New FlightScope Mevo+ (MERGED)

[Trap Junior]

The things that concern me that are holding me back from buying this ASAP is the following:

 

I heard the Angle of Attack reading is very different to Trackman. This would be a big problem for me.

I hear the carry distance with driver is very short compared to reality and Trackman.

 

Spin numbers especially with driver I read are often way off.

 

So for now I am holding off and hoping these are addressed.

[Dan13]

19 minutes ago, Trap Junior said:

The things that concern me that are holding me back from buying this ASAP is the following:

 

I heard the Angle of Attack reading is very different to Trackman. This would be a big problem for me.

I hear the carry distance with driver is very short compared to reality and Trackman.

 

Spin numbers especially with driver I read are often way off.

 

So for now I am holding off and hoping these are addressed.

Apparently Flightscope and Trackman measure AoA differently. Trackman somehow normalizes AoA so that measurements vary less shot to shot. It is worth researching as it is a known difference. If I remember correctly Leo Mode has a bit on this and Flightscope has commented on this in some X3 videos. 
 

Spin numbers with driver have been a weak point in limited flight. The new Titleist RCT ball has supposedly largely addressed this issue. Early reports are positive. Flightscope will get the M+ to recognize the RCT ball within the software “soon”. I have not heard of issues with spin outside. 

[Trap Junior]

9 minutes ago, Dan13 said:

Apparently Flightscope and Trackman measure AoA differently. Trackman somehow normalizes AoA so that measurements vary less shot to shot. It is worth researching as it is a known difference. If I remember correctly Leo Mode has a bit on this and Flightscope has commented on this in some X3 videos. 
 

Spin numbers with driver have been a weak point in limited flight. The new Titleist RCT ball has supposedly largely addressed this issue. Early reports are positive. Flightscope will get the M+ to recognize the RCT ball within the software “soon”. I have not heard of issues with spin outside. 

Thanks.

Why do these companies decide to measure differently? The thing is Trackman is seen as the gold standard and the 'true numbers'.  Whether Flightscope or Foresight like it or not that is the perception and why they would  measure parameters in a different way Trackman do is a little stupid if you ask me because their numbers are going to appear totally different and ''poor'' in comparison.   We have all grown up with Trackman over the last 15 years and those Trackman numbers are certainly my baseline anyway.  I dont want my Trackman AoA being +2 and then going on a Mevo + and getting numbers like +4 or +6 etc... 

Same with irons.  I know I am -4 or so with most irons.  I dont want the mevo telling me something different.  These companies should follow Trackmans methods imo.

 

Maybe its me but my perception is Trackman is liek a Mercedes while Flightscope is like a Ford.  Something about it seems far less premium.

[Dan13]

3 minutes ago, Trap Junior said:

Thanks.

Why do these companies decide to measure differently? The thing is Trackman is seen as the gold standard and the 'true numbers'.  Whether Flightscope or Foresight like it or not that is the perception and why they would  measure parameters in a different way Trackman do is a little stupid if you ask me because their numbers are going to appear totally different and ''poor'' in comparison.   We have all grown up with Trackman over the last 15 years and those Trackman numbers are certainly my baseline anyway.  I dont want my Trackman AoA being +2 and then going on a Mevo + and getting numbers like +4 or +6 etc... 

Same with irons.  I know I am -4 or so with most irons.  I dont want the mevo telling me something different.  These companies should follow Trackmans methods imo.

 

Maybe its me but my perception is Trackman is liek a Mercedes while Flightscope is like a Ford.  Something about it seems far less premium.

TM does not market to average golfers. FS is chasing that market full on. To me FS seems less polished and is clearly a smaller operation but that has never negatively impacted my perception. Henri - their CEO - is an engineer through and through. I have enjoyed listening to him explain things. No BS, just him geeking out on explaining their tech. 
 

As far as AoA FS would argue that their numbers are the “correct” ones. My admittedly layman’s understanding is that TM tweaks some data with the purpose of making it more actionable for the user. Some of the same kind of discrepancy exists with when club head speed is measured. TM at full compression and FS at first touch. Hence TM appears slower than FS. Just different ways of measuring. I will say  for CH speed the FS way makes more sense to me though. 

[Firethorn50]

You could always just pick up a TM then 🙂 For the cost the Mevo+ is really good. As I suggested before, take it with you to a studio that has a TM or a Quad and compare the numbers or baseline it. They all seem to get numbers a little bit differently. Haven’t you seen the guys on tour that are on the range with a TM AND a Quad? Must be a reason for that.

