Putting in a new simulator and have it narrowed down to these two. I'm left handed and everyone else that will be using it is right handed so I want something that we won't have to move back and forth. Does anyone have knowledge or experience with both? I know that the GCHawk cameras have more FPS, does that transfer into better accuracy?
-
-
My vote would for sure be Uneekor as you will have more software options at your disposal as time goes on. Uneekor really focuses on being integrated into all options while FS seems more concerned with keeping you locked into their software offerings. -
I have a quad and the EYEXO. I imagine the Hawk and Quad read similar so I am comparing Quad and EYEXO. Data is very close on all aspects between the two and the still images/video at impact you get with the EYEXO are nice to have. Foresight products are proven to be top notch but my personal opinion is that EYEXO is close and is constantly updating software to catch up. The ease of access to all 3rd party software is nice with EYEXO. Uneekor customer service will drop what they are doing to help with install and any issues you have. I love both units but if i had to pick only one it would be EYEXO due to being just as accurate (in my opinion), cost is lower, access to 3rd party software, very similar data info.Comment
-
This is great info. Thanks Wormburner! Has your experience been that the club data is very close between the two as well? Seems like I watched a video comparison between the gcquad somewhere and ball data was close but there was some variance in club data. I am consistently having to work on my swing path (I have a tendency to come over the top and swing out to in) so it super important to me that the club data is accurate. -
The two systems use two very different reflective stickers so I am not sure how it is possible to accurately compare the two on same swing. From what experience I can see they my read swing path very close, club face pretty close, dynamic loft on EYEXO is hit and miss currently. Lie on both read similarly. Both give solid club data and but If I had to pick which does it best it is GCQUAD. The EYEXO does a great job though and you get the camera images at impact which tell a lot of the story. You get enough consistant info on EYEXO to work on your game in my opinion but Quad is a beast in this area. -
Thanks. This is super helpful. From your comments it sounds like they are close enough that its hard to justify spending an extra $10K to jump up to the Hawk. Especially if Uneekor are working as hard as it sounds like they are to release updates and improvements.
-
-
I don't think you hit from the same spot for L and R play with the Hawk, so keep that in mind and confirm if that is going to be an issue for you.Comment
-
Hi - I was looking at both of these as well. My issue is my room is only 12' 8'' wide. Believe I'd need to offset with the EYE XO but not the Hawk. Anyone familiar with this able to help me understand how well either of these would work centered in a 12' 8'' wide room?Comment
-
I'll second wormburner and cooke's opinion. I went with the EYE XO mostly because it performs similarly, is less expensive and has more software flexibility.Comment
-
The hawk is meant for a 12 foot wide room. I believe the XO is mostly hit from the middle but there may be flexibility.Originally posted by jkplaxman View PostMy Courses:
World Par 3's by mthunt
Toronto GC (L) mthunt
Burlington G&CC by mthunt
Weston G&CC by mthunt
London Hunt Club L mthunt
Park CC Lidar mthunt
Sunningdale GC Robinson L
Sunningdale GC Thompson L
Muirfield Village (liDAR) First Ever Lidar course
Country Club of Castle Pines (liDAR)
The Sanctuary GC ProTee L
The National GC L mthunt
Mississaugua GC L mthunt
Shaughnessy G&CC L mthunt
Markland Woods CC mthunt
Hidden Lake Old L mthunt
Magna GC L mthunt
Barrie CC L mthunt
mthunt RangeComment
-
I'm leaning towards the EYE XO, My room will be 12' wide, so I will be offset, not a problem really, but I will have to offset the unit as well, and if I were to have left handed players, I would need the unit to be moveable. I think I can mount it to a track to slide. My concern is additional cameras. down the line no problem with space, but face on may be difficult with only about 5' from wall to golfer to capture full club swing. I see that uneekor can now be used with E6... I've used E6 and like it, but want more substantial data. Was also looking at the Hawk, but if its the same to the EYE XO, but more $$$$, duh. I think the Quad may be better data wise, but the $$$$, and XO seems to have more data? Am I right? Plus the multiple software options. I somewhat dislike FS software too. I mean, for $10k I can be a little picky right. Originaly wanted Trackman, but the $$$$, and I felt it was a bit limited with simulation. -
Trackman can’t be offset either. There’s a track system someone makes for an X0 where you click the remote and it moves for the other handed player. It’s something to think about. I personally wouldn’t want to try to fit a round peg into a square hole but it’ll work. Two GC2’s will give you the same results.
-
Comment