BIG difference in swing speed on FlightScope Mevo and AboutGolf Simulator. What do I trust?

[jteez13]

Hi all, this is my first time posting on this forum so I apologize if I miss out on any rules, don't use certain acronyms, etc. Please let me know if I do something wrong and I will either try to fix it or delete. I also apologize in advance for the long post but I like to be pretty in depth.

So, I've been playing since April 2022. I have gotten REALLY into golf and played a whole bunch over the summer, I've gotten about 6 lessons over the last 10 or so months, and continue to go to indoor simulators here in the winter since I can't play. I got both a driving range pass and a playing membership at a local course for this summer and plan on using them to their full effect once the season starts.

My brother and I went halves on a FlightScope Mevo portable launch monitor (the $500 model) as I was able to find one for a really good price on eBay. I've gotten to use it twice now (once inside and once outside at a range). I found that my club speed was significantly higher (compared to the indoor sim) on the FS when I used it the first time, which was outside. So, I took it to the indoor simulator that I've been going to for the last few weeks and brought the FlightScope with me to compare in real time. The indoor sim uses a simulator called "AboutGolf". It's not like Trackman, which sits behind you, instead, whatever tracks your swing is an overhead machine right above you. This was actually perfect because I could set up the FS behind me and not have it interfere with the other simulator and see any differences in real time.

Both of the simulators actually tracked distance pretty closely and were usually only off by a few yards most of the time, with the occasional 10 or so yard difference. Another thing I noticed was that the FS would inappropriately give me some shots (e.g. FS had it at 120 yards whereas AGsim had it 60 yards straight into the ranked) that I absolutely just mis-hit and shanked or something. Overall, the distances were pretty good.

The real issue I noticed was the significant differences in club head speed. I am eventually looking to get fitted for clubs soon as I'm currently using a starter set from Amazon and would like a decent idea of what flex shafts I will need and such so I don't go in completely blind. Because of this, I've admittedly been focusing a fair amount on club head speed. The comparisons are below (DR, 7-PW) using the averages for the two sims (I will add distances as well). For what it's worth, I will add that some of the club speeds that FS picked up weren't totally out of the ordinary, as I've reached some of these speeds on the AG sim before, just not averaged them. I didn't have a tape measure to actually measure out the distance between the ball and FS, but I did try to pace it out, and the ball and device were level height with each other.

So, does anyone have experience with either or both these sims and could tell me why there would be such differences in club speed? I would assume to trust the AG one as I would think it's a pretty expensive simulator, but I also assume it's not as good as a Trackman. Thanks in advance, and here are the numbers I recorded in my session yesterday using the "range mode" on the AG sim and regular full swing session on the FS.

Driver: FS average: 107.1 mph (high: 109 mph), 209.3 avg. carry | AG average: 101.7 mph (high: 107 mph), 217 avg. carry. Will note that yes, I know these carry distances should be higher based on club speed alone, I'm working on better overall contact with my coach!

7 iron: FS average: 91.6 mph (high: 93 mph), 160.1 avg. carry | AG average: 83.2 mph (high: 89 mph), 157 avg. carry.

8 iron (note* FS only recorded 6 shots, AG recorded 9 shots): FS average: 88.9 mph (high: 90 mph), 147 avg. carry | AG average: 80.2 mph (high: 86 mph), 144 avg. carry

9 iron: FS average: 87.6 mph (high: 91 mph), 146 avg. carry (IDK why I was averaging more carry than my 8i, maybe just feel more comfortable swinging 9i) | AG average: 84.1 mph (high: 86), 146 avg. carry

PW: FS average: 86.7 mph (high: 87 MPH), 130 avg. carry | AG average (recorded 2 more shots than FS): 81 mph (high: 84 mph), 136 avg. carry.

 

[Deleted member 25575]

Hard to say with just the data here but a 107 driver speed should be carrying a heck of a lot further than 217. As should a 101 speed but that’s probably closer to reality based on these numbers alone, however, if you have a massive banana slice then 217 at 107 speed could still be possible.
Go see someone who has trackman and see what the speed is on that. That should give you a better idea

 

[clubchamp98]

I don’t trust these machines they vary to much for me ,and would not buy any clubs that I hadn’t tried out on the golf course.

 

[Imurg]

What do you trust..?
Trackman or GC Quad.....

 

[clubchamp98]

What do you trust..?
Trackman or GC Quad.....

Trackman as it’s the most used on the tours .
they don’t use bad products.
but they only give you numbers.
I would still want a demo to try on the course.

 

[Jason.H]

I use PRGR on the range and I’ve found that pretty accurate to what actually happens on the course. I can relate to your About Golf numbers, my 7 iron numbers about the same as yours. Your driver speed should give more yardage but if you hit a fade that could account for that.
If your AG numbers are correct you would probably need a stiff flex, a fitting will get you sorted there.

 

[ntommo]

Stop getting too deep into numbers, if youre just on a simulator in the winter just practice what your instructor told you, when you can play outside again just go and play. What does it matter how fast you swing really, just go out and enjoy it for now and become a better ball striker.

 

[IanM]

My mate doesn't trust any of them.
He hits his 6 iron, 210, but they all only say 155

 

[Whereditgo]

If you're hitting range balls that could easily account for the discrepancies.

