Announcement

Collapse

TGC Tour - Congratulations!

Congrats to @shank12u and @Leon (NET) and @wbond and @shank12u (GROSS) winning the TGC 2018 SUMMER TOUR - John Deere Classic !

Join this weeks TGC 2018 SUMMER TOUR - Barbasol Championship with 2 rounds at Valhalla Louisville (Pro Tee) : https://golfsimulatorforum.com/forum...l-championship and the TGC 2018 SUMMER TOUR - The Open Championship with 3 rounds at St. Andrews Links - Old Course (ProTee Yellow) : https://golfsimulatorforum.com/forum...n-championship
See more
See less

Trackman Vs gc2 advice needed please

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Trackman Vs gc2 advice needed please

    Just wondering if anyone has any advice they can give. I have gc2 hmt at home and yesterday i went to a local golf shop to get fitted for a new driver. My current driver is a Titleist 910 D2 in a stiff shaft. They let me test out some drivers (epic,m2 etc) on their trackman and eventually the Titleist 917 D2 in an X flex was the best fit. According to trackman my old driver was carrying around 250 yards and the fitted driver around 270 yards with a tighter dispersion also. I ended up buying the new driver thinking "great I have added 20 yards of carry!". Today I fired up fr1 and tested my old driver against the new one just to see what numbers the gc2 hmt was giving. To my shock both drivers' average carry was 250. My best carries were about 270 with both drivers and dispersion was very similar. I'm very confused as there seems to be a major discrepancy with the trackman and gc2 data. I'm tempted to just take the new driver back and ask for a refund as on the gc2 the driver numbers were very similar. Is it possible I have been misfitted? Maybe their trackman's calibration is off? Has anyone had a similar experience? Really not sure what to do. Any advice welcome. Thanks.

  • #2
    So you were hitting both your old driver and the new ones on the same trackman at the store? Or have you hit your old driver on another trackman? Golf stores are notorious for boosting distances to sell you a club but that would be a pretty bold move to have you hit your old driver and then try and change settings before you hit a new one without you noticing.

    the other possibility is that your swing changed day to day and what was optimal in the store has changed. Either way I would probably take the club back and or at least ask to go through another fitting and bring your gc2 with you.

    Comment


    • #3
      Yea both drivers on the same trackman... It's weird. The driver I bought from the store was lower spin readings on trackman than on my gc2. At the golf store we were also using range balls (they have an outside range) I don't know if this would have had any effect...

      Wish I had brought my gc2 with me to compare numbers while I was there....

      I just hope my gc2 is ok and not giving false numbers....

      Comment


      • #4
        When using range balls the trackman is probably set to normalize mode. And that setting is ok at best. I know it's not always possible but you should always get fitted with premium balls, preferably the ball you play with. Range balls can give strange spin readings/ ball speeds etc.
        There probably is nothing wrong with the trackman or your gc2
        If possible bring 20 balls with you and hit 10 with each driver. Make sure trackman is set to outdoor mode and no normalize. (Even old beat up balls are better than range balls for testing)

        Comment


        • #5
          If you hit both, then did you see a noticeable difference in the ball flight yourself? I'm thinking 20 yard gain would have been easy to verify regardless of what trackman was showing.

          Comment


          • #6
            It could be spin. TM struggles reading lower spin inside. Strange that they differed on the TM though. Did you note the spin and LA between the two?

            Comment


            • #7
              The trackman session was an outdoor session. Spin readings were lower on trackman than my gc2 and also launch angles were slightly lower on trackman.... Strange....

              Anyway I am returning the driver tomorrow and i discovered there is a golf club nearby who actually have GC quad so I will feel for more comfortable going there to get fit!

              Comment


              • #8
                Did you ever figure this out? I was going to suggest that the demo model might have been hot from being hit so many times, or perhaps if its an adjustable driver, perhaps you didn't have it in the same configuration, or perhaps shaft length was different on demo vs what you bought and it shows in the spin numbers? Just some ideas, and i really am curious if you figured out what was going on. (oldish thread I know).

