Ball Data Accuracy of EyeXO

[bbjr]

I currently own a QED, and while I have tried most of the new updates that have been released, I have chosen to always revert back to the 8/20 update because I feel the the ball data is the most accurate. Most of the newer updates have resulted in a misread in about 2-3% of the shots, while I can’t remember the last time I had a misread with the 8/20 update. When I am doing simulator play, ball data accuracy is my #1 concern. Anyways, I have recently been wanting to add better club data to my set-up and that being said, I need to consider the option of upgrading my QED to the EyeXO. My only concern with giving up the QED is the excellent ball data accuracy that I get while using the 8/20 update, I literally have no complaints about using the QED for sim use.

In another thread jerry3 mentioned:

Originally posted by jerry3 View Post
“I've had Quad, QED and now EyeXo... As of this moment the Quad is the most consistently accurate with both ball and club data of these units followed by QED which also has reasonably accurate club data imo. From my experience the EyeXo is the least consistently accurate of the 3 units, it's probably accurate about 95% of the time on ball data, but the two others are like 99%. EyeXo is getting better all the time with updates and I'll bet by year end it will be just as accurate as QED, but right now in terms of accuracy I'd take QED or Quad. In terms of best value and overall customer experience factoring in integration with software I'd go QED, EyeXo, and then Quad.”



I just wanted to gauge other users experience with ball data accuracy on the EyeXO. Let me know what percentage of misreads you have when using this system and if they tend to be with certain clubs or shots.

[GWS67]

I have the EyeXo and I cannot speak higher of its accuracy. Before I installed it in my home I was a regular user of the Trackman at my Golf club both indoors and outdoors and my numbers on EyeXo are virtually identical.
I recently on a Washed out day at the club asked my 3 playing partners who are all very low handicap golfers to come to my house for a hit. 2 of these guys are a 2 and 3 handicap respectively and know their numbers with their clubs and they left my house literally stunned with how accurate the EyeXo was.
I see very few misreads with the EyeXo and they appear in club data not in Ball data.
The one time I used GC Quad which was before I installed my home Sim and I was trialling all launch monitors I felt the quad was providing me with exaggerated distance numbers, the numbers were not huge but enough for me to question the accuracy. In the end the reason I never got GC Quad was simply I didn’t want a mobile unit and wanted a fixed overhead unit.
Could not be happier with the EyeXo, is their better LM out there in the market? Possibly, probably and maybe not? Individual choice for everyone but I can’t fault the numbers on EyeXo.

[Underdog]

Similar experience for me. My EyeXo has exceeded my expectations. The distance and data seems really accurate to real life and few misreads. I am even installed in a low ceiling, below the recommendation and have very few misreads, maybe 1-2/round. Initially, I was having misread problems with certain wedges (54 degree mostly), quick not to Uneekor and they sent me a new download and completely resolved. I have club member come over and they can't believe how accurate. We have a +6 handicapper and he was very impressed with it!