New FlightScope Mevo+ (MERGED)

[Dan13]

2 hours ago, Daniel Eason said:

Somethings still bugging me about Radar Alignment today. 

 

On radar alignment it has the line then a box, where do I need this box to be positioned?

 

 

I assume you mean the red box projected on the floor where I think Mevo + is looking for the ball. If you change the distance from ball to unit and/or change the elevation btw ball and unit the box should update based on that input. 

 

Since I am not level in my setup and have the unit about 2" below the ball the  projected box seems alittle short compared to my measured 7' from the ball to the unit. Doesn't seem to make a difference best I can tell. Picks up 99% of the shots and the data looks good.

[whumber]

Oh wow, looks like Garmin added spin measurement to the R10 when used outdoors.

[Daniel Eason]

1 hour ago, whumber said:

Oh wow, looks like Garmin added spin measurement to the R10 when used outdoors.

 

Wrong thread here matey this is the FS group 🙂

[whumber]

37 minutes ago, Daniel Eason said:

 

Wrong thread here matey this is the FS group 🙂

Thought it would be interesting here to see just how much can be added to radar units via FW update.

[Dan13]

Flightscope posted "definitions" of the pro package data on Instagram yesterday. Face to path was "measured" at first impact. There has been prior discussion about how the face angle was actually a derivative of H launch.

 

If the face angle data (however determined) is in fact independent of H launch it would not be impacted by gear effect. If it is a derivative of H launch then it would clearly be impacted by gear effect and not representative of what the face angle would of been if center contact was made. If you are working on path / face relationship taking gear effect out of the equation helps I think since I'm not intentionally trying to hit off center.

 

So are all of the "mid-upper" level radar LM face angle measurements independent of H launch? Although curious as to how I mostly care about understanding if the face angle is prior to gear effect or impacted by it on X3 and soon Mevo +.  Any radar savy WRX's care to explain?  Hoping Flightscope will respond officially but after asking two different ways its been frogs and crickets for a couple weeks now.

 

 

[Paybax]

Version 0.19 is out 👍

[vonbonds]

I bought one on Cyber Monday. I can't wait for it to arrive!

[Dan13]

1 hour ago, Paybax said:

Version 0.19 is out 👍

Any idea what it is updating?

[games]

FS Support is saying 0.19 addresses spin across all clubs where interference is a factor or when estimations are needed.

 

My experience with the RCT balls is I got a lot of "accurate" non-italicized "double spin" reports from driver.

My guess is those "double spin" reads are going to be replaced with "correct" spin that cuts the initial read in exactly half.

If true, I'd be mildly interested in knowing whether or not the adjusted reads get reported as estimates or actual. 

Either way, it'll be more accurate than the "double spin" reads that show up now.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Paybax]

4 hours ago, Dan13 said:

Any idea what it is updating?

People, including me are noticing driver spin is much better, therefor better distances. 

[Daniel Eason]

Random post, after first week experiences with this device;

 

1. I was on the range going from dusk to night (4pm here btw its depressing), the range I was on had failed to remember to put the lights on....it picked up zero shots when pitch black, is this normal?

2. I had alignment sticks in a plane mate at an angle in front of me going past my head. The reads were way off with this on captured data

 

Its quite a lot of information to gauge when you first use the Mevo+, for evaluating your swing but I think its a good tool to invest in.

 

I'm not sure how pro plus will work though with dim light situations here in the UK in the winter evenings.

[Dan13]

3 hours ago, Daniel Eason said:

Random post, after first week experiences with this device;

 

1. I was on the range going from dusk to night (4pm here btw its depressing), the range I was on had failed to remember to put the lights on....it picked up zero shots when pitch black, is this normal?

2. I had alignment sticks in a plane mate at an angle in front of me going past my head. The reads were way off with this on captured data

 

Its quite a lot of information to gauge when you first use the Mevo+, for evaluating your swing but I think its a good tool to invest in.

 

I'm not sure how pro plus will work though with dim light situations here in the UK in the winter evenings.

Radar is not dependent on light. Should be able to play in the dark. Heard that some folks play sim golf in the dark w Mevo +.  Strange. 
 

