I was a relatively early adopter of the Trace system having owned it for some months now. Over that time I began to have some concerns about the performance of the unit based on anomalies I observed while using the Trace device and some less than convincing responses from the Trace team to my questions on performance. The revelations by Scatt of the capabilities of the Trace device in their videos seemed to confirm my suspicions. Over the last few weeks I have had access to a Scatt Basic unit so I was keen to make my own comparisons. I have decided to share my findings here in the hope that they may be of assistance to fellow shooters considering investing in one of these systems. Since the software and sample data for both devices is freely available you may find it helpful to install them so you can experience the look and feel for yourself and can see what I am referring to in the review below.
I apologise in advance because the comparison that follows is a little long winded so for those that want to cut to the chase, the link to the performance test video is at the end of the review.
I am happy to try to answer any questions that may arise.
Scatt Basic vs. Trace - Review and Comparison of Hardware and Software.
Introduction
The price point of the Trace unit and the manufacturer’s claims that its performance is equivalent to that of the Scatt units certainly made it an attractive proposition to me. To further tip the balance in Trace’s favour, the Scatt distributor in Australia did not stock the Scatt Basic unit when I made my purchase and even if they did, based on their current MX02 pricing compared to the US MX02 price the cost of the Basic would have been at least 20% - 25% higher than the equivalent US Scatt Basic pricing. Combine that with a 10% discount that Trace was offering when I placed my order, it seemed too good to be true. For comparison, at the time of writing this pricing was as follows, as you can see Trace still holds the advantage, particularly with their occasional 10% discount offers but the difference between them is not huge:
Trace €579 (~A$905) (US$690) including post
Scatt Basic US$749 (~A$984) including post in US or + US$50 (~A$66) post to Australia
(since both units currently sneak under the Australian GST threshold no local tax is payable on either unit.
At the time I ordered and paid for my Trace unit they were clearly only building devices to order after payment was received, delivery to Australia took just over a month. I don’t know if this is still the case or if they now carry stock. Having waited a month for the arrival of your device you are then subjected to the added indignity of having to wait for Trace to deem you worthy to use the device you paid for over a month ago and provide you with an activation code for their software. I don’t quite understand why Trace considers this level of security is necessary for their software given that it is freely available with read only functionality. This of course means that if for whatever reason you need to replace your computer at some time in the future and Trace has ceased support for this device or is no longer in business you effectively have a €579 paperweight. There is no such requirement for Scatt Basic it is fully functional out of the box.
Unboxing, First Impressions
When it comes to unboxing the units, both are supplied in simple cardboard boxes but this is where the similarities end. Design, build quality and materials are simply like chalk and cheese. The Trace unit is housed in a 3D printed enclosure and while the quality of the 3D printing is reasonable the look and feel of the unit is very cheap. The design features a mounting system and USB cable that are integrated into the housing so if either is damaged it is highly unlikely that the housing would be repairable or the cable replaceable. Similarly local repair appears to be out of the question as there seems to be no allowance for servicing or access to the electronics in the housing design. The Trace housing also incorporates a manual focus ring for setting of target distance. In comparison the Scatt Basic unit is housed in a precision-machined anodised aluminium body, USB cable and mount are detachable and there are no focus or distance adjustment facility on the housing. Various optional alternative mounting systems are also available separately from Scatt. The supplied mount is also anodised aluminium and incorporates adjusting screws to help dial out any parallax error between the mounting position and the target. The Scatt Basic device is supplied with an allen key, memory stick containing manuals, Mac OS and Windows software. Trace provided only the device and poorly photocopied manual. Windows software must be downloaded and a virtual machine is required for Mac OS functionality, manuals were not available on the Trace website however the Quick Start and FAQ sections now available on the website provide useful setup information with links to videos and animated screen captures.
Software
When it comes to software, since I could not use Trace for the first few days of ownership I found that Windows 7 recognised the Trace device as a 720p webcam and my webcam software was able to display video from it. Perhaps here we see at least one possible reason for Trace’s onerous software activation requirement, could it be their software could be made somewhat functional with any off the shelf webcam?
For the testing that follows the latest software versions available on the manufacturer’s websites were used, namely ScattBasic-1.0.0b-setup-2017-11-20_23-16 and Trace v1.2 (2308). Despite my open request to Trace to provide me with the software/firmware combination that would allow my device to perform like the unit in their recent comparison video and to provide their own animated test target software for side by side comparison with the target software provided by Scatt I am yet to see a response from Trace.
The software from both companies are a typical Windows applications, they are both easy to navigate and intuitive to use. Both offer functionality for printing of reduced scale targets and export of session files that can be sent and viewed remotely by coaches etc. with freely available software. Trace do offer a wider selection of targets than Scatt, from my perspective one particular omission from the Scatt Basic software is the ISSF 25m Rapid Fire Pistol target which will hopefully be added in a future update.
When I began this comparison the Scatt Basic software was still at version 2017-10-16_20-19 which I did find a little more challenging to calibrate and the Scatt device appeared to need a little more light on the target than the Trace unit to achieve a calibration. Trace gives a 0-5/5 rating on target detection quality using an automatic routine or you can select to manually adjust the detection settings. For Scatt Basic if there is insufficient light the target detection dot simply does not appear in the field of view. Both applications offered an indoor mode and Scatt Basic an additional low light check box to assist with difficult lighting conditions. Both have a preview mode which displays what the sensor is seeing which is helpful for initial setup and alignment. I discovered an update to the Scatt Basic software on their web site (11-20_23-16) which, once installed notified me that updated firmware (32) was also required for the device to function with the new software. The firmware update is achieved with a single click from the diagnostic page within the software itself.
