Looking for launch monitor, advice?

[ZMax]

The GC2 and the Vector don't measure club path/club face so how will they satisfy #1?

DD/P3pro uses reflective IR technology and are not recommended to be used outdoors. The GSA uses IR shadow technology, which requires an overhead light, so it can not be used outdoors, unless it's late at night and you brought your own light fixture. So, neither one will satisfy #2.

Read bubba22 and goatbarn's replies to infinity above.

[ZMax]

Can GSA's camera system Lx be worth the wait until May 2012? It has been postponed numerous times,
but seems to be a cheaper alternative to the GC2.

The LX is a very promising LM but so far, it's been nothing but vaporware. Scroll down a page or two and you'll find the LX thread.

[goatbarn]

The CG2 does not satisfy #1 as it will not give you club data, unless you spend more $$$ for the head tracking device.

I think your best option is to find a club tracking device for home use (ie, optishot, px2, protee) and then use a radar device like the purecontact to dial in half shots. I have the pureflight (in between purecontact and purelaunch) for just this, and I found it reasonably accurate, but not more accurate than the purecontact/similar devices.

Or I suggest getting the CG2, plus HMT, plus fitting software, divorce your wife, run away to another town, cash in your 401k, and live a life of solitude with your golf toys......oh wait, that doesn't make sense.

[left72]

The GC2 and the Vector don't measure club path/club face so how will they satisfy #1?

My assumption is that by measuring the ball accurately, the calculations for path/face angle are sufficient for my purpose. I'm not really into fitting clubs, so I could live with calculations as opposed to measurements.

DD/P3pro uses reflective IR technology and are not recommended to be used outdoors. The GSA uses IR shadow technology, which requires an overhead light, so it can not be used outdoors, unless it's late at night and you brought your own light fixture. So, neither one will satisfy #2.

I agree, they are not meant to satisfy #2 (which is outdoors), my hope is that they satisfy #1 (indoors).

Read bubba22 and goatbarn's replies to infinity above.

Will check that.

Thanks for posting,
Stefan.

[left72]

@goatbarn: Thanks, I'm thinking in the same direction: combining club tracking device for home use and the purecontact/pureflight for the range. Not the run-away-from-wife
Stefan

[ZMax]

The GC2 does not give calculations for club face and path. Only club speed I believe.

[goatbarn]

The HMT doesn't give head data: speed, path, face angle, deviation, AofA?

[TheGolfer]

being a little of a golf freak myself i went with the gc2 blew my budget and catch *hit from the wife and owe her big time for the rest of my life but that was me. plus cancelled vacations and christmas for the next 10 years for the family - exagerated. i started with a 3k budget also when i first started this process and nothing met my expectations. never imagined spending this kind of money initially. speaking from a nut that has a sand trap, chipping green, and putting greens in the basement rather than finishing or using it for storage like normal people do. i have found on the forum the lower the hcp and more obscessive / compulsive you are with your distances / swing / game those people tend to gravitate toward the gc2 launch monitor and those more interested in entertainment, gaming, playing the computer courses go with other sims. no right or wrong just different market segments. i am sure there are exceptions but just seems that way in general.

on a serious note I wouldn't do anything that would jeopardize your financials. the unit and range is expensive. even if you just get the unit with the screen its still a lot of money.

based on your goals above, perhaps build your own short game setup (putting / chipping) in the basement which if you do yourself you save a lot of money and your idea of looking at a used vector pro is creative just don't know how accurate they are.

relatively inexpensive (compared to these systems) but very effective for improving your game:
i went for years with just a hitting net and a mat and that was relatively cheap and improved my game over the winter so don't let that go as an option. literaly worked great for me. practiced with it even during the season and to warmup. great alternative that allows you to make great swing progress. add a full length stand mirror for < $225 for indoor mirror work. few cheap aids like an impact bag and throw in a swing radar if you are working on driver speed. even used an old video camera direct to an old TV and works great for checking swing plane and positions (no computer needed) - its just not fast enough to see the club face in all positions but easily can see where you are relative to the plane lines while pausing and going in slow motion. can easily draw plane lines on the tv and wipes off easily. if i had to choose to spend 3k on a simulator but that wasn't accurate or these items above I would choose these items above and work on my game. just a note on the computer courses. i spent a lot of money on 13 of them and don't really use them. don't see how they really help your golf game. spend my time on the range.

