Bushnell Launch Pro Device with Foresight

[WallysWorld]

4 hours ago, Rory4Pres said:

That seems promising.  My first thought watching a couple videos about the software made me think the gc2's range was actually better.  I'm sure the new one had more bells and whistles but having "locked" yardage targets seems really odd.  I mean, how hard is it to move a green up or back on a range? haha.  Would like a better view of the shot too.  Loved the flying view the gc2 provided.

 

I'm sure for me (and a lot of customers), the range should be a focal point of attention for software developers.  We want every distance, with several viewing options, all kinds of playing conditions, elevated or lower trajectory options, maybe even tree placement options to force certain ball movement left to right or vis versa.  

 

The idea of giving a basic flat green space with limited distances and view points seems crazy for the 40 or 50% of consumers who buy this with the primary focus of training in the off season rather than farting around playing sim golf, drinking beer, with the buddies or family.

FSX has a ton of different practice ranges with plenty of different views. I think a ton of people are just unaware of all of the features. Here is the video of all of the different views. 

 

 

[mdmack]

8 minutes ago, WallysWorld said:

FSX has a ton of different practice ranges with plenty of different views. I think a ton of people are just unaware of all of the features. Here is the video of all of the different views. 

 

 

I think people are more disappointed in the price of the software license/subscription when all they really want is the range. Most people would be totally satisfied with the FSX 2020 range if they could get only the range at a significantly lower price point. At least that's my opinion and what ive gathered from other peoples comments as well. We are forced to pay for a premium software that probably 90% of what it does, we care nothing about. The price of the software kills this option for a lot of people who dont want to play courses at all and just want an accurate device to hit on a decent 3D range. $3-4K for an accurate device with an included decent range that does not require another $1,000 gaming computer to run it is fair, but $7k + $1k for a computer or $3k + $1K +$400/year is just getting a little steep when all we want is a decent range.

 

I 100% agree that if you use the device for playing a bunch of high profile courses, or playing online with other people etc. that the software is fairly priced, I just dont think that most golfers care about those things. 

 

If they would sell the $3,000 device and a $1,000 license to a decent range (maybe FSX mobile, I dont know much about this app) that could run on a normal computer and ipad/iphone they would sell a boatload of these things. 

[games]

26 minutes ago, jmnx973 said:

So i just got an email from Flightscope saying “big things are coming to memo+”. Anyone know what it could be?  Has to be something to keep them from losing 90% of their biz to a GC3…

 

The only business FS is losing is MEVO+ owners who think it's worth an additional $5000 to know their club path...

[Indygolf21]

2 minutes ago, games said:

 

The only business FS is losing is MEVO+ owners who think it's worth an additional $5000 to know their club path...

…and Mevo+ users who want data that is actually accurate…

[WallysWorld]

5 minutes ago, mdmack said:

I think people are more disappointed in the price of the software license/subscription when all they really want is the range. Most people would be totally satisfied with the FSX 2020 range if they could get only the range at a significantly lower price point. At least that's my opinion and what ive gathered from other peoples comments as well. We are forced to pay for a premium software that probably 90% of what it does, we care nothing about. The price of the software kills this option for a lot of people who dont want to play courses at all and just want an accurate device to hit on a decent 3D range. $3-4K for an accurate device with an included decent range that does not require another $1,000 gaming computer to run it is fair, but $7k + $1k for a computer or $3k + $1K +$400/year is just getting a little steep when all we want is a decent range.

 

I 100% agree that if you use the device for playing a bunch of high profile courses, or playing online with other people etc. that the software is fairly priced, I just dont think that most golfers care about those things. 

 

If they would sell the $3,000 device and a $1,000 license to a decent range (maybe FSX mobile, I dont know much about this app) that could run on a normal computer and ipad/iphone they would sell a boatload of these things. 

Unfortunately this is the market for accurate data. There are several options to choose from if you want to go with this device. If not, there are plenty of other companies that you can go with. 

[jmnx973]

3 minutes ago, Indygolf21 said:

…and Mevo+ users who want data that is actually accurate…

And a battery that last longer than 14 minutes

[mdmack]

3 minutes ago, WallysWorld said:

Unfortunately this is the market for accurate data. There are several options to choose from if you want to go with this device. If not, there are plenty of other companies that you can go with. 

Your right about that. There are just no devices that meet the space/accuracy requirements that dont also have the same pricing structure. There is a huge hole in the market, im just hoping someone decides to fill it. For now im just sitting with my fingers crossed hoping this device paves the way for other companies to up their game and keep driving prices down. 

