GC2 with HMT vs GCQuad

Pomps · January 23, 2017

Hi Folks,

I'm in the process of buying a house with the main intention of having room for an indoor studio with simulator. I see Foresight has a new GCQuad out. I have used the GC2 with HMT many times, but has anyone tried and compared the GCQuad against it? Any information would be helpful...thanks!

DatSliceDoe · January 24, 2017

I'm sure there will be some comparisons made at this years PGA merch show. I'd wait on buying until you see for yourself.

taylorx300 · January 24, 2017

The quad is $14K and won't ship till end of feb. They are offering a trade in on old GC2 units so I would imagine they will be refurbishing those and selling them again. The quad by specs is trying to compete with the radar based units but in the flyer I received it stated carry distance is calculated... not good for that price

LaterOn61 · January 24, 2017

The quad is $14K and won't ship till end of feb. They are offering a trade in on old GC2 units so I would imagine they will be refurbishing those and selling them again. The quad by specs is trying to compete with the radar based units but in the flyer I received it stated carry distance is calculated... not good for that price

The Quad will sell for $18k not $14k.

ronsc1985 · January 24, 2017

The quad is $14K and won't ship till end of feb. They are offering a trade in on old GC2 units so I would imagine they will be refurbishing those and selling them again. The quad by specs is trying to compete with the radar based units but in the flyer I received it stated carry distance is calculated... not good for that price

Did you even read the OP? He is constructing an indoor simulation space. All units be they radar or camera based calculate the carry distance indoors.

As to the original question. the quad has better error tolerances then a GC2 HMT combo. In either case they are better than any radar unit indoors and also outdoors except for the carry distance which is calculated.

It also has a much larger area from which to hit the ball. The quad does also not use a flash tube for shot illumination so that is not a maintenance item as it is in the GC2. This isn't a big deal since anyone with minimal mechanical and soldering skills can fix one with a faulty flash tube for less then 10 bucks.

Whether it is worth the price differential is your decision. You can probably get a GC2 HMT combo new for less then 12.5 K or so. Used is usually a lot cheaper except there are not a lot of HMT used units around.

When you are pricing the total don't forget to add in the cost of the software, simulation computer, projector and cage/enclosure/hitting screen you are planing to acquire/build.

RCorsa · February 3, 2017

Actually you are both off. The quad is 15k and the software fsx is 3k. I have a gc2 and HMT and the trade in is around 8k. I already have fsx so I'm all in for an extra 7. I'm getting my unit next week (shipped yesterday)

taylorx300 · February 3, 2017

Sorry but again I have a quote from my rep for 14k. Either way I will pass since the new trackman will also replace our Sam lab as well

redraider1685 · February 3, 2017

the quad is a better packaged finished product, the tolerances are tighter along with several other tweaks

is it revolutionary? No. But it is definitely a good step up from the pieced together gc2/hmt system

I believe the quad is the way to go especially indoors

RCorsa · February 6, 2017

Sorry you don't have all the info. $14k is the cost of GCQ with "ball data alone" but including the required FSX software which is $3k. (11k+3k =14k) if you want the GCQ with ball data AND club head data it's $15,000 for the unit and $3000 for the software which is why you keep hearing its $18,000. I've confirmed this with corporate at foresight. I already have FSX as I bought it last year with my GC2/HMT so my total cost is $15K minus the trade in value they are giving me back on the GC2/HMT as they are not discontinuing the GC2 but will refurbish them and resell. I'll get my unit this week.

Gerard_N · February 7, 2017

Like OP I am in the early planning stages of a home simulator, and have the GC2 in mind. I don't see how the Quad can be worth the extra $$$ over the GC2 but will wait for some reviews.

Is the $3k for FSX a permanent license for the software!?

tx33 · February 7, 2017

Sorry you don't have all the info. $14k is the cost of GCQ with "ball data alone" but including the required FSX software which is $3k. (11k+3k =14k) if you want the GCQ with ball data AND club head data it's $15,000 for the unit and $3000 for the software which is why you keep hearing its $18,000. I've confirmed this with corporate at foresight. I already have FSX as I bought it last year with my GC2/HMT so my total cost is $15K minus the trade in value they are giving me back on the GC2/HMT as they are not discontinuing the GC2 but will refurbish them and resell. I'll get my unit this week.

These $$ are in line with the quote I got from my Foresight rep. Just waiting to hear back on the trade in value for my devices before I decide.