good luck.



the only next step i know from gc2 is trackman 3. its 2.5-3 times the price and for indoors similar accuracy and requires 18 feet minimum from unit to screen along with a recurring > 2k annual software support fee. obviously outdoors no comparison to tm3 that tracks the ball versus simulates it. my goal was for indoor work.

[left72]

The GC2 does not give calculations for club face and path. Only club speed I believe.

The device displays ...

Ball Speed
Launch Angle
Path (at least the display reads Push Pull (deg) in the promo video)
Side Spin
Total Spin
Carry

[ZMax]

The device displays ...

Ball Speed
Launch Angle
Path (at least the display reads Push Pull (deg) in the promo video)
Side Spin
Total Spin
Carry

Yeah, that's ball path or ball azimuth. I was referring to club path, which is what I thought you were looking for.

[ZMax]

The HMT doesn't give head data: speed, path, face angle, deviation, AofA?

Yes it does but it's an add-on. Same price as the GC2 by itself. If he's going this route, divorcing his wife would not be enough as she would take half of everything including half of his 401K.

[goatbarn]

Ah yes, add rob a bank then/fake death and collect own life ensurance.

[left72]

Yeah, that's ball path or ball azimuth. I was referring to club path, which is what I thought you were looking for.

That may be a misunderstanding from my side: for the indoor scenario I though that if the device measures ball spin and direction accurately right after impact, than it can reasonably infer both club path, face angle and ultimately the curve of the ball.

I simply want to know whether I came inside-out or outside-in to the ball (and to which extent) and whether my club face was open, square or closed (and to which extent). My understanding was, that GC2 and the IR stuff (GSA PX ...) will tell you.

[goatbarn]

The CG2 will not tell you club path/face angle data. You can infer from the resulting simulated shot shape.

[bubba22]

GC2 alone will not measure club data at all as goatbarn says. Ther is an optionsl HMT deevice for the GC2 that one can buy. Not cheap and needs club markers and questionable accuracy???? The Protee/GSA/Trugolf/Optishot/P3pro will give club data.

[Santiago]

Any chance a golf buddy with no room would chip in for the GC2???

If you understand how to hit a draw or a fade, you can understand whats your club path and face angle for what you need, I would rather have less information but an accurate one, and trust the flight I get fro the unit, rather than spending my money on educated guess like some cheaper units.

[syhlif32]

If you understand how to hit a draw or a fade, you can understand whats your club path and face angle for what you need, I would rather have less information but an accurate one, and trust the flight I get fro the unit, rather than spending my money on educated guess like some cheaper units.

Why not the other way? If you know what your club is doing you know what the ball path will be.

When I practice home on my simulator I pay attention to data of the club face , club path, ball speed and to some extend the launch angle.
I am not sure why people need any electronic aids on the drive range?
Can't you just look at the ball?
The range ball spins less and will go shorter distance so I am curious of what important info, people get from a Trackman or any other launch monitors hitting range balls!

When I first got a simulator (The DD) I did not buy it for playing the courses. I got it for practicing my swing, even now where I bought the Protee it was mainly for practice.
But for sure I play the courses, a lot more than I thought I would.
While playing the courses are more for having some fun I do find that after I got a simulator with LA I can also practice some strategy while playing a course.