[kwayneiu]

On 10/7/2021 at 5:09 PM, WallysWorld said:

I think it's pretty demanding and laptops can overheat. Also suggested 3070 and up card! 

For fsx 2020 or gs pro? Also what?! I looked at foresight recommended specs (think it was for quad) and ended up getting 8-core i7 and 3060 thinking it was overkill given their recommendations. Until now 😞 will have to try over clocking probably then 

Edited October 8, 2021 by kwayneiu

[Krt22]

3 hours ago, Indygolf21 said:

…and Mevo+ users who want data that is actually accurate…

And actually captures all shots (ie chips, pitches, etc) indoors.

 

[CardsChamps11]

1 hour ago, Krt22 said:

And actually captures all shots (ie chips, pitches, etc) indoors.

 

Is Mevo+ that bad? I’ve had an Xi+ for a few years and outdoors it’s amazing. Indoors it’s okay but struggles when ball speed rises and spin drops. I’m intrigued by the GC3 but going to wait for some reviews for you fine folks

[Krt22]

5 minutes ago, CardsChamps11 said:

Is Mevo+ that bad? I’ve had an Xi+ for a few years and outdoors it’s amazing. Indoors it’s okay but struggles when ball speed rises and spin drops. I’m intrigued by the GC3 but going to wait for some reviews for you fine folks

I am mainly talking bout indoors. I had an Xi+ for years and passed on a cheap x3 upgrade, went with a quad instead.  95% of my shots are indoors and I wanted accurate spin/spin axis/dplane data for both full and partial shots. I wasn't too interested in outdoor perforamnce with range balls 

[Indygolf21]

Foresight’s Instagram page just posted a video of them packing up GC3s saying that the GC3 has officially left  the building. 
 

Would think that those who purchased the GC3 right away will receive next week. 

Edited October 9, 2021 by Indygolf21

[Knockdown]

9 hours ago, mdmack said:

I think people are more disappointed in the price of the software license/subscription when all they really want is the range. Most people would be totally satisfied with the FSX 2020 range if they could get only the range at a significantly lower price point. At least that's my opinion and what ive gathered from other peoples comments as well. We are forced to pay for a premium software that probably 90% of what it does, we care nothing about. The price of the software kills this option for a lot of people who dont want to play courses at all and just want an accurate device to hit on a decent 3D range. $3-4K for an accurate device with an included decent range that does not require another $1,000 gaming computer to run it is fair, but $7k + $1k for a computer or $3k + $1K +$400/year is just getting a little steep when all we want is a decent range.

 

I 100% agree that if you use the device for playing a bunch of high profile courses, or playing online with other people etc. that the software is fairly priced, I just dont think that most golfers care about those things. 

 

If they would sell the $3,000 device and a $1,000 license to a decent range (maybe FSX mobile, I dont know much about this app) that could run on a normal computer and ipad/iphone they would sell a boatload of these things. 

100% agree

[games]

10 hours ago, CardsChamps11 said:

Is Mevo+ that bad? I’ve had an Xi+ for a few years and outdoors it’s amazing. Indoors it’s okay but struggles when ball speed rises and spin drops. I’m intrigued by the GC3 but going to wait for some reviews for you fine folks

MEVO+ is exceptional.  The following video by a professional long driver dispels the myth of a lack of MEVO+ "accuracy" at higher speed and spin.  The "benchmark"  LM used?

 

The GC Quad.  

 

 

 

Edited October 9, 2021 by games

[amj6135]

46 minutes ago, games said:

MEVO+ is exceptional.  The following video by a professional long driver dispels the myth of a lack of MEVO+ "accuracy" at higher speed and spin.  The "benchmark"  LM used?

 

The GC Quad.  

 

 

 

You should check out My Golf Spy’s test for the best personal launch monitor for 2021.  The Mevo+ was the worst unit at measuring spin.  It was worse than any available personal launch monitor on the market.  If you can’t see the limitations of that device you’ve drank the kool-aid.  
 

If the Mevo+ or even the X3 was comparable to a GCQuad I think Bryson would have one behind him instead of a GCQ beside home. Even your brand ambassador doesn’t trust the product.

Edited October 9, 2021 by amj6135

[Topher925]

The Golf Simulator Videos YouTube channel released a first look at FSX Play this morning.

