Looking for launch monitor, advice?

[ZMax]

I adjust ball speeds for when I use fake balls. Usually for my driver and wedge. Adding spin module so we can hit off other surfaces instead of the sensor mat. i.e. rough panel, etc... When there is no club data, spin can not be estimated.

[bubba22]

ZMax makes a good point with data verification. With the Protee with every shot you can access the interface program to see the sensors for the club data recorded as well as the cameras that show the ball data. Not spin but the ball direction, launch and speed. Again the pictures don't lie.

[TheGolfer]

why do you use fake balls and if so isn't accuracy mute? no matter how much you play around with the computer carry adjuster i don't see how you can get it the same for each club and shot. spin varies greatly on real balls let alone fake ones (ie 2, 3, 4, 5 piece balls have different spins with driver down to wedges along with different compressions that are meant for different swing speeds).

curious to test some old almost golf balls with the real balls with pw and driver. just don't see them being close to the real thing. having said that if you are hitting fake balls don't think the gc2 is probably the right fit.

i switched from prov1 / penta during indoor practice (except for short game) because they get warn very quickly with other multi layer balls that are close (not exact) for spin but have a slightly harder shell. so far they have been working out great and not tearing up and still can get the wedge to backup.

[goatbarn]

With systems like protee/gsa where spin is calculated from path/face ratio, there is no difference whether you use fake or real balls. Only difference comes in ball speed but there might be a possibility of a slight difference with launch angle/gear effect, but I'd think this would be negligable. So fake balls, once ball speed is dialed in, should be simulated as accurately as real balls on these systems, until spin device is developed.

And I would imagine testing during spin development phase would take place to allow factors to be applied to fake balls to mimic the spin of a real ball.

I hit real balls every shot, so I wouldn't need ball adjustments, but the "home" simulator market has more people that hit fake balls than real I would imagine. Not everyone has enough protection or room to allow for mis-haps with a real ball. Being in a garage (like me), you can afford a rare hole in the wall, at least that's my take.

[syhlif32]

A lot of our setups are also Home Theaters so we use softer limited flights balls not to do damage to the room/ screens also also because we do not what a large setup with protective netting.
GC2 are publishing some impressive tolerances but so did Pro3Swing.
Looking at the forum here, I am not so sure that they should clam the accuracy!

For Protee it would be foolish to clam an accuracy of so and so when they have no control over how careful the users are with setting up the cameras and even the sensor mat.

Also what kind of environment are you simulating. I play golf at 900 meters and at ocean level.
The first hole on the mountain course is a 178 yards par 3, the green is about 15-20 yards lower than the tee.
On a warm dry windless day I have to hold back with a 7 iron. While one a wet/ humid cold day I have to hit with a 5 iron.

That is another reason why it is important, for some of us, to be able to make adjustment to the distances and the amount of spin.

[Asics]

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.

I do like the fact that GC2 has tested and publishes its accuracy tolerances. This would be true regardless of cost. Since Titleist, Ping and most all of the major club manufacturers are buying the GC2, they must appreciate that fact, as well. As far as verifying shot path, you can do that with the GC2 by simply taking it to the range or course and hitting. The GC2, Trackman, Vector Pro, and Optishot all publish accuracy tolerances. Apprently, Protee does not. I suppose we could argue all day over whether Optishot or Protee is more accurate, but I do believe it would be helpful to potential buyers to have this information before making a purchase decision.

[TheGolfer]

never really though of hitting fake balls before. interesting and very creative. a launch monitor is probably not the right choice for this application and perhaps the sims are better a choice.

its funny, when i started my research on sims back in Sept - Oct 2011 I just assumed everyone used a sim for the same purpose that I was looking for; no clue; now I realize there are many different valid reasons of using one.

i was frustrated when i got a bum first unit with gc2 at first where the carry was off by 10 - 15 yards and it was so frustrating I couldn't use it.

p3pro actually publicized ball launch error tolerances (ball spin, speed, path, etc)? surprised. you need to tell the computer which club you are hitting and I thought it estimated ball data based on club measurements and your club selection on the computer. i think its similar to protee where you need to tell the computer what club you are hitting (without the tape on the club) and if you don't the computer assumes a certain club for the shot.