[bubba22]

I completely agree syhlif32. The debait of what is more important club or ball will go on forever. I think it depends on the individual. Both are important in my mind. For me the ball data is great for fitting of club and ball especially the driver and woods. Been there and done that and continue each year to get fitted by a pro on a launch monitor. For swing analysis and home use, I love the Protee to really look at the club data especially the clubface at impact. I typically have an inside out swing but knowing my clubface at impact and that initial ball direction is of great value. Certainly the spin data from GC2 is fantastic info but personally I like the club data, and like I said that really depends on the individual.

[syhlif32]

I did not mean to put down ball data compared to club data after all it is the ball that counts in the end.
And I would like to have a launch monitor home. Got a big net outside where we hit real golf balls and for sure a launch monitor would be great there.

But I really do not like drive ranges anymore just tired of hitting the old scuffed up balls which even new are not that nice to hit.
So I do not understand the value of measuring the shots with the range balls?

Got a couple of friends that is playing golf with range balls but pretty sure it is not because they prefer playing with them

[Santiago]

syhlif, I guess it comes down to the guy swinging the club. I always prefered that the ball do the talking, and adjust my swing to what the ball is doing, if i am hitting the draw I prefer, it does not matter much to me if the club is coming 3 o 6 degrees from the inside.

Also, I am not sure how accurate the cheaper sims are, I only tried the optishot, and while is fun playing with it for a while, the margin of error is just to big to take it seriously for practice. Lastly, I am also a clubfitter/builder, so I use spin numbers a lot more than the regular golfer.

[bubba22]

I am the exact opposite. I much prefer the clubdata for my everyday practice. I like the ball data for club and ball fitting. If I am hitting fades I like knowing my club path and face angles for sure. The Protee is definitely accurate.

[Asics]

Does Protee publish any data or represent what its accuracy tolerances are? I know Optishot does. It would be nice to see published data for the Protee. Can someone give me a link if it exists?

[bubba22]

The accuracy and tolerances of Protee hardware are the same as GSA. Remember they are essentially the same unit. The software integration and algorythms are however different.

[Asics]

Does GSA publish its accuracy tolerances? Is there a link for that?

[bubba22]

Here is some info on the hardware measurement http://www.golfsimfactory.com/ElectronicSensors.htm

[TheGolfer]

gsa error tolerances in the past have been how tight they measure the club head data which in turn they use to estimate spin. gc2 postes the error tolerances for the actual ball measurements that matter at the end of the day - spin, path, launch angle, speed, etc.

curious if this has changed and gsa can posts ball launch error tolerances for spin, etc?

[bubba22]

Spin in GSA and Protee is estimated and its well known that the club data can accurately estimate spin through algorythms. Every sim uses algorythms even GC2. As a 4 handicap, I am very happy with the club data and thus spin that Protee displays. The hcam and vcam is 100% accurate as you actually have a window on the interface that you can see the pictures of the ball flight. Pictures don't lie.

[ZMax]

Yeah, the GC2's published numbers can make you feel good after spending $8-14K, but how does the GC2 user verify the numbers such as ball path and LA? Even the Vector Pro shows you two images of the ball after impact.

[TheGolfer]

why do you guys talk about the need to adjust up / down the carries with software controls if the unadjusted numbers are really accurate? why are you looking for a spin module for the sim in the future if it already is that accurate and estimates spin as good as a device that measures it?

[bubba22]

The adjustments of carry are mainly for those that chose to use limited flight balls. I don't need to hit my ProV or Penta balls in my basement. I hit limited flight balls at home. I have been fitted for my clubs and balls etc. Thats where a launch monitor like the GC2/Vector/Flightscope/Trackman come in handy. Having club and ball data that correlate together is the best of all worlds. The Protee like the GSA/Trugolf/Golftek do a great job of estimating spin but mesasuring the spin would be of benefit for not needing club selection, spin around the greens etc. so it would help there is no arguement there. Is it critical for showing the degree of fades/draws or carry, and accurate simulation, I would say no but selecting the club is needed for better accuracy with the algorythms. I personally would be happy to just have the setup as is but having direct ball spin measurement will for sure be a bonus. The ball direction, launch and speed is as good as it gets now.