You might me reading my mind. I too have been wondering why the difference. One thing to note is make sure you align ur quad target alignment to trackman alignment. When I did that the variance wasn't as great as you mentioned (+-4 degrees of path ) between the two. When I compared the two all data was fairly close although quad was more inside albeit small. I am noticing that, too your point that more often than not quad has me more inside I don't think you want to be more than 3 degrees inside on quad. It will develop bad habits. Focus more on face to path and face and compare to ball flight. If your face is square or zero at impact , and the ball goes straight then your path has to be fairly square. I think quad +2 path is very good. For example , when I'm plus 2 path and face 0ish the ball flys straight often.
Informative video that even my swing coach hasn't been able to mention to me. I own the QuadMax and he uses the Trackman at my Golf club. I'm consistent 2-4 degrees in to out and his numbers never matched mine... Well, now I can at least teach him something.. LOL Keep up the good work🤘
Great video and information. I use my bushnell launch pro while I’m practicing on the Trackman at my local course. I have seen differences for sure, but so much of the data is similar. Well Done!
This is good point. Also on clubhead speed and AoA which can confuse if you’re not aware. 1.45 is Gc3’s 1.50 smash on TM. Nick Taylor did a good video of side by side testing a few yrs back .
I guess the main point is you should know your numbers on your launch monitor and don’t worry if something else you use occasionally is different. Thanks for sharing the other info.
HI great info! I really like your channel. Wondering if you could point me in the right direction. I just moved from a Skytrak to Mevo+ for the pro package and face impact. I really like the data margins capability but have no idea what to put for the margins. I'd like to know what scratch golfers have for the various data points so I have something to work toward. Any idea where I can get this info so I can set aggressive data margins? Thx!
I’ve been skeptical of trackman since it first launched for outdoor use. It consistently gave me absurd (1.52+) smash factor readings on the range and that hasn’t really changed through the years.
Foresight uses a reflective alignment stick. You place the stick on the ground in the hitting zone pointed at your target and it reads the angle instantly. Trackman I'm not positive on but I believe you adjust it using the internal camera until it's pointed at your target.
According to a test performed with a swing robot, the GCQ is more consistent. I heard all of the main manufacturers and governing bodies use quad, so it was an excellent choice
I've spent the last 8 months trying to get my 5-7 degree in-to-out path more neutral on my Quad. I had no idea this was a thing.
Brilliant I have a GC3 and am about 5-7 in to out but when I have lessons on trackman wondered why I get 2-3 - now I understand thanks 🙏
Glad it helped!!
You might me reading my mind. I too have been wondering why the difference. One thing to note is make sure you align ur quad target alignment to trackman alignment. When I did that the variance wasn't as great as you mentioned (+-4 degrees of path ) between the two. When I compared the two all data was fairly close although quad was more inside albeit small. I am noticing that, too your point that more often than not quad has me more inside I don't think you want to be more than 3 degrees inside on quad. It will develop bad habits. Focus more on face to path and face and compare to ball flight. If your face is square or zero at impact , and the ball goes straight then your path has to be fairly square. I think quad +2 path is very good. For example , when I'm plus 2 path and face 0ish the ball flys straight often.
Informative video that even my swing coach hasn't been able to mention to me. I own the QuadMax and he uses the Trackman at my Golf club. I'm consistent 2-4 degrees in to out and his numbers never matched mine... Well, now I can at least teach him something.. LOL Keep up the good work🤘
Ha! I guess this happens to more people than I thought. Glad it helped!
Great video and information. I use my bushnell launch pro while I’m practicing on the Trackman at my local course. I have seen differences for sure, but so much of the data is similar. Well Done!
It could drive you crazy if you thought it was just you!
This is good point. Also on clubhead speed and AoA which can confuse if you’re not aware. 1.45 is Gc3’s 1.50 smash on TM. Nick Taylor did a good video of side by side testing a few yrs back .
I guess the main point is you should know your numbers on your launch monitor and don’t worry if something else you use occasionally is different. Thanks for sharing the other info.
In depth information. Thanks Bobby
Glad it’s helpful
HI great info! I really like your channel. Wondering if you could point me in the right direction. I just moved from a Skytrak to Mevo+ for the pro package and face impact. I really like the data margins capability but have no idea what to put for the margins. I'd like to know what scratch golfers have for the various data points so I have something to work toward. Any idea where I can get this info so I can set aggressive data margins? Thx!
I’ve been skeptical of trackman since it first launched for outdoor use. It consistently gave me absurd (1.52+) smash factor readings on the range and that hasn’t really changed through the years.
The number of variables is insane and somehow we all seem to obsess over the minutiae.
Similar between Flightscope and Trackman where FS uses first contact while Trackman uses full deformation..
Definitions are key!
How do these monitors "know the target line" and how does the user know they are aligned correctly?
Foresight uses a reflective alignment stick. You place the stick on the ground in the hitting zone pointed at your target and it reads the angle instantly. Trackman I'm not positive on but I believe you adjust it using the internal camera until it's pointed at your target.
I just picked up a GC quad. Which do you feel is more accurate for clubhead data?
According to a test performed with a swing robot, the GCQ is more consistent. I heard all of the main manufacturers and governing bodies use quad, so it was an excellent choice
I'm biased to the GCQuad but I feel the cameras tracking the plane of the club face (using reflective markers) just has to be better than radar.