Tweet
I’ve been using the Par2Pro HQ screen for about 2 years now, and am a huge fan of it.
It displays a great quality image, and seems to be lasting very well for me. It did take a bit of tweaking to get the bounce back right, and I’ve never really considered it to be a noisy screen. Having said that, I’ve only experience of an archery weave screen/net prior to the HQ screen. I’ve always been of the opinion that the majority of the noise of indoor golf comes from the club / ball contact rather than the ball hitting the screen.
Over the last 2 years I’ve acquired some scuff marks that you can see when the projector is off - however they’re barely visible when there is a golf course on the screen!
I bought the finished HQ screen, which I specced with velcro down both edges and across the top.
The screen is made up of a very fine weave, and has a mat finish to it. The material is quite thin, and you can see my backing net through it if they are touching each other.
When I initially hung the HQ screen, I was having a bit of trouble with bounce back. The ball would land almost back at my feet, and then would bounce past me and hit the garage door behind me.
I cured this by fitting a memory foam mattress topper behind the large area. It made a huge difference, and the ball would land about a foot from the screen and have much less momentum.
When I saw the BETA testing for the SQ HQ (Super Quiet High Quality) screen and read that one of the new features was less bounce back, I thought I’d give it a try.
Here are 2 links to videos of my HQ screen bounce back. Both of these videos are with a 4 iron.
The first one is before I removed the memory foam topper. The ball falls down and stops after a couple of small bounces. It finished up about half way between me and the screen.
The second one is once I removed the memory foam topper. I had to move the camera a bit wider to give an indication on how bad this was! It lands about where the first ball stops - but it is coming at me with a considerable velocity, and leaps up on my my mat. If I didn’t stop it with my foot, it would carry on and hit the garage door behind me!
After taking a few photos for comparison I took the HQ screen down carefully. It took a considerable amount of time to remove all the bungees and the tonne of velcro I have fitted!
When taking the SQ HQ screen out of its packaging, it was immediately apparent that it was considerably heavier than the original. The material of the SQ HQ is significantly thicker than the HQ. It reminded me on a hoody I wear when snowboarding that has a slight feel of neoprene! There is an almost spongy feel to it. Visually, it has a slight shine to it. Not glossy, but you can see the threads glisten under certain lights.
The screen arrived folded up in a box, inside a plastic bag. This screen is much more creased than my HQ ever was. Perhaps down to the extra weight / thicker material?
With it being Christmas / New Year, this screen also spent about 4 weeks in this box being shipped from the US to the UK - including a full 10 days in customs!
My SQ HQ screen cost $462.50 which included $98 to ship it to the UK. This was for the finished screen to exactly the same specification at my original. This was less than half the price of my original HQ screen. I also got charged a few pence over £40 by customs, so the total cost to me was a little under £400.
If I remember correctly, my HQ screen was about $800 plus shipping on top of that.
It took a while, but eventually the SQ HQ screen was in place. I decided to leave the memory foam topper off and see how it performed. Although Par2Pro claim that you don’t need a net behind this, I thought I’d leave mine in place. I’ve already got it, and it won’t do any harm - so why remove it?! Surely it’ll help with longevity? One thing I did notice when fitting the SQ HQ was that it had loads more eyelets than my HQ did, so it was a good job I had plenty of spare bungees!
When hitting my first ball, there were 2 very noticeable things. One… the bounce back was similar to having my memory foam topper fitted. Two… this screen is definitely Super Quiet! I had always assumed that the THUD noise was the club striking the ball, however the noise is significantly quieter than when using the HQ screen.
I’d go as far as saying the picture quality on my original HQ screen was slightly sharper. The comparison picture below shows the same close up pic of both (almost the same!) and I think everything looks a bit clearer on the original. That’s standing with your nose pressed against the screen. When standing 9ft back on my mat, I can’t see the difference - they both hold a great image given the projector I’m using (Benq TH682ST at 1600x1200). Perhaps if I was using a 4K projector there would be a more noticeable difference between the two? In all honesty, the SQ HQ actually looks better, as you can’t see the jagged edges of the pixels quite so obviously.
So far I’ve only hit 20 or so shots at this new SQ HQ screen. Obviously this isn’t going to give you any info on how well it lasts (apparently much more resilient than the HQ screen) but I suspect given its significantly thicker material that it’ll hold up a lot better than the HQ screen. I know a lot of guys here complain about the price v’s lifespan of the HQ screen as more frequent users can potentially wear a hole in the HQ within a year. I’m lucky if I hit 200 balls at mine a week - which i suspect is why mine is still in excellent condition... combined with the fact I have a good backing net and probably the mattress topper helps too!
My verdict so far is that this was a great purchase - especially given the introductory ‘beta tester’ price and forum member discount.
I’ve ordered a handheld steamer to try and get rid of the creases. Hopefully that’ll make it sit a bit better than in my photo too.
I’ll be playing my regular 2 rounds on Tuesday night - where I’ll be testing it out with a full array of clubs rather than just a 4 iron! I may need to adjust the tension of my ball bungees depending on how it copes with a driver and even some wedges.
I’ll report back once I’ve given it a proper test. I wanted to get my initial impressions posted for anyone looking at purchasing one of these.
