quote:

Originally posted by jhe888:
Is this also caused by the ball sliding up the club face of the more lofted clubs on impact?

You mean like wedges? I should think that would be negligible to non-existent if the club has good grooves and the face is clean.

If the club face is not grabbing the ball well, spin rate will be adversely affected.

You can see the results of a really grippy wedge on a flop shot. Ball hits the green and stops like it has brakes. I love doing those (Was actually one of the few things I did fairly consistently well, last season.)

quote:

Originally posted by ensigmatic:

quote:

Originally posted by jhe888:
Is this also caused by the ball sliding up the club face of the more lofted clubs on impact?

You mean like wedges? I should think that would be negligible to non-existent if the club has good grooves and the face is clean.

If the club face is not grabbing the ball well, spin rate will be adversely affected.

For a clean-faced short iron or wedge with respectable grooves, the ball doesn't slide up the face. Instead, the ball compresses to some extent and the club's grooves make brief, but positive contact with the ball. I have 20+ year old TaylorMade Firesole irons. With my 7 iron and shorter clubs, with solid hits, I see definite evidence of the contact on the club face -- the grooves tear into ball covers, leaving small shavings in the grooves. These shavings marks are always round -- they never climb up the club face, nor make a vertical ellipse. I have also tested this with Strike Spray -- a powder spray that clearly shows impact locations on the face.

I haven't found websites which go into to the technical details or physics of why maximum obtainable smash factors are lower with higher-lofted clubs. I do suspect some of the club's forward energy is transferred into spin energy, rather than ball speed. But I also wonder if launch monitors try to measure ball speed on the ground -- essentially the horizontal component -- rather than the ball's absolute launch speed on whatever upward angle that occurs. Regardless of the physics behind smash factor calculations, I know and accept that drivers, 6-irons, and wedges are built for different purposes.

****
Both work and personal challenges have limited my time for chasing the little white ball. Once a week, I've tried to hit a small bucket of balls at the nearby municipal course during lunch. I always bring my Garmin G80 to monitor club speeds & smash factors. I bring my chart from the second page of this thread to confirm feel vs reality. I bring Strike Spray for when I'm struggling to hit with the center of the club face.

My ball striking consistency is slowly improving. My 18-hole scores are beginning to drop back into the 80's. My drives are becoming more consistent and more accurate. But on the flipside, I'm still making stupid mistakes. Good thing I have a day job.

So....is the $400 Garmin G-80 launch monitor & course GPS improving my game? I think so.

quote:

Originally posted by ChicagoSigMan:
This new entry from Garmin looks super-interesting:

Garmin Approach R10

Yep, I noticed it, and so has a somewhat impulsive golfer at our office. He wants to buy it today.

If the R10 does what it purports, then the $2k Mevo+ and the $2k Skytrack have uber serious competition. I feel there needs to be some independent testing against a Trackman and/or GCQuad. Web rumors hint that the R10's radar isn't sophisticated enough to actually track the ball rotation -- rather, the metrics are based on algorithms. Time and testing will tell.

But if the $600 R10 truly measures all those metrics accurately, I'm all over it like white on rice.

quote:

Originally posted by fritz:

quote:

Originally posted by ChicagoSigMan:
This new entry from Garmin looks super-interesting:

Garmin Approach R10

Yep, I noticed it, and so has a somewhat impulsive golfer at our office. He wants to buy it today.

If the R10 does what it purports, then the $2k Mevo+ and the $2k Skytrack have uber serious competition. I feel there needs to be some independent testing against a Trackman and/or GCQuad. Web rumors hint that the R10's radar isn't sophisticated enough to actually track the ball rotation -- rather, the metrics are based on algorithms. Time and testing will tell.

But if the $600 R10 truly measures all those metrics accurately, I'm all over it like white on rice.

Me too.
I am interested primarily on accuracy and more metrics.
The simulation stuff is no real concern of mine as I don't have anywhere to set it up.

