Flightscope Mevo $424 @ Amazon

[Golfrnut]

Just a heads up for anyone that has money burning a hole in their pocket.

 

https://www.amazon.com/FlightScope-Mevo-Portable-Personal-Monitor/dp/B07L52KP31

[fsutanker]

I got in on this last week. $424 delivered in about 14 hours.

The MEVO is very cool. Still trying to figure out how to use it to improve. Also how to dial in my distances while accommodating for Range Ball disparities.

[MrMojoRisen]

Unfortunately the mevo is junk. tested next to a trackman and GCQuad - the numbers were 7-12 yards off for carry numbers but it wasn't consistent either some were longer some were shorter when on trackman they showed them landing a couple of yards from another which was also physically verified - you can get the same inaccurate numbers from much cheaper units. They priced the mevo just high enough to make people think it "should" be more accurate than the cheaper units but still "more affordable" than actual accurate launch monitors which go for 10k+

 

If you need real numbers go work with a pro in your area who has access to a trackman. Just think - you can get 5 one hour sessions for the price of the mevo.

[Golfrnut]

> @MrMojoRisen said:

> Unfortunately the mevo is junk. tested next to a trackman and GCQuad - the numbers were 7-12 yards off for carry numbers but it wasn't consistent either some were longer some were shorter when on trackman they showed them landing a couple of yards from another which was also physically verified - you can get the same inaccurate numbers from much cheaper units. They priced the mevo just high enough to make people think it "should" be more accurate than the cheaper units but still "more affordable" than actual accurate launch monitors which go for 10k+

>

> If you need real numbers go work with a pro in your area who has access to a trackman. Just think - you can get 5 one hour sessions for the price of the mevo.

 

That is highly dependent on the numbers tested as well as the setup. Have both a FS and a mevo, they provide a lot more common numbers than different from my experience.

There's also a big difference between having a FS/TM unit outside that can track full ball flight vs a unit that has to take the data and normalize it.

[MrMojoRisen]

> @Golfrnut said:

> > @MrMojoRisen said:

> > Unfortunately the mevo is junk. tested next to a trackman and GCQuad - the numbers were 7-12 yards off for carry numbers but it wasn't consistent either some were longer some were shorter when on trackman they showed them landing a couple of yards from another which was also physically verified - you can get the same inaccurate numbers from much cheaper units. They priced the mevo just high enough to make people think it "should" be more accurate than the cheaper units but still "more affordable" than actual accurate launch monitors which go for 10k+

> >

> > If you need real numbers go work with a pro in your area who has access to a trackman. Just think - you can get 5 one hour sessions for the price of the mevo.

>

> That is highly dependent on the numbers tested as well as the setup. Have both a FS and a mevo, they provide a lot more common numbers than different from my experience.

> There's also a big difference between having a FS/TM unit outside that can track full ball flight vs a unit that has to take the data and normalize it.

 

The full fledged Flightscope unit is also junk when tested next to a trackman or GC quad. Just saying.

[Golfrnut]

> @MrMojoRisen said:

> > @Golfrnut said:

> > > @MrMojoRisen said:

> > > Unfortunately the mevo is junk. tested next to a trackman and GCQuad - the numbers were 7-12 yards off for carry numbers but it wasn't consistent either some were longer some were shorter when on trackman they showed them landing a couple of yards from another which was also physically verified - you can get the same inaccurate numbers from much cheaper units. They priced the mevo just high enough to make people think it "should" be more accurate than the cheaper units but still "more affordable" than actual accurate launch monitors which go for 10k+

> > >

> > > If you need real numbers go work with a pro in your area who has access to a trackman. Just think - you can get 5 one hour sessions for the price of the mevo.

> >

> > That is highly dependent on the numbers tested as well as the setup. Have both a FS and a mevo, they provide a lot more common numbers than different from my experience.

> > There's also a big difference between having a FS/TM unit outside that can track full ball flight vs a unit that has to take the data and normalize it.

>

> The full fledged Flightscope unit is also junk when tested next to a trackman or GC quad. Just saying.

 

To each their own...I can give examples where each one of them will give crappy numbers that doesn't equate to real life.

[MrMojoRisen]

> @Golfrnut said:

> > @MrMojoRisen said:

> > > @Golfrnut said:

> > > > @MrMojoRisen said:

> > > > Unfortunately the mevo is junk. tested next to a trackman and GCQuad - the numbers were 7-12 yards off for carry numbers but it wasn't consistent either some were longer some were shorter when on trackman they showed them landing a couple of yards from another which was also physically verified - you can get the same inaccurate numbers from much cheaper units. They priced the mevo just high enough to make people think it "should" be more accurate than the cheaper units but still "more affordable" than actual accurate launch monitors which go for 10k+

> > > >

> > > > If you need real numbers go work with a pro in your area who has access to a trackman. Just think - you can get 5 one hour sessions for the price of the mevo.

