What are the real advantages of GCQuad-GC2 over SkyTrak

[golfer55082]

I have a SkyTrak and like it. But I have read arguments that "serious" golfers need to move to GC2 or GCQuad or Trackman. After doing some research, I don't find convincing reasons to make this upgrade. This is besides the fact of huge price difference. Overall,

 

- GC2/Quad is not more accurate than SkyTrak in indoor setting to measure ball distance, backspin and launch angle;

- QC2/Quad is not more accurate than SkyTrak in indoor setting to measure ball side angle and side spin; (I started from the assumption that GC2/Quad is definitely more accurate than SkyTrak in this regard but cannot find any credible quotation or literature. Please share if you find anywhere)

- QC2/Quad with HMT can provide club data e.g., face angle, swing path, and attack angle. (However, I don't think I need club data because the ball data - especially side angle and side spin - is largely sufficient to diagnose and correct golf swings)

- Trackman is LIKELY LESS accurate than SkyTrak in indoor setting to measure ball side angle and side spin;

- Trackman is MUCH MORE accurate than SkyTrak in outdoor setting. (Be able to follow and measure the true ball flight is a huge advantage of Trackman - I assume this explains the popularity on the tour. However, I am not looking at using any launch monitor outdoors)

 

What do you think? I welcome to be corrected.

[DFinch]

It really comes down to outdoor/lighting conditions.

 

If you're exclusively indoor, I think Skytrak at it's price point is absolutely the way to go. If you're also taking it to the range, GC2 doesn't have the sunlight/reading issues that Skytrak does.

 

Indoors, the camera systems like Skytrak/GC2 are better and take less space than the radar units.

 

If Skytrak worked better in sunlight, I'd already own one. Since I want to set up an indoor range but also want the ability to take it to the outdoor range during the season, I haven't pulled the trigger on any of the existing systems because the price jump is too steep. I'm working toward a GC2 while also hoping that someone comes in and produces a more economical indoor/outdoor solution.

[golfer55082]

It really comes down to outdoor/lighting conditions.

 

If you're exclusively indoor, I think Skytrak at it's price point is absolutely the way to go. If you're also taking it to the range, GC2 doesn't have the sunlight/reading issues that Skytrak does.

 

Indoors, the camera systems like Skytrak/GC2 are better and take less space than the radar units.

 

If Skytrak worked better in sunlight, I'd already own one. Since I want to set up an indoor range but also want the ability to take it to the outdoor range during the season, I haven't pulled the trigger on any of the existing systems because the price jump is too steep. I'm working toward a GC2 while also hoping that someone comes in and produces a more economical indoor/outdoor solution.

. I like your balanced input. But I doubt the value of using GC2/GCQUAD outdoors. Based on what I read about the lack of accuracy in side axis in GCx, the observed offline will likely be different from, and more accurate than, the GCx reading. Trackman outdoors then yes because it tracks the entire ball flight.

[grant2145]

Having owned both I've found the ball data and flight algorithms of the GC2 and SkyTrak are very close. The GC2 is much more reliable and won't miss shots as the SkyTrak is known to do and many people have said the SkyTrak won't work at all in sunny outdoor conditions. I also have the HMT and find the info it gives invaluable when making slight swing changes.

[DFinch]

It really comes down to outdoor/lighting conditions.

 

If you're exclusively indoor, I think Skytrak at it's price point is absolutely the way to go. If you're also taking it to the range, GC2 doesn't have the sunlight/reading issues that Skytrak does.

 

Indoors, the camera systems like Skytrak/GC2 are better and take less space than the radar units.

 

If Skytrak worked better in sunlight, I'd already own one. Since I want to set up an indoor range but also want the ability to take it to the outdoor range during the season, I haven't pulled the trigger on any of the existing systems because the price jump is too steep. I'm working toward a GC2 while also hoping that someone comes in and produces a more economical indoor/outdoor solution.

. I like your balanced input. But I doubt the value of using GC2/GCQUAD outdoors. Based on what I read about the lack of accuracy in side axis in GCx, the observed offline will likely be different from, and more accurate than, the GCx reading. Trackman outdoors then yes because it tracks the entire ball flight.