[paulman21]

21 hours ago, HiTrajLoSpin said:

 

Rather than determining if their ball rpm/mph for 8 feet of flight is at least 11, I think most people would rather want to know what the minimum ball flight distance should be for a given ball rpm/mph. So, converting FlightScope's metric of 11 at 8 feet gives:

 

               minimum distance (ft) = 88 x (ball mph/rpm)

 

Using FlightScope's example of 180 mph and 2000 rpm gives

 

              minimum distance (ft) = 88 x (180/2000) = 7.92 ft

 

 

 

I don't think you can extrapolate like that. Flightscope has said you need 8ft of flight for short indoor mode. Going less than that may just render useless numbers at any spin-to-ball-speed ratio. Going to 9ft of flight may not have any restrictions on that same ratio.

[goudok]

Someone needs to create a hybrid.  Radar Camera system.  Club and initial launch metrics are from camera and then rest of flight is radar. 

[DS12312]

1 hour ago, goudok said:

Someone needs to create a hybrid.  Radar Camera system.  Club and initial launch metrics are from camera and then rest of flight is radar. 

Ernest Sports has tried but their weak point is the microphone trigger that won't read a shot if you hit the ground before the ball

[DS12312]

4 hours ago, Firethorn50 said:

You could always just pick up a TM then 🙂 For the cost the Mevo+ is really good. As I suggested before, take it with you to a studio that has a TM or a Quad and compare the numbers or baseline it. They all seem to get numbers a little bit differently. Haven’t you seen the guys on tour that are on the range with a TM AND a Quad? Must be a reason for that.

Quad normalizes data without environmental impact...TM shows you what is happening actually to the ball in flight

[FAbb]

I had an odd session today. It was the first time I’ve used the unit since updating to the .20 firmware. There’s extra stuff in my garage from some renovation work going on inside, which I think is a possible source of some issue. The odd thing is that I was able to get good data from my 21 degree UW, but long iron reads were basically garbage. 

[Daniel Eason]

Someone for my sanity tell me why these are so massively apart on distances?

 

 

[Dan13]

39 minutes ago, Daniel Eason said:

Someone for my sanity tell me why these are so massively apart on distances?

 

 

First shot makes sense. Second one not so much. See Flightscope optimizer results attached. Was there wind pushing the ball down range? Only plausible explanation I can come up with.

Looks like range ball setting is adding about 20 yards carry. 

[Daniel Eason]

I think it might be the wind/weather was set, I find with FS I update weather and sometimes it doesn't see the latest updated weather. 

 

I hope this new FS update is going to fix this sort of stuff lol

[games]

2 hours ago, Daniel Eason said:

Someone for my sanity tell me why these are so massively apart on distances?

 

 

Your club speed greatness greatly exceeds the parameters of the Mevo+.  Definite candidate for Optishot! <\s>

Edited January 30, 2022 by games

[Firethorn50]

3 hours ago, FAbb said:

I had an odd session today. It was the first time I’ve used the unit since updating to the .20 firmware. There’s extra stuff in my garage from some renovation work going on inside, which I think is a possible source of some issue. The odd thing is that I was able to get good data from my 21 degree UW, but long iron reads were basically garbage. 

Yeah, I was getting 115 mph CH speed with my 8i today. It happened a few times.. never happened before. 

[Firethorn50]

2 hours ago, Daniel Eason said:

Someone for my sanity tell me why these are so massively apart on distances?

 

 

My guess would be height and spin loft.

[Trap Junior]

3 hours ago, Daniel Eason said:

Someone for my sanity tell me why these are so massively apart on distances?

 

 

How are you getting 21.6 degree left spin axis yet the shot finishes 27 yds right of target?  Are you swinging a crazy amount in to out?  Numbers dont make sense to me.

[Dan13]

1 hour ago, Trap Junior said:

How are you getting 21.6 degree left spin axis yet the shot finishes 27 yds right of target?  Are you swinging a crazy amount in to out?  Numbers dont make sense to me.

Look at the starting H launch - 10 degrees right. I don’t think he is lining up / hitting along the unit’s target line. 

[Sons_of_Pitches]

12 hours ago, Firethorn50 said:

You could always just pick up a TM then 🙂 For the cost the Mevo+ is really good. As I suggested before, take it with you to a studio that has a TM or a Quad and compare the numbers or baseline it. They all seem to get numbers a little bit differently. Haven’t you seen the guys on tour that are on the range with a TM AND a Quad? Must be a reason for that.