> > >

> > > That is highly dependent on the numbers tested as well as the setup. Have both a FS and a mevo, they provide a lot more common numbers than different from my experience.

> > > There's also a big difference between having a FS/TM unit outside that can track full ball flight vs a unit that has to take the data and normalize it.

> >

> > The full fledged Flightscope unit is also junk when tested next to a trackman or GC quad. Just saying.

>

> To each their own...I can give examples where each one of them will give **** numbers that doesn't equate to real life.

 

Fair enough. I have seen each of them spit out wrong data no doubt. I have just had better luck with trackman and gc4. simply rated and i am sure you would agree 1- trackman 2- gc4 3- Flightscope

 

 

[Golfrnut]

> @MrMojoRisen said:

> > @Golfrnut said:

> > > @MrMojoRisen said:

> > > > @Golfrnut said:

> > > > > @MrMojoRisen said:

> > > > > Unfortunately the mevo is junk. tested next to a trackman and GCQuad - the numbers were 7-12 yards off for carry numbers but it wasn't consistent either some were longer some were shorter when on trackman they showed them landing a couple of yards from another which was also physically verified - you can get the same inaccurate numbers from much cheaper units. They priced the mevo just high enough to make people think it "should" be more accurate than the cheaper units but still "more affordable" than actual accurate launch monitors which go for 10k+

> > > > >

> > > > > If you need real numbers go work with a pro in your area who has access to a trackman. Just think - you can get 5 one hour sessions for the price of the mevo.

> > > >

> > > > That is highly dependent on the numbers tested as well as the setup. Have both a FS and a mevo, they provide a lot more common numbers than different from my experience.

> > > > There's also a big difference between having a FS/TM unit outside that can track full ball flight vs a unit that has to take the data and normalize it.

> > >

> > > The full fledged Flightscope unit is also junk when tested next to a trackman or GC quad. Just saying.

> >

> > To each their own...I can give examples where each one of them will give **** numbers that doesn't equate to real life.

>

> Fair enough. I have seen each of them spit out wrong data no doubt. I have just had better luck with trackman and gc4. simply rated and i am sure you would agree 1- trackman 2- gc4 3- Flightscope

>

>

 

Completely depends on the application. Outdoor vs indoor, etc. Different use will rank them differently for me. I do not hold TM as the highest, for me personally, due to the cost vs accuracy. They all give bad numbers at times, and the accuracy is not there where it really matters for double the cost.

[Krt22]

> @MrMojoRisen said:

> > @Golfrnut said:

> > > @MrMojoRisen said:

> > > Unfortunately the mevo is junk. tested next to a trackman and GCQuad - the numbers were 7-12 yards off for carry numbers but it wasn't consistent either some were longer some were shorter when on trackman they showed them landing a couple of yards from another which was also physically verified - you can get the same inaccurate numbers from much cheaper units. They priced the mevo just high enough to make people think it "should" be more accurate than the cheaper units but still "more affordable" than actual accurate launch monitors which go for 10k+

> > >

> > > If you need real numbers go work with a pro in your area who has access to a trackman. Just think - you can get 5 one hour sessions for the price of the mevo.

> >

> > That is highly dependent on the numbers tested as well as the setup. Have both a FS and a mevo, they provide a lot more common numbers than different from my experience.

> > There's also a big difference between having a FS/TM unit outside that can track full ball flight vs a unit that has to take the data and normalize it.

>

> The full fledged Flightscope unit is also junk when tested next to a trackman or GC quad. Just saying.

 

Yeahhh no.

 

As for the mevo, for the price it's a very capable unit. You just need to know how to use it and understand at the end of the day its a sub $500 piece that can absolutely help many golfers get a grip of what their real distances are.

[MrMojoRisen]

> @Krt22 said:

> > @MrMojoRisen said:

> > > @Golfrnut said:

> > > > @MrMojoRisen said:

> > > > Unfortunately the mevo is junk. tested next to a trackman and GCQuad - the numbers were 7-12 yards off for carry numbers but it wasn't consistent either some were longer some were shorter when on trackman they showed them landing a couple of yards from another which was also physically verified - you can get the same inaccurate numbers from much cheaper units. They priced the mevo just high enough to make people think it "should" be more accurate than the cheaper units but still "more affordable" than actual accurate launch monitors which go for 10k+

> > > >

> > > > If you need real numbers go work with a pro in your area who has access to a trackman. Just think - you can get 5 one hour sessions for the price of the mevo.

> > >

> > > That is highly dependent on the numbers tested as well as the setup. Have both a FS and a mevo, they provide a lot more common numbers than different from my experience.

> > > There's also a big difference between having a FS/TM unit outside that can track full ball flight vs a unit that has to take the data and normalize it.

> >

> > The full fledged Flightscope unit is also junk when tested next to a trackman or GC quad. Just saying.

>

> Yeahhh no.

>

> As for the mevo, for the price it's a very capable unit. You just need to know how to use it and understand at the end of the day its a sub $500 piece that can absolutely help many golfers get a grip of what their real distances are.

