Garmin Approach R10 Portable Golf Launch Monitor

[Red4282]

1 hour ago, pybm said:

In case anyone else is interested, I had a look at the R10's performance versus Trackman and GC Quad in GungHoGolf's recent YouTube videos.  Basically, I put all the metrics from R10 / Trackman / GC Quad for each shot into a spreadsheet and had a look at the average difference (and st dev) for each metric.  Around 50 shots in total - so not a huge sample.  (I ignored the little chip shots in the GC Quad video.)

 

Seems to me that it did a great job on ball metrics being measured directly (speed, launch, direction).  Club speed measurement looks close too, but with a slightly "slow" bias for the R10

 

Start to see some variability in R10 measurement of club metrics (AoA, face, path), with path being the weakest.  Looks like there was a strong negative bias in R10 path measurement.  That will be driving the fade bias seen in spin axis.  Also wide variability with path (e.g., vs Trackman the difference in path had st dev of 6.7 degrees)

 

The consistent biases in some measurements (club speed and path) make me think there is potential to tighten things up with future firmware / software

 

Saw some large variations in carry and offline deviation with driver.  I wonder how much can be improved by improving the measurement of the club metrics (face and path), vs how much is just due to R10 being unable to factor in gear effect and contact point on face?

 

I was expecting R10 to perform "better" outdoors where it gets to see a bit more of the flight. But this didn't seem to be the case, other than perhaps spin axis was a bit better.  I guess outdoors the "accuracy" probably is impacted by comparing the R10 calculations to the Trackman’s observation of actual ball flight which will include any effects of ambient conditions (wind, altitude, temperature, etc).

 

 

I believe the club speed will be naturally slower, at least thats my understanding. Like trackman gets the middle of the club where as gc captures the toe which is traveling faster. 

[mhedwards93]

4 hours ago, Wildest1 said:

I set up my R10 in my back yard 6+ feet behind the ball, hitting into a net about 8 feet in front of the ball.

My main goal is to get accurate distances, direction and shot shape.

 

My biggest problem is aligning the R10 to directly aim at the target line. Eyeballing the 1/2 inch long red line on top is not much to work with. The horizontal launch angle and shot shape seem to be directly affected by the alignment of the R10. Without another LM to compare it to, I have to rotate the R10 left or right based on how the direction and shape of my shot "feels."

 

There also appears to be a fade bias. I often hit irons on the course with a baby draw, and this shot shape has never shown up with the R10. Do you have any suggestions on how to accurately align the R10? And how critical do you think the alignment is to measured performance?

 

Has anyone else experienced similar issues?

I have literally the exact same thing 🙂 so much seems so close, speed, carry, height, launch direction etc etc. Except for the shot shape. I also am 5+ degrees in to out and it regularly reads a push fade which is a shot I would love to hit but rarely happens on the course. Feeling fairly confident it’s resolvable with updates.

[Sandhurst241069]

3 hours ago, toddmanley said:

Mine arrives today and I'm hoping to get some outdoor driving range time with it tonight or tomorrow.  I'm curious to see how the alignment boundaries really work - I'm guessing that there's a margin of error and then you fall off a cliff with readings when you get way too far outside the target line.  If there's consistency in readings to +/- 1 foot then it makes it easier to plop this down on the range or course...but if it's +/- 2 inches than a bit more rigor will be required for alignment.

Just to clarify.. you still want the device aligned with the target line .. but you effectively have a box between 6 and 8 feet from the unit and a foot each side of the target line in which you can place the ball (for memory)

[Wildest1]

1 hour ago, Stevie989 said:

I have a builders level/laser that I’ll probably use to align the r10. 

I used a laser on my setup, but I would like a better alignment aid on the R10.

Edited August 19, 2021 by Wildest1

[Spazzen]

I do have to wonder about the expectations people have for this item.

 

For me it fits a specific and useful purpose.

 

I want a launch monitor and simulator, but I'm not prepared to drop 5-10k (AUD) to find out I don't use it as expected.

 

By doing everything, even if not perfectly I'll be able to find out how I use it.

 

Do I mostly use it at home as a sim.

