Do I have even room for a launch monitor? Pics Included

[that0neguy]

This past year I've put together a net, CCE mat, and tour links putting green in my garage. I only am allowed half the garage so my wife can park in the other half. With studying for the CPA exam, an almost 2 year old, and a pregnant wife with horrible nausea through all of pregnancy, the most I get out is 9 holes a week usually, and a range session at lunch once a week, unless I use a vacation day. I don't see this changing for 3-5 years (MBA is next). Also have 6 months of winter (Indiana). During this time of little golf, I'd like to maintain or improve my game if possible.

 

The only way I see this as remotely possible I believe is by finding time for productive practicing and that is practicing at home with a simulator. I don't have the availability to go practice and play more than once and once a week when my wife needs me here and I want to be at home with my kids. We have no lighted ranges in the area either. Because of this I want a simular, here are some challenges I either need to overcome or if I can't, I won't be able to get a simulator. My knowledge is very limited on simulators so my question is two fold: (1) Is it even feasible to add a launch monitor with my current set-up, and (2) if so, which ones would you suggest?

 

 

 

 

1. Limited Space - Dimensions are 18 feet in length (16 feet factoring the net), 11 feet depth, and 8.5 feet in height

2. Non-insulated/heated garage. I plan to get a great heater for the winter. I won't be able to leave my launch monitor in the garage. Everything will need to be easy set-up and portable since it can't sit in the garage during winter.

3. I would love to project it on an impact screen with projector in front of the net or add a monitor where the mirror is so I could look up and see all my shots

4. We plan to move into a larger home in 3-4 years, and hope to have my own golf area inside then. And I won't want to upgrade my launch monitor at that time.

5. User interface is very important to me, I don't want to drop big $$ on something and then not use it because it wasn't user friendly/easy enough.

6. Budget is say around $6-7k and I am willing to wait for good prices for used.

[Jacob Mac]

Flightscope needs 16 feet minimum. The xi is 2500.

 

Skytrak would absoulutely work. I think it is 2000

 

Hc2 would definitely work. It is a lot more than either.

 

I don't know how much space trakman needs. But it is way more expensive.

[goatbarn]

Everything can be bought used, and all framing/screen, PC...etc. can be done DIY for 20% of what it costs to have someone do it for you.

 

I have a 20' x 22' garage with 9.5' ceilings. I put in a 10 x 9 HQ screen from Par2Pro ($300ish), built the cage myself with EMT ($50ish), 10' x 30' Netting from ebay ($100), PC ($1000, but already had this), TGC ($800, used), GC2 ($3000ish, used), CCE 5' x 5' ($300ish, used), BenQ 1080 projector ($200, ebay used).

 

Total of just under $6k. That's with the top of the line hardware/software/screen/PC. If I paid for an all in one solution, that'd be probably over $20k.

 

With your smaller space, I'd be looking at the skytrak and nothing else. Unless you want to use a Vector Pro. But radar will not have sufficient space with your setup. Go camera launch monitor...GC2, Skytrak, Vector

[that0neguy]

Everything can be bought used, and all framing/screen, PC...etc. can be done DIY for 20% of what it costs to have someone do it for you.

 

I have a 20' x 22' garage with 9.5' ceilings. I put in a 10 x 9 HQ screen from Par2Pro ($300ish), built the cage myself with EMT ($50ish), 10' x 30' Netting from ebay ($100), PC ($1000, but already had this), TGC ($800, used), GC2 ($3000ish, used), CCE 5' x 5' ($300ish, used), BenQ 1080 projector ($200, ebay used).

 

Total of just under $6k. That's with the top of the line hardware/software/screen/PC. If I paid for an all in one solution, that'd be probably over $20k.

 

What's TGC? Is your garage heated?

[goatbarn]

I did put a heater in my garage. I ran black iron gas pipe to my garage and installed a Mr. Heater overhead infrared heater on a thermostat. That was probably $300 in materials.

 

TGC is "The Golf Club". Check out simulation play here at Congressional:

[northgolf]

Everything can be bought used, and all framing/screen, PC...etc. can be done DIY for 20% of what it costs to have someone do it for you.

