Who would have caught this ?

Ok so the fancy scope helped, though you can do the same with the frequency setting on a Pico/others. Seen a good few of this guys videos but this is an amazing catch even by his high standards!

Wightscope wrote: Ok so the fancy scope helped, though you can do the same with the frequency setting on a Pico/others.

Features like this are what set the eScope apart from other scopes. Yes, you can do this with other scopes. I have used the the Pico to graph crank frequency many times. Each time, there is a "tuning'', as I call it, process to go through. Dialing in the proper frequency range, applying the correct amount of filter, setting the proper zoom level, plotting out and labeling cylinders... The eScope does all of this for you. Very nice! It is designed to be stream-lined for this kind of things. It has become my preferred scope.

Yea it's a nice scope, but being from the UK that makes an already expensive scope even more so. The only UK seller I can find sells the basic 4ch unit (no tablet) for $4,400 vs $2,600 over there.
I am soon in the market for a new 4ch, but like so much stuff it would appear getting a non paid opinion on anything is really difficult so I welcome yours!

Wightscope wrote: Yea it's a nice scope, ...getting a non paid opinion on anything is really difficult so I welcome yours!

My honest opinion is that I love it. But, I encourage you to check, and compare, specs before you make your decision. Many people seem to think that it has the sampling power of Pico. It doesn't. In fact, Snap-on scopes have more sampling power. The uScope has the same sample rate as the eScope. It is more than suitable for most automotive applications. Here , is my first opinion/review/comparison with Pico. It has been awhile, and I could add a lot more to that comparison. Both, good and bad. But, it is a good first-impression comparison.

I love the eScope. But, I would not want to be without a Pico, either.

Add the IEA & E-SCAN Elite to this 4 or 8 ch scope and you've got a hell of a tool. Little pricey though but once you use it enough things flow quickly. Has the pull down built into the scope which is a great feature might I remind you many other scopes just don't have.

Had I knew about ATS before I'd bought other brand stuff, well I would've just bought the ATS. Yes it's not the only thing out there but it's one of the few great feature packed diagnostic tools out there hands down.

If you're doing alot of diag work, Want to be able to capture raw data then break it down the ATS is one of the more user friendly scopes for that. As with anything all brands have a learning curve and you have to practice to get better.

Chad wrote: I have used the the Pico to graph crank frequency many times. Each time, there is a "tuning'', as I call it, process to go through. Dialing in the proper frequency range, applying the correct amount of filter, setting the proper zoom level, plotting out and labeling cylinders...

That and "guessing" what RPM is doing around the sync notch.

Couple other options that appear to have the ability to "smooth out" the sync are the USB Autoscope and the Rotkee. If you don't want to watch the entire vid it gets interesting at around 9:40

<i-frame width="1013" height="570" src="" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen>

Chad wrote:

Wightscope wrote: Many people seem to think that it has the sampling power of Pico. It doesn't. In fact, Snap-on scopes have more sampling power. The uScope has the same sample rate as the eScope. It is more than suitable for most automotive applications.

Shared 1 MS/s is very low considering the price point.And the file you posted in the "review" thread looked like it was only hitting about half the claimed sampling rate.

Matt T wrote: That and "guessing" what RPM is doing around the sync notch.

YES! That is a HUGE plus! I have been wanting to check out the USB Autoscope. And, I just started hearing about Rotkee. :dry: So, many scopes. So, little time (money). :whistle:

Shared 1 MS/s is very low considering the price point.And the file you posted in the "review" thread looked like it was only hitting about half the claimed sampling rate.

Agreed. It doesn't go, totally, un-noticed, either. If sample rate is what you are shopping for, eScope would not be my recommendation. Still, I go for the eScope, first. The appeal for me is the lack of channel set up. I, REALLY, like that. Going back to the Pico, I get a little frustrated at have to set up the channels. I get even MORE frustrated when I set the scaling wrong on a channel, and have to RE-capture.

I justify the price with/by all the EXTRAS. Not, the sample rate. Take all the EXTRAS into consideration and the price is...well, still pretty hard to swallow.:woohoo:

I, still, highly recommend the eScope. But, if your on a budget and don't have a Pico, I would recommend getting the Pico, first.