MEVO vs GCQUAD

[Wormburner]

Here is a short demonstration on how well the Mevo keeps up with the GCQuad.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EO3JxHnfWFc

LINK IS NOW ACTIVE!

Thanks!

[GungHoGolf]

Cool. Got a summary while we wait for the video?

[Wormburner]

YES! I was very surprised to see that the tiny Flightscope Mevo was able to give very accurate data compared to the Quad. If the Mevo could read sidespin then this unit would be a beast for the amount that it cost. I have had the Mevo+ in the past and it read as good as the Mevo but seemed a little more sensitive to setup and only had a few more data points not justifying the extra cost IMO. Don't get me wrong Mevo+ is a great unit but goodness it is sensitive to surroundings and did not read putts very well. The Mevo in a nutshell does as advertised and worth the money if you have the need for a portable unit that reads limited data!

[GungHoGolf]

Ah, overlooked that this was an original Mevo comparison, was assuming/hoping for Mevo+. I have both, and agree that the original Mevo is pretty good. Were you inside or outside?

[Wormburner]

inside. I have actually had 2 Mevo + and sold both. They are great units too but sold to upgrade to the EYEXO and Quad. If I come across another unit I will do a comparison for sure. I do think it will read very accurately.

[Adrenaline]

inside. I have actually had 2 Mevo + and sold both. They are great units too but sold to upgrade to the EYEXO and Quad. If I come across another unit I will do a comparison for sure. I do think it will read very accurately.

Sorry I am new to this and in research mode for 2 weeks now. I like what I am reading so far about the EYE XO as I would like an overhead unit with club data. Noobie question I have is why have the EYE XO and the Quad both?

[Wormburner]

Good question! There is absolutely not a need to have both as they are both great units and each has their pros and cons. I am an instructor and both units have value in what I use them for so I do like having them both!

[Gresh12]

I also didn’t pick up until the very end that it was a Mevo not Mevo+ but kept wondering why sidespin never came up.

I really wish I could find a quad nearby as so much online content I watch is on a quad and I’ve never hit on one. It appears to measure swing speed differently from my research and my gut tells me it’s more generous with carry than TM4 (which I do have access to once a week) but it’s hard to get that information without starting arguments. I can get ball speeds in the low 160s as measured on Mevo+, TM4, SC200 and whatever camera system the driving range near me uses (SkyTrak I couldn’t get in 160s but I sold it before high ball speed patch) but the youtubers in the low 150 balls speeds on quad seem to out carry me even when I get good launch numbers (I do struggle at times hitting down on driver). I’m at sea level which can influence but some of the distances I see are from people also at sea level. I’m trying to figure out the difference (some of it definitely is me but FS optimizer seems to come up short on quad with same numbers when I’ve looked).

[Wormburner]

They are two different technologies for sure and have there own algorithms. I will state my opinion on the carry. I have had trackman,quad, uneekor, mevo, and mevo+. Quad is not generous on carry from my experience, it is very accurate as is Trackman. I am a +4 handicap and distances are spot on with Quad. All of the units listed above read very similar in all data points but what separates each unit is consistency of readings. I can hit 10 balls on the Quad or Trackman and neither misses a beat, distances will vary 2 or so yards on shots hit well so tolerances are tight in all areas. When you get to the other units the yardages may vary 8 to 5 yards on similar hits and tolerances are not as tight. The quad has the ability to change weather and altitude which has a huge impact on distances, no telling what settings are being set on units before videos you are watching are recorded . Also there are other variables that play into carry other than ball speed. Not an argument but just an opinion based on my experiences. I have also taken quad outside and tested with carry and it has been on point. Trackman is a solid unit as well and I do not say one is better than other but I do prefer GCQuad for various reasons. If interested in why you can message me.

[Gresh12]

@Wormburner

Thanks for your input. This is the kind of feedback I've been interested in by someone that has used all the devices and plays at a high level (as Quad is a gap for me) so you're not going to get arguing from me. I'm really just trying to understand where I can improve and what my potential is as my launch conditions are far from perfect (I was a 1 handicap so not your level but decent as a kid but I'm just getting back in to playing consistently so it's a work in progress) but even when I get "proper" launch and spin I'm still miles short of what I see mostly from quad users (as it seems quad is the more popular device these days which is a credit to its quality).