It hit the practice range after work, at the muni course not far from my office. Like many public ranges, they use shit range balls that are hard as a rock -- from Wilson, with 103 compression. I just don't get the distance I get from a Pro V1. Here's the first time I've achieved a ball speed of 150mph with my old Taylor driver with shit balls, per the G80. Smash factor isn't all that great for a impact "on the screws".



It was a great evening for hitting short and medium irons. I got hungry and thirsty, and it was hot. A cold Pepsi and a Snickers bar got me back in the groove, but not before struggling with a number of hits. And I mean really struggling with a 3 wood.

Word has it that the Garmin R10 is being shipped to people in the UK. I have not yet seen web reviews by whom I consider first tier YouTube golfers.

Bushnell's Launch Pro is shown to have 3 cameras. The Foresight GC2 has 2 cameras in the base unit. The GCQuad has 4 cameras. With this in mind, the Launch Pro probably will be expensive. It should be at least as capable as the GC2. The Launch pro might cost in the $3k to $5k ballpark, maybe more. Maybe with annual subscription costs.

Full Swing announced a new launch monitor, based on Doppler radar. Tiger Woods is linked to it. Priced at $4k.

I still haven't tested the 3 varieties of Callaway's Apex irons. And now TaylorMade just announced a new version of the P790 -- with rave reviews from reliable YouTube testers. I need to win the Lotto.

Two R10 comparisons just hit YouTube -- against a Trackman outdoors, and a GC2 indoors. The guys hitting weren't the most consistent, which in some ways is an interesting test of the numbers. From what I see, the R10 can struggle to match the spin numbers of the expensive units. Both in backspin and side spin axis. Sometimes the metrics are really close, other times not so much.

I suspect the R10's methods to convert observed data into extrapolated data needs some fine tuning. I'd like to see a comparison by a YouTuber who hits the ball more consistently -- maybe Rick Shiels or Michael Newton.

Still, for some people, it could be a valuable tool as is.

quote:

Originally posted by fritz:
It hit the practice range after work, at the muni course not far from my office. Like many public ranges, they use shit range balls that are hard as a rock -- from Wilson, with 103 compression. I just don't get the distance I get from a Pro V1. Here's the first time I've achieved a ball speed of 150mph with my old Taylor driver with shit balls, per the G80. Smash factor isn't all that great for a impact "on the screws".



It was a great evening for hitting short and medium irons. I got hungry and thirsty, and it was hot. A cold Pepsi and a Snickers bar got me back in the groove, but not before struggling with a number of hits. And I mean really struggling with a 3 wood.

Word has it that the Garmin R10 is being shipped to people in the UK. I have not yet seen web reviews by whom I consider first tier YouTube golfers.

Bushnell's Launch Pro is shown to have 3 cameras. The Foresight GC2 has 2 cameras in the base unit. The GCQuad has 4 cameras. With this in mind, the Launch Pro probably will be expensive. It should be at least as capable as the GC2. The Launch pro might cost in the $3k to $5k ballpark, maybe more. Maybe with annual subscription costs.

Full Swing announced a new launch monitor, based on Doppler radar. Tiger Woods is linked to it. Priced at $4k.

I still haven't tested the 3 varieties of Callaway's Apex irons. And now TaylorMade just announced a new version of the P790 -- with rave reviews from reliable YouTube testers. I need to win the Lotto.

Are you happy with G80? I still haven’t pulled the trigger on a launch monitor yet. I have the original set of P790’s, I’ve had them about 3 years now, been really good irons but I’m getting the itch for some new irons. I got the Sim2 driver this season and it has been awesome got more distance than my M3 and about a 1000 RPM’s less spin to 2500.

quote:

Originally posted by wingfoot:
Are you happy with G80?

Yeah, it's been a good $400 investment.