Do I just use the range features.

Do I take it to the practice range or do all my practice inside at home.

Is my indoor space appropriate.

Do I get indoor swing syndrome.

 

The Garmin will give me 6-12 months use, then I'll look to replace it (and use the Garmin as a Christmas present for my Dad), then I'll know if I want a unit for indoors and outdoors, whether I go radar or camera, a portable model or ceiling mounted camera unit.

 

And if it turns out I don't actually use it much and don't want to upgrade I've only spent a small amount.

[wolfyand1]

26 minutes ago, Spazzen said:

I do have to wonder about the expectations people have for this item.

 

For me it fits a specific and useful purpose.

 

I want a launch monitor and simulator, but I'm not prepared to drop 5-10k (AUD) to find out I don't use it as expected.

 

By doing everything, even if not perfectly I'll be able to find out how I use it.

 

Do I mostly use it at home as a sim.

Do I just use the range features.

Do I take it to the practice range or do all my practice inside at home.

Is my indoor space appropriate.

Do I get indoor swing syndrome.

 

The Garmin will give me 6-12 months use, then I'll look to replace it (and use the Garmin as a Christmas present for my Dad), then I'll know if I want a unit for indoors and outdoors, whether I go radar or camera, a portable model or ceiling mounted camera unit.

 

And if it turns out I don't actually use it much and don't want to upgrade I've only spent a small amount.

 

Yeah I agree with you. I am also in Melbourne where we cant play golf at the moment, and it would be cool to "play" whilst in my backyard. I am looking for a placeholder before the Bushnell/Foresight unit comes out and I will save my pennies for that. 

 

It is just concerning that the club path which is supposedly measured is giving such variation. Unfortunately there is so many variables that it may be difficult to determine exactly what people are having issues with in testing. 

[vsabre]

Just got confirmation I'll receive my R10 tomorrow and I'll compare with my original Mevo indoors over the weekend, which seems a little more realistic than a contest with $10k plus units.

 

Before I start using lasers, advanced trigonometry and requisitioning DOD satellite time, I think I'll work with the more simple alignment method indicated in the R10 manual here :

 

Adjusting the Device Alignment

If the device is misaligned, your swing metrics while using the golf simulator features will not be accurate. For 
example, if the alignment is off by several degrees, the metrics will also be off by several degrees. If your swing 
metrics seem to be inaccurate, you can adjust the alignment.
1 Hit a short, straight shot using a high loft club, such as a sand wedge.
2 Compare the shot to the ball launch direction in the Garmin Golf app.
If the device is misaligned, the ball launch direction in the app will not match your shot. For example, if the 
device is facing too far to the left of your target line, the launch direction shown in the app will be farther 
right than your shot.
3 Adjust the alignment of the device as needed.
4 Repeat this process until the ball launch direction in the app matches your shot.

[wolfyand1]

1 minute ago, vsabre said:

Just got confirmation I'll receive my R10 tomorrow and I'll compare with my original Mevo indoors over the weekend, which seems a little more realistic than a contest with $10k plus units.

 

Before I start using lasers, advanced trigonometry and requisitioning DOD satellite time, I think I'll work with the more simple alignment method indicated in the R10 manual here :

 

Adjusting the Device Alignment

If the device is misaligned, your swing metrics while using the golf simulator features will not be accurate. For 
example, if the alignment is off by several degrees, the metrics will also be off by several degrees. If your swing 
metrics seem to be inaccurate, you can adjust the alignment.
1 Hit a short, straight shot using a high loft club, such as a sand wedge.
2 Compare the shot to the ball launch direction in the Garmin Golf app.
If the device is misaligned, the ball launch direction in the app will not match your shot. For example, if the 
device is facing too far to the left of your target line, the launch direction shown in the app will be farther 
right than your shot.
3 Adjust the alignment of the device as needed.
4 Repeat this process until the ball launch direction in the app matches your shot.

 

These two devices is what I am tossing up between, would be keen to see the comparisons!

[vsabre]

Just now, wolfyand1 said:

 

These two devices is what I am tossing up between, would be keen to see the comparisons!

