Jump to content

gibbiesmalls

Advanced Members
  • Posts

    653
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by gibbiesmalls

  1. Srixon ZX7 5 Iron - Any Shaft - Head Only Ok
  2. Not range shaming... Was honestly curious how you manage to get identical results outside (at range) and inside since there is no "normalization" on Foresight LMs. It's the reason why I don't take my quad to the range, it would provide little value hitting (limited flight balls or very worn balls) at my local (muni) ranges, so I'm jelly of those who have premium balls at their range. Is all. Hit em straight bud.
  3. Just curious... Does your range use premium golf balls, or do you hit range balls indoors? lol
  4. yes, and assuming the Quad was misaligned, those numbers would have been affected too. No number with any horizontal measurement would be correct.
  5. I think it's outrageous that if you cancel the subscription you also lose a purchased course!
  6. No it's calculated relative to how the quad is aligned. If the quad is actually pointed 4* to the right of your target (straight line to the screen) and you actually hit a straight shot relative to the straight line to the screen, the Quad will measure you pulling the shot by 4*, because you in fact started the ball 4* left of how the Quad was aligned. Likewise, if you think your quad is pointed at 0* degrees, but isn't, then your club path measured is going to be off as well, because instead of you swinging at 0* path, you're really swinging 4 degrees in-to-out or out-to-in, but because the Quad wasn't aligned properly it measures you pretty neutral.
  7. Hope it isn't the case, but I'm getting some Ernest Sports (ES16 and ES 2020) vibes from this release and how FSG is going about it. This whole simulating a golf ball's flight isn't easy, and Ernest Sports proved that with 2 releases.... so I'd definitely be sitting on the sidelines on this one until FSG demonstrates an accurate working unit (or 100).
  8. I'd start with eliminating the variables.. How was the Quad aligned ? Ensure the Quad is algined at 0* (degrees) relative to your target line (screen) (very easy to do with the alignment rod). Doing so will ensure that all the angles (club path, face to path, etc) are accurate relative to the actual target line. Sometimes these places have a tendency to just place the Quad down and if the quad isn't aligned relative to the target line at 0*, then all numbers will be off. Even just a few degrees which are almost imperceptible to the naked eye matters to accurate ball (horizontal angles) and club data (angles).
  9. You're wrong. As I mentioned a few days ago, there is an IPAD version of FSX Pro (which I also stated in my reply you quoted is better than FSX Mobile). https://www.foresightsports.com/fsx-pro-ipad-user-manual
  10. What wedge combines are you referring to? Not aware of any wedge combines on FSX. But if you're asking whether the BLP/GC3 can be used without the PC and only an IPAD the answer is yes. There is an IPAD version of FSX Pro as well as FSX Mobile (Pro is better imo).
  11. You don't need more than that. No more than 2 feet (if that) or so and you'll be fine.
  12. It happened prior to the quad. The GC2/HMT was released many many years prior to the GC Quad - it wasn't a case of cannibalizing any sales. The HMT was designed and manufactured years after the release of the GC2. The quad was a significant form factor upgrade to the GC2/HMT. It was designed and sold as a replacement of the the GC2/HMT - along with it being much more portable, it's much easier to align, has a much larger hitting area, and has internal barometer that can measure temperature, altitude, and son (plus many other features). Hardly the same thing and hardly indicative of them possibly doing it again with the GC3. Not going to happen.
  13. You can forget about this. Isn't happening. For starters, if you were to add on a piece of hardware for a 4th eye (camera), then it would effectively be a GC Quad. Additionally, the GC Quad's doesn't have software add-ons, the Quad already has 4 eyes, but buyers can choose to buy them with all 4 cameras (ball/club) or just 2 cameras (ball) functioning. Turning on the other 2 is done via firmware in the device and remotely(servers). Needless to say the GC3 only has 3 cameras and no software or firmware update is going to change that. Foresight Sports isn't about to cannibalize their GC Quad sales by offering a 4th eye for the GC3 in the form of hardware. There is virtually ZERO chance of this happening.
  14. lol Just wait till they make the Foresight backpacks available on their accessories sales site.. lol I think the whole battery thing is their way of trying to minimize the 2nd hand market for these devices (trying to prevent what happened with GC2s). Second hand devices will now require a transfer fee and repair fees!
  15. Right! The launch monitor doesn't care or know what you hit the ball with. Whether you hit the ball with a 7 iron or you hit the ball with the putter, if a shot is triggered the GC2/GcQuad and GC3 will apply it's world class "photometric thingy" and apply it's algorithms to simulate what the ball has would have done in real life and will continue doing so as best in class. Seems silly to me to think/doubt that the GC3 is going to be inaccurate with something the GC2 and GCQuad excel in, given that it's virtually the exact technology in all 3 LMs. What the GC3/BLP will not have, and where I think folks are getting confused with is the Putting Analysis Module (that only GC Quad has) that allows you to effectively convert your Quad into a putting swing analysis system like a Quintic or Capto (or anything else that costs thousands of dollars - and no, I'm not saying the Quad is better or on par with say a Quintic). The Putting Module is a $2k add-on on the quad anyway (that's what it cost me when I got it).
  16. Yes, it was my immediate thought too.. looks just like the Adams 9033HF
  17. Maybe I'm just thinking way too simplistically... But I would expect the GC3 to be as accurate as the GC Quad (or GC2) for the data parameters it will provide. I can't imagine the accuracy to be any different than the Quad because the tech it will be using is exactly as the Quads. Additionally, the flight algorithms/physics used by the software to simulate ball flight will be exactly as it is with the Quad because it's the same software (FSX). I would expect the GC3 to be identical in accuracy as the GC Quad - the only difference being the missing 4th camera that will not allow you to get face impact, dynamic loft, face angle, etc. But for all ball data points and the few club data points the GC3 will provide, I'd expect them to be identical to the Quad's (within tolerances). With that said, the GCQuad/GC2 are considered the gold standard in LM technology (in particular indoors). Don't take my word for it, take the players on tours use of them.... (I've tested my GCQ and GC2 against one another, and I would say they're virtually identical in accuracy because the tech and software are the same for all things ball data).
  18. I just wonder how much of my $69.99 is in TXG's pockets. Maybe they're better people than I am, but I doubt TXG put their reputation behind this product out of the goodness of their heart. After all, it is Ian and Matt's video that is prominently displayed and the selling point on the scammer's website (still). No, I'm not saying TXG scammed me.
  19. They told me I would get mine this PAST February. lol They've literally ghosted me when I started demanding my money back. Embarrassing.
  20. Yes, invisible to FS. It's just smarter folks than me, who find a way to extract the data points of each shot that can then be used by other 3rd party software. That's really all that's going on. Heck, I stumbled upon a way to use the Dongle version of FSX2020 without an actual dongle. I've been able to replicate on every pc I've tried.
  21. I understand. One last point.. These devices aren't jailbroken like a phone typically is so there is no potential harm to any hardware. It's usually software on the PC you're connecting the launch monitor to that performs all the breaking (in the form of software), because it's the PC you're connecting to that you're using to siphon all the data points from FSX2020 to then be used by other golf sim software (TGC, etc.). No firmware or modules are ever installed in the launch monitor so there is zero risk of "bricking" your LM. The work-arounds are always software and they're only on the PC. In fact, I'd be shocked if the current work-arounds for the Quad won't work for the GC3. We shall see.
×
×
  • Create New...