So the H launch angle data wasn’t matching up with what you were seeing? I have found the H launch to be really accurate.  

[Clifford]

8 hours ago, Dan13 said:

Radar is not dependent on light. Should be able to play in the dark. Heard that some folks play sim golf in the dark w Mevo +.  Strange. 
 

So the H launch angle data wasn’t matching up with what you were seeing? I have found the H launch to be really accurate.  

when i played in dark except  the light over the ball, mevo would not see many putts, but read drivers and irons but not putts

[Daniel Eason]

9 hours ago, Dan13 said:

Radar is not dependent on light. Should be able to play in the dark. Heard that some folks play sim golf in the dark w Mevo +.  Strange. 
 

So the H launch angle data wasn’t matching up with what you were seeing? I have found the H launch to be really accurate.  

 

On the second issue, I'm thinking the alignment sticks were interfering. 

[one_under_at_the_turn]

Does anyone have any experience hitting Mevo products with range balls? Our range doesn't use limited flight balls but the new Garmin G10 didn't register any of the balls.

[Paybax]

1 hour ago, one_under_at_the_turn said:

Does anyone have any experience hitting Mevo products with range balls? Our range doesn't use limited flight balls but the new Garmin G10 didn't register any of the balls.

Yes it read them fine. That’s odd. 

[ilikegolf26]

This may be a stupid comment but on short putts how does the Mevo (or I guess any set up that is behind the ball) even pick the ball up? I find that on my follow through it’s probably not even seeing the ball in front of my putter head. 

[Exactice808]

HOLY SMOKES BATMAN! .19 update.  If you have been having Driver spin issues.  UPDATE UPDATE UPDATE.

 

The Spin issues have been greatly corrected it seems.

 

Pre .19 Update  Driver - (Tested Setup 44" cut down Black Tie 7M3, first time hitting this setup) 

 

Averages -

Carry- 216y

Ballspeed - 143.57mph (crappy I know I was testing something)

Spin - 3064rpms

Launch - 10.74*

 

POST Update - .19 update - (Tested Setup 44" cut down Black Tie 7M3, couple days of practice) 

Carry- 229y (+13y carry)  (increase likely due to both ball speed and decrease in spin) 

Ballspeed - 147.8mph (+4.23mph, )  (Increase likely getting comfortable with the setup, PS hacked 1.5" off the driver)

Spin - 2518 (-546rpms of spin) (AWESOME decrease)

Launch - 10.93* (+.19* LA) (Nothing changed hear, but surely too low)

 

POST Update - .19 update - (Tested Setup 44.5" cut down Rouge Silver- First time hitting this setup) 

Carry- 232y (+16y carry pre patch) (+3y carry post patch)  (Matching the Post update, so looks consistent now)

Ballspeed - 147.10mph (+3.53 over pre patch)  (-0.7 post patch) (Same so good) 

Spin - 2451 (-613rpms pre patch)  (-67rpms post patch)  (Matching decrease in spin so good) 

Launch - 12.65* - (+1.91 pre Patch) ( +1.72* Post patch) (Shaft change surely helped Launch)

Edited December 7, 2021 by Exactice808

[Dan13]

2 minutes ago, Exactice808 said:

HOLY SMOKES BATMAN! .19 update.  If you have been having Driver spin issues.  UPDATE UPDATE UPDATE.

 

The Spin issues have been greatly corrected it seems.

 

Pre .19 Update  Driver - (Tested Setup 44" cut down Black Tie 7M3, first time hitting this setup) 

 

Averages -

Carry- 216y

Ballspeed - 143.57mph (crappy I know I was testing something)

Spin - 3064rpms

Launch - 10.74*

 

POST Update - .19 update - (Tested Setup 44" cut down Black Tie 7M3, couple days of practice) 

Carry- 229y (+13y carry) 

Ballspeed - 147.8mph (+4.23mph, )

Spin - 2518 (-546rpms of spin) 

Launch - 10.93* (+.19* LA)

 

POST Update - .19 update - (Tested Setup 44.5" cut down Rouge Silver- First time hitting this setup) 

Carry- 232y (+16y carry pre patch) (+3y carry post patch)

Ballspeed - 147.10mph (+3.53 over pre patch)  (-0.7 post patch)

Spin - 2451 (-613rpms pre patch)  (-67rpms post patch)

Launch - 12.65* - (+1.91 pre Patch) ( +1.72* Post patch)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 Your drop in spin rate is really impressive! Look forward to trying 0.19 with driver myself. 