I love my Mevo original. Bought it new from Flightscope last December but it had a chance to mature by then through updates and I expect the R10 to follow a similar path. Love the sim capability of the R10 and it will be fun using..

[jvpark]

Mevo Plus vs R10

 

I have them both (got the R10 yesterday) and did a side by side comparison today.  
 

Carry, swing speed, ball speed, deviation, height, AOA, launch angel, Spin numbers were very close.  
 

comparable but not exact.  Well writhing they error % disclosed on the website. 

 

total distance can fluctuate because you can choose on the Mevo the type of landing surface (soft, medium or hard).  Not sure if the R10 can?
 

ball flight were identical and spin axis were within 2 degrees (most of the time)

 

club path and face were nice to see but not sure how accurate, especially when 2 degrees is a significant variation.  Good enough to send you down the right rabbit hole for sure.  
 

maybe I got lucky with my set up but it was not like one ball flight went left while the other monitor read a right shot.  
 

for most of us, we can tell when we strike the ball, if the shot felt right or left and both PLMs confirmed how the strike felt.  
 

if you are in the $600 price range this is good as it’s going to get (currently). 
 

im going to keep the Garmin and get rid of my Mevo plus.  
 

For me, I hit the ball into an outdoor net (do not have an indoor set up) and I do not use my Mevo plus as much as I would because the start up time to hit your first ball is much longer than with the Garmin.  I hit balls many times during the day and it’s a chore to whip out the Mevo. 
Also, battery life is important to me and attaching a external battery was always another step. 
 

I feel the Mevo is more accurate but fragile (power cord issues and battery life) but for my purposes, the Garmin is a better option. 
 

with the R10 you turn it on, align it open the app and it’s already linked (ready to go in under a minute) (Mevo owners will know what I mean). 
 

I like the interface of the Mevo better, feels like it’s easier to customize and read data but I can live with the Garmin interface.  
 

 

 

Edited August 20, 2021 by jvpark

[psu517]

10 minutes ago, jvpark said:

Mevo Plus vs R10

 

I have them both (got the R10 yesterday) and did a side by side comparison today.  
 

Carry, swing speed, ball speed, deviation, height, AOA, launch angel, Spin numbers were very close.  
 

comparable but not exact.  Well writhing they error % disclosed on the website. 

 

total distance can fluctuate because you can choose on the Mevo the type of landing surface (soft, medium or hard).  Not sure if the R10 can?
 

ball flight were identical and spin axis were within 2 degrees (most of the time)

 

club path and face were nice to see but not sure how accurate, especially when 2 degrees is a significant variation.  Good enough to send you down the right rabbit hole for sure.  
 

maybe I got lucky with my set up but it was not like one ball flight went left while the other monitor read a right shot.  
 

for most of us, we can tell when we strike the ball, if the shot felt right or left and both PLMs confirmed how the strike felt.  
 

if you are in the $600 price range this is good as it’s going to get (currently). 
 

im going to keep the Garmin and get rid of my Mevo plus.  
 

For me, I hit the ball into an outdoor net (do not have an indoor set up) and I do not use my Mevo plus as much as I would because the start up time to hit your first ball is much longer than with the Garmin.  I hit balls many times during the day and it’s a chore to whip out the Mevo. 
 

with the R10 you turn it on, align it open the app and it’s already linked (ready to go in under a minute) (Mevo owners will know what I mean). 
 

I like the interface of the Mevo better, feels like it’s easier to customize and read data but I can live with the Garmin interface.  
 

 

 

Thanks for the post!  Can you elaborate on the comparison of carry distance and draw/fade? Specifically with irons and wedges.  Ie how close was the typical read and what were the outliers?  Thanks!

[jvpark]

26 minutes ago, psu517 said:

Thanks for the post!  Can you elaborate on the comparison of carry distance and draw/fade? Specifically with irons and wedges.  Ie how close was the typical read and what were the outliers?  Thanks!

Carry was usually within 3-4 yards and they always read the same draw and fade shots.  Deviation of shot was also within the same 3-4 yards. 
 

outliers were only with the total distance.  
 