Some examples of where I struggle with what I would have thought were pretty credible sources based on seemingly unbiased work on the info they put out (I'll caveat I'm not trying to call anybody out it's just where my questions come from). I'd kill for Matt from TXG's swing but below is a shot from a random video (and I've done this a handful of times with similar results):

Ballspeed 170.4 mph
Launch angle 12.2*
Side angle -2.7*
Axis -1.9*
Spin 2263
Quad carry 304
FS optimizer carry 285
Elevation they are in Toronto which is elevation of roughly 250'

Another example from Rick Shiels:

Ballspeed 159 mph
Launch angle 13.5*
Side angle .9*
Axis -5.6*
Spin 2193
Quad Carry 278
FS optimizer carry 264
Elevation he is in Manchester which is elevation of roughly 110'

I'd be happy to hear that FS optimizer is light but it much more closely matches what I see on the course. My ball speeds are high 150s and low 160s and without downhill or down wind I'm not carrying it 280 (I'll have to check TM4 on Thursday but I don't think it would even put my optimal carry at 278 when it shows potential if launch/spin was optimized).

I'm a math guy so this has been driving me nuts.

[Aapo]

I completely agree with you all. I'm currently in the low 160's ball speed (best ever 172) and spin low 2000 and my carry distance on course is typically 270 yards which is very accurate compared to mevo+) Meanwhile TXG gets 285-290 yards carry out of the same ball speed. The GC quad carry algorithm with driver is inflated.

[Wormburner]

Gresh12 I am not sure how the FS optimizer works behind the scenes but I have used it on their website. The crazy thing is with all of the these units is that there is no no way definitively to say which is right or not. It is hard to test with driver since ball is lands so far from golfer on the course. I have tested many different irons on carry and I am getting accurate results so I have assumed the driver is as accurate with Quad. The numbers you are posting are definitely showing huge gaps which is interesting. When I get some time I will post a video on Course carry vs Quad Carry and we will see what I come up with. I will need some help so I have to recruit a helper but this will be fun to test!

[Wormburner]

Shankz if you want to come to North Alabama let me know! lol
I will hit in SIM tonight or tomorrow and enter in the info on the optimizer and see what I get. I will report soon!

[Wormburner]

Gresh12 My ball speed is 161 or so on average and my carry is 270 to 285 depending on spin rate. My spin is 2100 to 2800 which can cause a big change in carry. my launch angle is 11.5 to 13. My total shows 290 to 305 depending on the spin of course.

[Gresh12]

Thanks Wormburner it would be great if you compare some indoor shots to FS optimizer. Your average ball speed matches up nicely with my roughly top end but I’m usually launching more around 8-10* with 2600-3100 spin which I know isn’t optimal (I have perfect 3 wood delivery but can’t turn the slightly down in to slightly up for the life of me). So when I see my carry at low 160s of like 255 it’s hard to fathom the video I saw last night where 162 turned in to 290 carry but maybe there’s hope for me yet.

[Shankz]

I would be happy to stand in a field a few hundred yards out (as a target) to help measure distance and accuracy of different launch monitors.

[Gresh12]

Just move to Vancouver Canada you’ll find your pitch mark on drives from about now until May.

[Brettster]

Wormburner - nice videos and your sim room is great. Just wondering though on a few measurements that you are using to get those very good results from the Mevo unit? How close are you (ball to screen) when you hit the ball, and it seems like you mention 7', is that the distance back from ball to Mevo unit that gives you the highly accurate results? Does the Mevo unit work for putting?

Since I will be installing an 'in-floor' ProTee system, I'm wondering if something like the Mevo might work for me to take to the course, but I would need to know if I can get anywhere close to your impact area setup indoors, to make it work (unfortunately my Sim build will be in an area only 15'6" deep (maximum) and that's before I mount my screen, and put the walls up, so I'll probably have only 14' maximum to work with in depth.

[Wormburner]

Brettster Thank you! I am 12 feet from ball to screen. I am 7 feet (give or take an inch or two) from unit to ball. It will work fine at 6 feet from ball to unit but you have to make sure the app knows the distance. I do think the further away ball to screen distance is helps the Mevo read better. Weakness of these radar units is they need room to read ball. This is the Basic Mevo and it does not do putting. You will need the Mevo+ to get putting data and SIM play. I have read in places that all you need is 8 to 10 feet ball to screen to get an accurate reading but I have not tested. I hope this helps but I do believe you are pushing the Mevo unit to the limit with your depth but it may just work!

[FCMTX75]

I would not trade my Quad for anything.

[chicub15]

Excellent video! I sold my QED (and my Skytrak) as I wanted something more robust that I could take to the range to really help me nail down my carry numbers. The Mevo is fantastic for the price- I am loving the accuracy and ease of use.
I will be ordering a Mevo+ once the shipping delay shrinks but must say I am impressed with the original Mevo.

[Wormburner]

That is the whole reason I wanted to make this video! I think this little guy does not get enough credit for the amount of money it cost. Glad you enjoyed and I will be posting a some more comparison vids soon. Mevo+ Is a great unit as well but definitely not worth the money people are purchasing them for at the moment.