                Comment


                • #9
                  Never did figure it out. I returned the driver and next time I will be testing on quad or bringing my GC2 along. The demo driver was standard shaft length and setup as far as I know. Just can't put my finger on it... Came away very disillusioned.... Would be interesting to see my GC2 along side their Trackman to compare...

                  Comment


                  • Clevited
                    Clevited commented
                    Editing a comment
                    Very strange indeed. Maybe the guy was pushing a secret POWAR!! button each time you swung that one haha. Anyways, thanks for the update.

                • #10
                  Originally posted by Chris83d View Post
                  Just wondering if anyone has any advice they can give. I have gc2 hmt at home and yesterday i went to a local golf shop to get fitted for a new driver. My current driver is a Titleist 910 D2 in a stiff shaft. They let me test out some drivers (epic,m2 etc) on their trackman and eventually the Titleist 917 D2 in an X flex was the best fit. According to trackman my old driver was carrying around 250 yards and the fitted driver around 270 yards with a tighter dispersion also. I ended up buying the new driver thinking "great I have added 20 yards of carry!". Today I fired up fr1 and tested my old driver against the new one just to see what numbers the gc2 hmt was giving. To my shock both drivers' average carry was 250. My best carries were about 270 with both drivers and dispersion was very similar. I'm very confused as there seems to be a major discrepancy with the trackman and gc2 data. I'm tempted to just take the new driver back and ask for a refund as on the gc2 the driver numbers were very similar. Is it possible I have been misfitted? Maybe their trackman's calibration is off? Has anyone had a similar experience? Really not sure what to do. Any advice welcome. Thanks.
                  As an owner/tester of both Trackman 4 and GC2, I can tell you this for sure: Trackman is more accurate than GC2 indoor and outdoor. GC2 had more margin of error than Trackman in shots whether it was indoor or outdoor. I've done some testing and wrote the result on the forum so you can refer to that.

                  Now, there are 2 possibilities to your situation:

                  1) if Trackman: I would check if it was normalized. on a normalized setting, they can boost the yardage up by making your current elevation to 10,000 ft (I don't even know if it can go that high as I haven't even tested that but I'm sure you can at least boost it up to like 5000ft since there are golf courses with that elevation) for instance which can at least boost up another 10+yds. I doubt that was the case but who knows at a brick & mortar shop to sell the clubs.... That is the only way to trick Trackman. There is no other way to boost up numbers on Trackman.

                  2) if GC2: on a low spin low launch angle driver shots, GC2 misreads carry frequently and adds 20 yds more to the extreme and is off in its carry here and there. What a lot of GC2 users do not know (or do not want to admit to be frank) is that they're oftentimes not getting the pinpoint 100% accurate data. GC2's algorithm is just not as stable as Trackman.

                  All in all, there is no possible way of any current launch monitors out there that can beat Trackman outdoor. Trackman's tolerance is 1.5ft at every 160yds or something. 3ft is 1yd. It'll only be off 1yd at 320yds carry. And outdoor Trackman measures carry. GC2 is a good device at a much cheaper cost, but unfortunately I don't think it's reliable to safely assume its driver carry distance.
                  Last edited by LEO MODE; 02-10-2018, 07:19 AM.

                  Comment


                  • Tommyseb
                    Tommyseb commented
                    Editing a comment
                    Leo did you get your GC2 back from Foresight? Did the fix it / find anything wrong? I took mine to the range and every single flight shape was correct to what the app said, obviously can't verify distance and spin to any degree off accuracy, but I recall your own show draws when the ball flight didn't.

                  • LEO MODE
                    LEO MODE commented
                    Editing a comment
                    I haven’t got it back yet. It looked like they calibrated it again but they didn’t tell me in details yet. I will update and re-do the testing when the unit comes back again though. I seriously hope it proves me wrong this time.

                    As we conversed before, it is very player dependent (I was 3/10 successful and my friend was 7/10 successful). But I am glad that it’s working well for you. If it works well, then it is a hard machine to beat. For carry and spin axis, I would find a Trackman and compare that outdoor to see the exact number. But all the other numbers (ball speed, launch direction, launch angle, spin rate) they should be nearly pinpoint accurate.
                    Last edited by LEO MODE; 02-10-2018, 06:33 PM.