Like OP I am in the early planning stages of a home simulator, and have the GC2 in mind. I don't see how the Quad can be worth the extra $$$ over the GC2 but will wait for some reviews.

Is the $3k for FSX a permanent license for the software!?

As I see it, the Quad is basically a 'tighter' GC2+HMT in a single package at a similar price point. If you just want an indoor sim (play mode) just the GC2 will do fine, but for lessons or fitting IMHO the HMT funcationality is a must.

The license I have is permanent, but I don't know if they offer any subscription plans nowadays.

RCorsa · February 7, 2017

I think without HMT gc2 is an overpriced ball flight simulator. You'd do just as well getting an Earnest sports or sky track for a lot less money. Adding HMT is truly game changing as we all know the ball does what the club is doing at impact and we only have control of the club. So for fitting and importantly game improvement you need details like attack angle, club path, club speed and strike location so you can effectively change your game. The quad for me is about it the small improv,ends but also the better portable unit. I tried taking my gc2/HMT to my club only and it was combersome to carry two units that are awkward and hard to see in daylight. The quad addresses all of this and IMO is a trackman killer..

RCorsa · February 7, 2017

Yes FSX is a perminant license but non transferable. The Bluetooth on GC2/HMT will allow you to use other software. The GCQ is getting rid of Bluetooth and will force you to use FSX.

Gerard_N · February 8, 2017

Yes FSX is a perminant license but non transferable. The Bluetooth on GC2/HMT will allow you to use other software. The GCQ is getting rid of Bluetooth and will force you to use FSX.

Clearly you are happier with FSX over TGC then? Please keep us updated with some comparisons to previous model when your quad arrives.

Also, I read on another forum there could also be an activation charge for the HMT feature - Is it then possible to buy the base quad, and unlock HMT at a later stage?

redraider1685 · February 8, 2017

I think without HMT gc2 is an overpriced ball flight simulator. You'd do just as well getting an Earnest sports or sky track for a lot less money. Adding HMT is truly game changing as we all know the ball does what the club is doing at impact and we only have control of the club. So for fitting and importantly game improvement you need details like attack angle, club path, club speed and strike location so you can effectively change your game. The quad for me is about it the small improv,ends but also the better portable unit. I tried taking my gc2/HMT to my club only and it was combersome to carry two units that are awkward and hard to see in daylight. The quad addresses all of this and IMO is a trackman killer..

GC2 is way more accurate and consistent versus the skytrak and ES models, especially when you value spin readings

Gerard_N · February 9, 2017

Also, I read on another forum there could also be an activation charge for the HMT feature - Is it then possible to buy the base quad, and unlock HMT at a later stage?

Confirmed from foresight to be true - you will simply pay the difference to unlock the HMT data at a later stage.

The base unit will also come with a 30 day trial of the club data, for the EU/UK at least.

RCorsa · February 10, 2017

Got the quad last night and the GC2/HMT leaving today. I'll have a review up shortly

Gerard_N · February 10, 2017

Very nice

andfri · February 13, 2017

Any update on Gc Quad Reviews?

vpexp · March 4, 2017

Any GC Quad users?

RCorsa · March 5, 2017

Yep

GolfMonster2 · July 30, 2017

Hey, I am looking at a GC Quad. I note they are selling for $US18K with the FSX software. To buy where I live (outside the US) the package is going to cost about 5K more (regardless of the relevant taxes)! They are saying the units (?software) will only work in the country of purchase, which seems a bit restrictive given a proportion of their market would be touring pros? Can anyone shed some light on this? Many thanks!

augustgolf · July 30, 2017

Yep

Any reviews yet or was it placed in another forum?

cch1976 · September 22, 2017

I think without HMT gc2 is an overpriced ball flight simulator. You'd do just as well getting an Earnest sports or sky track for a lot less money. Adding HMT is truly game changing as we all know the ball does what the club is doing at impact and we only have control of the club. So for fitting and importantly game improvement you need details like attack angle, club path, club speed and strike location so you can effectively change your game. The quad for me is about it the small improv,ends but also the better portable unit. I tried taking my gc2/HMT to my club only and it was combersome to carry two units that are awkward and hard to see in daylight. The quad addresses all of this and IMO is a trackman killer..

Actually, the Gc2 with HMT tracks the ball and club head independently of each other. So does the Quad which is just sick!