even with my new gc2 unit that is accurate the launch monitors are only as good as the simulation software in sim mode. learned that after i bought it. even when trackman came over to demo tm3 they used their software on the range and stayed completely away from showing E6 courses even though they integrate and sell with E6 but they view the sim courses as fancy video games. tend to stay away from the computer courses myself and stay more in the range to work on my swing. unfortunately i spent a lot of money on 13 courses and don't get my money worth. the courses though look pretty but i find frustrating since even though you are swinging a club and a ball goes flying it doesn't feel like golf outside - putting, judging chipping/pitching, sand, rough, elevation are not fun for me in the sim and i actually play way worse on the simulator than real golf and its not due to technique. in golf i am good with these shots and worked hard at practicing them. on the sim because its not real and precise i think it actually would hurt my game if i got in a steady diet of it.

if you are concerned about your cinema equipment which is a good concern take a look at the link below for some possible ideas. i converted the golf room into a cinema room also. front center speaker is behind screen. front left/right are built into the extended wall i brought out from the original wall to level with the screen with metal mesh protection painted black. sides are up on the top of the wall along with back. receiver and blue ray is hidden in the closet and the media computer is hidden in the next room to be used as a home computer also. was able to get rid of the nets by using a wide screen 8 x 14 so you don't miss the screen and the front sides / above screen / ceiling have black carpet with padding to make the room black for movies and protection from an accident. i got lazy at the end and didn't put the sub in the closet wall and just leave that in the back corner. i just need to get the IR repeaters set up with the remotes so i don't need to go in the closet and turn on the equipment. just some thoughts.

http://forum.ottawagolf.com/showthre...ection-Options...

[goatbarn]

Optishot is not even in the same league as protee. Technology used, # of sensors, measured characteristics of the golf flight to mention a few.

[bubba22]

I agree. Placing Optishoyt and Protee in the same breath makes no sense! The proof is in the users. No one is claiming the Protee to be as good as the GC2. No way. What I do know as a person that has tried every launch monitor and every sim is that the Protee is fantastic and can be tweaked for even more accuracy. Obviously owning the device allows one to better understand it rather than just testing for a day.

[TheGolfer]

i also like how foresight gc2 publish their error tolerances. they are becoming the standard for indoor launch monitors for fitters and need to convince this market segment of its accuracy. i agree with the poster above, has nothing to do with the cost of the device.

there is a reason why the major club manufacturers have switched to using gc2 for testing along with the major retail chains like golfsmith, tgw, etc that in process of switching for club fitting.

for indoor fittings it has a leg up on trackman because of 1) price, 2) space requirements. outdoors clearly advantage trackman without a question though 3 times the price and an annual 2k software maintenance fee is too steep for me. not sure what ever happened with the vector / pro that seemed to be the standard years ago.

as a recent buyer having ball launch error tolerances is invaluable for comparison purposes because most users on this forum that use all types of sims including the wii tiger woods says their sim is the "most accurate". i looked long and hard for including asking some of the sim companies for the data so you can compare the accuracy against the price point. at some point on the curve the accuracy you gain may not be worth the additional price point for a given user.

they do not want buyers to do that obviously. the reason most of the sim companies don't publish it is because people would stop buying it and going to the launch monitors that have more precision or any other device that has better error tolerances for a given price point.

not having the data except for gc2 i had to test 4 different sims and compare to the only baseline I know and can trust which is my carry outdoors. did i verify that launch angle is good to 0.5 degrees or 0.25 degrees, no. did i compare which sim took all the data and projected the shot shape correctly along with my average carries were representitive - yes. at the end of the day for my purposes that is what i needed.

[bubba22]

Glad your happy theGolfer. remember your testing may be already obsolete as most of these sims are updating their interfaces and hardware. At the end of the day its like buying a car, be happy with what you have. I know I am happy!!!

[TheGolfer]

being a consumer i would love more competition within the market segment that foresight seems to have uniquely positioned for indoors. this would me more choices and better pricing.

unfortunately i think its going to be a long time before optishot, p3pro, protee, and gsa will be able to compete with these launch monitors. keep hearing soon but been hearing that since i started back last September when i started researching.

gsa seems like they been advertising their spin camera in development for a very long time.

just recently studying this market it seems like the traditional sim companies with IR sensors, etc were the dominant design for the industry but seems like now the launch monitors who are more accurate realized this is an adjacent industry and will be hard to compete against wrt accuracy as long as they get their cost down.

if i were a sim company i would 1) quickly get my spin attachment done asap 2) makes my range software is top shelf, 3) drop my price to half the gc2, 4) have their system with prepackaged integrated components and sell those components with little margin (ie projectors, computers, screens, etc) 4) develop top class customer service reachable anytime during business ours in the states then they probably wouldn't lose market share against the LMs for time to come.