 

Here ya go: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VBUpLdmX4Z0

Edited October 9, 2021 by Topher925

[Jpan08]

11 minutes ago, Topher925 said:

The Golf Simulator Videos YouTube channel is releasing a first look at FSX Play this morning.

Hoping for the best

[Indygolf21]

1 hour ago, games said:

MEVO+ is exceptional.  The following video by a professional long driver dispels the myth of a lack of MEVO+ "accuracy" at higher speed and spin.  The "benchmark"  LM used?

 

The GC Quad.  

 

 

 

Looks like this video shows up to a 7 yard difference in wedge shots and up to a 15-20 on longer shots. 
 

I know everyone has different purposes for their monitor, but this just isn’t good enough to be useful for me. 
 

Also, he’s got way more space for ball flight than most people do indoors, so this is going to be an even better result than almost anyone can get at home.  

Edited October 9, 2021 by Indygolf21

[oodavo]

11 hours ago, Indygolf21 said:

Foresight’s Instagram page just posted a video of them packing up GC3s saying that the GC3 has officially left  the building. 
 

Would think that those who purchased the GC3 right away will receive next week. 

I saw that too! Hopefully the same for Bushnell units. 

[noodle24]

59 minutes ago, Topher925 said:

The Golf Simulator Videos YouTube channel released a first look at FSX Play this morning.

 

Here ya go: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VBUpLdmX4Z0

Looks good! For me, though, it's never going to compete with something like GS Pro or TGC 2019 where new courses are getting added all the time that you don't have to pay for. I don't want to have to pay $200 to add one new course. I presume they'll never open this up for people to design courses.

[clevited]

2 hours ago, games said:

MEVO+ is exceptional.  The following video by a professional long driver dispels the myth of a lack of MEVO+ "accuracy" at higher speed and spin.  The "benchmark"  LM used?

 

The GC Quad.  

 

 

 

 

I watched that video.  The Mevo+ even with more space than most have was still unacceptable to me.  The ball speeds, kaunch angles and spin were way too different at times, enough to make differences.  The most important thing though imo is spin axis.  That is a difficult thing to get right with radar indoors and can lead to a frustrating experience especially the faster you are.  I had issues with Skytrak even ( and that wasn't radar) and I am not nearly as fast as that guy.  Mevo plus was a big let down for me performance wise.

[WallysWorld]

Thoughts on new FSX play? Is it now worth it? 

Edited October 9, 2021 by WallysWorld

[Gresh12]

If you’ve got enough ball flight (which most don’t) the Mevo+ does as well as a Trackman indoors on ball parameters based on my testing. I own a Mevo+ and hit on a Trackman every week and we’ve put them side by side many times and the ball data when spin is measured is so close you’d think we were faking it. This is with about 25’ of ball flight though and I know from my experience the spin values at home with driver are way off and the spin axis has some challenges at times throughout the bag with my 10’ of ball flight. 
 

For what it is I believe the Mevo+ is a really strong device (it’s way more accurate than my SkyTrak was even with 10’ of ball flight overall as SkyTrak HLA was so inconsistent it was worse than spin challenges for me). I will agree indoors with short ball flight GC3 is clearly better at measuring the ball but keep in mind when talking about accuracy of carry distance the flight algorithm comes in also and Foresight’s seems pretty generous on the low spin (I say this to note none are perfect and consistency is key as my Mevo+ matches my on course yardages just fine for irons). 

[amj6135]

10 minutes ago, Gresh12 said:

If you’ve got enough ball flight (which most don’t) the Mevo+ does as well as a Trackman indoors on ball parameters based on my testing. I own a Mevo+ and hit on a Trackman every week and we’ve put them side by side many times and the ball data when spin is measured is so close you’d think we were faking it. This is with about 25’ of ball flight though and I know from my experience the spin values at home with driver are way off and the spin axis has some challenges at times throughout the bag with my 10’ of ball flight. 
 

For what it is I believe the Mevo+ is a really strong device (it’s way more accurate than my SkyTrak was even with 10’ of ball flight overall as SkyTrak HLA was so inconsistent it was worse than spin challenges for me). I will agree indoors with short ball flight GC3 is clearly better at measuring the ball but keep in mind when talking about accuracy of carry distance the flight algorithm comes in also and Foresight’s seems pretty generous on the low spin (I say this to note none are perfect and consistency is key as my Mevo+ matches my on course yardages just fine for irons). 

