+ Reply to Thread
Results 31 to 60 of 633
Thread: NEW SkyTrak Launch Monitor
-
08-12-2014 11:59 PM #31
- Join Date
- Dec 2011
- Location
- Melbourne, Land of Oz.
- Posts
- 1,535
Disagree. Should be Trackman outdoors without wind etc. Tested against GC2 at same time. TM used as the control. Others then compared.
-
08-13-2014 01:00 AM #32
- Join Date
- Aug 2014
- Location
- Surrey
- Posts
- 10
Yes outdoor could work as well, but there has to be absolutely no wind. If I was testing a skytrak outside and there was no wind, it would be versus my rangefinder and observed landing area first and foremost. I suppose that trackman is so accurate outdoors that it can serve as a proxy for actual measured results.
-
08-13-2014 02:00 AM #33
- Join Date
- Oct 2010
- Location
- Chicago
- Posts
- 3,687
Looking at the Japanese PDF that CPA posted, it appears the discrepancies in carry yardage was due mainly from the differences in LA and possibly a little wind. The SkyTrak's LA are consistently higher than TM's LA by 1.5-3 degrees. This could be due to setup or a problem with the SkyTrak itself.
If the SkyTrak's LA readings were all over the place compared to TM, then I could question the SkyTrak's LA accuracy. But it appears to be consistent. Also, some of TM's carry numbers don't jive with Flightscope's Trajectory Optimizer. SkyTrak's carry numbers were closer to Flightscope than TM's carry numbers, which makes me think there might have been some wind involved.
LA is relatively easy to measure. To be off by that much means either a problem with setup or the unit itself IMO. BS readings were very close and backspin numbers were close most of the time. Overall, not bad for a LM that will cost less than 1/4 of the GC2 or maybe even less.
-
08-13-2014 05:57 AM #34
- Join Date
- Dec 2011
- Location
- Melbourne, Land of Oz.
- Posts
- 1,535
I cannot understand why they posted that test. They had control of wind etc. Should they not have tried to get any outside agency to 0 influence.
Also should have physically measured carry and offline numbers and perhaps slow mo cam to verify launch angles.
-
08-13-2014 06:43 AM #35
- Join Date
- Oct 2010
- Location
- Chicago
- Posts
- 3,687
CPA, to do all that takes planning and a lot of work and people that know what they're doing.
-
08-13-2014 07:14 AM #36
- Join Date
- Dec 2011
- Location
- Melbourne, Land of Oz.
- Posts
- 1,535
Yeah I know Z. I presume the companies that make these things have these resources and skills. They are the ones using that test as a marketing tool.
Last edited by CPA; 08-13-2014 at 04:35 PM.
-
08-15-2014 10:52 AM #37Ba2Guest
Wind is a big factor. Any indoor test with TM is not reliable. The best set up is TM outdoor without wind. I am familiar with the Skytrak unit and I know there has been robot tests done on this unit early in the morning without wind in a clear day and the results were pretty good.
-
08-15-2014 10:55 AM #38Ba2Guest
-
08-15-2014 01:44 PM #39
- Join Date
- Nov 2013
- Location
- Calgary
- Posts
- 323
-
08-15-2014 04:08 PM #40
I agree that LA is much easier to measure than horizontal azumuth with the floor mounted units. My testing with Skytrak vs ProTee with respect to launch angle was spot on.
-
08-15-2014 09:56 PM #41Ba2Guest
I have the latest TM. I hit against gc2 and SkyTrak all the time and what I observe is that the back spin is good indoor. In other words good consistency can be observed among the three. But side spin is really a problem. (Even with the metallic tape). All other params are good. So the shot shape cannot be determined accurately indoor. (Perhaps my set up is not good a bigger indoor area is needed with less metal around etc. But where I live space is a problem so I cannot test in a bigger indoor environment)
-
08-15-2014 10:18 PM #42
- Join Date
- Dec 2011
- Location
- Melbourne, Land of Oz.
- Posts
- 1,535
What are your room and TM setback dimensions
-
08-15-2014 10:24 PM #43
-
08-15-2014 10:41 PM #44
- Join Date
- Dec 2011
- Location
- Melbourne, Land of Oz.
