Hello wzthonda, thanks for stopping by. I was originally planning on purchasing the automotive firmware, to install into it. Unfortunately, as of now, you can't install automotive into STO1104E. It's still a really great scope anyway. It has some really cool features in it.
Vladimir C, sometimes I do feel like the STO is faster, only I’m not sure if it’s In my head. Yea, I’ve said it to a few people already, if only Micsig would give you the option to install the ATO options into the STO. I think that would be ideal. Maybe if more people would mention it to Micsig, they would make it happen. When I asked them about it, they said they have no plans to do so at this time; that the ATO is their automotive scope. Oh well, we’ll see what happens.
@@atomsworkshop195 Maybe you can advise me, I have been racking my brains for several days, I can not decide between the two models. I would like a mode for automotve OS, but I do not do this on an ongoing basis, I can sometimes look at the accelerometer pedal or the camshaft or crankshaft sensor I don't quite understand what the firmware for automotive mode gives I work more with microcontrollers in home
Vladimir C. If it was me, and I did not do a lot of automotive diagnostics, I would go with the STO. The main advantages of the ATO are, it has some reinforced plastic around it to keep the scope itself more protected (for a shop or outside atmosphere). It has all the automotive presets; so if you are going to diagnose, say an O2 sensor (or many other options) you can go into the automotive presets, choose O2 sensor, and it will tell you what kind of lead/probe to use, then automatically set your trigger, time base, voltage per devision, etc. With that said, you can set all that yourself on the STO. In fact, on the STO (or ATO) you can press the auto function, and it will usually set a nice waveform. Also, the ATO has the 360/720 degree option that can be useful in automotive diagnostics. I know it’s a hard decision my friend. Neither one of them are cheap (for the average guy). Like I said, if Micsig would allow an automotive upgrade to the STO, it would be a no brainer. But for now, only you can make that decision. I feel comfortable enough saying, I think you would be happy with, and enjoy using either one; but if you can only get one, and your not doing full time automotive diagnostics, and you will be inside at a table for most of your work, I would go STO. If you are gonna be in a shop like environment and diagnosing automobiles most of the time, I would go with the ATO. Regardless of which one you choose, I would definitely get the 4 channels. I really feel if you get a 2 channel, you will regret it later, and want to upgrade to the 4 channel. I hope this helps you make an educated decision my friend. Good luck, and let me know which one you decide on. Also, if you have any more questions, now or after you own the scope, feel free to ask me. I’m no expert, but I can share my experience (with the scopes) with you, to try and answer any questions.
Vladimir C. I just wanted to clarify, you can look at the things you mentioned, CAM/Crank sensors, accelerator pedal, etc. with the STO. Only, once connected to the sensor, you will have to set the trigger, time base, etc. yourself (which is Not hard to do). Often, you can just press the Auto function, and it will set a nice waveform automatically.
Thanks for taking the time to make these videos, I've just bought the STO version and learning to use it
I believe this scope for industrial used even some aspects better than ato1104
Hello wzthonda, thanks for stopping by. I was originally planning on purchasing the automotive firmware, to install into it. Unfortunately, as of now, you can't install automotive into STO1104E. It's still a really great scope anyway. It has some really cool features in it.
it seems to me that the model STO works a more faster..
you noticed it too?
Vladimir C, sometimes I do feel like the STO is faster, only I’m not sure if it’s In my head. Yea, I’ve said it to a few people already, if only Micsig would give you the option to install the ATO options into the STO. I think that would be ideal. Maybe if more people would mention it to Micsig, they would make it happen. When I asked them about it, they said they have no plans to do so at this time; that the ATO is their automotive scope. Oh well, we’ll see what happens.
@@atomsworkshop195 Maybe you can advise me, I have been racking my brains for several days, I can not decide between the two models.
I would like a mode for automotve OS, but I do not do this on an ongoing basis, I can sometimes look at the accelerometer pedal or the camshaft or crankshaft sensor
I don't quite understand what the firmware for automotive mode gives
I work more with microcontrollers in home
@@atomsworkshop195 you know how it is, new models are given more priority than old ones.
new functions will be the first for the STO model
Vladimir C. If it was me, and I did not do a lot of automotive diagnostics, I would go with the STO. The main advantages of the ATO are, it has some reinforced plastic around it to keep the scope itself more protected (for a shop or outside atmosphere). It has all the automotive presets; so if you are going to diagnose, say an O2 sensor (or many other options) you can go into the automotive presets, choose O2 sensor, and it will tell you what kind of lead/probe to use, then automatically set your trigger, time base, voltage per devision, etc. With that said, you can set all that yourself on the STO. In fact, on the STO (or ATO) you can press the auto function, and it will usually set a nice waveform. Also, the ATO has the 360/720 degree option that can be useful in automotive diagnostics. I know it’s a hard decision my friend. Neither one of them are cheap (for the average guy). Like I said, if Micsig would allow an automotive upgrade to the STO, it would be a no brainer. But for now, only you can make that decision. I feel comfortable enough saying, I think you would be happy with, and enjoy using either one; but if you can only get one, and your not doing full time automotive diagnostics, and you will be inside at a table for most of your work, I would go STO. If you are gonna be in a shop like environment and diagnosing automobiles most of the time, I would go with the ATO. Regardless of which one you choose, I would definitely get the 4 channels. I really feel if you get a 2 channel, you will regret it later, and want to upgrade to the 4 channel. I hope this helps you make an educated decision my friend. Good luck, and let me know which one you decide on. Also, if you have any more questions, now or after you own the scope, feel free to ask me. I’m no expert, but I can share my experience (with the scopes) with you, to try and answer any questions.
Vladimir C. I just wanted to clarify, you can look at the things you mentioned, CAM/Crank sensors, accelerator pedal, etc. with the STO. Only, once connected to the sensor, you will have to set the trigger, time base, etc. yourself (which is Not hard to do). Often, you can just press the Auto function, and it will set a nice waveform automatically.