 

I'd absolutely prefer radar outdoors, but I don't see that technology catching up with camera systems for indoor use in terms of space. I think that's why we are starting to see units that try to utilize both (ES 20/20 and, to a much lesser degree, Flightscope X3), but nothing exists yet that brings the best of both worlds and certainly not in an affordable package. I think from what's currently available, I'd rather risk some outdoor accuracy (where I really just want speed, launch angle, and spin since I can see the flight) than have to deal with the limits of indoor radar.

[golfer55082]

Having owned both I've found the ball data and flight algorithms of the GC2 and SkyTrak are very close. The GC2 is much more reliable and won't miss shots as the SkyTrak is known to do and many people have said the SkyTrak won't work at all in sunny outdoor conditions. I also have the HMT and find the info it gives invaluable when making slight swing changes.

 

Thanks for the information. If missing shots is a concern then I consider myself lucky because my SkyTrak almost always pick up shots. Maybe it’s my setup or light and environment etc - it just works. For the club data..yes, there is absolutely value and I still struggle to see how much value and if it’s worth the price premium.

[manima1]

What about the slow readout of the Skytrak vs. GC2? That alone would seem to get bothersome.

 

Also, is multiplayer still not an option during WGT mode?

 

Those are 2 big negatives that have nothing to do with accuracy.

[Krt22]

I have a SkyTrak and like it. But I have read arguments that "serious" golfers need to move to GC2 or GCQuad or Trackman. After doing some research, I don't find convincing reasons to make this upgrade. This is besides the fact of huge price difference. Overall,

 

- GC2/Quad is not more accurate than SkyTrak in indoor setting to measure ball distance, backspin and launch angle;

- QC2/Quad is not more accurate than SkyTrak in indoor setting to measure ball side angle and side spin; (I started from the assumption that GC2/Quad is definitely more accurate than SkyTrak in this regard but cannot find any credible quotation or literature. Please share if you find anywhere)

- QC2/Quad with HMT can provide club data e.g., face angle, swing path, and attack angle. (However, I don't think I need club data because the ball data - especially side angle and side spin - is largely sufficient to diagnose and correct golf swings)

- Trackman is LIKELY LESS accurate than SkyTrak in indoor setting to measure ball side angle and side spin;

- Trackman is MUCH MORE accurate than SkyTrak in outdoor setting. (Be able to follow and measure the true ball flight is a huge advantage of Trackman - I assume this explains the popularity on the tour. However, I am not looking at using any launch monitor outdoors)

 

What do you think? I welcome to be corrected.

 

Minus that trackman is more accurate outdoors, I don't think any of these statements are correct.

 

Skytrak and GC2/Quad use the same technology, but GC2/quad has a much higher data sampling rate and thus is inherently more accurate (300FPS vs 10,000FPS) . At higher ball speeds (160+) the amount of data skytrak captures really isnt enough to accurately measure spin/velocity.

 

Trackman indoors is very accurate for ball speed. Spin can be very accurate as well as long as it's setup correctly

 

With that being said, skytrak can still an extremely useful tool given it's price point and the performance delta might not be justifiable depending on your own swing/skill.

[golfer55082]

Skytrak and GC2/Quad use the same technology, but GC2/quad has a much higher data sampling rate and thus is inherently more accurate (300FPS vs 10,000FPS)

 

I am very motivated to see a side-by-side comparison to prove this. Being "Inherently" more accurate is not enough to draw the conclusion without the support of explicit data; it would explain a test result that GC2/Guad is more accurate than SkyTrak but the "test" has to precede the explanation. SkyTrak has a published data tolerance of 2° (+/-) in side angle; one search I read, Foresight does not do much better in this regard. To directly cite the research: "There was also notable systematic bias of 1–2° in the launch direction measurements from Foresight.".....

[Krt22]

Good reading in here

 

http://www.golfwrx.com/forums/topic/1587258-skytrak-new-model/page__st__60

[sdrthedj]

HLA on higher launch shots is not as good on Skytrak vs GC2. GC2 measurable tolerances are smaller than skytrak and more reliable.