[bubba22]

You do understand that there are several other companies that have camera based launch monitors. The About golf is probably the best launch monitor there is with their AG mobile http://www.aboutgolf.com/products/ but it is very pricey. GSA and Bogolf have promised portable launch monitors to compete with the GC2 but who knows when they will arrive. In time there will be several options I am sure. The world of simulation and launch monitors (which were completely separate a few years ago) are now combining due to improved technology. I agree that cheaper options with as much accuracy are needed and will eventually come.

[TheGolfer]

i tried both the new about golf 3track and had quotes for a custom install at the home for 30k. also tested the version prior to 3track that is not as accurate. the 3track is expensive because of the install, travel, enclosure, etc. i have found that it is not more accurate than the gc2 even when you use their balls with 100 hash marks all over it to help it pick up spin.

the fitters over at a golf galaxy i know are not to crazy about it either.

i got quotes from bogolf also but exensive and i couldn't get error tolerances. i think they are based out of china but don't quote me. their market seems more china, japan, korea. i thought they just got a sales rep over for the states but not sure. just seemed to risky for me with little opportunities to test it.

i wouldn't be surprised that an afforable good technology comes from china. just copy the best hardware designs and pay people $1 day in labor. The software also just duplicate it and you can't compete on labor costs. In theory they have a great opportunity to produce something that is good at a very low price point.

[bubba22]

I disagree about the 3track. They have several different model. I would encourage you to talk to the company and try the produucts. They are pricey but high quality. I live close to the HD Golf and have been there several times to see their products and they are top notch as well. Plenty of good companies out there.

[psace]

Man, this debate is getting tiresome. The Golfer you seem to have your own wishes for a launch monitor/simulator so why do you knock down the other companies out there? Some of us like playing rounds and having fun on a simulated golf course. So don't bother telling us what we should have for a simulator we can make our own choices!!

Let's try being positve for a change. I have the ProTee and I love it It is exactly what I want, but not probably what you want.

[bubba22]

I completely agree psace!!!!

[bubs3141]

make me a third. Everyone needs to be happy with their choices. Let's please end this bickering.

[TheGolfer]

frankly what starts the debats and is getting old is the three of you who don't have a gc2 enjoy jumping and trying to identify major problems with the unit and getting it documented i in the forum. why the big urgency to do that I don't know - perhaps a direct or indirect relationship with DJ at protee?

frankly if the three of you look back at the history since Sept. when i started my research since day one we have been hearing how accurate the protee system is yet we learn most of you don't even use real balls and adjust the carries to anything you want it and the computer needs to know your clubs or has a default. that is fine if you choose that.

early in my research i felt i was mislead from some people on the forum because when someone says its highly accurate you assume its highly accurate then later find out they adjust carries up / down and hit fake balls and spin is not measured.

my point is if someone is looking for honest feedback before the start this journey I am going to give it to them. as ~ 3 people usually have a very quick counter to foresight gc2 has having problems the new users should have the data for a balanced perspective.

everytime somone mentions anything about the foresight you want to open up a thread so its searchable in google and jump on the bang wagon as users are working out potential carry / setup issues where you don't even own a gc2 or hit real balls for that matter so you can have a thread that talks about gc2 potentially having problems. you have bubba/zmax telling guys they have ball speed and camera problems with the gc2 before ruling out basic setup issues first - ie casing effects, 0-2" on hitting surface, matt, environmental, etc. just recommend due diligence before stating there are problems with the unit.

[bubba22]

TheGolfer we all have different sims and recommend different sims to all who seek advice. I recommend them all including the GC2. Your advice for everyone is to get the GC2 which is not always th best advice. No one is putting down the GC2 but all you speak of is the GC2 and how every other simulator is no good, and this is coming from a person that has much, much less simulator experience and knowledge than a lot of users on thi forum. We all have different sims GSA, Protee, Trugolf etc and advise them all, even the Optishot. The overall experience of sim users here is way more important than the simple testing you did.

