Better device than Garmin R10?

[golfun]

What in your opinion when you would want to spend more than $600 after buying the R10, would be the next level up LM? I heard the Mevo+ isn't really worth the upgrade so what then? Thanks!

[Bubbtubbs]

The R10 is a great product for the cost, bit anything costing more (except maybe ES Tour Plus) is going to be better.

 

The question is whether the easier alignment,  putting, Fusion Tracking, bigger radar array and potential access to D-plane parameters through the Pro upgrade are worth it to the individual user. For the majority that just want a few data points for range sessions or to play sim golf with friends, R10 is enough. That's why people say that standard Mevo+ may not be worth it over the Garmin.

 

I'd rank them:

 

R10 

used Skytrak (exclusively indoor, don't buy new)

Mevo+ (with or without Pro)

used GC2 

Launch Pro/GC3 

used GC2+HMT

EyeXO (exclusively indoor)

X3 

Quad/TM

 

Edit: this is in order of cost - I'd take any of these over the R10 if budget allows.

 

FullSwing Kit might slot in there between GC3 and EXO. I'm just not convinced yet that it's worth the extra cost over an Xi Tour.

 

Edited November 16, 2022 by Bubbtubbs

[mgoblue83]

Mevo+ has by far the best data and accuracy for the cost. Camera systems can be more accurate depending on the environment at a much higher price but the Mevo+ is a massive step up from the R10. Night and day difference.

[Longdriver295]

I've been thinking seriously about selling my R10. I really don't use anything other than the main ones, SS, BS, Carry, and maybe Launch Angle. Even though the PRGR doesn't do launch everything I've read says it's more accurate and no setup just put on ground behind you and go.

[golfun]

After the Mevo+ are we basically splitting hairs on how accurate each system is? I feel like I've seen all these system fair really well to trackman. Your opinion?

Thanks

[Bubbtubbs]

55 minutes ago, golfun said:

After the Mevo+ are we basically splitting hairs on how accurate each system is? I feel like I've seen all these system fair really well to trackman. Your opinion?

Thanks

You're paying for additional metrics, features, software, etc. after a point. 

 

X3 and Trackman are fairly similar but TM has integrated optimization software/simulation (with a sub fee) and some extra data, mainly impact location. 

 

Quad has more club parameters, a larger detection area and swappable batteries over GC3.

 

It's all about what each customer wants and how much they're willing to pay for the extra bits. I'd rather spend 7k on a GC2+HMT than fork over the same amount for GC3 because the added parameters are worth more to me than ease of transport, since I wouldn't take either device to the course but someone with a nicer range and better climate may feel differently.

[hammersia]

On 11/16/2022 at 1:00 PM, mgoblue83 said:

Mevo+ has by far the best data and accuracy for the cost. Camera systems can be more accurate depending on the environment at a much higher price but the Mevo+ is a massive step up from the R10. Night and day difference.

Not seen any statistically valid analysis that would prove the mevo+ to be more accurate than an R10. There are loads of youtube review vids, full of "feelings" about accuracy, but no actual final numbers. 

 

Many people including me consider the R10 "good enough" and the best bang for buck out there by a margin.

My next launch monitor will almost certainly be whatever Garmin release after the R10. 

[mgoblue83]

11 minutes ago, hammersia said:

Not seen any statistically valid analysis that would prove the mevo+ to be more accurate than an R10. There are loads of youtube review vids, full of "feelings" about accuracy, but no actual final numbers. 

 

Many people including me consider the R10 "good enough" and the best bang for buck out there by a margin.

My next launch monitor will almost certainly be whatever Garmin release after the R10. 

 

R10 is great for the price and could be the best bang for the buck depending on your environment and needs.

 

It is not as accurate or as consistent as Mevo+. That is a fact not an opinion. 

[Bubbtubbs]

1 hour ago, hammersia said:

Not seen any statistically valid analysis that would prove the mevo+ to be more accurate than an R10. There are loads of youtube review vids, full of "feelings" about accuracy, but no actual final numbers. 

 

Many people including me consider the R10 "good enough" and the best bang for buck out there by a margin.

My next launch monitor will almost certainly be whatever Garmin release after the R10. 

The extra data points from Pro package aside, most of the difference you're paying for with Mevo+ is a long history in precision Doppler measuring (they started off working for the military), camera alignment, Fusion Tracking, putting capability and ergonomics (I find it fits perfectly in a bag pocket instead of using the carry case).