Didn’t hit wedges but my understanding is that shorter irons were more accurate although driver carry was within 5 yards (under).  There were a few drivers where the difference was 10 yards difference.  
 

I trust the Mevo Plus more and love the Spin Loft number that the R10 does not have. 
 

if I was a teaching Pro I would use the Mevo Plus with my students. 

[Trickygolf]

Okay so it’s a tool and a toy

 

It’s a useful tool when working with the figures that are actually measured – Club head speed, ball seed, launch angle, launch direction (horizontal)  So like other radar devices in this range it can do a good job of calculating carry distance and can be used to gap clubs reasonably, help increase swing speed, ball speed  and carry etc. By entering club loft and assuming a square hit it should also be able to give a reasonable estimation of backspin.

 

Unfortunately because it has no idea of club face at impact (open/closed) and swing path no amount of algorithm tweaking is going to give an accurate ball flight. And I’m fairly sure at this price firmware updates still aren’t going to enable those measurements to be made
 

So when it comes to golf simulation it’s a toy – good to play around with mates and kids but not for the serious golfer.

 

....now if they also included a single linked high speed camera to be placed opposite the ball to measure club face and path…. Wonder if the iPhone camera would do that?

[wolfyand1]

1 hour ago, jvpark said:

Mevo Plus vs R10

 

I have them both (got the R10 yesterday) and did a side by side comparison today.  
 

Carry, swing speed, ball speed, deviation, height, AOA, launch angel, Spin numbers were very close.  
 

comparable but not exact.  Well writhing they error % disclosed on the website. 

 

total distance can fluctuate because you can choose on the Mevo the type of landing surface (soft, medium or hard).  Not sure if the R10 can?
 

ball flight were identical and spin axis were within 2 degrees (most of the time)

 

club path and face were nice to see but not sure how accurate, especially when 2 degrees is a significant variation.  Good enough to send you down the right rabbit hole for sure.  
 

maybe I got lucky with my set up but it was not like one ball flight went left while the other monitor read a right shot.  
 

for most of us, we can tell when we strike the ball, if the shot felt right or left and both PLMs confirmed how the strike felt.  
 

if you are in the $600 price range this is good as it’s going to get (currently). 
 

im going to keep the Garmin and get rid of my Mevo plus.  
 

For me, I hit the ball into an outdoor net (do not have an indoor set up) and I do not use my Mevo plus as much as I would because the start up time to hit your first ball is much longer than with the Garmin.  I hit balls many times during the day and it’s a chore to whip out the Mevo. 
Also, battery life is important to me and attaching a external battery was always another step. 
 

I feel the Mevo is more accurate but fragile (power cord issues and battery life) but for my purposes, the Garmin is a better option. 
 

with the R10 you turn it on, align it open the app and it’s already linked (ready to go in under a minute) (Mevo owners will know what I mean). 
 

I like the interface of the Mevo better, feels like it’s easier to customize and read data but I can live with the Garmin interface.  
 

 

 

That is really intresting, do you have any pictures of your set up that you would be willing to share? or any screenshots that you have of the data?

I 

[psu517]

43 minutes ago, jvpark said:

Carry was usually within 3-4 yards and they always read the same draw and fade shots.  Deviation of shot was also within the same 3-4 yards. 
 

outliers were only with the total distance.  
 

Didn’t hit wedges but my understanding is that shorter irons were more accurate although driver carry was within 5 yards (under).  There were a few drivers where the difference was 10 yards difference.  
 

I trust the Mevo Plus more and love the Spin Loft number that the R10 does not have. 
 

if I was a teaching Pro I would use the Mevo Plus with my students. 

Thanks for the reply! Makes sense. 

[Red4282]

1 hour ago, Trickygolf said:

Okay so it’s a tool and a toy

 

It’s a useful tool when working with the figures that are actually measured – Club head speed, ball seed, launch angle, launch direction (horizontal)  So like other radar devices in this range it can do a good job of calculating carry distance and can be used to gap clubs reasonably, help increase swing speed, ball speed  and carry etc. By entering club loft and assuming a square hit it should also be able to give a reasonable estimation of backspin.

