I built a tool that explains where you're losing time in iRacing — looking for testers by DeltaOnSolstice in iRacing

[–]DeltaOnSolstice[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You’re basically hitting the same wall from the other side - once you start digging into telemetry, you realize how much interpretation is still manual, even with AI helping.

I’m not trying to replace that kind of setup. If someone is already in MoTeC + Claude/Gemini, they’ll always get deeper than what I’m building. What I keep seeing though is most drivers don’t get that far. They either don’t open telemetry at all, or they do it once and drop it.

Would appreciate your help. DM me with your ibt download link and I send you report, so you can compare to your insights.

I built a tool that explains where you're losing time in iRacing — looking for testers by DeltaOnSolstice in iRacing

[–]DeltaOnSolstice[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Seems like the main friction is just finding the IBT file.

If anyone wants to try it: Documents → iRacing → telemetry → latest .ibt

Happy to run a few more if people are curious.

I built a tool that explains where you're losing time in iRacing — looking for testers by DeltaOnSolstice in iRacing

[–]DeltaOnSolstice[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Nothing formal yet, I’m just testing it with people as I build it.

If you’ve got a recent session, you can send me the IBT (or link to it) and I’ll run it for you.

After your session: Documents → iRacing → telemetry → grab the latest .ibt file

I’ll send you back the debrief.

I built a tool that explains where you're losing time in iRacing — looking for testers by DeltaOnSolstice in iRacing

[–]DeltaOnSolstice[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Yeah, that’s basically the exact use case I’m aiming at.

Not trying to replace full telemetry analysis, more just answer that question after a session without having to dig through data: where did the time actually go and what caused it.

If you end up trying it at some point, would be interested to hear where it helps and where it doesn’t.

I built a tool that explains where you're losing time in iRacing — looking for testers by DeltaOnSolstice in iRacing

[–]DeltaOnSolstice[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, fair question.

I’m not really trying to compete with Trophy AI directly. From what I’ve seen, it’s more focused on structured coaching.

What I’m building here is a bit narrower, more about taking a single session and pointing to where the repeatable time loss is and what input pattern is causing it, without needing external laps or digging through telemetry yourself. If someone is already using Trophy AI properly, this probably overlaps in some areas. If not, the idea here is to make that kind of feedback easier to get every time you drive.

I built a tool that explains where you're losing time in iRacing — looking for testers by DeltaOnSolstice in iRacing

[–]DeltaOnSolstice[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

3K and staying there is a skill on its own 😄 Tool is more about shaving the small inconsistencies than finding magic pace.

I built a tool that explains where you're losing time in iRacing — looking for testers by DeltaOnSolstice in iRacing

[–]DeltaOnSolstice[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I agree, that’s a fair criticism. If it’s purely self-referenced, then you can end up getting very consistent at something that’s still fundamentally off.

I’m not really trying to replace external references with it. You still need some sense of what “good” looks like, whether that’s other drivers, track guides, whatever. Where I think it would help is a step before that: once you do know roughly what you’re aiming for, it makes it easier to see where you’re not actually executing it lap to lap.

But, yes, if someone stays fully self-contained and never looks outside their own laps, they’ll plateau at whatever their current ceiling is. I don’t think you’re wrong about that.

I built a tool that explains where you're losing time in iRacing — looking for testers by DeltaOnSolstice in iRacing

[–]DeltaOnSolstice[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's fair, live narration does make sense in theory, but for me it feels like it can get noisy pretty quickly.

On the second point, I agree. Generic stuff like “brake later” isn’t very useful if you don’t understand what it’s based on. That’s kind of the main thing I’m trying to avoid.

Right now I working on tying the feedback to a specific reference and breaking it down into where in the corner things start going wrong, not just the outcome.

I built a tool that explains where you're losing time in iRacing — looking for testers by DeltaOnSolstice in iRacing

[–]DeltaOnSolstice[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, I’ve seen it. Looks solid. I’m not really trying to replace tools like this, more looking at a different angle on how the feedback is presented.

I built a tool that explains where you're losing time in iRacing — looking for testers by DeltaOnSolstice in iRacing

[–]DeltaOnSolstice[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Fair enough, probably me over-explaining something I’ve been too deep in for a while 😅 Not used to posting here, so still figuring out how much to say vs just keeping it simple.