 

I have a 20' x 22' garage with 9.5' ceilings. I put in a 10 x 9 HQ screen from Par2Pro ($300ish), built the cage myself with EMT ($50ish), 10' x 30' Netting from ebay ($100), PC ($1000, but already had this), TGC ($800, used), GC2 ($3000ish, used), CCE 5' x 5' ($300ish, used), BenQ 1080 projector ($200, ebay used).

 

Total of just under $6k. That's with the top of the line hardware/software/screen/PC. If I paid for an all in one solution, that'd be probably over $20k.

 

With your smaller space, I'd be looking at the skytrak and nothing else. Unless you want to use a Vector Pro. But radar will not have sufficient space with your setup. Go camera launch monitor...GC2, Skytrak, Vector

 

GC2 or Skytrak. I'd avoid the Vector. A year ago I would have argued GC2 only, but Skytrak has come a long way.

[wdfwguy]

What would be the minimum space you'd need for a mat, net and Skytrak?

 

We have a game room upstairs and I'm kicking around the idea of something just like this.

[iteachgolf]

What would be the minimum space you'd need for a mat, net and Skytrak?

 

We have a game room upstairs and I'm kicking around the idea of something just like this.

 

If you can swing you have enough room for camera based systems.

[that0neguy]

Does Foresight offer swing plane, swing path, angle of attack, or can only radar based systems do that? Is the only downside for camera based system the fact that it doesn't record spin as accurately? Or are there certain measurements you can get with Trackman / Flightscope that you can't get with the GC2.

 

I know the downside of Skytrack vs. GC2 is the fact that Skytrack only tracks the ball. I'd be willing to wait for a used GC2 like Goatbarn over a new Skytrack if I could grab one for $3-4k.

[iteachgolf]

Does Foresight offer swing plane, swing path, angle of attack, or can only radar based systems do that? Is the only downside for camera based system the fact that it doesn't record spin as accurately? Or are there certain measurements you can get with Trackman / Flightscope that you can't get with the GC2.

 

I know the downside of Skytrack vs. GC2 is the fact that Skytrack only tracks the ball. I'd be willing to wait for a used GC2 like Goatbarn over a new Skytrack if I could grab one for $3-4k.

 

To get club data you need HMT. And you need to double your budget. Indoors GC2 if anything will be more accurate than radar with respect to spin.

[northgolf]

Does Foresight offer swing plane, swing path, angle of attack, or can only radar based systems do that? Is the only downside for camera based system the fact that it doesn't record spin as accurately? Or are there certain measurements you can get with Trackman / Flightscope that you can't get with the GC2.

 

I know the downside of Skytrack vs. GC2 is the fact that Skytrack only tracks the ball. I'd be willing to wait for a used GC2 like Goatbarn over a new Skytrack if I could grab one for $3-4k.

 

HMT (needed to track club) almost doubles the price of GC2.

[that0neguy]

Does Foresight offer swing plane, swing path, angle of attack, or can only radar based systems do that? Is the only downside for camera based system the fact that it doesn't record spin as accurately? Or are there certain measurements you can get with Trackman / Flightscope that you can't get with the GC2.

 

I know the downside of Skytrack vs. GC2 is the fact that Skytrack only tracks the ball. I'd be willing to wait for a used GC2 like Goatbarn over a new Skytrack if I could grab one for $3-4k.

 

To get club data you need HMT. And you need to double your budget. Indoors GC2 if anything will be more accurate than radar with respect to spin.

Does Foresight offer swing plane, swing path, angle of attack, or can only radar based systems do that? Is the only downside for camera based system the fact that it doesn't record spin as accurately? Or are there certain measurements you can get with Trackman / Flightscope that you can't get with the GC2.

 

I know the downside of Skytrack vs. GC2 is the fact that Skytrack only tracks the ball. I'd be willing to wait for a used GC2 like Goatbarn over a new Skytrack if I could grab one for $3-4k.

 

HMT (needed to track club) almost doubles the price of GC2.

 

Based on both of your comments, it sounds like I can get HMT used on the market for $3-$4k similar to the simulator if I'm patient enough? And if that's the case, what features does GC2 without HMT provide over something like SkyTrak?