 

Unfortunately because it has no idea of club face at impact (open/closed) and swing path no amount of algorithm tweaking is going to give an accurate ball flight. And I’m fairly sure at this price firmware updates still aren’t going to enable those measurements to be made
 

So when it comes to golf simulation it’s a toy – good to play around with mates and kids but not for the serious golfer.

 

....now if they also included a single linked high speed camera to be placed opposite the ball to measure club face and path…. Wonder if the iPhone camera would do that?

The thing about club face is we know club face attributes to like 75-85% of horizontal launch direction. I believe thats how the garmin gets its data, it measure the launch direction then estimates club face based on that and a measured path. On solid strikes, it should be in the fairly accurate. On severe mishits where the club face twists or gears,  it wont do a great job of giving accurate numbers. 

Edited August 20, 2021 by Red4282

[Jackjaacck]

Received my r10 unit today. Been testing it out in my garage hitting bay. 7 ft from impact zone and 8ft to impact net. My garage floor slopes slightly from back to front and have approx 1 inch deviation in height from the hitting mat to the unit on the ground. I've tried propping the unit up and using it without the tripod. My launch angle and apex height readings are all very low. I'll get 27 yards apex height out of GW/PW but once I get to 6 iron and up, I can't get over 4 yards height. Can anyone help me out on this? I've tried raising the mat with padding to level out, I've tried making sure the r10 unit was dead level.

[Trickygolf]

59 minutes ago, Red4282 said:

The thing about club face is we know club face attributes to like 75-85% of horizontal launch direction. I believe thats how the garmin gets its data, it measure the launch direction then estimates club face based on that and a measured path. On solid strikes, it should be in the fairly accurate. On severe mishits where the club face twists or gears,  it wont do a great job of giving accurate numbers. 

Ok but does the R10 measure club path directly? The product info gives no accuracy data for club face or oath suggesting both are calculated 

If not then that is the problem, It’s calculating ball flight using two unknowns - club face and club path and only knowing the launch direction

Of course I could be wrong about club path  

[Sandhurst241069]

43 minutes ago, Trickygolf said:

Ok but does the R10 measure club path directly? The product info gives no accuracy data for club face or oath suggesting both are calculated 

If not then that is the problem, It’s calculating ball flight using two unknowns - club face and club path and only knowing the launch direction

Of course I could be wrong about club path  

Yes it measures clubhead speed, path and AOA directly … there have been links to published accuracy metrics earlier in this thread from playbetter.com and then Golfstead.com .. the playbetter.com claimed +/- 2 degrees on path and +/- 1 on AOA but then golfstead.com published less favourable numbers (+/- 4 and +/- 3 I think) You’re right in that Garmin are not including path and AOA in their site specs so leads me to believe that the numbers are less impressive / consistent and closer to golfstead … having said that I’ve seen decent comparisons of path/AOA vs other LM’s some of the Youtube videos.. so I’m hopeful (given I’ve got an R10 on the way) that the clubhead readings are ok even if more sensitive to certain variables. 

[Trickygolf]

15 minutes ago, Sandhurst241069 said:

Yes it measures clubhead speed, path and AOA directly … there have been links to published accuracy metrics earlier in this thread from playbetter.com and then Golfstead.com .. the playbetter.com claimed +/- 2 degrees on path and +/- 1 on AOA but then golfstead.com published less favourable numbers (+/- 4 and +/- 3 I think) You’re right in that Garmin are not including path and AOA in their site specs so leads me to believe that the numbers are less impressive / consistent and closer to golfstead … having said that I’ve seen decent comparisons of path/AOA vs other LM’s some of the Youtube videos.. so I’m hopeful (given I’ve got an R10 on the way) that the clubhead readings are ok even if more sensitive to certain variables. 

