My Visit to Carl's Place to Test Golf Simulators

[@101realtor]

Ya, Mevo+ manual shows you should have it setup on the same height without an breaks the radar. An bounce off of. Could be why it was missing some of that data correctly.

[@troym4354]

Carls place is great, I just picked up one if their premium screens. Great quality, prices, and customer service.

[@anthonycorrao3651]

Mevo + has to have no gap between the unit and hitting area as well as being level.

[@donmillner6063]

Mevo+ although cost effective could be problematic with it being stand alone on the floor and having the potential of being hit and damaged.

[@VoodooZ]

Don't forget that different LM (ex: trackman vs flightscope) measure various values differently.. ie. At ball contact vs at Ball deformation which affects low point and AoA numbers and numerous others. Also, mevo+ is a bit more picky about setup (especially AoA and low point) I use mevo+ for my home studio because it was only thing affordable and without subscription fees.. Might not apply for a commercial solution but I'd also consider if you intend on having beginners or lefties the optical solutions might not be a good idea.. Also, consider the extra cost of using Titleist RCT golf balls to get the utmost in spin detection with radar based LMs

[@golfdoc1950]

I don’t know a lot about the data gleaned from launch monitors. That being said, is it true that an in-to-out path correlates well with a downward angle of attack? Is a qualitative result good enough for a non-scratch golfer who mainly wants to eliminate bad slices? I can see how a Tour level player wants quantitative data. Just not sure if I do.