[Daniel Eason]

14 minutes ago, Dan13 said:

 

 Your drop in spin rate is really impressive! Look forward to trying 0.19 with driver myself. 

 

Ok, playing devils advocate how do you know which spin rate is accurate here though?

[Dan13]

11 minutes ago, Daniel Eason said:

 

Ok, playing devils advocate how do you know which spin rate is accurate here though?

 I think the only way to know for sure is having a baseline spin reading from an enterprise LM like Trackman or GC Quad from a fitting / practice session. Although some inference from what you know to be your actual carry distances is not a bad unofficial comparison.  The high spin rate with driver for Mevo + is pretty well documented.

[Exactice808]

45 minutes ago, Daniel Eason said:

 

Ok, playing devils advocate how do you know which spin rate is accurate here though?

A couple of items.

 

1) Prior knowledge of spin due to fittings with other Launch Monitor systems,  Trackman and GC quad.  With same or similar setups. (Driver)

 

2) On course clarifications. Mevo+ distances pre patch Never matched on course distances.  Very unreliable.

 

3) Mevo+ has had many threads about struggles with Driver spin giving, off readings. Especially with a short indoor setup. (I am using a short indoor. 8ft ball to screen 7ft ball to mevo+)

 

 

After the patch.  

 

1) Distances are seemingly closer to actual on course distances.

2) Ball flight and carry distance visually are seemingly more realistic and closer to actual distances.

3) I did a Shaft swap to solidify the results.  As we can see similar setups,  but the 7M3 which is a lower launching low spin shaft, was capture pretty accurately.  When I switched to the Rouge Silver which is a mid/low launch and a low spin shaft. It was captured accurately.  The launch increased but spin remained in the similar values as the 7M3.  

4) The only values that changed was the spin, NOT the launch angles Pre patch/post patch for the 7M3. so distance were changing due to the corrected spin values! 

 

 

So I am pretty darn confident its working better.

 

Finally, I am showing the E6 data not the FS App. The FS App has been more accurate than the E6 but the E6 I use often to practice due to the simulation and the Putting/Short game area, that I can get really good wedge work in.

 

With better spin number values it helps tighten up the game and better confidence in distance gapping.

 

 

Edited December 7, 2021 by Exactice808

[Daniel Eason]

On 12/7/2021 at 8:16 PM, Exactice808 said:

A couple of items.

 

1) Prior knowledge of spin due to fittings with other Launch Monitor systems,  Trackman and GC quad.  With same or similar setups. (Driver)

 

2) On course clarifications. Mevo+ distances pre patch Never matched on course distances.  Very unreliable.

 

3) Mevo+ has had many threads about struggles with Driver spin giving, off readings. Especially with a short indoor setup. (I am using a short indoor. 8ft ball to screen 7ft ball to mevo+)

 

 

After the patch.  

 

1) Distances are seemingly closer to actual on course distances.

2) Ball flight and carry distance visually are seemingly more realistic and closer to actual distances.

3) I did a Shaft swap to solidify the results.  As we can see similar setups,  but the 7M3 which is a lower launching low spin shaft, was capture pretty accurately.  When I switched to the Rouge Silver which is a mid/low launch and a low spin shaft. It was captured accurately.  The launch increased but spin remained in the similar values as the 7M3.  

4) The only values that changed was the spin, NOT the launch angles Pre patch/post patch for the 7M3. so distance were changing due to the corrected spin values! 

 

 

So I am pretty darn confident its working better.

 

Finally, I am showing the E6 data not the FS App. The FS App has been more accurate than the E6 but the E6 I use often to practice due to the simulation and the Putting/Short game area, that I can get really good wedge work in.

 

With better spin number values it helps tighten up the game and better confidence in distance gapping.

 

 

 

Nice one!

 

I did notice that carry distances seemed different on 0.19. 

 

Can't wait till they've got the Pro+ stuff, you can speculate whether this is the start of adding this into the OS.