Ok that’s good to know that there is some hope for improved accuracy. Thanks for the info

[Red4282]

5 hours ago, Trickygolf said:

Ok but does the R10 measure club path directly? The product info gives no accuracy data for club face or oath suggesting both are calculated 

If not then that is the problem, It’s calculating ball flight using two unknowns - club face and club path and only knowing the launch direction

Of course I could be wrong about club path  

Im not a 100% but I believe it does. There would be no way to calculate path, unless its measuring spin axis which we know its not measuring actual spin so im positive its not measuring spin axis. Otherwise it would be just throwing out random numbers and i highly doubt they would release a product that does that. Evidence also seems to support this in some of the testing and having the alignment (degrees of rotation) off. Again, many things can be accurately calculated with formulas given strike is pure… thats the caveat. 

[games]

9 hours ago, Trickygolf said:

Okay so it’s a tool and a toy

 

It’s a useful tool when working with the figures that are actually measured – Club head speed, ball seed, launch angle, launch direction (horizontal)  So like other radar devices in this range it can do a good job of calculating carry distance and can be used to gap clubs reasonably, help increase swing speed, ball speed  and carry etc. By entering club loft and assuming a square hit it should also be able to give a reasonable estimation of backspin.

 

Unfortunately because it has no idea of club face at impact (open/closed) and swing path no amount of algorithm tweaking is going to give an accurate ball flight. And I’m fairly sure at this price firmware updates still aren’t going to enable those measurements to be made
 

So when it comes to golf simulation it’s a toy – good to play around with mates and kids but not for the serious golfer.

 

....now if they also included a single linked high speed camera to be placed opposite the ball to measure club face and path…. Wonder if the iPhone camera would do that?

My thoughts exactly!  It’s a regular Mevo with horizontal launch detection and a random number generator for spin axis.

[bimpecoven]

Got my R10 on Monday. Took it to the range (range balls were a mix bag of used white balls) after work Monday and it performed fairly well, tracking all of my shots without missing one and the general shot shape and distance appears to be close. Last night I took it to another range to test out home tee hero and e6. This range provided primarily yellow balls with the exception of a few white balls. I noticed my r10 would almost NEVER pickup the yellow balls. Is this normal with a Doppler based device?

[jeg208]

Very limited testing here, but I wanted to mention that I am pretty sure club selection is important.  I was so excited that I totally forgot to check this and was giving my PW everything I had and struggling to carry 105+ yards.  As soon as I changed the club from D to PW, the numbers were far more consistent and in a more realistic (for me) area of 120-125 carry.

[Simpsonia]

3 hours ago, Red4282 said:

Im not a 100% but I believe it does. There would be no way to calculate path, unless its measuring spin axis which we know its not measuring actual spin so im positive its not measuring spin axis. Otherwise it would be just throwing out random numbers and i highly doubt they would release a product that does that. Evidence also seems to support this in some of the testing and having the alignment (degrees of rotation) off. Again, many things can be accurately calculated with formulas given strike is pure… thats the caveat. 

 

I'm also almost positive that it has at least some basic capacity to measure club path. If it did not, it would have absolutely no way to estimate spin, and it would have no way to discern a straight push from a push draw or push slice. The fact that it can (albeit not super accurately) means it has some basic capacity to measure path. Now I'm pretty sure it is not measuring face, rather doing calculations from H. Launch angle and path to calculate back face to path. I think another piece of evidence is the fact that club waggles at address seem to upset it pretty easily, which means it's detecting that club head movement. 

 

I definitely think there's room for improvement, and I think the high degree of accuracy of H. Launch angle is the cornerstone of that. I'm guessing that Garmin used some machine learning to generate the algorithm, and for whatever reason the data input was very fade biased. Hopefully Garmin sees enough promise in the product to continue development resources to correct for these issues. The biggest potential hurdle I see is if the unit is already maxed out on its accuracy/resolution of measured club path via the cheap(er) doppler hardware, it might not be possible to get much more accurate beyond just correcting for bugs/biases. 

Edited August 20, 2021 by Simpsonia

[Red4282]

12 minutes ago, Simpsonia said:

 

I'm also almost positive that it has at least some basic capacity to measure club path. If it did not, it would have absolutely no way to estimate spin, and it would have no way to discern a straight push from a push draw or push slice. The fact that it can (albeit not super accurately) means it has some basic capacity to measure path. Now I'm pretty sure it is not measuring face, rather doing calculations from H. Launch angle and path to calculate back face to path. I think another piece of evidence is the fact that club waggles at address seem to upset it pretty easily, which means it's detecting that club head movement. 

