FlightScope Mevo - Portable Launch Monitor for the Everyday Golfer

[billchao]

9 minutes ago, Lihu said:

Also in the default mode, only 3 can be stored.

If you’re a coach, can I request you as the instructor or does it go to some random pool?

I ask because I jjust don’t want Kostis

 

If you want @iacas to look at your swing, you can just post a video here: 

[bmartin461]

Not sure if this is helpful or not, but Golf WRX has started a new "Trackman Tuesday" series.

First one: Trackman Tuesday (Episode 1): Drive it Longer

 

[Lihu]

8 minutes ago, bmartin461 said:

Not sure if this is helpful or not, but Golf WRX has started a new "Trackman Tuesday" series.

Thanks for posting this!

[Lihu]

On 1/5/2018 at 1:20 PM, Lihu said:

Although the dots are not absolutely necessary in outdoor conditions, I find them to be a bit more accurate. I ran out of them and am currently using 1/4" copper tape (aluminum tape will likely work as well), and found a source for 1/4" dots for about $34/2000 dots.

http://amzn.to/2qvnTG6

Amazon offers other sizes as well:

http://amzn.to/2CW5sNn

Of course Flightscope doesn't overcharge that much anyway. . . https://flightscope.com/product/metalic-stickers/

My package arrived today. Going to compare them to the one Mevo dot I have left.

[Lihu]

Just had a long discussion with Flightscope.

They confirmed what I thought. First of all club head speed is pretty accurate if you have the unit around 5' to 7' away with proper alignment. The issue with ball speed is that if your swing is such that it "covers" the ball it will not pick up ball speed properly.

They also confirmed that low smash factor numbers are very likely due to the use of the 1pc Srixon range balls. Makes sense anyway.

The unit to ball to target alignment turns out to be non-optimal. What they recommended is placing the unit outside that target line. Place the Mevo about 6 inches away from you relative to the ball/target line. They have not finalized this placement yet, and are still experimenting with it before they publish it publicly. So, if you do this know that it is possibly not going to be the "final setup configuration" they recommend.

The error in doing this is quite small if you place the unit 7' away from the ball. cos(6/(7*12))= 0.997 or about 0.3% reduction in readings.

I'm going to test this out this afternoon. 1' is even possible with only 0.9898 reduction in readings. Better than losing a lot more from not getting the velocity of the ball until it's several yards away. That explains why my carry yardages are low compared to observation.

Note that Mevo measures velocity for about 40 yards. Which is more than sufficient for accurate measurements. Outdoors is going to be a lot more accurate.

They also recommended using 2 dots side by side and the target position for the dots is more optimal. I told them I put a 1/2" by 1/4" piece of copper tape on the back, and they thought that was a good idea. That gave me much more consistent spin readings.

So, I'm returning the Amazon dots, and getting the 3/8" size in place of the 1/4" ones I ordered. I only used a couple and the company seemed okay with returning them. Great service. I pay for shipping back to them though.

[bmartin461]

On 1/10/2018 at 10:45 AM, bmartin461 said:

Not sure if this is helpful or not, but Golf WRX has started a new "Trackman Tuesday" series.

First one: Trackman Tuesday (Episode 1): Drive it Longer

 

Second one: Trackman Tuesday (Episode 2): Driver Loft

Third one: Trackman Tuesday (Episode 3): Better Ball Striking

 

[iacas]

21 minutes ago, bmartin461 said:

Second one: Trackman Tuesday (Episode 2): Driver Loft

Third one: Trackman Tuesday (Episode 3): Better Ball Striking

Perhaps a separate topic for these, as they're not really related to the Mevo.

[Lihu]

Talked with Kevin at Flightscope again. They’re going through all 588 swings of data for me. Told them it’s not a big deal since the Mevo works great for Swing changes, but they want to see how I’m using it I guess?

Speaks volumes for their wonderful technical support!

Edited January 27, 2018 by Lihu

[dennyjones]

@iacas do you have these in stock or are you placing an order soon?

[iacas]

5 minutes ago, dennyjones said:

@iacas do you have these in stock or are you placing an order soon?

B

[dennyjones]

I'm in...

[klineka]

One quick question, do you have to hit a ball for the mevo to register the clubhead speed, or can I use it as a swing speed radar for the superspeed golf system? 

 

Either way, Im pretty sure I'll be pulling the trigger on this soon as well.

Im also looking into a net/turf setup in my yard so I'll be set. 

Will help gauge how well im striking into the net, plus will be useful when I do go to the range, since its slightly uphill its hard to see the ball land on yardages much past 160yds.

[Lihu]

27 minutes ago, klineka said:

One quick question, do you have to hit a ball for the mevo to register the clubhead speed, or can I use it as a swing speed radar for the superspeed golf system? 

 

Either way, Im pretty sure I'll be pulling the trigger on this soon as well.

Im also looking into a net/turf setup in my yard so I'll be set. 

Will help gauge how well im striking into the net, plus will be useful when I do go to the range, since its slightly uphill its hard to see the ball land on yardages much past 160yds.