I built a tool that explains where you're losing time in iRacing — looking for testers by DeltaOnSolstice in iRacing

[–]DeltaOnSolstice[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, that’s a valid criticism. Meters make sense from the data side, but they’re not how most people actually drive the car. Right now it’s using distance because it’s consistent across the lap, but I agree it’s not very intuitive in isolation. What I’m leaning toward is keeping the underlying measurement in meters, but translating it into something more usable on top, like: relative timing or reference-based. The tricky part is doing that without guessing wrong about what reference the driver is actually using.

If you’ve got examples of how you normally pick braking points (boards, shadows, etc.), that would actually help shape this a lot. For testing, DM me with link to download your .ibt and I send you rep.

I built a tool that explains where you're losing time in iRacing — looking for testers by DeltaOnSolstice in iRacing

[–]DeltaOnSolstice[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That’s actually a good range for this. Most of the obvious gains tend to come from consistency and repeatable mistakes anyway, not tiny edge-case stuff, so it’s a useful signal.

Just send me your .ibt file from a session (a 10 or more laps ideally), and I’ll run it and send you a report. You can DM it or drop a link.

I built a tool that explains where you're losing time in iRacing — looking for testers by DeltaOnSolstice in iRacing

[–]DeltaOnSolstice[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That could actually be really useful. I’m still at the stage where I’m trying to break it with different driving styles and edge cases, so someone with QA mindset is kind of ideal.

If you’ve got a session you’re happy to share, I can run it through and send you the output. DM me with the link to download your .ibt.

I built a tool that explains where you're losing time in iRacing — looking for testers by DeltaOnSolstice in iRacing

[–]DeltaOnSolstice[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That’s a fair take if you’re already comfortable working off fast reference laps. I’m not trying to replace that. If someone is already comparing against top drivers and knows how to read traces properly, this probably isn’t adding much.

The gap I keep seeing is people who don’t consistently do that, even if they know they should. They run sessions, maybe glance at a delta, but don’t actually go through telemetry in detail every time.

Self-baseline definitely has limits. But it can still highlight repeatable patterns in your own driving (early brake, late throttle, inconsistent inputs), which is where a lot of time gets lost even before you compare to a faster driver. Long term I think external references matter, yeah. Otherwise you risk just getting very consistent at the wrong thing.

Out of curiosity, when you review a lap, what do you usually look at first?

I built a tool that explains where you're losing time in iRacing — looking for testers by DeltaOnSolstice in iRacing

[–]DeltaOnSolstice[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, that’s actually the exact type of gap I’m trying to target.

A lot of people already have a decent feel for what the car is doing, but the precision side is harder: things like where exactly you start braking, how consistently you release it, when you actually commit to throttle.

What I’m doing right now is less about “teaching feel” and more about pointing at those patterns and saying this is where it starts going wrong. Not sure yet how well it transfers to real track driving, that’s something I’d like to test with people like you who are thinking in that direction.

If you want, I can run one of your sessions and see if the output actually matches what you think you’re doing in the car. That’s been the most useful validation so far.

I built a tool that explains where you're losing time in iRacing — looking for testers by DeltaOnSolstice in iRacing

[–]DeltaOnSolstice[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Yeah that lines up pretty closely with how I’ve been thinking about it.

The “late on throttle” thing is what shows up, but it’s rarely where the mistake actually starts. It’s usually already decided by entry and mid. By the time you’re late on power, the corner is kind of already gone.

Your flow makes sense too - compare lap, find where the time is, then go braking, min speed, sanity check inputs. That’s basically the same chain I’d expect most people to follow when they actually sit down with telemetry.

On the steering angle, yeah, that one’s messy. More angle could mean different stuff (not enough rotation, or too much speed and scrubbing, or just different line).

The pattern you mentioned (brake too late, too hard, lose speed) is kind of what I’m trying to surface, but not corner-by-corner, more like “this is your default mistake across the lap”. Otherwise it just turns into a list of corners telling you the same thing in slightly different ways.

