Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'simulator'.
Found 4 results
I went to a local golf store recently and their trackman was giving some drives around 305-310 total distance but my swing speed is only 112 AT THE MOST, average about 103. I never hit it this far in real golf, could the store be tampering with the trackman to get us golfers suckered into buying the $500-$600 driver? Anyone else here experience something similar at a golf store simulator?
Hello, I am thinking about buying a golf simulator. I've spent a lot of time researching this decision. My finalists are ProTee, SkyTrak, GC2, or GC2 with HMT. If money wasn't a factor, I think the GCQuad would easily be my top choice. SkyTrak is the cheapest, but I don't think I can tolerate the delay between hitting the ball and seeing the results. I also intensely dislike their business model with their monthly fees. I'm currently leaning towards ProTee. Despite all the time I've spent on research, I haven't been able to find any data comparing ProTee to other launch monitors. ProTee vs GCQuad would be ideal, as GCQuad seems to me to be the gold standard. Ideally, the tester would have ProTee and GCQuad set up at the same time measuring the same shots. It'd be informative to compare spin rate, carry distance, apex, etc. It'd be nice to see some wedges, some mid-irons, and some drivers. I wouldn't expect ProTee to match GCQuad, given that ProTee is less expensive. But without having any idea of what the ProTee margin of error is, I'm going to have a problem pulling the trigger. Have you seen any comparisons like this on the internet? If so, please reply with the links. I wonder why ProTee doesn't include any specific claims about accuracy on their website. Do you think I should be concerned about this? It seems to me that lots of potential customers would have this same question. Thanks for your replies.
I’ve got a local indoor golf place with several bays that use Foresight GC2s.The owner (an instructor) told me he sets the altitude/elevation at 1200’ above sea level because it provides results comparable to what we’d normally have mid-summer in Chicago (which sits at about 600’ above sea level).I didn’t think much of it and proceeded to hit there a couple of times and the distances indicated were pretty spot on with my typical yardages. I was feeling good about the accuracy of the GC2 until my last session where I was getting about 10% less distance on every club. I asked the (different) guy who set me up if there was something wrong with that unit, and he said no. The owner overheard us and asked the guy if he changed the elevation setting. Upon checking, the elevation was at the default sea level setting. After it was changed to 1200’, I was back to normal distances. Does it seem right that a launch monitor would need to be set at 1200’ to return the same results that are had in the real world at 600’? Also, it’s been a long time since I’ve played in Florida, but is it accurate to estimate a 10% difference in distance from sea level to 600’ above?I found this on the Titleist website, and it seems to indicate the difference shouldn’t be that much:You can calculate the distance gain you will experience (compared to sea level) by multiplying the elevation (in feet) by .00116. For example, if you're playing in Reno, at 1 mile elevation (5,280 ft.) the increase is about 6% (5,280 x .00116 = 6.1248). If you normally drive the ball 250 yards at sea level, you will likely drive it 265 yards in Reno.Any knowledgeable insight from anyone?
Just finished the ordering process for the skytrak, I'm super excited. I've been using an optishot but have been severely disappointed with its ability to even correctly read or predict club path. Now the waiting commences as I sit and stare out the window waiting for the UPS man to get here....