 

The quality of life upgrades and ability to transition to Pro are more than worth the extra cash IMO, even if there is no difference in accuracy - not saying there isn't, just that I haven't investigated it at all for months and I won't make claims without hard numbers.

 

The R10 ticks a lot of boxes for being sub-$1000. Hard to beat it for entry into launch monitors.

Edited November 21, 2022 by Bubbtubbs

[Dan13]

2 hours ago, hammersia said:

Not seen any statistically valid analysis that would prove the mevo+ to be more accurate than an R10. There are loads of youtube review vids, full of "feelings" about accuracy, but no actual final numbers. 

 

Many people including me consider the R10 "good enough" and the best bang for buck out there by a margin.

My next launch monitor will almost certainly be whatever Garmin release after the R10. 

I think the R10 being “good enough” is totally true for most people. The amount of flight tracked outdoors and the measured spin indoors is what immediately comes to mind for differences in M+’s  favor. The club data tolerances have also been demonstrated to be more accurate with M+ through multiple reviews/comparison.  Does this make a meaningful difference most of the time for the mid capper’s practice/ sim play? No, I don’t think it does. 
 

The software and tools as a practice tool (not as a sim) I find to be the biggest difference btw the two. 

[hammersia]

5 hours ago, mgoblue83 said:

 

R10 is great for the price and could be the best bang for the buck depending on your environment and needs.

 

It is not as accurate or as consistent as Mevo+. That is a fact not an opinion. 

Ok well you forgot to link a reference to this fact.

[mgoblue83]

14 hours ago, hammersia said:

Ok well you forgot to link a reference to this fact.

 

 

You are literally the only person who disputes it. R10 doesn't even measure spin indoors. How about from Garmin itself:

https://support.garmin.com/en-GB/?faq=kj37CgzvwM98hC9WPrIQm5&productID=695391&searchQuery=data&tab=topics

[hammersia]

1 hour ago, mgoblue83 said:

 

 

You are literally the only person who disputes it. R10 doesn't even measure spin indoors. How about from Garmin itself:

https://support.garmin.com/en-GB/?faq=kj37CgzvwM98hC9WPrIQm5&productID=695391&searchQuery=data&tab=topics

No, Garmin announced RCT compatibility on September 8th:

 

https://www.garmin.com/en-US/newsroom/press-release/sports-fitness/garmin-announces-approach-r10-integration-with-titleist-golf-balls/?fbclid=IwAR05KfFyP-EXSC5tAto0Gnad2_EWee54A1ngZ-d1D-b7vfZqTefoORkPAHk

 

And those of us who use and measure the R10 have also found that metal dots work very well and give very good indoor spin readings, at least down to around 15 feet of flight. 

[Longdriver295]

3 hours ago, mgoblue83 said:

 

 

You are literally the only person who disputes it. R10 doesn't even measure spin indoors. How about from Garmin itself:

https://support.garmin.com/en-GB/?faq=kj37CgzvwM98hC9WPrIQm5&productID=695391&searchQuery=data&tab=topics

You are wrong again, the latest R10 update will absolutely do spin using RCT. 

[mgoblue83]

2 hours ago, hammersia said:

No, Garmin announced RCT compatibility on September 8th:

 

https://www.garmin.com/en-US/newsroom/press-release/sports-fitness/garmin-announces-approach-r10-integration-with-titleist-golf-balls/?fbclid=IwAR05KfFyP-EXSC5tAto0Gnad2_EWee54A1ngZ-d1D-b7vfZqTefoORkPAHk

 

And those of us who use and measure the R10 have also found that metal dots work very well and give very good indoor spin readings, at least down to around 15 feet of flight. 

 

46 minutes ago, Longdriver295 said:

You are wrong again, the latest R10 update will absolutely do spin using RCT. 

 

I'm not sure what point you guys are trying to make. The R10 is a great unit for the cost. It's very accurate. It's just not as accurate as a Mevo+. If you are claiming it is then I don't know what to tell you. 

[hammersia]

1 hour ago, mgoblue83 said:

 

 

I'm not sure what point you guys are trying to make. The R10 is a great unit for the cost. It's very accurate. It's just not as accurate as a Mevo+. If you are claiming it is then I don't know what to tell you. 

As mentioned, you need to present some figures to back up your claim. As an example, these are real measured accuracy figures that I did a few months ago (before the spin update) against TopTracer with the methodology and statistics explained:

 

So please find or carry out a similar head to head between R10 and Mevo +, of course you will also need an accurate control measure which would be GCQuad, Trackman or a calibrated TopTracer setup.