The good:
- It measures ball speed pretty much on the nose. Club speed is very close, at most 1 or 2 mph slow.
- This means that smash factor is very good. Way too often, the truth hurts.
- The GPS information is spot on. I still don't have all the features down. But it accurately tells me from a given lie how far away the edges of greens, fairways, and hazards are.
- The battery charge lasts a long time. More than enough time to play 18 holes using GPS. More than enough time to for multiple 1-hour practice sessions at the range using the launch monitor function.
- It's small, and it can easily be kept in the golf bag at all times.
- The smash factor is incredibly useful in finding the sweep spot of clubs. It's amazing how quickly ball speed -- and thus distance -- falls off on my clubs as strikes vary from the sweet spot.

The not so good:
- The launch monitor doesn't measure spin, spin axis, or launch angle. Which means distance figures can be a bit off at times.
- The distance calculations are based on sea level air pressure. This is fine if you play at low elevation. At my typical playing elevations of 5300-5500 feet ASL, the flight distances are understated by 6%.
- This means I have a data sheet that I use for crappy range balls at the driving range. Honestly, I don't look at distance all that much at the driving range. I'm more interested in maintaining desired & consistent club head speeds, then watching the smash factors to see how efficiently I'm hitting.

Again, I'm pleased with the G80. If I lost it tomorrow, I'd buy another as soon as I could find it on sale again for $400.

****
Going forward, I'm looking for a unit that accurately measures spin axis, spin rate, and distance at my altitude. Primarily outdoor use. It will be challenging to find this for a reasonable price. Trackman and X3 do this, as they follow the ball to the ground.

Mevo Plus tracks the ball's flight to either 50 or 100 yards, I don't recall which. The base Mevo has even less ball tracking distance. SkyTrack doesn't work well outdoors in the sun. I don't believe any of these 3 units adjust for altitude.

GCQuad supposedly works as well as Trackman and X3 outdoors, with the exception of wind effects on the ball. GCQuad adjusts for altitude.

Time will tell on this year's 3 new launch monitor units. I suspect Mevo Plus and SkyTrack are working on their next models, too.

Reviving an older thread -- some decent info here, spring has sprung, golf balls are in the air. Plus new info.

A buddy bought the new Garmin R10 launch monitor a few months ago and set up a reasonably priced garage play/practice system. He has nets strung in front/top/sides of the garage door, runs software from his Iphone, uses a 50" TV to view results. Uses the course software with the R10, plus E6 Connect. I've now played 7 round of "garage golf" indoors. We also took his R10 outdoors to a driving range and compared the metrics to my Garmin G80. My thoughts:

The R10 unit measures club head and ball speed quite accurately. I expected this, as my G80 does a good job.

R10 seems to measure launch angle pretty well, both indoors and out.

R10 seems to measure ball flight direction and ball apex height quite well outdoors. Indoors seems OK, but not quite as well.

R10 distance is more accurate than my G80 outdoors -- my G80 underestimates almost everything at Colorado altitude. Because R10 uses algorithms for spin, sometimes I see some head scratcher distances on the E6 Connect golf courses in the garage. But most of the time the flight distances seem to be in the ballpark.

R10 uses algorithms for spin numbers, and this is its weakness. It does better outdoors than indoors. Backspin seems OK for the longer clubs, but it underestimates my higher spin short irons and wedges. I suspect side spin figures are calculations based on the direction the ball moves off line from the club face. I take indoor side spin numbers with a large grain of salt. Outdoors, the sidespin numbers are more in the ballpark. I often hit with a slight left pull and a little fade spin -- R10 can get confused here, sometimes not knowing what occurred.

The R10 unit connects to E6 pretty well. Playing the courses can be quite enjoyable -- a boatload better than moping around at home, when snow has closed all nearby golf courses. R10 captures most hits. It can miss short chips -- especially for a right handers, when they pull the chip to the left. I suspect this means the person's body blocked the G10's ability to "see" the ball.

The Garmin R10 doesn't supply perfect metrics for club fitting, but for budget garage golf it's amazing at $600.