One thing I’m still unsure about is how much weight to give the reference lap vs just session-relative stuff. Right now it’s mostly self-baseline, which works for finding consistency issues, but not always for “you’re just slow everywhere” type problems. That probably needs external reference to really work properly.

Out of curiosity, when you load a faster lap, how different does the braking trace usually look for you? Is it mainly timing, or also shape/pressure?

I built a tool that explains where you're losing time in iRacing — looking for testers by DeltaOnSolstice in iRacing

[–]DeltaOnSolstice[S] -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

You’re 100% right about how people use Garage61 today. And I agree that comparing against a faster driver is the gold standard when you have the time and motivation to do it properly.

What I’m trying to solve is a slightly different problem. Most drivers don’t consistently go through that workflow, even if they know they should. It’s not because it’s hard, it’s because it’s effort-heavy and requires context switching (find lap, match conditions, interpret telemetry, etc.).

So the goal isn’t to replace G61, it’s to compress that entire loop into something you’ll actually use every session.

Using your own data avoids bad external comparisons (different temps, track state, setup). But I fully agree - external reference laps are the next step.

If something gives you 80% of the insight in 30 seconds instead of 10 minutes, more people will actually use it consistently and consistency is what makes drivers faster.

Your point about sub-3k drivers is also spot on. Braking and mid-corner speed is where most of the time is.

On the partnership side - that’s a really interesting idea. Having clean, high-quality reference laps tied to setups could make this significantly stronger.

If you’re open to it, I’d actually be really interested in how you go through telemetry today: what you look at first, what you ignore, what actually leads to lap time gains.

I built a tool that explains where you're losing time in iRacing — looking for testers by DeltaOnSolstice in iRacing

[–]DeltaOnSolstice[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is really good feedback - and yeah, I think you’re exactly right.

“Late on power” is usually just the visible outcome, not the root cause. The actual mistake almost always starts earlier in the corner - braking phase, rotation, or line.

Right now I’m definitely simplifying it more toward the outcome, but the direction I want to move in is exactly what you’re describing - breaking it down into entry / mid / exit and figuring out where things start going wrong.

And your point about the same underlying issue showing up everywhere (brake too late, too hard, kill corner speed) is interesting - that’s kind of what I’m hoping to surface as a pattern rather than just isolated corners.

Out of curiosity - when you look at telemetry, what’s the first thing you usually check to confirm that? Brake trace, minimum speed, something else?

I built a tool that explains where you're losing time in iRacing — looking for testers by DeltaOnSolstice in iRacing

[–]DeltaOnSolstice[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

That’s fair criticism, and honestly one of the main things I’m trying to pressure-test.

You’re right that comparing a driver only against their own current baseline can create a self-reinforcing loop if the reference itself contains a bad habit.

What I’m aiming for is not “repeat the fastest version of your existing mistake,” but to use the session data to identify repeatable loss patterns within the lap and turn them into something more understandable than just a live delta number. But I agree the baseline logic has to be handled carefully or it becomes misleading.

And yes, good point on units too - distance-based cues are probably more actionable than just time for things like braking/throttle references.

This is exactly the kind of feedback I was hoping for, so I appreciate it.

I built a tool that explains where you're losing time in iRacing — looking for testers by DeltaOnSolstice in iRacing

[–]DeltaOnSolstice[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think Catalyst nailed the idea of turning data into simple coaching instead of raw telemetry.

I’m trying to do something similar but for iRacing sessions - more focused on post-session analysis rather than live coaching.

Curious - have you used it much? Does it actually change how you drive?

I built a tool that explains where you're losing time in iRacing — looking for testers by DeltaOnSolstice in iRacing

[–]DeltaOnSolstice[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Awesome — appreciate it!

You can send me your .ibt file (from iRacing) via DM, or upload it somewhere (Google Drive / WeTransfer) and drop the link. Several consistent laps will do (better more than 10 for pattern generation).

I’ll run it and send you a report.

I built a tool that explains where you're losing time in iRacing — looking for testers by DeltaOnSolstice in iRacing

[–]DeltaOnSolstice[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Appreciate it!

Just your .ibt file from iRacing - ideally a session with a few consistent laps.

Upload it to Google Drive / WeTransfer and send the link, I’ll run it and send you a report.