[bubba22]

As well I take offense to your accusations that one has a relationship with Protee or that there is a deliberate attempt to put down Foresight Golf. These are serious accusations that are completely unfounded.

[JJSmith]

TheGolfer: reading your posts makes me wonder what you have against all the other sims.
All you do is praising the gc2 and telling how "bad" all the others are.

You also seem to be very worried about how the gc2 appears in google??
Why do you care. Are you doing search engine optimization for foreseight?

Why these accusations? Are you trying to defend someone or something?

Write about your own gc2 experiences and stop comparing it with sims you hardly played.
If you want to do comparisons, start your own simulator review website.

Let people make their own judgements and do their own testing.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder (and his wallet)!

[goatbarn]

Amen.

[netcam]

For the OP, I use a Vector Pro with VRange software and im really happy with it, accuracy and feels about the same as the course and the calculated club data seems mostly accurate to me but im sure not as good as a ProTee or GSA systems.

Only problems I have with the Vector Pro is the line on the ball which is a bit of a pain (I use Nike Mojo golf balls which already has a perfect line on them) and no course simulation which I really wish was possible but I can live without it especially for the cost I got everything at. Last thing I will mention is the Vector support people are really helpful and quick to respond.

I would still like to upgrade to something for just playing courses but this is working great for now.

A couple pictures (sorry about the quality):


Golf Sim Vector Pro 1 by netcam12, on Flickr


Golf Sim Vector Pro 2 by netcam12, on Flickr


Golf Sim Vector Pro 3 by netcam12, on Flickr

[bubba22]

The Vector is a good unit! I have used it and it has good accuracy. Some say that the line really improves the spin accuracy of any launch monitor compared to spin from the dimples. This of course is a debate!!! Very nice setup netcam. What type of mat is that?

[netcam]

Bubba, The mat is from AllturfMats.com it was recommend by someone on the forum and it is one of better ones you can buy form them. Overall I am happy with it although the there is noticeable "dips" I can fell under my feet from wear. The feeling for the club on the mat is good though. Rest of the grass is just turf from Home Depot, just put it in for looks to cover up the plywood.

The Vector does a nice job using the line, on the occasional shot it will miss-read the ball and all you have to do click on the ball image where the line starts and ends to have it recalculate the flight correctly, usually they are bad shorts anyway and I dont always want to know they really did

Impact screen is from Cory (bulk screen) that I had a local person hem for me and it is wonderful!

[bubba22]

Good for you Netcam. Very nice setup. Have you thought about integrating with trugolf or P3pro for simulation? I get the sense that Trugolf is a little more advanced than the P3pro at this time for simulation integration.

[syhlif32]

http://www.eswinggolf.com/

Looks like they at least have a proto type working?
I got a excel ball flight prediction program from him last year which I thought was pretty good.
But do looks like they have a hard time getting financed!
Anybody in the Seattle area that con go by and see if thy can demo a real unit. Would not mind to pledge some money if they have a product.

What do you guys think about the price point?

[bubba22]

E swing is not new. Its is a swing analyser that is in the process of adding a camera to get some ball data. It uses ultrasonic as well as infrared to analyse club data (speed/face angle and path) to determine ball distance, spin, speed etc with its base model. The launch monitor add on will have a single camera that measures total spin and launch angle directly but estimates ball speed (from club speed and launch angle) and spin tilt axis from club data. Ball direction is also estimated from club data. I know from speaking with the owner exactly this. It seems reasonable. Cost is about $3000 and that's with no simulation software courses but a practice range. If anybody went to the Seattle Golf show and can review it, that would be awesome.

[netcam]

Bubba, I would love to integrate the Vector with courses but I just dont trust P3Pro I had one as my first simulator and did not like it at all and I am very disappointed in the limited data they use in the courses from the Vector. I would be extremely interested in the TruGolf integration but it is a bit out of my price range, if they would release E6 to work with the Vector on my current setup that would be very tempting...

I am very interested in Protee, do you know if they have any plans to ever integrate with Vector? I know you talk with some of the Protee people on occasion so I figured I would ask. Protee with the Vector seems like a winning combo to me...

PS: I uploaded some better quality photos if anyone is interested: http://www.flickr.com/photos/4644826...7629302202377/