- Posts
- 1,535
Interesting as TM now says min room length 5.5 meters
-
08-15-2014 10:45 PM #45
- Join Date
- Nov 2013
- Location
- Calgary
- Posts
- 323
Ba2 my length from TM to net is almost identical to yours and my shots on the sim match what I am hitting on the course very well. Not a perfect measure and I likely will need to compare to other tech at some point, but perhaps a discussion for another thread as I don't want to take away from the,discussion here on what appears to sound like a very promising technology.
-
08-15-2014 10:54 PM #46
I agree. TM indoors will be less accurate for sure. The sidespin would be the weakest. Ba2 how does Skytrak compare aginst GC2 and TM outdoors. We call TM outdoors the "gold standard" but in my opinion, nothing is perfect!
-
08-16-2014 03:01 AM #47Ba2Guest
-
08-16-2014 03:22 AM #48Ba2Guest
-
08-16-2014 07:59 AM #49
- Join Date
- Apr 2010
- Location
- Findlay
- Posts
- 300
Any date as to when SkyTrak will go on sale?
-
08-16-2014 11:20 AM #50
- Join Date
- Mar 2014
- Location
- Oakville
- Posts
- 387
Here's a different question. I'm building a sim. The room is 20x16. The limitation of this or GC2 is playing with a lefties and righty and the need to turn it around. Foresight suggested 2 GC2's. Some ranges have a stance mat with a hitting mat on either side for left or right. Is it possible to set up a sim where the player stands in the middle and there's a LM on both sides thus 2 LM's? With the software allow this? Will the Protee SOftware allow this?
Thanks,
Mike
-
08-18-2014 03:03 AM #51
- Join Date
- Oct 2011
- Location
- norway
- Posts
- 1
How about the smash factors that all the skytrak videos are using, club speed of 66MPh and ball speed of 103MPh?
-
08-18-2014 10:25 AM #52
- Join Date
- Sep 2012
- Location
- Long Island, NY
- Posts
- 128
No club data?
-
08-19-2014 12:11 AM #53
- Join Date
- Aug 2012
- Location
- fairborn
- Posts
- 63
Hey Z or bubba. This is pretty exciting stuff. What kind of testing did you guys do? Did you
Test the unit outside and compare the real ball flight to what is shown on the screen? Just really curious!
-
08-19-2014 09:42 AM #54
- Join Date
- Oct 2010
- Location
- Chicago
- Posts
- 3,687
Yes, tested outside also.
-
08-19-2014 01:55 PM #55
- Join Date
- Aug 2012
- Location
- fairborn
- Posts
- 63
-
08-19-2014 02:05 PM #56
- Join Date
- Oct 2010
- Location
- Chicago
- Posts
- 3,687
Not yet.
-
08-19-2014 10:55 PM #57
- Join Date
- Jun 2013
- Location
- ny
- Posts
- 2
How about chips
-
08-20-2014 09:37 PM #58
- Join Date
- Aug 2012
- Location
- fairborn
- Posts
- 63
thanks for your responses, Z!
when testing, did you find high lofted wedge shots not registering or registering incorrectly as the unit only captures launch angles up to 55 degrees? do you think this will be a big issue?
-
08-24-2014 06:48 PM #59
- Join Date
- Aug 2012
- Location
- fairborn
- Posts
- 63
promotional price
promotional pricing will be $1495. what do you guys think?
-
08-24-2014 06:56 PM #60
- Join Date
- Oct 2012
- Location
- Lansing
- Posts
- 156
Thread Information
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 3 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 3 guests)
Similar Threads
-
GGS LX launch monitor
By ZMax in forum Home Simulators - HardwareReplies: 1945Last Post: 02-20-2015, 05:39 PM -
AccuSport Vector Pro Launch Monitor P3ProSwing with Launch Angle and Video Capture
By wzjy47 in forum Other Golf AdsReplies: 0Last Post: 11-10-2011, 10:52 PM -
GT Launch Monitor
By golfisforfun in forum General Golf TalkReplies: 18Last Post: 08-06-2007, 02:49 AM -
Vector Launch Monitor
By pwr_fade in forum Local StuffReplies: 12Last Post: 03-30-2004, 08:28 PM -
Launch Monitor
By natgolfer in forum InstructionReplies: 0Last Post: 10-10-2002, 09:45 AM