Xi+ first impression

[Brutaly]

Hi!

Clubfitter here and i have just replaced my Accusport with a brand new Xi+ and thought i would share my first impression.

Im not claiming that this is a review or even facts but there are some stuff that i think i would like to share.

First the Xi+ app is really intuitive and its extremely easy to add "bags" so each customer can have their own bag. Its also easy to add clubs in a bag which facilitates to ability to compare the customers driver and the one i built for him/her. Its really easy to explain what they actually pay for.
What i have noticed is that the app/myflightscope sometimes gets bugged and its a mess to get the right clubs in each bag. However if i just plan ahead and prepare myself for the customer (like the day before) i can come fully setup for a fitting.

The Xi+ also failed once to save a series of shot and also to transfer it to myflightscope.com. This is actually a bit worse imo since the history of the customer is the "evidence" of what they pay for. Hopefully it wont happen again.

One last thing thats really nice is the ability to share the results via mail etc. Super easy and i imagine if used it can increase the customers involvement.

The Xi+ has gotten some negative feedback in some forums regarding the lack of clubpath and face angle. I sincerely dont get this. If you understand what creates the horisontal shape of the shot and know the horisontal launch angle you can actually determine face to target very accurate and if you have face to target the fade/draw tells the path.

Even if you dont have the experience to intuitively determine this for your own practice or fitting there are numerous softwares and spreadsheats that very accurately can give you the mean values of a series of shots. It takes like 5 seconds to input these figures and get a very good understanding of path and face angle, Its the mean value thats important imo and not individual shots.

The same goes for angle of attack or apex. The reason why i bring this up is that Xi doesnt have those values, but once gain, its math.

Whats my point here. i just fitted two drivers this saturday and had no issues coming up with loft, lie and face angle and in my opinion there is no need for more data than the Xi+ delivers and tbh it would be no issue to fit with Xi as well, all the numbers are there and it just takes like 10 seconds more compared to if i gotten my X2 i originally ordered but that got backordered.

Im actually kind of greatful that i didnt get one, it saved me a lot of money.

When it comes to setup its really easy, just do what it says in the manual and you are good to go. Infact the first times i set it up i actually got suspicious that i had misunderstood something, it just cant be that easy was my first impression. After setting it up like 10 times during the short period i had it i can easily do it in less than a minute

I know some people state that you shouldnt fit customers indoor but i really dont have a choice since i live in northern Europe. When i bought the Xi+ i suddenly didnt have room to use it in my studio in my house. So i have made an agreement with our local simulatorfacility that i may use one of their simulatortees which have enough room to the screen and behind the tee. I will knock out a wall later this year so i can move back in but for now i have to be a guest at the simulatorfacility.

What i was very curious about was how it would measure spin. So during the two sessions i had my old accusport side by side and i must say im very impressed tbh. The values i got from both monitors was very similar and this is true not just for spin. So either both launch monitors are flawed or they both work as they should. My last customer this afternoon had 115 mph in svingspeed and a smashfactor of 1,48 and it didnt have any issues reading that powerhouse. Both the accusport and the Xi+ had close to the exact same spin and ballspeed.

I have also input the mean values in both Trajectorware and OptimalFlight and besides a stray or two it seems very accurate,

Now comes the real interesting part. When i set up the Xi+ the simtee is a bit to close to the screen so i have bought a separate tee (2*2m) which i place behind the original tee. This give me optimal distance to the screen and optimal distance behind the tee. The issue is that it takes 5 minutes to setup before a fitting. The thing is that my last customer stayed behind when i removed all my equipment, including the tee, after our session and when i was about to go home he asked if he could hit a couple of more shots before i took down the Xi+. Ofc he could but i explained that i wouldnt set it all up again so 3 meters to the screen was what he had to play with. He thought it was alright so i gave him a ball with a metallmarker on and he svinged away. The guy is a 3 handicapper and hits like 270 meters with a -2 degrees AoA. In other words, this is a ballstriker. When i glanced at his numbers i saw just a very slight difference compared to when the Xi+ was setup with the correct distance from ball to screen. The difference in numbers wouldnt change a thing in the club recommendations and the testdriver i made for him during our session which is what matters to me at least, the ability to give correct advice to my customers.

I was rather intrigued by this so i asked him to take a pause and then i moved the Xi+ closer to the tee. From 270 cm to 240 cm and asked him to fire away again. He did and the numbers where still very similar between the three series:
1. Correct distance infront and behind tee
2. Correct distance behind the tee but to short infront of the tee
3. To short distance infront and behind the tee.

I then setup my accusport again an asked him to hit 5 more and both the accusport and the Flightscope had close to the same numbers.

Im really intrigued by this and will test this out on my own during the week but my first impression is that the Xi+ infact measures correctly even if you set it up with incorrect distances infront and behind the radar.

Overall im thrilled by the device, it breathes quality and compared the whats out there its a bargain imo.

I will get back to this thread later on with numbers on my old mans swing and do a couple of testseries to see if my initial impression regarding setting the device up is correct.

Anyone that has the same experience?

[Si_Berry]

Great write up.

Can I ask if you calibrate the unit before each session? By this mean do the radar "right and left" hits as well as the distance to tee checks... I usually use mine at a range and generally have it 90inches back from tee and reads perfectly well.

I only wish it show dynamic loft, however by the sounds of it you say is just math, any tips on which values to compute?

My gripe with myflightscope is that's it's a buggy too. You can't edit out any unwanted shots after upload. Also I wish it had a historical club average for each club rather than just last session played.... Much prefer the new version to old though!

