Based on that video alone I would not buy a Trace system...

Last week accidentaly met a friend at Bisley, who is a computer nerd and actually owns a trace trainer. While we discussed the accuracy issues he made some tests over the weekend to show the precision and sent me this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hvmByaHLhHg

From his feedback - he had some struggle with the initial setup, but once the setings are adjusted the system operates well and is happy about it.

Terry please ask your friend to run the same test with a 10m rifle target instead of the much bigger 10m pistol target, you will probably see a far worse picture. And if he tries the 50m rifle target you will barely even see a circular shape with the TRACE system.
And also, like I said before SCATT is ready to perform a comparison, open to public, with series of automated performance, speed and accuracy tests at any major international shooting competition.

Will ask him to do same on 10m air rifle and see how it goes.

However, since I need it for 10m pistol only I will buy one because their price is very nice.

scatt_manufacturer wrote:

TerryHunter wrote:

rmca wrote:

Ricardo wrote:I love this! The two systems arguing around the issue. As a (former) scientist, I would say that the control experiment would be for the Trace team to produce a head-to-head video to counter SCATT's. Thousands (hundreds? A few dozen?) of shooters await the result.

Big +1

The ball is rolling... time for Trace to kick it forward!
Based on that video alone I would not buy a Trace system...

Last week accidentaly met a friend at Bisley, who is a computer nerd and actually owns a trace trainer. While we discussed the accuracy issues he made some tests over the weekend to show the precision and sent me this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hvmByaHLhHg

From his feedback - he had some struggle with the initial setup, but once the setings are adjusted the system operates well and is happy about it.

Terry please ask your friend to run the same test with a 10m rifle target instead of the much bigger 10m pistol target, you will probably see a far worse picture. And if he tries the 50m rifle target you will barely even see a circular shape with the TRACE system.
And also, like I said before SCATT is ready to perform a comparison, open to public, with series of automated performance, speed and accuracy tests at any major international shooting competition.

Thanks for the video, photos, and comments scatt_manufacturer.
€579.00 = $854.43 Canadian
€749.00 = $935.22 Canadian

Just the more professional casing seems to be worth the extra $100 IMO.

Unless someone can point to an advantage with the Trace software (and an explanation of why the side-by-side test made the Trace look so bad), the extra money is worth having something more professional looking attached to my firearm.

SlartyBartFast wrote: Unless someone can point to an advantage with the Trace software (and an explanation of why the side-by-side test made the Trace look so bad), the extra money is worth having something more professional looking attached to my firearm.

One advantage I have heard of with the Trace software, and I have not seen it myself, is that it records the trace for aborted shots.

This could be useful in identifying some reasons for why you abort shots.

Whether that is enough to be a deciding factor in which system you buy is up to you.

they have trace routines that looks great tool for me and also my kids in training.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wywUp4mj9_g

SlartyBartFast wrote:Thanks for the video, photos, and comments scatt_manufacturer.
€579.00 = $854.43 Canadian
$749.00 = $935.22 Canadian

Just the more professional casing seems to be worth the extra $100 IMO.

Unless someone can point to an advantage with the Trace software (and an explanation of why the side-by-side test made the Trace look so bad), the extra money is worth having something more professional looking attached to my firearm.

I've tried Trace routines myself in a club, quite handsome to train with. Maybe there's something else like this?

New comparison ! Trace apparantly needs fast computer as background processes cause lag. Accuracy is still a sour point.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=sJihCtG7n2g&sns=fb

Hi there shooters, as promised earlier, here is a second, extended, and more elaborate test, with a brand new Trace unit going against SCATT MX-02 and SCATT Basic - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZbxYD_NdrAA

PhilipM wrote:New comparison ! Trace apparantly needs fast computer as background processes cause lag. Accuracy is still a sour point.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=sJihCtG7n2g&sns=fb

Thank you PhilipM for posting it! I guess it spreads faster that we thought. Essentially my link it's almost the same video, but with few small clarifications and attention points.

Very nicely done tests, but I do have one question: I don't mean to be picky, but would it be possible that the Trace system has a problem detecting the black from white on a computer screen that emits light but not so much on light reflected from paper? Right now, that remains the one remaining variable that makes these tests different from real conditions. Perhaps those who know the inner workings of the detectors could chime in with their opinion.

Ricardo wrote:Very nicely done tests, but I do have one question: I don't mean to be picky, but would it be possible that the Trace system has a problem detecting the black from white on a computer screen that emits light but not so much on light reflected from paper? Right now, that remains the one remaining variable that makes these tests different from real conditions. Perhaps those who know the inner workings of the detectors could chime in with their opinion.

same here, waiting for test with paper targets and calibrated trace system. at the moment these tests look kinda far from real world and just two companies fighting who's better

John67 wrote:.......at the moment these tests look kinda far from real world and just two companies fighting who's better

Not really. It's been all Scatt so far.

I would have thought that Trace would have done their own tests and published them but, so far, nothing.

David Levene wrote: Not really. It's been all Scatt so far.

I would have thought that Trace would have done their own tests and published them but, so far, nothing.

+1

Perhaps it is not in the best interest of Trace to enter into a direct comparison with SCATT? Yes, SCATT hold the major market share, but purely competing head-to-head may not be the answer. Trace may be trying to differentiate its product by carving out a different niche. Perhaps it is the capabilities of Trace, that differentiates it from SCATT, that is their primary focus. My view is that both systems are training tools.