[iteachgolf]

Does Foresight offer swing plane, swing path, angle of attack, or can only radar based systems do that? Is the only downside for camera based system the fact that it doesn't record spin as accurately? Or are there certain measurements you can get with Trackman / Flightscope that you can't get with the GC2.

 

I know the downside of Skytrack vs. GC2 is the fact that Skytrack only tracks the ball. I'd be willing to wait for a used GC2 like Goatbarn over a new Skytrack if I could grab one for $3-4k.

 

To get club data you need HMT. And you need to double your budget. Indoors GC2 if anything will be more accurate than radar with respect to spin.

Does Foresight offer swing plane, swing path, angle of attack, or can only radar based systems do that? Is the only downside for camera based system the fact that it doesn't record spin as accurately? Or are there certain measurements you can get with Trackman / Flightscope that you can't get with the GC2.

 

I know the downside of Skytrack vs. GC2 is the fact that Skytrack only tracks the ball. I'd be willing to wait for a used GC2 like Goatbarn over a new Skytrack if I could grab one for $3-4k.

 

HMT (needed to track club) almost doubles the price of GC2.

 

Based on both of your comments, it sounds like I can get HMT used on the market for $3-$4k similar to the simulator if I'm patient enough? And if that's the case, what features does GC2 without HMT provide over something like SkyTrak?

 

Accuracy and reliability that comes from years and years of R&D. Skytrak started out buy simply purchasing another companies antiquated software patents/formulas and are playing catchup and continually updating. Skytrak will be very good eventually but they basically betatested with the early adopters and used them to find the flaws and have been fixing them as they go. The fact that GC2 is upgrade able to HMT down the road IMO makes it the only choice if you see yourself wanting club data from a camera based system.

[that0neguy]

 

Accuracy and reliability that comes from years and years of R&D. Skytrak started out buy simply purchasing another companies antiquated software patents/formulas and are playing catchup and continually updating. Skytrak will be very good eventually but they basically betatested with the early adopters and used them to find the flaws and have been fixing them as they go.

 

That's what I assumed, thank you both for all the info.

[Krt22]

I agree a camera based LM is best for that space. With 16ft you are right at the limit of the flightscope in short indoor mode, but more importantly your ceilings are pretty low for the 8ft of ball travel required.

 

I just added a flightscope Xi+ and nice sliding net like yours however, I can post pictures once I am done

[jut111]

Related question. How much room would you need behind a net to absorb impact without hitting a wall? I have a similar cramped space I've considered setting up a winter golf area.

[that0neguy]

Related question. How much room would you need behind a net to absorb impact without hitting a wall? I have a similar cramped space I've considered setting up a winter golf area.

 

I've done it with 26 inches or so, but I'd recommend 2.5 - 3 feet at minimum.

[northgolf]

I've got an impact screen in front of my net and I've been fine with 20". The screen is kept taught with bungees, so it offers more resistance than a free hanging net.

[larssonlegend]

You may have trouble swinging a driver , especially on the through swing . Similar height to my garage but I whack the ceiling when extending to a finish.

[northgolf]

8.5 is low for a driver. My ceiling in 9.5 and I just barely get away with hitting a driver off the mat (I'm 6'3").

[bg211]

 

Accuracy and reliability that comes from years and years of R&D. Skytrak started out buy simply purchasing another companies antiquated software patents/formulas and are playing catchup and continually updating. Skytrak will be very good eventually but they basically betatested with the early adopters and used them to find the flaws and have been fixing them as they go. The fact that GC2 is upgrade able to HMT down the road IMO makes it the only choice if you see yourself wanting club data from a camera based system.

 

That's not quite true. The hardware was established for sometime and comes via Rapsedo and have been a player in launch monitors for years. The software for the 'SkyTrak' release of the hardware was done by SkyGolf and certainly there was maybe a year of a 'beta' type environment. It has been stable since well before christmas now and new releases only add new features, more than addressing issues. A large amount of issues were proven to be users simply over estimating their numbers or not hitting indoors as well as outdoors. Certainly mats had a part to play as well. I would argue accuracy and reliability are very good. GC2 (without HMT) really only gives a better spin accuracy of +-50rpm vs +-250rpm. When spin is 1800rpm upwards, I would contest that the extra +-200rpm accuracy means not a lot for anyone, regardless of ability. For me, GC2 extra cost is only worth it is you are looking to go with the HMT down the road. Although Skytrak plan to implement SkyPro integration in the future (will not report strike as HMT does though).