                  • LEO MODE
                    LEO MODE commented
                    Editing a comment
                    Just tested my TPS using normalize mode. Looks like you can have 30yds more carry in like 8000ft altitude normalized from a hard ball to a premium ball. That's a significant boost.

                • #11
                  I’ve got to say I don’t agree with you Leo. Trackman indoors is equal at best. Trackman loves to not give you a reading for low burners and it is far less reliable for spin in my experience. If Trackman was superior as you are stating I’d think you would see far less GCQuad’s in golf stores as it is a similar price. I’d love to see an unbiased publication compare the two with a robotic device hitting the ball. Guess market for these is still too small to justify doing that comparison.

                  Comment


                  • LEO MODE
                    LEO MODE commented
                    Editing a comment
                    The reason why I tested both units was simple: I was getting frustrated with Trackman not reading short putts, auto-triggering shots in simulator caused by my shadow or light and little things like wifi/camera not connecting intermittendly. So I was looking for an alternative and GC2 had all the answers (doesn’t require a certain distance, reads all putts, no auto-trigger, bluetooth connection with any softwares, etc.). So I decided to buy it and test it.

                    However, just like what Skytrak users say comparing with GC2, when it comes to comparing with Trackman, GC2 data was not consistent. The ball goes more left, carry goes 20yds farther. With Trackman the data never failed me whether it was comparing or using flight algorithm (of course Trackman had some misreads too but way less often). As I mentioned before, all devices are accurate when it measures properly (even Optishot would be when it captured properly). The only difference between devices are having more margin of error. GC2 clearly had more margin of error than Trackman. Don’t get me wrong, GC2 is a fabulous device and it’s a blast to use indoor more so than Trackman. I also like GC Quad more because of more convenient features.

                    Price is not the same. GC Quad for a ball data is $13k indoor/outdoor. Trackman is $25k indoor/outdoor. You can buy another GC Quad. I remember you bought GC Quad because you didn’t want to spend more money. I mean it is more expensive and more pressure on using it as a hobby. That’s the truth.

                    Golf stores using GC Quad has nothing to do with tour players using more Trackman. The reason golf stores use GC is because it doesn’t require a distance, they get bulk discounts, it’s way cheaper and data is relatively consistent throughout. When you say far less reliable for spin, spin rate is not reliable when Trackman calculates it. It can be off up to 3000rpm. But even when GC2 measured ball spin properly, the carry distance was still off! In every flight algorithm I tested, Trackman’s carry distance tolerance was within 5-7yds with ‘calculated’ ball spin whereas GC2 was up to 20yds difference when ‘measured’ ball spin. What would you say to that reliability of data if you see that? It just tells me that GC2 carry calculation needs more polishing.

                    In conclusion, I’ve encountered this a lot with GC users recently. You can believe what you want because you’re a GC buyer and keep saying Trackman is not accurate. I love both products which is why I am buying it and they both have pros and cons. But when it comes to data, Foresight needs more work on making less disperse on its accuracy algorithm. With hitting at least 300 balls as an amateur which is actually a better test because you can see so many variables, I can confidently say Trackman is more accurate than GC2. I strongly suggest you get your hands on Trackman, take it outside and compare the difference. You’ll be surprised at how off GC can be at times. Unless you tested both units outside and have a raw data to compare, just by saying it’s not accurate is a personal opinion and not a proven fact in my humble opinion.
                    Last edited by LEO MODE; 02-10-2018, 06:32 PM.

                • #12
                  The debate continues. I suggest that this discussion be taken over to the head to head tests that Leo conducted. Many who claim spin is off on TM in indoor mode don’t out the metallic sticker on the ball when using TM. From my perspective I think Leo is right for his comments based on the testing that he has done. However, I suspect the GCQ is just as accurate as TM, but currently gives more data on hints like ball strike than TM does (with stickers of course on the club). GCQ is also cheaper and requires less distance indoors than radar. There are so many variables that we can’t say why one is chosen over another. GCQ does not have an annual fee could be another, but saying your gut tells you spin is off without doing a side by side, I have to question that.