 

I've also owned both the Mevo+ and Skytrak and I'll say for the money they are both great if you understand their weaknesses and limitations, and use them appropriately.  I found the inconsistencies with Skytrak's HLA to be frustrating but easily recognizable when it got it wrong.  Much less frustrating than hitting a great shot to have the Skytrak miss it. 

 

As opposed to the Mevo+'s inconsistencies with spin axis where I found you could be thinking you're hitting fades based on the data then go on the course and hit draws and hooks all day.  I found it almost impossible to practice shot shaping with the Mevo+ with a ball flight distance of 15 feet.  I could hit what would be huge draws or massive cuts outdoors and the Mevo+ would either get the spin axis opposite or it would be drastically under reported. 

 

I think the Mevo+ is great with limited flight if you want to bang balls into a net and work on proper contact and launch angles but for dialing in shots and working on shot shaping it will do more harm than good. Ask me how I know.    

[soupy01833]

21 hours ago, mdmack said:

Ive been saying this too. For $3,000 the base functionality of the unit should include some sort of 3D range. I would venture to say that more than 50% of the people buying this product only really want a decent range.

 

MOST GOLFERS DONT LIKE SIM GOLF. Nothing wrong with liking it, but if you go to an actual golf course and ask everyone who walks through the door if they would be interested in buying a device to play rounds of simulated computer golf at home I think the answer would be a resounding no. 

I play 110 rounds outdoors every year.  I still love my sim and love playing on it

[Celeras]

6 hours ago, games said:

MEVO+ is exceptional.  The following video by a professional long driver dispels the myth of a lack of MEVO+ "accuracy" at higher speed and spin.  The "benchmark"  LM used?

 

The GC Quad.  

 

 

 

Lmao did you even watch?

 

Quad Ball speed 199.8 vs Mevo+ 191.6. C'mon bruh. Not even close.

[Gresh12]

2 hours ago, amj6135 said:

 

I've also owned both the Mevo+ and Skytrak and I'll say for the money they are both great if you understand their weaknesses and limitations, and use them appropriately.  I found the inconsistencies with Skytrak's HLA to be frustrating but easily recognizable when it got it wrong.  Much less frustrating than hitting a great shot to have the Skytrak miss it. 

 

As opposed to the Mevo+'s inconsistencies with spin axis where I found you could be thinking you're hitting fades based on the data then go on the course and hit draws and hooks all day.  I found it almost impossible to practice shot shaping with the Mevo+ with a ball flight distance of 15 feet.  I could hit what would be huge draws or massive cuts outdoors and the Mevo+ would either get the spin axis opposite or it would be drastically under reported. 

 

I think the Mevo+ is great with limited flight if you want to bang balls into a net and work on proper contact and launch angles but for dialing in shots and working on shot shaping it will do more harm than good. Ask me how I know.    

Interesting you had shot shape flipping on you with Mevo+ as I’ve not experienced that even at 10’ of ball flight. Granted I hit 95%+ draws with a miss as a hook and I will admit it understates the left for sure sometimes but I’ve never seen a fade where I wasn’t playing one on purpose which is consistent with my game on course. 
 

I agree on SkyTrak, you knew HLA was wrong but it was awful for doing anything related to proximity when you see the ball hit the right of the centre line and SkyTrak gives you a pull that then over draws and missed left when it was actually a good shot. 

I’m hoping GC3 works with other sim software regardless as it does fit my setup best but I don’t really want to commit to the FSX ecosystem (not the best software and I’m against pay per course at their costs plus I can’t keep playing with my friends with non-foresight products). 
 

 

[mikewohlwend]

I would have preferred there was an option for spin and club data without simulation. In the 4 years I've owned a Skytrak, it's been used for playing a course once a year. That's why I never upgraded to TGC19

[jcrews5508]

5 hours ago, WallysWorld said:

Thoughts on new FSX play? Is it now worth it? 

Never having owned a simulator and since you've now seen the new release video how did the graphics compare to the other two Premier software programs? I understand there are still going to be serious limitations with courses but for me that's not gonna be a huge issue as I'm not expecting to try to play 100 different courses.

[gibbiesmalls]

On 10/7/2021 at 1:56 PM, PantherFritz said:

Can someone review the FSX Pro app? I’m interested in a GC3 for my backyard net/range using just my iPad. With FSX Pro available why would someone use FSX mobile? Maybe I’m missing something. Any input would be appreciated. 

In case this hasn't been answered.....

 

What you're missing is that FSX Mobile is used with mobile devices like cell phones or tables, where as FSX Pro requires a PC/Laptop in which the software is installed.