 

I definitely think there's room for improvement, and I think the high degree of accuracy of H. Launch angle is the cornerstone of that. I'm guessing that Garmin used some machine learning to generate the algorithm, and for whatever reason the data input was very fade biased. Hopefully Garmin sees enough promise in the product to continue development resources to correct for these issues. The biggest potential hurdle I see is if the unit is already maxed out on its accuracy/resolution of measured club path via the cheap(er) doppler hardware, it might not be possible to get much more accurate beyond just correcting for bugs/biases. 

From what i gather, its ball measurements are  ball speed, vertical launch and horizontal launch. All 3 seem very accurate from early reviews. Its club measurements are speed path and AOA. Less accurate than the ball measurements but also seems sensitive to setup.  Everything else- spin, spin axis, face angle, carry, ball flight is all a calculation. Which knowing ball flight laws, it should do a decent job if its algorithms are accurate. What it cant do is account for strike and its effects. So for simulator purposes, it will be hit and miss. I do think it can be useful when used as a tool for learning ball flights and working on swing mechanics. Thats the part im most excited about.

[Dwchung6]

Ordered r10 from golf galaxy on 7/13. Just received an email that saysit is shipping out today.

[adamb731]

15 hours ago, Jackjaacck said:

Received my r10 unit today. Been testing it out in my garage hitting bay. 7 ft from impact zone and 8ft to impact net. My garage floor slopes slightly from back to front and have approx 1 inch deviation in height from the hitting mat to the unit on the ground. I've tried propping the unit up and using it without the tripod. My launch angle and apex height readings are all very low. I'll get 27 yards apex height out of GW/PW but once I get to 6 iron and up, I can't get over 4 yards height. Can anyone help me out on this? I've tried raising the mat with padding to level out, I've tried making sure the r10 unit was dead level.

 

I've taken my unit to the range twice and have this exact issue. Club head and ball speeds all seem reasonable. Horizontal launch and spin numbers are pretty good, but my Launch Angle numbers seem way of. I'll bomb a beautiful drive and it shows me 148 ball speed with like 6deg launch angle and only 220 carry when I can watch the ball go past the 250 marker.

 

Did you have any luck getting this fixed? Curious if you are left or right handed?

 

I'm also having club path issues. It loves to tell me my path is 20.0deg L which makes me think it is maxing out is club path reading. I'm a lefty with a typical fade, occasional slice. I can promise that I'm not swinging 20deg inside-out :)

 

 

[Jackjaacck]

1 hour ago, adamb731 said:

 

I've taken my unit to the range twice and have this exact issue. Club head and ball speeds all seem reasonable. Horizontal launch and spin numbers are pretty good, but my Launch Angle numbers seem way of. I'll bomb a beautiful drive and it shows me 148 ball speed with like 6deg launch angle and only 220 carry when I can watch the ball go past the 250 marker.

 

Did you have any luck getting this fixed? Curious if you are left or right handed?

 

I'm also having club path issues. It loves to tell me my path is 20.0deg L which makes me think it is maxing out is club path reading. I'm a lefty with a typical fade, occasional slice. I can promise that I'm not swinging 20deg inside-out 🙂

 

 

I'm still tinkering. Haven't used it outdoors yet, bought it mainly for an indoor purpose use. Will try to add more padding to level out the hitting mat and adjust the surface the unit sits on. I'm a low handicap right, love to shape shots, so I've been testing by hitting extreme cuts, draws, baby shapes, straight pulls and pushes. As long as it's close to what I feel vs what it reads out, I'm OK with that. But it just seems way off at the moment and could be due to simple alignment. 

[spres13]

On 8/18/2021 at 6:42 PM, Harley_ou812 said:

I am looking into getting a car port with sides to set up the r10 inside.  We can then set up a space heater inside to take the chill off. 

 

I wanna do this. I’m trying to find a big enough one ( assuming I need 12 feet of height )