                  As for for the case at hand, I think the ball or the club likely had more to do with the differences than TM. I can’t see the testers changing the elevation on someone while they are in the middle of a session. Why note to back with your GC2 and ask them if you can test the driver out again and try and figure out what is up? At least his way the OP can have the comfort he is searching for.

                  Comment


                  • LEO MODE
                    LEO MODE commented
                    Editing a comment
                    When Trackman measures ballspin indoor, it was within 100rpm of GC2. Many people do not know when Trackman calculates or measures ball spin, so they just simply think Trackman was off when compared to GC2 or something. It is just a lack of knowledge in using the TPS software and how to navigate/understand the readings. I initially had that problem too until I saw Trackman University and Trackman support and learned more stuff on how this all works.

                • #13
                  Other than Leo’s analysis, this is the only good comparison I have seen done https://youtu.be/Pbj6vHAvVQE

                  Comment


                  • #14
                    Originally posted by Stingreye View Post
                    Other than Leo’s analysis, this is the only good comparison I have seen done https://youtu.be/Pbj6vHAvVQE
                    Yes but read Leo’s comments below the video. The guy doing the testing never answers some of Leo’s direct questions (he seems to pick and choose what he is answering).

                    Comment


                    • LEO MODE
                      LEO MODE commented
                      Editing a comment
                      I’m not going to even debate with that guy after seeing how he tries to react to my questions. Why isnt he showing the ball flight and no Trackman or even Flightscope is there to compare it outdoor? Plus that video still shows having a draw bias in both indoor and outdoor. It is as if they think GC Quad is the industry standard and Trackman is competing against it which is totally the opposite in real life. What I noticed was that most of the people who play simulator games thus in this forum are almost always camera system owners. If you look at other golf forums where they involve with professional golfers (cant mention names here) they deem Trackman as industry standard. I am a little tired of talking about this now because they just don’t want to admit it and believe that GC is better than Trackman indoor, and those people didn’t even have Trackman for a week to compare side by side with no data to prove it.

                      I am not leaned towards anything to be completely honest. I just want the truth and only want to tell the truth. The only next step for me is to see it for myself that GC2 algorithm is absolutely correct outdoor. Because at the end of the day, if it’s accurate outdoor it will be accurate indoor (in calm, 0ft elevation no wind condition).

                      And I would love to wait for that to happen because I will be the hardest advocate than anyone out there that GC is better than Trackman.

                      I REALLY REALLY hope people understand me for this one thing:
                      At the end of the day I don’t personally give a damn who is better. Neither of them gave me a free unit and I can care less if they are more used by the pro. All I care about is just being accurate both indoor and outdoor so I know what I did to my swing. If Trackman is not accurate, I'm going to sell it and vice versa. Simple as that. So I please ask you, let's be honest about things and show me the proof when I ask them.
                      Last edited by LEO MODE; 02-11-2018, 02:01 AM.

                  • #15
                    I’d like to see a pro in a simulator room setup to use both these. Unless you are a very low single digit handicap or better it’s pretty tough to know which numbers are correct if you are hitting indoors. I’m curious why both the professional training/practice centers using Trackman indoors don’t have dots on the ball if it’s so crucial for correct data.

                    Comment


                    • LEO MODE
                      LEO MODE commented
                      Editing a comment
                      It is very simple process though. Pros are not even needed. All you have to do is take the unit outdoor and compare it with Trackman or Flightscope. The radar will 'measure' carry and ball flight. If the numbers come out to be the same consistently, then that means GC will be better indoor. So far, I just haven't seen any real comparison video comparing them both outside showing data to data. All people say is GC is better indoor. Under what proof though is my question and thus tested them both outdoor, and saw that GC2 had more discrepancies than Trackman outdoor.

                      Lastly, don't get too hung up on the dots on the ball. If Trackman cannot measure/calculate data, it will simply show nothing. As long as you have minimum of 17ft distance, you should be good to go. Just plug in the numbers in Trajectory Optimizer for instance. It'll reveal the truth, which in my case Trackman had less error tolerance. If you still want to see it to believe it, I can upload some more raw data for you and you can fill them in on the optimizer.
                  Working...
                  X