It’s not a swing speed radar, but you might or might not need one with a Mevo. I just happen to have both.

[Lihu]

On 1/27/2018 at 8:33 AM, Lihu said:

Talked with Kevin at Flightscope again. They’re going through all 588 swings of data for me. Told them it’s not a big deal since the Mevo works great for Swing changes, but they want to see how I’m using it I guess?

Speaks volumes for their wonderful technical support!

So, Flightscope went through all my data, and concluded that the low smash factor was due to the use of range balls. My friends unit was tested using premium balls. The shortness of the carry numbers versus observed was due to the SW algorithm not being able to compensate for really low compression range balls. Normal range balls vary from 100 to 117 while the Srixon 1 PC is 83. It's effectively a limited flight ball with a rated reduction of >6%, and based upon observations is more than likely 10% which consistent with what Srixon stated.

Nothing wrong with my Mevo and nothing wring with the range balls.

I've really enjoyed the time that Flightscope took to satisfy my needs.

Get one. You won't regret it.

Edited January 31, 2018 by Lihu

[billchao]

1 hour ago, Lihu said:

So, Flightscope went through all my data, and concluded that the low smash factor was due to the use of range balls. My friends unit was tested using premium balls. The shortness of the carry numbers versus observed was due to the SW algorithm not being able to compensate for really low compression range balls. Normal range balls vary from 100 to 117 while the Srixon 1 PC is 83. It's effectively a limited flight ball with a rated reduction of >6%, and based upon observations is more than likely 10% which consistent with what Srixon stated.

Nothing wrong with my Mevo and nothing wring with the range balls.

I've really enjoyed the time that Flightscope took to satisfy my needs.

Get one. You won't regret it.

Interesting. Pretty sure the two ranges by me both use the 1-piece range ball (I know for a fact that one does because the end of the range borders on the 2nd hole). That means my range numbers won't be accurate? That's a bit of a bummer.

I mean it works fine on my net where I do most of my practicing anyway, but I'd like to hit actual targets when I start mapping partial wedges and stuff.

[iacas]

6 minutes ago, billchao said:

Interesting. Pretty sure the two ranges by me both use the 1-piece range ball (I know for a fact that one does because the end of the range borders on the 2nd hole). That means my range numbers won't be accurate? That's a bit of a bummer.

I mean it works fine on my net where I do most of my practicing anyway, but I'd like to hit actual targets when I start mapping partial wedges and stuff.

@billchao, if you have limited flight range balls, they either have different dimples, lower ball speeds, or both. So no, you're going to get bad numbers from those. You need to find a range with at least "regular" range balls, or do the wedge mapping in a field or something. Or your net with YOUR golf balls might work (especially with the dots).

I mean, you can't expect the Mevo to know whether the ball you just hit is a golf ball, a 5%, a 12.2%, or whatever reduced distance ball, you know?

[billchao]

6 minutes ago, iacas said:

@billchao, if you have limited flight range balls, they either have different dimples, lower ball speeds, or both. So no, you're going to get bad numbers from those. You need to find a range with at least "regular" range balls, or do the wedge mapping in a field or something. Or your net with YOUR golf balls might work (especially with the dots).

I was kind of thinking out loud there and didn't finish the thought, apparently. Basically it's good to know I shouldn't bother with the Mevo at those ranges. I'll have to find a good range to Mevo on.*

I'm sure I'll end up doing some partial wedges on my net anyway; it's better than nothing at the very least.

*yes I'm using Mevo as a verb, like Google. I'm going to make it a thing 

11 minutes ago, iacas said:

I mean, you can't expect the Mevo to know whether the ball you just hit is a golf ball, a 5%, a 12.2%, or whatever reduced distance ball, you know?

Right and I didn't expect it to. It's good to know that the Mevo accurately reads both clubhead speed and ball speed separately. I've hit on some LMs that only measure your ball speed and calculate your clubhead speed based on a fixed smash factor number (or vice versa) and found them lacking.

[iacas]

6 minutes ago, billchao said:

I was kind of thinking out loud there and didn't finish the thought, apparently. Basically it's good to know I shouldn't bother with the Mevo at those ranges.

You can still use it for comparative data. If 1.36 is your best smash factor, that's still going to indicate a better strike than a 1.29. And so on.

But I wouldn't then upload that data. I'd just delete it after you were done.

6 minutes ago, billchao said:

*yes I'm using Mevo as a verb, like Google. I'm going to make it a thing 

It already is.

6 minutes ago, billchao said:

Right and I didn't expect it to. It's good to know that the Mevo accurately reads both clubhead speed and ball speed separately. I've hit on some LMs that only measure your ball speed and calculate your clubhead speed based on a fixed smash factor number (or vice versa) and found them lacking.

Yeah, those are pretty lame. The Mevo measures the fastest thing. So it tracks the clubhead coming in, and then when the speed of the fastest thing instantly jumps, that's the ball and thus impact.