It displays a great quality image, and seems to be lasting very well for me. It did take a bit of tweaking to get the bounce back right, and I’ve never really considered it to be a noisy screen. Having said that, I’ve only experience of an archery weave screen/net prior to the HQ screen. I’ve always been of the opinion that the majority of the noise of indoor golf comes from the club / ball contact rather than the ball hitting the screen.
Over the last 2 years I’ve acquired some scuff marks that you can see when the projector is off - however they’re barely visible when there is a golf course on the screen!
I bought the finished HQ screen, which I specced with velcro down both edges and across the top.
The screen is made up of a very fine weave, and has a mat finish to it. The material is quite thin, and you can see my backing net through it if they are touching each other.
When I initially hung the HQ screen, I was having a bit of trouble with bounce back. The ball would land almost back at my feet, and then would bounce past me and hit the garage door behind me.
I cured this by fitting a memory foam mattress topper behind the large area. It made a huge difference, and the ball would land about a foot from the screen and have much less momentum.
When I saw the BETA testing for the SQ HQ (Super Quiet High Quality) screen and read that one of the new features was less bounce back, I thought I’d give it a try.
Here are 2 links to videos of my HQ screen bounce back. Both of these videos are with a 4 iron.
The first one is before I removed the memory foam topper. The ball falls down and stops after a couple of small bounces. It finished up about half way between me and the screen.
The second one is once I removed the memory foam topper. I had to move the camera a bit wider to give an indication on how bad this was! It lands about where the first ball stops - but it is coming at me with a considerable velocity, and leaps up on my my mat. If I didn’t stop it with my foot, it would carry on and hit the garage door behind me!
After taking a few photos for comparison I took the HQ screen down carefully. It took a considerable amount of time to remove all the bungees and the tonne of velcro I have fitted!
When taking the SQ HQ screen out of its packaging, it was immediately apparent that it was considerably heavier than the original. The material of the SQ HQ is significantly thicker than the HQ. It reminded me on a hoody I wear when snowboarding that has a slight feel of neoprene! There is an almost spongy feel to it. Visually, it has a slight shine to it. Not glossy, but you can see the threads glisten under certain lights.
The screen arrived folded up in a box, inside a plastic bag. This screen is much more creased than my HQ ever was. Perhaps down to the extra weight / thicker material?
With it being Christmas / New Year, this screen also spent about 4 weeks in this box being shipped from the US to the UK - including a full 10 days in customs!
My SQ HQ screen cost $462.50 which included $98 to ship it to the UK. This was for the finished screen to exactly the same specification at my original. This was less than half the price of my original HQ screen. I also got charged a few pence over £40 by customs, so the total cost to me was a little under £400.
If I remember correctly, my HQ screen was about $800 plus shipping on top of that.
It took a while, but eventually the SQ HQ screen was in place. I decided to leave the memory foam topper off and see how it performed. Although Par2Pro claim that you don’t need a net behind this, I thought I’d leave mine in place. I’ve already got it, and it won’t do any harm - so why remove it?! Surely it’ll help with longevity? One thing I did notice when fitting the SQ HQ was that it had loads more eyelets than my HQ did, so it was a good job I had plenty of spare bungees!
When hitting my first ball, there were 2 very noticeable things. One… the bounce back was similar to having my memory foam topper fitted. Two… this screen is definitely Super Quiet! I had always assumed that the THUD noise was the club striking the ball, however the noise is significantly quieter than when using the HQ screen.
I’d go as far as saying the picture quality on my original HQ screen was slightly sharper. The comparison picture below shows the same close up pic of both (almost the same!) and I think everything looks a bit clearer on the original. That’s standing with your nose pressed against the screen. When standing 9ft back on my mat, I can’t see the difference - they both hold a great image given the projector I’m using (Benq TH682ST at 1600x1200). Perhaps if I was using a 4K projector there would be a more noticeable difference between the two? In all honesty, the SQ HQ actually looks better, as you can’t see the jagged edges of the pixels quite so obviously.
So far I’ve only hit 20 or so shots at this new SQ HQ screen. Obviously this isn’t going to give you any info on how well it lasts (apparently much more resilient than the HQ screen) but I suspect given its significantly thicker material that it’ll hold up a lot better than the HQ screen. I know a lot of guys here complain about the price v’s lifespan of the HQ screen as more frequent users can potentially wear a hole in the HQ within a year. I’m lucky if I hit 200 balls at mine a week - which i suspect is why mine is still in excellent condition... combined with the fact I have a good backing net and probably the mattress topper helps too!
My verdict so far is that this was a great purchase - especially given the introductory ‘beta tester’ price and forum member discount.
I’ve ordered a handheld steamer to try and get rid of the creases. Hopefully that’ll make it sit a bit better than in my photo too.
I’ll be playing my regular 2 rounds on Tuesday night - where I’ll be testing it out with a full array of clubs rather than just a 4 iron! I may need to adjust the tension of my ball bungees depending on how it copes with a driver and even some wedges.
I’ll report back once I’ve given it a proper test. I wanted to get my initial impressions posted for anyone looking at purchasing one of these.
Comment