 

Yeahhhh no - if we are talking about helping golfers get a grip on their real distance - hitting shots and stepping off the distance will assist someone more than the mevo will.

If the mevo tells someone they hit a pw 139 but in fact it only flew 130 - please explain how that will help someone?

[Krt22]

Yeahhhhh no, not exactly doable for most, especially for a full bag of clubs. Not to mention "pacing off" is subject to user error. If you had a 34" stride vs a 36" stride, you would be off by over 7 yards on a 130 "pace" shot and that error would compound as the distance grows.

 

The mevo (like any other higher priced LM) is only as good as it's user. If you take the time to properly set it up, it can be very powerful/useful.

 

If you prefer other units, that is totally fine, but to call the mevo (and the full fledged flightscope units) trash is completely off base and not at all in line with all of the data collected on the units thus far.

[MrMojoRisen]

> @Krt22 said:

> Yeahhhhh no, not exactly doable for most, especially for a full bag of clubs. Not to mention "pacing off" is subject to user error. If you had a 34" stride vs a 36" stride, you would be off by over 7 yards on a 130 "pace" shot and that error would compound as the distance grows.

>

> The mevo (like any other higher priced LM) is only as good as it's user. If you take the time to properly set it up, it can be very powerful/useful.

>

> If you prefer other units, that is totally fine, but to call the mevo (and the full fledged flightscope units) trash is completely off base and not at all in line with all of the data collected on the units thus far.

 

If you had a stride that much off you would still be more accurate than the mevo LOL

[Golfrnut]

> @MrMojoRisen said:

> > @Krt22 said:

> > Yeahhhhh no, not exactly doable for most, especially for a full bag of clubs. Not to mention "pacing off" is subject to user error. If you had a 34" stride vs a 36" stride, you would be off by over 7 yards on a 130 "pace" shot and that error would compound as the distance grows.

> >

> > The mevo (like any other higher priced LM) is only as good as it's user. If you take the time to properly set it up, it can be very powerful/useful.

> >

> > If you prefer other units, that is totally fine, but to call the mevo (and the full fledged flightscope units) trash is completely off base and not at all in line with all of the data collected on the units thus far.

>

> If you had a stride that much off you would still be more accurate than the mevo LOL

 

You’re lacking facts there...because my carry has been spot on based on range finder numbers. Maybe yours were off, not going to debate, but not everyone’s are.

[Krt22]

> @MrMojoRisen said:

> > @Krt22 said:

> > Yeahhhhh no, not exactly doable for most, especially for a full bag of clubs. Not to mention "pacing off" is subject to user error. If you had a 34" stride vs a 36" stride, you would be off by over 7 yards on a 130 "pace" shot and that error would compound as the distance grows.

> >

> > The mevo (like any other higher priced LM) is only as good as it's user. If you take the time to properly set it up, it can be very powerful/useful.

> >

> > If you prefer other units, that is totally fine, but to call the mevo (and the full fledged flightscope units) trash is completely off base and not at all in line with all of the data collected on the units thus far.

>

> If you had a stride that much off you would still be more accurate than the mevo LOL

 

So you got nothing. I would love to see you stride off exactly 130 yards...LOL. Do you calibrate your stride on the regular with a yardstick?

[MrMojoRisen]

I am strictly talking about trackman and gc4 vs the mevo -I guess you are missing my point. the MEVO IS NOT ACCURATE ENOUGH TO PRACTICE YOUR CARRY DISTANCE.

 

I have stepped off distances multiple times and lazed to confirm trackman has no issue whatsoever giving you accurate numbers -outdoors. indoors all launch monitors are neutered

 

I get it... you dont want to feel like you wasted your money. but dont let that cloud the truth. the mevo is not accurate within 7 yards consistently vs trackman and gc4. I am letting others know not to waste 500 bucks.

I think my original point - your money is better spent working with a pro who actually has a reliable launch monitor.

[Krt22]

But your stride over 130+ yards is, LOL. Bye Bye

[t4t3r]

My Mevo works fantastic. That is all.

[UtahWolverine]

I really liked the MEVO as well, I just do not use it enough now that the season is full go. That's why I have it listed on the BST board. $380 is anyone is interested.

[MI517]

My mevo works fantastic as well. A while back this year I sat on our range towards end of day, only guy there. Laser’d a few greens at ~100/130/160, can’t remember exact distances, but it was a dead calm low 60’s evening and I hit shots into each roughly even-level green. Threw down a bunch of my gamers (Srixon XV) WITHOUT the stickers.

My numbers with the mevo for carry were very accurate, within a yard or two. I wasn’t comparing it vs $15,000 systems or have some bias. Spin anecdotally seems reasonable, better w/ stickers.

 

Hit some drivers as well and couldn’t tell exactly where they landed, but the numbers I was seeing were roughly what I see on the course.

 

It’s more a fun toy that something I’m basing buying a new club on, but I must have got a good one that’s accurate to laser’d distances. Lucky me!