Flightscope VS Bushnell / GC3 --- One Unit SUCKS!
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 18 сен 2024
- This comparison is not sponsored in any way. I haven't been paid or given products for this test. I was shocked at the differences in the result. Like and comment if you enjoy these comparison style videos!
FS Mevo plus is more accurate indoors with ball markers or the Titleist balls. It’s cheaper and easier to carry around to the range. GC3 is out of reach for most with its cost. Your test was ridiculously biased.
You got your systems juiced up... Ain't no way that swing with a nine iron is going 200 yards.... You got a good swing but that's ridiculous
Need a look at trajectory. (apex) If he is hitting it high, at 8000 rpm, pretty tough to get it 200 yds. 100+ mph club speed, deloft the club a bit, then maybe. Think about when you caught one perfectly and hit it way over the green. He just does it all the time. He does have a lot of club speed, and both units agreed on that. It seems the bigger difference between the two units was rollout. That can have some algorithmic inequities, how dry is the fairway, what is the calculated descent angle. Of course descent angle would be a feature of ball speed, apex and spin rate. Calculable. Surface conditions of the fairway or rough would be a fixed data set input within the soft ware. Kinda fun stuff. Merry Christmas.
9 iron above 100mph is kinda crazy. Club speed is measured at different points on different machines. I normally get lower on the mevo+ compared to a gc3 I have access too. Usually a longer carry on the GC. However, the mevo+ I trust more when I’m outdoors on the range. It tracks the complete ball flight. GC always has a calculation to preform but i do trust it more indoors.
Flightscopes algorithm for distance on driver is less juiced than Foresight. I have a launch pro and Flightscope X3. If you GS Pro, it will take Flightscopes raw distance and use a more aggressive distance algorithm. On really low spinning shots, I think the foresight way overestimates distance vs Flightscope
The spin is more accurate with Mevo and the RCT ball
Bushnell definately looks like its good for the ego cause it read longer shots but even not knowing your distances i doubt you were carrying Driver over 300 from your swings but who knows.
The radar unit is affected by electronic interference. Specifically a photo unit sitting right next to the ball.
Tough to trust a review from a dude that's clearly faking his numbers.
Using the Titleist driver performance charts as a reference shows that the Bushnell is over inflating your carry and distance given your ball speed, launch and spin on each shot. The Mevo plus is deflating marginally but is closer to the actual distances you should be seeing given the data.
Not sure the chart you're referring to but Titleist HQ is in Carlsbad, so it's at sea level and I'm guessing you're basing your comment off 4000' of elevation difference. I've hit 150 balls a day for the last 40 days in socal at below sea level and consistently see 340-360 total. When I hit in Utah that jumps to 400+.
Titleist chart? Hahahaha… bushnell isn’t inflating his distance with his numbers
All this talk of “jacked” numbers and altitude misses the point. Why would you WANT your 9-iron to be your 195 yard club? So you can have 3-4 clubs with shorter yardages and 7-8 clubs with longer? That’s non-sense to give yourself only 2 or 3 club options from 150 and closer. Good luck scoring consistently.
This was my first thought before reading the "jacked numbers" comments. My other thought was about how he specifically points out that he's not using the stickers or the titleist rct balls. The spin numbers are much better on flightscope with those balls.
Martin Sandra Gonzalez Frank Lee Kevin
Why are you using such jacked irons. You seem like you don’t need the help. It’s like a 35 degree 9 iron
Stock lofts buddy.
Are you sure the ground conditions settings are similar? Seems flightscope has less run off
Ground firmness was set to medium on both monitors.
Regardless, Foresight has firmer ground conditions compared to most other software even if the relative setting are the same. @@mikelowegolf
I haven't read that anywhere? I'm curious, can you cite a source on that opinion? Never the less even if it is and I changed flightscope to 'hard' firmness, I'd get comments saying conditions were not the same. I'm not a software engineer, just a long driver.
You can't simulate run out, pointless talking about total distance on a launch monitor. You get courses that are soft and courses that are firm so runout will be completely different. One company's medium ground in their software will probably be very different to another companies. Only carry can be looked at with any degree of certainty on a launch monitor. Here in the UK, an inland course you get alot less runout than you do on links courses and very different amounts at different times of the year aswell.
Also not using the ball flightscope ask consumers to use on an indoor setting with the speed your hitting the ball at & the short flight time your asking that small radar unit to do alot. The mevo+ is a great unit and pretty accurate (it's better outdoors or with more flight time) value for money it's pretty hard to beat, trackman struggles with spin indoors unless you use the rct ball. I've used it plenty.
You do not specify which ball you are using. Mevo+ is optimized for the Titleist RCT ball. If you are using a regular ball then reads are going to be off on the Mevo+.
I do specify the ball I'm using in the video. It is not the RCT ball; however, in several other tests the RCT ball makes no notable change to the data parameters as a typical high end ball. This is a good video idea to do though!
how is hitting a 9 iron 200 yards even useful...I think you need to check your lofts. Also you need to use RCT balls indoors to get proper spin on the Mevo
Idk, ask Bryson. He's similar and one of the best golfers on the planet. Hitting a 9 iron 200 is plenty useful. Having the descent angle and stopping ability+ backspin into par 5s is a gamechanger. I have stock lofts on the Callaway Rogue ST Pro irons.
Is the driver shaft 48in with Krank LD 4*?
Correct!
2023 stats for Rory is 165 for his 9 iron.......
There's a reason he's a professional golfer and I'm not. I'm significantly faster and longer than Rory but his accuracy and consistency is off the charts. You can be a long driver without being a +9 handicap 👍
Touche' just watched one of your past videos and you're a real deal long hitter....Rock on!@@mikelowegolf
@@simgolf503 thanks man! I definitely understand the confusion though because there's a lot of tik tok/youtubers that say a lot of false data. I'm as transparent as it gets, I have a Trackman vs Flightscope coming out Saturday 👍
@@mikelowegolf Huh? Your 113mph driver swing speed is only the PGA average. Rory is swinging 122 mph with 183 mph ball speed (vs yours at 162 mph)...and yet Rory 'only' averages 320 yds.
Something smells.
How you smashing a 9 200 and and your driver just around 300 something isn’t right here. But a 200 yard 9 is nuts. Almost makes me not trust either.
This is in Utah so elevation plays a big role. 9 iron at home is 175/180 club. Driver at home is a 340 club. Here it's more like 370-380, so the numbers are a way larger spread than you said if you watch the whole video.
Great video