 

[golfer55082]

HLA on higher launch shots is not as good on Skytrak vs GC2. GC2 measurable tolerances are smaller than skytrak and more reliable.

 

SkyTrak only shows whole numbers in side angles and GC2 displays to first decimal point. It is fair to conclude that GC2 is probably more accurate. No objections here ( even though I still like to see data from side-by-side comparison test )

[rmyoung88]

Have owned both, people pretty much covered everything.

 

Skytrak:

Pros - price, accurate indoors, borderline unusable outdoors (I say borderline because I used my skytrak outdoors only for 2 years and you need shade) great UI and the app is beautiful

 

Gc2 + hmt pros - accurate, club data is amazing if you take lessons with someone who can coach you with the same type of tech

 

If you are going to use indoors and are absolutely sure you'll never need club data.. skytrak all the way. If your interested in path face delivery loft impact point delivery angle club speed etc get yourself a gc2 hmt.

 

Both can partner with tgc which imo is the best simulator

[Stuart_G]

I have a SkyTrak and like it. But I have read arguments that "serious" golfers need to move to GC2 or GCQuad or Trackman. After doing some research, I don't find convincing reasons to make this upgrade. This is besides the fact of huge price difference. Overall,

 

- GC2/Quad is not more accurate than SkyTrak in indoor setting to measure ball distance, backspin and launch angle;

- QC2/Quad is not more accurate than SkyTrak in indoor setting to measure ball side angle and side spin; (I started from the assumption that GC2/Quad is definitely more accurate than SkyTrak in this regard but cannot find any credible quotation or literature. Please share if you find anywhere)

- QC2/Quad with HMT can provide club data e.g., face angle, swing path, and attack angle. (However, I don't think I need club data because the ball data - especially side angle and side spin - is largely sufficient to diagnose and correct golf swings)

- Trackman is LIKELY LESS accurate than SkyTrak in indoor setting to measure ball side angle and side spin;

- Trackman is MUCH MORE accurate than SkyTrak in outdoor setting. (Be able to follow and measure the true ball flight is a huge advantage of Trackman - I assume this explains the popularity on the tour. However, I am not looking at using any launch monitor outdoors)

 

What do you think? I welcome to be corrected.

 

Since you mentioned "Credible Evidence" you should realize there really is none of that to either support or dispute any of your conclusions. The only proper and fully credible study I've seen compared GC2 to TM3 indoors - and the conclusion was that both were plenty accurate enough to meet even the most picky player/instructors needs.

 

For indoor use - either for self improvement or sim use, in these type of internet discussions, "accuracy" get's flagged as a buying point WAY more than it should. When talking about Skytrack, Flightscope, Trackman, or Foresight units - the differences in accuracy (when units are properly set-up) is just too small to be meaningful. It will have ZERO impact on your ability to have fun in the sim or to effectively work on your swing.

 

The main reason NOT to get a Skytrack is if 1) you want to use it outdoors or 2) you really think you need club data in addition to the ball data - or 3) want to be able to handle left and right handed players in a single session easily (which is a similar point against GC2/GCQuad).

 

[rant]

Or maybe if you are like me and strongly disagree with their subscription pricing policy. Sorry, no I'm not going to pay ST a yearly fee just so I can use some one else's sim software (that I also have to pay for on top of the ST subscription).

[/rant]

[xludan]

I've owned both and use my simulator 4-5 times a week. I can tell you that GC2 was a huge step up from skytrak for me. Here are some of the driving factors.

 

-Skytrak is very unreliable with higher swingspeeds (my driver is around 170mph ball speed). This is a known issue (visit golf simulator forum and look it up). My neighbor has a VERY high ball speed (190mph driver) and it only read every other drive for him and was very inacurrate when it did read. GC2 reads both of our drivers perfectly and misreads are very rare. This is probably due to the frame rate of the skytrak vs the GC2. I believe GC2 is around 10,000 fps and skytrak is only 300fps.

 

-Skytrak lag got annoying after a while

 

-Skytrak misread a lot of shots (probably 1 in 25 shots). GC2 misreads maybe 1 in 200. I messed with the lighting quite a bit in my golf simulator to get skytrak right and could never get it to get rid of misreads.

