Thoughts of Uneekor eye xo/xo2 versus Foresight Hawk

[DRettig80]

Backstory, I own a GC2 for the portability. Looking to build a garage sim for fun, lessons, etc.

I asked a foresight rep about the trade in program for the hawk and about possible sale of the GC2…

“In terms of Uneekor, Tour Players will not use it because they feel the data is suspect and they don't trust it. Even Cameron Champ, who is endorsed on their website, owns and uses the GCQuad device (which is the same camera technology as the GCHawk device.)

Basically, they bought our technology and tried to reverse engineer it without the same durability or industrial design. They use cameras that only capture 3K frames per second whereas our cameras capture 20K frames per second. For that reason, they cannot measure Launch Angle or Attack Angle (these are calculated) and the resolution of their cameras are not able to see Dynamic Lie Angle or the Spin Axis at all..”

Some of this I believe, so my question really is for Uneekor eye users in terms of accuracy, what do you feel?

[Bubba22]

That’s somewhat untrue. They definitely measure launch angle and spin/spin axis. Side by side to the GC3 it’s bang on. Uneeekor Eye mini is very accurate and can hang with the GC3.

[myrison]

I guess if we start from the premise of "is it good enough for a PGA Pro," we're talking about a pretty high bar, which most people on this site are not pursuing. So that's hard to answer as I'm nowhere good enough to recognize the small differences that might be readily apparent to someone at that skill level.

With that said, I take lessons at a local sim that has EyeXO and GC3, and I have a QED at home. In lessons, some days I end up on one, some days on the other, and the data are always very very similar across all 3 systems. If money was no object, I’d probably go GC Quad as well because why not, they're the gold standard.... but on a budget, and as an amateur, ~99% accuracy is good enough, and I think it's a fair trade off.

[StalefishFS3]

For the EyeXO/EyeXO2, the Foresight rep is somewhat right. The CLUB data is suspect on both those units. It is not bad by any means, but not the level of a Quad or a Hawk. For ball data only, you won't be able to tell the difference between Uneekor and Foresight.

Nothing beats a Quad on club data. It is the Gold standard. Hawk is very very close (Hawk does not measure closure rate).

And for God's sake, don't trade in your GC2 to Foresight. Sell it on the open market. Foresight will give you nothing for it.

[Hannaford]

Foresight reps seem to say whatever they can to make a sale. One recently told me that he just sold a quad to my favorite football player earlier in the day.

[DRettig80]

Thanks for the feedback everyone!

[GutterSnipe]

I can’t speak to the side by side quality of the club face numbers, I will say on the EyeXO sometimes they are way off.

HOWEVER - to me that is irrelevant because they don’t have impact video. Impact video is 5-10 times more useful than the raw data. You can see ball compression, impact location, clubface twisting…all at a glance. I would never buy a device that doesn’t have it.

[soupy]

wait 2 weeks, more coming in overhead market
or buy the xo now while its on sale. I would not buy a hawk. its overpriced

[Bubba22]

I agree. Hawk is pricey. Look at the Protee VX.

[Davileet]

wait 2 weeks, more coming in overhead market
or buy the xo now while its on sale. I would not buy a hawk. its overpriced

Which monitors have released lately/upcoming?