BlazinPond · November 12, 2017

Got the quad last night and the GC2/HMT leaving today. I'll have a review up shortly

My Quad w/ FSX is coming next week.

Would love to hear more about your experience in the interim....

I'm still debating the extra software (normally 4k extra but only 3k w/ purchase).

Thanks in advance!

thepinkbomber · December 19, 2017

Curious if anyone can give a comparison between the GC2 HMT versus the QUAD.

I have the GC2 but want the head information. My application will be for an indoor practice studio so I don't need to move it or take it outdoors. I also only use it on the range or in club fitting mode for training and don't use the simulator / game stuff.

The QUAD is very expensive and I don't know if I get much more with it than if I just purchased the HMT.

Do you notice any accuracy differences between the two? Foresight says it reduces the measurement errors by half. Cutting a 50RPM spin error down to 25RPM doesn't seem like you will see it that much for example. Or cutting a 0.5deg launch angle error to 0.25 will do the same.

The QUAD will get your altitude correct so the errors experienced due to that are fixed but I am only 350 ft above sea level. GC2 assumes sea level. I think I should see about 0.5% less distance on the GC2 compared to outdoors in my area at +350ft I think. I wish I can adjust that with the GC2 but not at the price of the QUAD.

Thanks.

LEO MODE · June 30, 2018

Curious if anyone can give a comparison between the GC2 HMT versus the QUAD.

I have the GC2 but want the head information. My application will be for an indoor practice studio so I don't need to move it or take it outdoors. I also only use it on the range or in club fitting mode for training and don't use the simulator / game stuff.

The QUAD is very expensive and I don't know if I get much more with it than if I just purchased the HMT.

Do you notice any accuracy differences between the two? Foresight says it reduces the measurement errors by half. Cutting a 50RPM spin error down to 25RPM doesn't seem like you will see it that much for example. Or cutting a 0.5deg launch angle error to 0.25 will do the same.

The QUAD will get your altitude correct so the errors experienced due to that are fixed but I am only 350 ft above sea level. GC2 assumes sea level. I think I should see about 0.5% less distance on the GC2 compared to outdoors in my area at +350ft I think. I wish I can adjust that with the GC2 but not at the price of the QUAD.

Thanks.

If you're only going to use it for indoor, GC2 will be more than enough for you. GC Quad will be over-wasting your money. If you're going to use it for outdoor 50% of your time, GC Quad will worth every penny because it has 1) much bigger hitting area, 2) alignment stick to point out your target, 3) altimeter/barometer to grasp better carry distance and 4) battery that lasts longer (lithium ion vs gc2's old type nickel or something).

Data-wise, don't expect anything dramatic. There is little to no difference in my comparison. One thing I do want to mention to you is, the longer the club gets (i.e. driver, 3 wood, etc.) your carry might be slightly longer than real life (around 10yds longer). Foresight doesn't have a perfect carry algorithm for longer clubs yet. But irons it should be spot-on.

thepinkbomber · December 7, 2018

Has anyone done an accuracy comparison between HMT and Quad?

My HMT seems to be draw biased. Curious if the Quad carry and ball projections are more accurate with Quad and new software.

LEO MODE · December 9, 2018

Has anyone done an accuracy comparison between HMT and Quad?

My HMT seems to be draw biased. Curious if the Quad carry and ball projections are more accurate with Quad and new software.

You mean GC2 is draw biased.

I own both GC2+HMT and GCQ. They are pretty much the same. I wouldn't buy GCQ thinking it's more accurate. GCQ is more of a convenient upgrade rather than performance upgrade in my opinion.

thepinkbomber · December 9, 2018

Has anyone done an accuracy comparison between HMT and Quad?

My HMT seems to be draw biased. Curious if the Quad carry and ball projections are more accurate with Quad and new software.

You mean GC2 is draw biased.
I own both GC2+HMT and GCQ. They are pretty much the same. I wouldn't buy GCQ thinking it's more accurate. GCQ is more of a convenient upgrade rather than performance upgrade in my opinion.

Do you notice the draw bias also? Foresight confirmed they got these reports on GC2. They said they have not gotten these reports on the Quad - but could be trying to sell a new unit. They did say they both have the same calculation engine so it should be the same but they said the quaid cut the error tolerances into at least half of the GC2 because of more cameras. Do you see a draw bias on GC2 but not on Quad?