+1 on this.  TM is 15k-20k and M+ is 2k-3k depending on the options. Mevo+ does well for being priced where it is.

[Daniel Eason]

8 hours ago, games said:

Your club speed greatness greatly exceeds the parameters of the Mevo+.  Definite candidate for Optishot! <\s>

 

I've just looked into optishot and ordered one...thanks

[theboypinoy]

1 hour ago, Daniel Eason said:

 

I've just looked into optishot and ordered one...thanks

 

I hope I'm being woosh-ed, but I hope you forgot the </s> tag 👀

Edited January 31, 2022 by theboypinoy

[FAbb]

15 hours ago, Firethorn50 said:

Yeah, I was getting 115 mph CH speed with my 8i today. It happened a few times.. never happened before. 

 

That'd be a heck of an 8-iron!

 

It'll be a few weeks until my garage is cleared out of the construction stuff, so I won't be able to differentiate whether that's the issue, or it's something with the new firmware.

 

I expect there will be some bumps in the road, early on with the deployment of firmwares supporting fusion tracking.  Still very happy with the unit, and debating whether I'll do the pro package upgrade.

[tocino]

On 1/28/2022 at 9:33 AM, Exactice808 said:

Well I am going to be that guy, I am leaning on NO right now.  The current setup in its current form outside of getting the GOSH DARN Putting working... The additional club data points wont change much for me.

 

Dont teach and dont get paid to golf. So $1,800 is my sweet spot.

I'm the same. I don't need that info or would be able to understand how to use it or "fix" stuff without outside help from an instructor who may have a better launch monitor anyway. ~$1800 is fine for now. 

[Firethorn50]

2 hours ago, FAbb said:

 

That'd be a heck of an 8-iron!

 

It'll be a few weeks until my garage is cleared out of the construction stuff, so I won't be able to differentiate whether that's the issue, or it's something with the new firmware.

 

I expect there will be some bumps in the road, early on with the deployment of firmwares supporting fusion tracking.  Still very happy with the unit, and debating whether I'll do the pro package upgrade.

I know, but it still gave me typical yardage (162)..I wanted to see how far an 8i hit at 115 would go 😂

[Krt22]

22 hours ago, Daniel Eason said:

Someone for my sanity tell me why these are so massively apart on distances?

 

 

This data doesn't make any sense at all if all of the settings are the same. The extra bit of ball speed isn't going to carry that much further when it's spinning higher and launching lower. Part of owning one of these devices is knowing when to trust it and knowing when it's a misread 

[Exactice808]

Another Update Yall! 

 

I got the Putting to work,  I was putting 5ft  and it read really well,   I would say it picked up 90% of the putts,  anything past 5ft was solid as its better/high ball speeds so it read it pretty much 95%+ of the time.

 

 

I am hoping and praying it was in fact Fusion Tracking that made the difference.  I updated my layout as per some Youtube Videos (Pre .19 / .20 firmware/Fusion Tracking I had completely given up.)  I  that time I had all the layouts as recommended on YouTube.  But this update, has been the most successful.

I will be trying to use it fully in the simulator later today after work.  I had tested it out in the practice green yesterday with a HUGE amount of success.

[Exactice808]

On 1/30/2022 at 8:57 AM, Daniel Eason said:

Someone for my sanity tell me why these are so massively apart on distances?

 

 

From the looks of it, I think you made a similar mistake like I did.  Using the Range ball setting it gives a "Gross" over estimation of a shot.  20+ needless yards

 

 

 

1) I think considering you are using the 1 piece range balls the distances dont make sense.  Below is the Trajectory Optimizer

 

It matches from shot 1 is your left table, shot 2 is your right table.

 

237.4 carry- 247 Total for left window

236.8 carry - 246.9 total for right window

 

I would say leave it at the "Standard" ball setting.

 

 

2) This is the 3d model of your shot.  Was this what your shots look like, Is a pretty huge "push" draw?

Left window is your left shot,  Right window your right shot.  So pretty big slings. If it is your shot, you may have both alignment issues as well as a swing issue. A Patrick Reed power draw shot.   The Mevo+ might not be able to fully capture as the hook is so large (just a guess, not facts)

 

 

Next, Trajectory optimizer - Comparison

 

Shot 1 - 255 carry/259.3 total   VS  237.4 carry and 247 total

Shot 2 - 288.6 carry/298.9 Total   VS 236.8 carry and 246.9 total

 

We can see its WAY off.  Leave it at the Standard ball setting.