 

[Golfnut1957]

If you're hitting range balls that could easily account for the discrepancies.

This definitely. Two of us went to a range with Trackman on Friday where our ball speed and distance turned out to be abysmal. We both had a lot of driver shots carrying a total of 170ish running out to just over 200. I pointed out to him that in the real world if we stood on our fifth tee and hit driver the ball would finish a long way down the 6th, air mailing the 6th green. Low and behold to prove the point, yesterday I hit a 6 iron into the middle of that very green. 170 yards.

Our assumption was that the distances produced on the range were the product of range balls which had all been hit thousands of times and at a temperature of zero degrees. Obviously it is impossible to tell just how accurate the trackman was, but visually the ball appeared to be going nowhere.

 

[Captain_Black.]

I went to the range the other day.
They use range balls & In Range monitors.
I was hitting a 7 iron Pitching Wedge distance!!!
when I got home & looked at the data, there was so little difference between any of the clubs I hit, it was ridiculous & left me feeling that it was a total waste of time.
nothing really beats out on the course testing in my opinion.

 

[Jason.H]

The OP stated there was a big difference in club head speed whilst using both monitors together and that distances were reasonably close. So it’s nothing to do with range balls.

 

[Golfnut1957]

The OP stated there was a big difference in club head speed whilst using both monitors together and that distances were reasonably close. So it’s nothing to do with range balls.

I'll take your word for it as I didn't read it. Too long.

Mine was a ramble about range balls.

 

[Jigger]

This is a typical problem of simulators at that price range. Pgr excluded as it is by all accounts an accurate swing radar not a simulator, you don’t get any real accuracy until you get to mevo+ or SkyTrak levels.

As for measuring in prep for your fitting, I personally think you’re a little Mis-focused. By all means use something to develop you swing speed but a good fitter will get you in the right shaft for you being at one end and the clubhead being at the other. You could be borderline and one shaft at regular with a certain kick point may get similar results as a different stiff shaft with other characteristics. Moral of the story is not to try and do the fitters job for them. You want them to maximise what you have.

 

[Jason.H]

The fact that there are differences in monitors is well known. Best thing is to stick to one and if you use a different one don’t be overly concerned that your not hitting your numbers. I use mine regularly on our range and the odd time I can’t hit my normal speed.

 

[Region3]

I can’t remember where but I read/heard an explanation for the difference across monitors for club speed that sounded plausible. I haven’t fact checked it because it doesn’t really matter to me.

Radar based monitors that sit behind the line like Teackman measure the club speed through the bottom of the swing and give a reading for the fastest it read.
Camera based monitors like GCQuad that sit beside the ball can see the ball, so know when impact is and measure club speed at that point, by which time the club has slowed a little due to contact with the ball.

Like I said, can’t guarantee this is right but it sounds sensible, and would explain why 2 top of the range launch monitors often read 4-5 mph different in club speed.

 

[Imurg]

I can’t remember where but I read/heard an explanation for the difference across monitors for club speed that sounded plausible. I haven’t fact checked it because it doesn’t really matter to me.

Radar based monitors that sit behind the line like Teackman measure the club speed through the bottom of the swing and give a reading for the fastest it read.
Camera based monitors like GCQuad that sit beside the ball can see the ball, so know when impact is and measure club speed at that point, by which time the club has slowed a little due to contact with the ball.

Like I said, can’t guarantee this is right but it sounds sensible, and would explain why 2 top of the range launch monitors often read 4-5 mph different in club speed.

You, Sir Gary, are correct

 

[Springveldt]

I can’t remember where but I read/heard an explanation for the difference across monitors for club speed that sounded plausible. I haven’t fact checked it because it doesn’t really matter to me.

Radar based monitors that sit behind the line like Teackman measure the club speed through the bottom of the swing and give a reading for the fastest it read.
Camera based monitors like GCQuad that sit beside the ball can see the ball, so know when impact is and measure club speed at that point, by which time the club has slowed a little due to contact with the ball.

Like I said, can’t guarantee this is right but it sounds sensible, and would explain why 2 top of the range launch monitors often read 4-5 mph different in club speed.

Yes, it's kind of like that. GC Quad usually gives you a faster swing speed than Trackman though as it's the other way around. The camera based system gives you the speed of the face of the club while Trackman is measuring the CG of the clubhead and they are slightly different as the GC Quad reads the swing speed slightly later than Trackman.

So in theory if you moved the ball position forward the GC Quad would likely read the swing speed even faster than if it was in the middle of your stance.

@jteez13 I'm not sure which is correct but it's interesting that both are kind of in line with each other with the speed drops as well. On Trackman a few years ago I was swinging my 7 iron at 91mph and my driver at 109mph when I went after it so the Mevo seems correct in that. Now I'm older, stiffer, fatter and don't work out on my Rapsodo MLM my driver speed is around 100mph and my 7 iron is around 82mph which lines up with the other system and mirrors what I see on the course.
Either way you need to sort out that driver carry for that swing speed but your iron carries look spot on.

 

[Whereditgo]

The seemingly low carry with the driver was the reason for my original comment re range balls.

In my experience I have found that the drop off in distance is much greater on the longer clubs with range balls, wedges and even mid irons I get distances similar to what I would expect.