 

-Skytrak is VERY finicky with lining it up correctly and getting it leveled. If you don't have a permanent installation it is hard to get skytrak aligned correctly everytime. This makes a huge difference as to how it calculates the ball flight. Look this up online and you will see many stories of people trying to find the correct way to align the skytrak. Especially since the level dot on top of the skytrak unit is notoriously inaccurate.

 

With all that said GC2 is a big step up in price. I would say I was 60% happy with skytrak. I have no complaints with GC2 and everyone that has upgraded usually wishes they had done it sooner. Hope this helps.

[golfer55082]

Thanks. For the yearly subscription of SkyTrak, it’s $100 for practice package plus $100 for WGT play. I don’t like this as a consumer but it’s a good business model for Skygolf. Plus it’s at least affordable, not like Trackman in that you have to play $1k a year to get software up to date.

 

I have a SkyTrak and like it. But I have read arguments that "serious" golfers need to move to GC2 or GCQuad or Trackman. After doing some research, I don't find convincing reasons to make this upgrade. This is besides the fact of huge price difference. Overall,

 

- GC2/Quad is not more accurate than SkyTrak in indoor setting to measure ball distance, backspin and launch angle;

- QC2/Quad is not more accurate than SkyTrak in indoor setting to measure ball side angle and side spin; (I started from the assumption that GC2/Quad is definitely more accurate than SkyTrak in this regard but cannot find any credible quotation or literature. Please share if you find anywhere)

- QC2/Quad with HMT can provide club data e.g., face angle, swing path, and attack angle. (However, I don't think I need club data because the ball data - especially side angle and side spin - is largely sufficient to diagnose and correct golf swings)

- Trackman is LIKELY LESS accurate than SkyTrak in indoor setting to measure ball side angle and side spin;

- Trackman is MUCH MORE accurate than SkyTrak in outdoor setting. (Be able to follow and measure the true ball flight is a huge advantage of Trackman - I assume this explains the popularity on the tour. However, I am not looking at using any launch monitor outdoors)

 

What do you think? I welcome to be corrected.

 

Since you mentioned "Credible Evidence" you should realize there really is none of that to either support or dispute any of your conclusions. The only proper and fully credible study I've seen compared GC2 to TM3 indoors - and the conclusion was that both were plenty accurate enough to meet even the most picky player/instructors needs.

 

For indoor use - either for self improvement or sim use, in these type of internet discussions, "accuracy" get's flagged as a buying point WAY more than it should. When talking about Skytrack, Flightscope, Trackman, or Foresight units - the differences in accuracy (when units are properly set-up) is just too small to be meaningful. It will have ZERO impact on your ability to have fun in the sim or to effectively work on your swing.

 

The main reason NOT to get a Skytrack is if 1) you want to use it outdoors or 2) you really think you need club data in addition to the ball data - or 3) want to be able to handle left and right handed players in a single session easily (which is a similar point against GC2/GCQuad).

 

[rant]

Or maybe if you are like me and strongly disagree with their subscription pricing policy. Sorry, no I'm not going to pay ST a yearly fee just so I can use some one else's sim software (that I also have to pay for on top of the ST subscription).

[/rant]

[golfer55082]

Very helpful. Thanks. ... your neighbor with 190 mph speed !! Is he a long drive competitor? Just curious..

 

I've owned both and use my simulator 4-5 times a week. I can tell you that GC2 was a huge step up from skytrak for me. Here are some of the driving factors.

 

-Skytrak is very unreliable with higher swingspeeds (my driver is around 170mph ball speed). This is a known issue (visit golf simulator forum and look it up). My neighbor has a VERY high ball speed (190mph driver) and it only read every other drive for him and was very inacurrate when it did read. GC2 reads both of our drivers perfectly and misreads are very rare. This is probably due to the frame rate of the skytrak vs the GC2. I believe GC2 is around 10,000 fps and skytrak is only 300fps.

 

-Skytrak lag got annoying after a while

 

-Skytrak misread a lot of shots (probably 1 in 25 shots). GC2 misreads maybe 1 in 200. I messed with the lighting quite a bit in my golf simulator to get skytrak right and could never get it to get rid of misreads.