 

 

Next is your Actual swing result.  

 

1.39 smash and 1.42 smash is generally low, that is not a good shot at all,

 

with 109.2 swing speeds you should average 158mph to 163mph ball speeds.

 

You are no where near this.  This to me indicates low quality of strikes, as well as swing faults.  

 

Honestly, I think you might need to go hit up your local box store or a coach with a Sim to have your swing checked and matched up with the Sim.

 

1) I see the right spin numbers there? So the 6000rpms of spin is not chronic.

2) I see low smash factors indicating poor strikes. 

3) I see BIG slinging shots where I mentioned in your original thread about certain windows of capture. My SC100/radar & ES14/Radar. If I hit a missed shot out of the window it wont capture.  Your shots are big slings...thats why it might not be aligned and capturing as your center line vs starting ball light is so far right.

 

 

I think your Mevo+ is fine, you just need to get the alignment worked out (Aim the Unit further right to compensate for the sling) with your slinging shots and potentially a coach for the low smash factors and odd AoA etc.

 

 

 

 

Edited January 31, 2022 by Exactice808

[Daniel Eason]

29 minutes ago, Exactice808 said:

Another Update Yall! 

 

I got the Putting to work,  I was putting 5ft  and it read really well,   I would say it picked up 90% of the putts,  anything past 5ft was solid as its better/high ball speeds so it read it pretty much 95%+ of the time.

 

 

I am hoping and praying it was in fact Fusion Tracking that made the difference.  I updated my layout as per some Youtube Videos (Pre .19 / .20 firmware/Fusion Tracking I had completely given up.)  I  that time I had all the layouts as recommended on YouTube.  But this update, has been the most successful.

I will be trying to use it fully in the simulator later today after work.  I had tested it out in the practice green yesterday with a HUGE amount of success.

Isn't this v0.20?

 

1 minute ago, Exactice808 said:

From the looks of it, I think you made a similar mistake like I did.  Using the Range ball setting it gives a "Gross" over estimation of a shot.  20+ needless yards

 

 

 

1) I think considering you are using the 1 piece range balls the distances dont make sense.  Below is the Trajectory Optimizer

 

It matches from shot 1 is your left table, shot 2 is your right table.

 

237.4 carry- 247 Total for left window

236.8 carry - 246.9 total for right window

 

I would say leave it at the "Standard" ball setting.

 

 

2) This is the 3d model of your shot.  Was this what your shots look like, Is a pretty huge "push" draw?

Left window is your left shot,  Right window your right shot.  So pretty big slings. If it is your shot, you may have both alignment issues as well as a swing issue. A Patrick Reed power draw shot.   The Mevo+ might not be able to fully capture as the hook is so large (just a guess, not facts)

 

 

Next, Trajectory optimizer - Comparison

 

Shot 1 - 255 carry/259.3 total   VS  237.4 carry and 247 total

Shot 2 - 288.6 carry/298.9 Total   VS 236.8 carry and 246.9 total

 

We can see its WAY off.  Leave it at the Standard ball setting.

 

 

Next is your Actual swing result.  

 

1.39 smash and 1.42 smash is generally low, that is not a good shot at all,

 

with 109.2 swing speeds you should average 158mph to 163mph ball speeds.

 

You are no where near this.  This to me indicates low quality of strikes, as well as swing faults.  

 

Honestly, I think you might need to go hit up your local box store or a coach with a Sim to have your swing checked and matched up with the Sim.

 

1) I see the right spin numbers there? So the 6000rpms of spin is not chronic.

2) I see low smash factors indicating poor strikes. 

3) I see BIG slinging shots where I mentioned in your original thread about certain windows of capture, your (my SC100/radar & ES14/Radar) If I hit a missed shot out of the window it wont capture.  Your shots are big slings...thats why it might not be aligned and capturing.

 

 

I think your Mevo+ is fine, you just need to get the alignment worked out with your slinging shots and potentially a coach for the low smash factors and odd AoA etc.

 

 

 

 

 

Im waiting for Fusion Tracking and hoping its not as picky with alignment.\

I get the big slingers, I'm working on speed over winter so im getting these occasionally however how is 6000 spin with a driver possible ??? Id need to be hitting about 10 down wouldn't I??

