Upgrading SkyTrak to either GC2 or Uneekor QED advice

[schwame]

I currently have a SkyTrak and a Custom Design Golf Portable Simulator Enclosure. I am looking to upgrade to a higher end launch monitor (and also improve my room layout - but that's for a different post).

I've pretty much narrowed it down to either the GC2 or the Uneekor QED. I'm using this mostly for game improvement. Accuracy is one of the most important features. I'm a little concerned about getting marked balls should I need them for the QED, but also favor getting the additional club data. I also think that you just can't go wrong with a GC2...

My room (when I finish the upgrades) will be about 13' wide (give or take a few inches depending on what I do with the impact screen). I should have about 12-13' of depth from back of simulator to impact screen. Ceilings are 9'9".

I'd love any community feedback to help me make my decision.

Thanks in advance.

[Ryan5508]

I have owned a skytrak, gc2 and now eyexo.

the uneekor and gc2 are very similar. biggest differences really are size of the hitting area and club data. I switched just so I could allow left and right handed play without moving the GC2. otherwise I was perfectly happy with the GC2.

Playing tgc they seem exactly the same. I dont think you can really go wrong with either. I do like it being up on the ceiling vs next to the ball with newer players though.

[alexsmith11]

Hi there,

I had a skytrak for about 2.5 years and thought it was great, but it had a few compromises that were driving me crazy. So when I saw a certified preowned GC2 unit for sale I jumped at the opportunity. But honestly, other than

• Hardly any no reads - my skytrak would seem to not read my purest strikes
• Larger ball placement area - skytrak has the dot but you have some wiggle room but this impacts the windows to capture your shots
• Self-leveling - the skytrak needs to be leveled to accurately display your shot, the GC2 just needs to be placed at the same height as the ball.
• Shorter shot delay - the skytrak has a 2-3 second delay after hitting (this didn't really bother me), the GC2 is like less than 1 second
• Better outdoor performance - the skytrak doesn't do so well in sunlight unless in shade or if the sun is opposite the units carera window, the GC2 works great at the range

I find the actual data measured by the skytrak to be very close to the GC2. However, sometimes I find the GC2 gives strange results on low spin drives, almost as if the ball flight algorithm favors extremely low spin.

One thing I do miss from skytrak is the range app. I don't have FSX2020 so I don't know if their range has similar features, but I instead have the FR1 range, and that is great to dial in your numbers, but doesn't really have information like the shot optimizer to give you insight on your performace.

So if those things bother your indoor golf experience like they did for me, then I must say, the GC2 is a great upgrade. Also, in future if you want to add club data you can always get a HMT for the GC2.

Hope this helps, good luck.

[JayBrd85]

I had a Skytrak for almost 3 years and then upgraded to a QED. I've loved it, and my only complaint would be finding a normal ball. The Bridgestone balls that come with the unit seem to get the correct speed but the spin is way too low. The Urethane Unicorns get the right amount of spin (maybe a touch high), but the ball speed seems consistently 4 or 5 mph below a similar strike with the bridgestone. I just got the GSK QED Tour balls last week and those seem to have both the correct speed and spin numbers, my only wish is the 3dot print was around the whole ball and not just around the center. I agree with with alexsmith11 above said about the skytrak accuracy and its short-comings. The best strike of the day was never picked up with the Skytrak.

I average 1 mis-read per month, usually reports a 45+ degree launch angle on a shot that was actually in the 10-15 degree range. I've personally never had a no-read on my system. My buddy that comes over every Friday to play gets a few no-reads each month on the system - only because he is topping the ball with a white driver. Otherwise it picks up every shot.

Ball placement area on the QED is about 18"x18". When you calibrate it, you can select the area of your hitting mat you want the system to pick up and can customize the size a bit.

Shot delay - The QED is basically instant. You hit the ball and when it hits the screen, the animation typically continues. Once in a blue moon in will be a quarter/half-second delay. You see the putts drop in the hole on TGC before the ball hits the screen - it's wonderful.

If you have both righty/lefty, the QED wins over the GC2. And having the unit above/behind you helps the nerves a lot more than it being on the ground - especially if you have newbies hitting. But If you want to take the unit to the driving range, the GC2 is the only portable option.

The QED software also allows you to hook up additional USB cameras for side/rear views of your swing. That's in addition to the built-in camera view that will display the clubhead thru ball impact video after every shot. With the clubhead stickers, I'd say that data feels accurate about 95% of the time. It sometimes struggles with all white club heads or very reflective ones for the club head speed. The ball speed number seems accurate 99.99% of the time.

Good luck!

[GutterSnipe]

I went from SkyTrak to the EyeXO. I still have some non-reads on extreme shots, I suspect some of it has to do with the Fiberbuilt mat. That being said, for game improvement having the video of the club going through impact and seeing the impact on the face is a game changer. I am getting so much better at hitting the sweet spot.

I should also mention that my SkyTrak was consistently under reading spin by 1000-2000 rpm and was very inconsistent on wedges left right spin.

TGC 2019 is so much more playable now, it’s more one bounce and stop than one bounce and roll.