 

-Skytrak is VERY finicky with lining it up correctly and getting it leveled. If you don't have a permanent installation it is hard to get skytrak aligned correctly everytime. This makes a huge difference as to how it calculates the ball flight. Look this up online and you will see many stories of people trying to find the correct way to align the skytrak. Especially since the level dot on top of the skytrak unit is notoriously inaccurate.

 

With all that said GC2 is a big step up in price. I would say I was 60% happy with skytrak. I have no complaints with GC2 and everyone that has upgraded usually wishes they had done it sooner. Hope this helps.

[Stuart_G]

For the yearly subscription of SkyTrak, it's $100 for practice package plus $100 for WGT play. I don't like this as a consumer but it's a good business model for Skygolf.

 

Of course it's good for SkyTrack to get "money for nothing" :-)

[grant2145]

For the yearly subscription of SkyTrak, it's $100 for practice package plus $100 for WGT play. I don't like this as a consumer but it's a good business model for Skygolf.

 

Of course it's good for SkyTrack to get "money for nothing" :-)

 

I wish Foresight's business model was more like SkyTrak. Thank goodness Foresight didn't encrypt the Bluetooth on the GC2 which would have blocked third-party software options.

[golfer55082]

It is amazing. My best guess is that the "free-money" from subscription brings in $1 million to $3 million a year for SkyGolf.

 

For the yearly subscription of SkyTrak, it's $100 for practice package plus $100 for WGT play. I don't like this as a consumer but it's a good business model for Skygolf.

 

Of course it's good for SkyTrack to get "money for nothing" :-)

[Stuart_G]

I wish Foresight's business model was more like SkyTrak. Thank goodness Foresight didn't encrypt the Bluetooth on the GC2 which would have blocked third-party software options.

 

It's not the encryption that's an issue - they all do that to some degree. It's the choice not to integrate with anyone elses sim software that's the key problem w/ Foresight's model.

 

But that's actually good news for GC2 owners (or prospective owners) in that it means the GC2 units will hold it's resale value very well.

 

 

It is amazing. My best guess is that the "free-money" from subscription brings in $1 million to $3 million a year for SkyGolf.

 

And it only works because there is no real competition in the same price range. Some people do see it as better to shell out $100-200 a year (for 'nothing') than to shell out and additional $2-3,000.00 in up front costs. (despite the equity in the higher up front cost).

[coreyhr]

I'll start by saying that I owned a Skytrak before getting my GC2. If sim play is a priority, GC2 is far superior in my opinion. I find it to be much better for chipping, pitching and putting. The smaller tolerances allow you to be more creative and hit a wider array of shots. Like mentioned above, horizontal launch angles are much tighter on GC2. I didn't see a large variance on much of the other data though. If you're just looking simply for range type data, then I can't say that the price increase is justified. I however do love not having to put my ball so close to the Skytrak, and the no delay is obviously a huge plus. I never had a problem with missed shots because I used wifi instead of the USB connection (doing this drastically reduces "no reads").

[golfer55082]

“

And it only works because there is no real competition in the same price range. Some people do see it as better to shell out $100-200 a year (for 'nothing') than to shell out and additional $2-3,000.00 in up front costs. (despite the equity in the higher up front cost).”

 

There is no real competition in high-end camera-based launch monitor market either - this is why Foresight can charge whatever price thay want i.e., $4k for a club data license, $3k for basic software, $2.5k for putting software, all on top of $11k hardware.

[dg_1983]

I have a skytrak, it's awesome. Would I trade you for a GC2? Yes. +HMT? Yes. Quad? Yes.

 

Can I justify the gains Vs cost. Nah.

 

Shot vs delay lag - some folks must have a hard time during 5.5hr rounds if a 3 second delay gets tiring!

[bonvivantva]

I've never played with a GC2, but I do own a skytrak and have played simulated rounds on a trackman.  All my experience is indoors, so I can't speak to outdoor use at all.  With trackman, the club data you don't get from skytrak is pretty cool.  I think trackman club data could really be utilized to help beginners really conceptually understand the golf swing.  Face to path in particular.  To see that your path is 5 degrees in to out, and you club 2 degrees open when you hit a nice draw can really help you understand the conditions that affect shape in a way that just explaining it to someone can't.  So even though I don't have experience with the HMT, certainly I can understand why club data could be of value.