[jon.summy@aol.com]

Brutally

"Even if you dont have the experience to intuitively determine this for your own practice or fitting there are numerous softwares and spreadsheats that very accurately can give you the mean values of a series of shots. It takes like 5 seconds to input these figures and get a very good understanding of path and face angle, Its the mean value thats important imo and not individual shots.

The same goes for angle of attack or apex. The reason why i bring this up is that Xi doesnt have those values, but once gain, its math"


Can you please share what software would help calculate path and face angle? I would like to not have to buy the X2.

Thanks so much for your help!!!!

[Skedaddle]

Great write up Brutaly and thanks for your input. Might be able to assist other posters a bit :

* Dynamic loft by subtracting Angle of Attack from Spin Loft (assuming AoA is -ve otherwise just add)
* Face angle at impact is pretty much bang on Horizontal launch direction (given on Xi+). 75% comes from face, just 25% from path
* Path can be derived from spin axis as know the club face from above (this assumes no gear effect from centre strike which Dr Scholls would help determine)

Is the above correct?

What really grabbed my attention was deriving for the Xi (I've got an Xi and have been thinking about upin to an Xi+ but would rather not if don't need to!) :

* Angle of Attack
* Apex - can see this peak at same height on my screen but no idea how would calculate it. Is it to do with having the carry distance and land angle and using Optimal Flight?

Would really appreciate some feedback on how you would fit with just an Xi

Thanks a lot

[Skedaddle]

Oh and finally, how did the Launch angle numbers from Accusport stack up against Flightscope? Were they pretty bang on?

[goatbarn]

Great write up.

I concur with your review, although I have an Xi. IMO, great investment.

[Brutaly]

I just wrote a post that adressed all questions and something got messed up when i pressed post and everything just disappeared. Sigh....

So here comes the answers with out quoting etc.

No i dont calibrate it each session, i have tape on the floor and a static tee so the values i use are the same from session to session. It might be wrong but i havent found anything stating that you need to recalibrate if the device is used in a static environment. But even if i had to recalibrate it takes no time at all.

Optimal Flight or Trajectoware are nice softwares. I used optimal flight which is very affordable and get frequent updates.
I just swapped to trajectoware which is free but get no updates but its really easy to use. I will stick with Trajectoware due to the ease when simulating path alterations.

Yes i can explain how to fit with Xi and that was what i focused on in my post that got messed up. I will write a new post later this week that i will try to post correctly. :-)

Angle of attack which is missing in Xi and which is needed for driver fitting. See the picture i attached. What you need to do is measuring the loft of the driver (which you need to do even if the LM has AoA.) to use the chart. Only use horisontal centerhits to eliminate the roll angle and exclude hooks and slices since those tend to manipulate the loft.

I would use 85% on woods and 75% on irons when translating horisontal launch to face angle

Apex. Just insert numbers from Xi in trajectoware. My next post regarding fitting with Xi will explain one way to get face angle and club path which is needed for a correct calculation in trajectoware.

Dynamic loft=Static loft+(angle of attack)

To be perfectly honest i find spin loft of less importance when it comes to fitting, its more of a swing issue and as such i just dont use it even though i adjust it with different shafts etc.. But to answer you, i dont know how to calculate that. Its the product of Static loft and AoA so the easy answer is SL=DL-AoA. By using different shafts you can affect then spin loft by approx +/-0,7 degree from the players baseline. Well calculating that is beyond my competence.
When i fit i look more at launch angle, apex, angle of descent and ballflight so it suits the player. Apex, angle of descent and flight is after all the effect of the dynamic loft. Dont get me wrong, its superimportant but knowing how to calculate it exactly isnt worth the time.

Here is an other take on it which is basicall what you wrote:
Spin Loft = Dynamic Loft - Angle of Attack
Dynamic Loft = Spin Loft + Angle of Attack

It might not be scientifically exact but its good enough.In general i think people look to much at the numbers but know very little on how to change them, both in their swing and in their equipment.

This link is the one i have found that really explains it well.
http://www.golfwrx.com/204625/get-a-...-of-spin-loft/


I found the launch numbers to stack up compared with the Accusport.

Sidenote, i included a pic that shows you how close i used it yesterday with acceptable (compared to the simulator which i have no clue regarding its validity) data. Thats about 60 inches. It wasnt acceptable for fitting but for simulator gameplay i wouldnt hesitate one second. There were some anomalies but for sim use i could really live with it.

[fhann]

What would your minimum acceptable distances for fitting be for:

distance from front of launch monitor to ball
distance from ball to impact screen?

[Brutaly]

What would your minimum acceptable distances for fitting be for:

distance from front of launch monitor to ball
distance from ball to impact screen?

What Flightscope recommends in the manual.

I havent tested enough to be certain regarding the thresholds.

For sim i suspect 150 cm from radar to ball and 250 cm from ball to screen. It might be good enough for simulations, at least with my 95 mph swingspeed. What seems to be messed up with shorter distance to the screen is mainly spin. Which means then higher the swingspeed the less accuracy in measuring spin.

I didnt have the time to go in depth yesterday and today my Accusport was picked up by its new owner. So my future tests has to be based on comparing the simulator data with the flightscope data.

B

[Bubba22]

Is that a Golfacheiver I see in the picture?

[Brutaly]

Is that a Golfacheiver I see in the picture?

Yeah, side spin is messed up and wedges are to long. Infact not so much the side spin as how it shapes the shot based on side spin.

Mid irons work nicely on it so it will be those i have to do my testing with, i7 is pretty spot on with the Xi+.

[Bubba22]

But you find that the numbers jive with the Flightscope?

[Brutaly]

What do you mean with numbers jive? Im not very familiar with english,,

[goatbarn]

Doe's the data measured by both the FS and GA correlate? Does the data match closely?

[Maverick]

GA estimates spin and spin axis last time I checked.