[iteachgolf]

 

Accuracy and reliability that comes from years and years of R&D. Skytrak started out buy simply purchasing another companies antiquated software patents/formulas and are playing catchup and continually updating. Skytrak will be very good eventually but they basically betatested with the early adopters and used them to find the flaws and have been fixing them as they go. The fact that GC2 is upgrade able to HMT down the road IMO makes it the only choice if you see yourself wanting club data from a camera based system.

 

That's not quite true. The hardware was established for sometime and comes via Rapsedo and have been a player in launch monitors for years. The software for the 'SkyTrak' release of the hardware was done by SkyGolf and certainly there was maybe a year of a 'beta' type environment. It has been stable since well before christmas now and new releases only add new features, more than addressing issues. A large amount of issues were proven to be users simply over estimating their numbers or not hitting indoors as well as outdoors. Certainly mats had a part to play as well. I would argue accuracy and reliability are very good. GC2 (without HMT) really only gives a better spin accuracy of +-50rpm vs +-250rpm. When spin is 1800rpm upwards, I would contest that the extra +-200rpm accuracy means not a lot for anyone, regardless of ability. For me, GC2 extra cost is only worth it is you are looking to go with the HMT down the road. Although Skytrak plan to implement SkyPro integration in the future (will not report strike as HMT does though).

 

Hardware is the part anyone can do. The key to all launch monitors is the software and algorithms. And their ball flight model was very poor initially.

 

So you're arguing that a product that has been out since 2014 has now been stable for 6 months like that's an amazing thing? I'd say that is exactly what I'm talking about. They had a substandard product for over a year. Releases are definitely address issues and tweaking hints and not simply adding features. Skytrak has issues reading outdoors and GC2 IMO still reads hot and isn't perfect. I've had spin rates over 1,000rpms off on both GC2 and skytrak and were easily a whole club off distance wise.

[dornstar]

 

Accuracy and reliability that comes from years and years of R&D. Skytrak started out buy simply purchasing another companies antiquated software patents/formulas and are playing catchup and continually updating. Skytrak will be very good eventually but they basically betatested with the early adopters and used them to find the flaws and have been fixing them as they go. The fact that GC2 is upgrade able to HMT down the road IMO makes it the only choice if you see yourself wanting club data from a camera based system.

 

That's not quite true. The hardware was established for sometime and comes via Rapsedo and have been a player in launch monitors for years. The software for the 'SkyTrak' release of the hardware was done by SkyGolf and certainly there was maybe a year of a 'beta' type environment. It has been stable since well before christmas now and new releases only add new features, more than addressing issues. A large amount of issues were proven to be users simply over estimating their numbers or not hitting indoors as well as outdoors. Certainly mats had a part to play as well. I would argue accuracy and reliability are very good. GC2 (without HMT) really only gives a better spin accuracy of +-50rpm vs +-250rpm. When spin is 1800rpm upwards, I would contest that the extra +-200rpm accuracy means not a lot for anyone, regardless of ability. For me, GC2 extra cost is only worth it is you are looking to go with the HMT down the road. Although Skytrak plan to implement SkyPro integration in the future (will not report strike as HMT does though).

 

Hardware is the part anyone can do. The key to all launch monitors is the software and algorithms. And their ball flight model was very poor initially.

 

So you're arguing that a product that has been out since 2014 has now been stable for 6 months like that's an amazing thing? I'd say that is exactly what I'm talking about. They had a substandard product for over a year. Releases are definitely address issues and tweaking hints and not simply adding features. Skytrak has issues reading outdoors and GC2 IMO still reads hot and isn't perfect. I've had spin rates over 1,000rpms off on both GC2 and skytrak and were easily a whole club off distance wise.

I agree that SkyTrak was very rough around the edges for a while, but they have a pretty good product right now. It's not perfect, but it's certainly has come a long ways.