 

[Krt22]

12 minutes ago, Exactice808 said:

From the looks of it, I think you made a similar mistake like I did.  Using the Range ball setting it gives a "Gross" over estimation of a shot.  20+ needless yards

 

 

 

1) I think considering you are using the 1 piece range balls the distances dont make sense.  Below is the Trajectory Optimizer

 

It matches from shot 1 is your left table, shot 2 is your right table.

 

237.4 carry- 247 Total for left window

236.8 carry - 246.9 total for right window

 

I would say leave it at the "Standard" ball setting.

 

 

2) This is the 3d model of your shot.  Was this what your shots look like, Is a pretty huge "push" draw?

Left window is your left shot,  Right window your right shot.  So pretty big slings. If it is your shot, you may have both alignment issues as well as a swing issue. A Patrick Reed power draw shot.   The Mevo+ might not be able to fully capture as the hook is so large (just a guess, not facts)

 

 

Next, Trajectory optimizer - Comparison

 

Shot 1 - 255 carry/259.3 total   VS  237.4 carry and 247 total

Shot 2 - 288.6 carry/298.9 Total   VS 236.8 carry and 246.9 total

 

We can see its WAY off.  Leave it at the Standard ball setting.

 

 

Next is your Actual swing result.  

 

1.39 smash and 1.42 smash is generally low, that is not a good shot at all,

 

with 109.2 swing speeds you should average 158mph to 163mph ball speeds.

 

You are no where near this.  This to me indicates low quality of strikes, as well as swing faults.  

 

Honestly, I think you might need to go hit up your local box store or a coach with a Sim to have your swing checked and matched up with the Sim.

 

1) I see the right spin numbers there? So the 6000rpms of spin is not chronic.

2) I see low smash factors indicating poor strikes. 

3) I see BIG slinging shots where I mentioned in your original thread about certain windows of capture. My SC100/radar & ES14/Radar. If I hit a missed shot out of the window it wont capture.  Your shots are big slings...thats why it might not be aligned and capturing as your center line vs starting ball light is so far right.

 

 

I think your Mevo+ is fine, you just need to get the alignment worked out (Aim the Unit further right to compensate for the sling) with your slinging shots and potentially a coach for the low smash factors and odd AoA etc.

 

 

 

 

If he is in fact hitting range balls, this analysis is likely a bit off. Some range balls realistically are a solid 5-7mph slower than premium balls, the Mevo+ is reading back what it is actually measuring, thus the low smash. If you have it in range ball mode, it still reports back the raw speed data, but inflates the carry to account for the range ball. If he put it into standard ball, it would report the carry numbers for that ball, but realistically he should/would hit it further on the course with premium balls. With the same swing and premium balls he could easily be over 160 ball speed, which would be 1.45+ smash. But that doesnt really explain why the lower launching, higher spinning ball carries 30+ yards more. 

 

This is why using launch monitors with range balls can be tricky, every ball is different and depending on which club you get they can behave very differently, very non-linear effects. A full wedge spins less, a full long club spins more, somewhere in the middle you might get close to similar launch/spin, but ball speeds across the board are lower. You need to spend a lot of time hitting on them (aka like a teaching pro) and work in some real ball data to get rough ideas of what is real and what isn't.  

[Exactice808]

2 hours ago, Daniel Eason said:

Isn't this v0.20?

 

 

Im waiting for Fusion Tracking and hoping its not as picky with alignment.\

I get the big slingers, I'm working on speed over winter so im getting these occasionally however how is 6000 spin with a driver possible ??? Id need to be hitting about 10 down wouldn't I??

 

 

Yes?  that is why I said I have given up on all the firmware's prior to .19/.20?  So the .20 firmware update with Fusion tracking has been the most successful.

 

 

 

As for 6000rpms, If you are full flight and crappy balls and Mevo+ pre .19/.20. firmware 6000rpms is not out of the questions

 

 

This is Pre .19 patch,  4189rpms of spin, 

 

I know for a fact on TM and GC Quad I am in the 2200 range.  So this is reading almost double. IF you have a rough swing with normally 3000rpm,.... Mevo+ doubling is not surprising.

 

Secondly.  put a bad swing on it and you are getting higher spin.

 

3rd your alignment is off, it can read the data wrong and calculate wrong as well.  

 

AoA is not the only factor of Spin, so hitting down -10 is not the only reason you got a bad reading of 6000rpms.  

 

 

Edited January 31, 2022 by Exactice808