This latest Scatt Basic update has simplified their calibration process, target recognition seems to have improved, lighting requirements also appear to have reduced slightly, the preview image is clearer and it is generally much easier to achieve a good calibration. Scatt Basic has now also automated the brightness control and removed the manual brightness slider as well as the indoor and low light check boxes. Shot detection on both systems could be easily adjusted to recognise the electronic trigger of my LP10E to register the shot in dry fire mode using only the sound of the solenoid without the need to engage the striker each time. A nice feature of the Trace software is the ability to save user / target / distance / shot detection setting combinations into a “preset file” so that they can be recalled with a single click whereas Scatt requires that these options are manually selected each time making Trace more user friendly in this regard. A similar approach would be a welcome addition to the Scatt Basic software. With both systems the importance of making a good calibration at the start of each session is critical to achieving accurate results from the system.
Features
Something else that Trace has introduced in their software is “Trace Routines” currently consisting of Aiming Stability and Hit the Spot exercises where performance feedback is provided to the user. Having used Scatt’s animated target for this testing I think there is a real opportunity to combine these two concepts, perhaps in cooperation with a recognised coach to develop various training exercises using a laptop or tablet as an animated target, thus adding some variety to dry firing along with the ability to measure and monitor progress in the various exercises through the software (I will provide an address for the royalty checks later).
Data Analysis
When it comes to data analysis the main function of both systems is to record and review the trajectory of aiming process, shot release and follow through. Scatt Basic allows you to colour code the stages of the shot process to your liking, allowing identification of a fixed 1 second period before the shot breaks. For Trace colours are fixed but Trace allows you to customise the thickness of the trajectory line and the time period before the shot is also adjustable with a default of orange 1 sec, and red 0.2 sec before the shot. Trace shows a table of numbered shots broken into series, scores can be toggled between standard and decimal and total time taken for the shot is also shown along with grand totals for the two columns. Also displayed as each shot is selected is the trajectory length. Scatt Basic also shows a table of numbered shots broken into series with an arrow indicating direction from centre. Individual shot scores are shown in decimal form followed by trajectory speed in mm/s and total time taken for the shot in the final column. At the bottom there are two totals one showing a total for decimal scores and the other totaling the standard integer score along with averages for speed and shot time. Trace allows for shots to be deleted from the table Scatt Basic does not. Trace also offers filters to allow display of shots that fall within defined parameters such as score range, shot time, trajectory length etc. as well as a time interval chart and a coordination chart to help analyse performance, both of which provide useful information. Hopefully an upcoming release of the Scatt Basic software will add similar features for their users.
Naturally both systems offer the ability replay the trajectory by simply selecting the shot in from the data table. Trace stores and replays the entire period that the trajectory remains on the target whereas Scatt stores 10 seconds before the shot breaks and 1 second of follow through. This ensures the most important part of the shot process is displayed with a minimum of unnecessary clutter on the screen. The total time taken for the shot is available from the Scatt Basic’s data table if required. Both systems allow zooming of the replay however only Scatt Basic allows the replay to be paused and restarted during playback along with a slider which allows for a virtual frame by frame view if so desired when analysing the results.
Test Methodology
Finally but most importantly we come to the accuracy of the devices. These tests were performed multiple times in an attempt to get the best performance from both devices. The laptop on the left in the video is running the Scatt Basic software and the one on the right the Trace software. Both devices were attached to the same cylinder held in a vice. Trace auto detection was performed with the device hand held as recommended in their quick start guide and achieved a 5/5 rating, (the vice was loosened and the cylinder hand held between the jaws). The distance to the target was accurately measured at 10m. The Scatt animated target program which is freely available for download was used to produce the various patterns and the size of the scoring ring on the target laptop was also accurately measured. The speed of the animated target was set at the default 80mm/s which is probably a little higher than an average shooter's aimpoint speed but the intention here was to challenge both systems to determine which displays better accuracy. My intention is to follow up with some live fire tests if/when time permits using full size printed targets also at 10m with both devices attached an LP10E, the Trace device on the cylinder and Scatt Basic on the Scatt LP10 rail mount.
Conclusion
I think it is clear for all to see in the video that the Trace device struggles to follow the trajectory of the target accurately. Of most concern to me are the sharp erratic deviations from the actual trajectory that appear randomly. If such deviations occur in the final stages of the shot process the data being captured is meaningless and the shooter is trying to analyse something that did not actually happen. As I mentioned previously these tests were performed multiple times and what I have shown is actually the best performance I was able to achieve after trial and error with both devices. When watching the video pay attention to how closely the devices follow the scoring rings. When drawing squares and zigzag patterns notice the return to centre path for Trace, it is slightly different each time whereas with Scatt Basic there is a highly repeatable single path. Probably the most telling of the tests is the 5 circles in the 10 ring. For the Scatt Basic device even on the 10m Air Rifle target we can see a defined circular motion whereas in the case of Trace the inherent “noise” of the system itself overpowers its ability to detect let alone replicate the motion of the target. In conclusion I have to say that if I had my time over I would buy the Scatt Basic device, even with the current 21% Christmas discount being offered by Trace, in my opinion the Trace device does not live up to the performance claims made by the Trace team.
Video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sa0JigH8Vrs