 

If you look youtube, you can find video of people concurrently running skytrak and GC2.  I've watched a few of the videos, and they all seem to conclude that the numbers are pretty similar until you get way up there in swing speed.  For me, that's a non-issue, but if you really swing the club I guess you could have some issues with skytrak.

 

The only two things that really seem to differentiate the two units are price and delay.  Personally, I appreciate the skytrak delay.  For practice, it prevents me from raking and rushing.  I'll admit that I'd prefer no delay when I'm playing a simulated course, but for the range, it's almost like a safety setting for not rushing.

[AmateurAmateur]

Pumping life back into this thread.... I have to say that the GC Quad is significantly more accurate than the skytrak. In my experience as a high level amateur player who knows his clubs within 1-2 yards, Skytrak was unreliable. The same shots I know would be a slight draw or a slight fade in the summer on trackman, would regularly be pushes and pulls with no ball movement on the skytrak. Carry distances were off the further I would hit it, and shot shape was sketchy at best. If you are a patient person, maybe Skytrak can work for you, but in my personal experience having used both Skytrak and GC Quad indoors, a 90 minute practice session on the skytrak involved 30 minutes of getting it set up correctly (as anything other than perfect results in horrible feedback), and probably another 25-30 minutes of deleting misreads.

Essentially, it depends on if your patience is greater than your budget. 

[Fairways_and_Greens]

My Skytrak struggles with ball speed over 166.

[MysteryV]

The delay everyone talks about is something I've never experienced.  I've been running mine on an iPad Pro for 2 or 3 years, and never had an issue.

 

I run into "finnicky network issues"  about once every 6 months - where the units won't connect, and it gets frustrating, but I'm not sure where that issue lies (my network, their servers, the Skytrak unit, iPad, etc.).  It usually resolves itself relatively quickly.

 

Oddly, missed shots tend to come more from certain clubs than others.  My Miura Baby Blades were notoriously bad for missed shots, while my PXGs register 99.5% of the time.  I think quite a bit has to do with reflectivity, ferrule color,  surface reflection, etc. - but that's really just a guess.

 

I'm considering upgrading to a GC Quad as I'd really like to get club data to start building out some feels.  I tend to have a very neutral path, which leads to the dreaded 2-way miss, and think more consistent club data is the way to get that sorted.

 

That said, if Skytrak released an HMT of their own for a couple grand - I'd likely buy that before moving to the GC Quad.  Not sure why they haven't yet...

[Bubbtubbs]

On 12/30/2020 at 12:38 PM, MysteryV said:

The delay everyone talks about is something I've never experienced.  I've been running mine on an iPad Pro for 2 or 3 years, and never had an issue.

 

I run into "finnicky network issues"  about once every 6 months - where the units won't connect, and it gets frustrating, but I'm not sure where that issue lies (my network, their servers, the Skytrak unit, iPad, etc.).  It usually resolves itself relatively quickly.

 

Oddly, missed shots tend to come more from certain clubs than others.  My Miura Baby Blades were notoriously bad for missed shots, while my PXGs register 99.5% of the time.  I think quite a bit has to do with reflectivity, ferrule color,  surface reflection, etc. - but that's really just a guess.

 

I'm considering upgrading to a GC Quad as I'd really like to get club data to start building out some feels.  I tend to have a very neutral path, which leads to the dreaded 2-way miss, and think more consistent club data is the way to get that sorted.

 

That said, if Skytrak released an HMT of their own for a couple grand - I'd likely buy that before moving to the GC Quad.  Not sure why they haven't yet...

If you're having to finish swinging and look down at a device, you wouldn't notice. You'll see the delay if you're using a projector, though. The fastest ST can be is 2s from shot to display.

[MysteryV]

1 minute ago, Bubbtubbs said:

If you're having to finish swinging and look down at a device, you wouldn't notice. You'll see the delay if you're using a projector, though. The fastest ST can be is 2s from shot to display.

 

Makes sense.  Not the way I use it, so I suppose it doesn't really bother me much.