How much are GC3/BLP owners missing club data (impact loc, loft/lie, face angle)?

[Gstmike]

GC2/HMT owner here.
This question was partly prompted by another thread. But as many continue to assess whether or not to upgrade to GC3 from GC2/HMT, I'm wondering how many that HAVE made the switch to GC3 are really missing impact location, loft/lie, and face angle.

I know there are other ways to get impact location. I just feel like I would miss all that info in one place to get that full picture of strike location/club delivery.
As someone uses their unit mainly for game improvement rather than sim play, I greatly value to those additional club parameters. But love the other things that GC3 brings (portability, slightly larger hitting area, alignment).

But wondering how others that use their GC3 for game improvement/lessons/coaching are getting by without those additional club parameters knowing the options are/were sticking with GC2/HMT or paying the premium ($11k or more) for the Quad w/ club data.

Thanks

[John8888]

I had the GC2/HMT and moved to a GC3.

The data from the GC2/HMT is missed a lot. The ability to use the old FR1 software and the old iPad fitting app are also missed. I love the ability to move the GC3 to new locations.

During the winter I hit balls at several indoor spots into nets and coming in with a GC3 is so much faster. Getting the GC2 + HMT set up, getting the target square, getting the protective case on etc was a time killer and I did not always bring the HMT to avoid that set up time.

If I was at home and had things set up in one spot I would prefer a GC2 + HMT. On the road I prefer the GC3.

[KidDoc]

GC3 on the course makes up for any missing measured data points, in my opinion .

[Gstmike]

Hopefully some others will chime in. Though I suspect many GC2/HMT owners have not switched. I'm sure for those that regularly travel and/or take their unit to the range/course, it was an easier decision.

[fortysixandtwo]

I haven’t made the switch but I’m definitely on the fence. I can say when I have lessons and we use swing catalyst basically the only data points my coach ever pointed out was club path and club head speed.

We worked more on motions and positions on the video and the data fell in the right place.

Now when I would practice on fsx2020 range I really only looked at face angle as an extra thing I glance at. I don’t think I’d ever miss lie, closure rate or impact location. Honestly I wonder if the gc3 really could have that parameter but locked it out.

I think before I had hmt and if I took gc2 to the range I only looked at ballspeed! Lol

It’s pretty telling by the amount of gc2’s on the market that those people made the jump vs getting an hmt add on

I even thought considering keeping the gc2/hmt and getting a gc3 for portability to take to the range and course or if needed for left hand play if I could find one without the software attachment. Is that crazy, but it seems cheaper than getting a quad with club data if you already own a gc2 or gc2/hmt?!?

[OttawaP]

The shot shape and starting line mentally gives you face angle close enough I'd say if you know the path and AOA. Having the exact number isnt as important.

[Wiegs]

Honestly, I think the biggest thing I miss (though I didn't play extensively with hmt or quad etc) is strike location. When I practiced previously I used to use foot spray to check my impact location, and train myself to understand what each felt like, and also draw horizontal lines on my balls with dry erase marker (which transferred nicely to club face) to check dynamic lie angle, and I wish I could replicate that during practice with my GC3. If it becomes a real issue, I'll set up a hitting net and do the same, so I don't mark my screen. But I do wish I had that capability. I just don't think it's worth 10k+ to get it with a quad.

[KidDoc]

Impact tape works great with the single dot marker.
all shots still get picked up.

[Gstmike]

As I continue to wait for my HMT to be returned to me from Foresight, the decision to upgrade to GC3 or GC Quad still looms.