[iteachgolf]

 

Accuracy and reliability that comes from years and years of R&D. Skytrak started out buy simply purchasing another companies antiquated software patents/formulas and are playing catchup and continually updating. Skytrak will be very good eventually but they basically betatested with the early adopters and used them to find the flaws and have been fixing them as they go. The fact that GC2 is upgrade able to HMT down the road IMO makes it the only choice if you see yourself wanting club data from a camera based system.

 

That's not quite true. The hardware was established for sometime and comes via Rapsedo and have been a player in launch monitors for years. The software for the 'SkyTrak' release of the hardware was done by SkyGolf and certainly there was maybe a year of a 'beta' type environment. It has been stable since well before christmas now and new releases only add new features, more than addressing issues. A large amount of issues were proven to be users simply over estimating their numbers or not hitting indoors as well as outdoors. Certainly mats had a part to play as well. I would argue accuracy and reliability are very good. GC2 (without HMT) really only gives a better spin accuracy of +-50rpm vs +-250rpm. When spin is 1800rpm upwards, I would contest that the extra +-200rpm accuracy means not a lot for anyone, regardless of ability. For me, GC2 extra cost is only worth it is you are looking to go with the HMT down the road. Although Skytrak plan to implement SkyPro integration in the future (will not report strike as HMT does though).

 

Hardware is the part anyone can do. The key to all launch monitors is the software and algorithms. And their ball flight model was very poor initially.

 

So you're arguing that a product that has been out since 2014 has now been stable for 6 months like that's an amazing thing? I'd say that is exactly what I'm talking about. They had a substandard product for over a year. Releases are definitely address issues and tweaking hints and not simply adding features. Skytrak has issues reading outdoors and GC2 IMO still reads hot and isn't perfect. I've had spin rates over 1,000rpms off on both GC2 and skytrak and were easily a whole club off distance wise.

I agree that SkyTrak was very rough around the edges for a while, but they have a pretty good product right now. It's not perfect, but it's certainly has come a long ways.

 

I agree, which is exactly what I said. It will be very good and comparable, but it's not there yet. There's a reason for the price difference.

[Jrm3]

I'm glad I live in Florida and can play year round. I didn't realize how expensive these indoor set ups were.

[SadTrombone]

I love my GC2, but it's EASILY a club off in carry distance.

 

Even outside hitting real balls, it's off.

[iteachgolf]

I love my GC2, but it's EASILY a club off in carry distance.

 

Even outside hitting real balls, it's off.

 

I'm about full club longer on gc2 than reality.

[SadTrombone]

I love my GC2, but it's EASILY a club off in carry distance.

 

Even outside hitting real balls, it's off.

 

I'm about full club longer on gc2 than reality.

 

I'm pretty much right with wedges, but the longer the club, the shorter I get with GC2. I'm thinking its a spin issue.

[iteachgolf]

I love my GC2, but it's EASILY a club off in carry distance.

 

Even outside hitting real balls, it's off.

 

I'm about full club longer on gc2 than reality.

 

I'm pretty much right with wedges, but the longer the club, the shorter I get with GC2. I'm thinking its a spin issue.

 

For me opposite. Long clubs are pretty much dead on and mid to short irons read longer. Essentially fliers on every shot

[dornstar]

I'm glad I live in Florida and can play year round. I didn't realize how expensive these indoor set ups were.

I live in Florida, golf literally every day and my indoor setup is a net savings. I hit A LOT of balls though. My range pass is $250 per year and gets you $3 large buckets. I pretty much always hit 2 of them and probably did at least 250 days out of the year. That's nearly $1800. Then add in drinks, tees, etc and you have a SkyTrak paid for.

 

The difference is that I can practice in 70 degrees year round and literally do it anytime I want. If I'm in bed watching the golf channel at 11pm and get the urge to hit balls, I can. If I want to hit a few wedges with my coffee in the morning, I can do that too. I also don't have to hit crappy beat up balls. The amount of improvement I've seen since building my indoor setup has been ridiculous. Florida or not, you can't beat having an indoor simulator. It's literally one of the best purchases I've ever made in my life.