[Humble Pro]

I admit this product looks very exciting.  A little worried how accurate it is.  Saw this video and also soem others who have spin and carry way off compared to Trackman.  Can anyone tell me more how they compare from first hand experience?

 

 

[Paybax]

8 hours ago, Humble Pro said:

I admit this product looks very exciting.  A little worried how accurate it is.  Saw this video and also soem others who have spin and carry way off compared to Trackman.  Can anyone tell me more how they compare from first hand experience?

 

 

It’s extremely accurate. Here are some other new videos that has 0.18 firmware and 0.19 that is a week or so old is way better. 
 

 

 

[Humble Pro]

1 hour ago, Paybax said:

It’s extremely accurate. Here are some other new videos that has 0.18 firmware and 0.19 that is a week or so old is way better. 
 

 

 

The carry and spin were way different to GC2 though

[Dan13]

These videos seem to resurface every couple of months just because there are so few comparison videos out there.  The large differences are due to Mevo + struggling with spin measurements. Flightscope has made some progress on this by issuing a firmware update (0.19) intended to improve spin. Then there is the RCT ball which will also help radar units pick up spin in limited flight situations. Flightscope is working on getting Mevo + to recognize the RCT ball specifically which will also help with getting accurate spin.

 

With these improvements the large spin differences should be greatly reduced and associated carry differences should be much closer. Will be interesting to see the next batch of comparison videos with Mevo+ with 0.19 and the RCT ball. Camera based systems are still preferable indoors but the radar units are catching up.

 

 

[Humble Pro]

3 hours ago, Dan13 said:

These videos seem to resurface every couple of months just because there are so few comparison videos out there.  The large differences are due to Mevo + struggling with spin measurements. Flightscope has made some progress on this by issuing a firmware update (0.19) intended to improve spin. Then there is the RCT ball which will also help radar units pick up spin in limited flight situations. Flightscope is working on getting Mevo + to recognize the RCT ball specifically which will also help with getting accurate spin.

 

With these improvements the large spin differences should be greatly reduced and associated carry differences should be much closer. Will be interesting to see the next batch of comparison videos with Mevo+ with 0.19 and the RCT ball. Camera based systems are still preferable indoors but the radar units are catching up.

 

 

Anything more than 1-2 yds in difference for carry distance even for drives is not good enough imo.   I dont expect all launch monitors to read the same but being 5-10 yds out is a joke.   

 

If Mevo can get within 1-2 yds then I will invest but if not I doubt I will.  If the numbers aren't accurate then the whole unit is pointless. 

[Paybax]

6 hours ago, Humble Pro said:

The carry and spin were way different to GC2 though

 

28 minutes ago, Humble Pro said:

Anything more than 1-2 yds in difference for carry distance even for drives is not good enough imo.   I dont expect all launch monitors to read the same but being 5-10 yds out is a joke.   

 

If Mevo can get within 1-2 yds then I will invest but if not I doubt I will.  If the numbers aren't accurate then the whole unit is pointless. 

Are you serious? This thing costs $1800. Don’t be such a cheap a** if you want amazing accuracy. If you are actually a Pro won’t you be teaching outdoors? This unit is very accurate outside but you should be looking at a Trackman or Flightscope X3 or a Foresight product. 

Edited December 14, 2021 by Paybax

[Dan13]

33 minutes ago, Humble Pro said:

Anything more than 1-2 yds in difference for carry distance even for drives is not good enough imo.   I dont expect all launch monitors to read the same but being 5-10 yds out is a joke.   

 

If Mevo can get within 1-2 yds then I will invest but if not I doubt I will.  If the numbers aren't accurate then the whole unit is pointless. 

 

1- 2 yards is a difference of less than 0.5% on a 250 yard shot. Two Quads could differ that much on the same shot. If you will be using the Mevo + mostly indoors and 5 yards difference is deal breaker then I think you have to step up to the GC3 to get a somewhat comparable data set.  Mevo plus may yet get close to the carry accuracy you want indoors but that is TBD. If gear effect and spin axis with woods matters indoors then its got to be BLP or GC3.  For outdoor use, IMO, its Mevo Plus all day due to the value.