Connect with us

Equipment

2013 Adams Tight Lies fairway woods

Published

on

The original Tight Lies fairway woods from Adams Golf were launched in 1995, but 18 years later golfers might need them now more than ever.

That’s because of the design of today’s fairway woods, which are much larger than the fairway woods of the past. That added size, combined with breakthroughs in materials and design, has allowed them to fly faster and farther than ever before.

But the added distance hasn’t done much to solve the No. 1 problem most golfers have with fairway woods — from anywhere but off the tee or from a perfect lie in the fairway, they’re extremely hard to get airborne.

That’s why Adams is releasing a 2013 version of the Tight Lies fairway woods, which like the original design will give golfers the confidence to hit a fairway wood even when the lie isn’t perfect.

Click here to see what members are saying about the new Tight Lies in the forums.

According to Mike Fox, director of product line management for Adams Golf, the average size of a fairway wood currently hovers around 175 cubic centimeters. But the new Tight Lies fairway woods are only 133 cubic centimeters, and have a shallow, low-profile design that makes them extremely forgiving and easy to get airborne.

a191f744567844fb77afb6a3985c1f12

Generally, smaller, low-profile fairway woods lack the distance of larger, deeper-face designs, but Fox said that golfers shouldn’t worry about losing yards with the Tight Lies. That because for the first time, Adams is using its “Cut-Through Slot Design” in a fairway wood —  slots on the crown and sole of the club that increase spring-like effect.

The Cut-Thru design allows the Tight Lies to have a characteristic time of 220, which is twice as high as the originals. And despite the fact that the Tight Lies are higher spinning than Adams’ larger, deeper-faced Super S and LS fairway woods (Click here to read a full review on them), and have a slightly lower CT, many golfers will actually hit the Tight Lies farther than those clubs because of the increased carry and consistency.

5f6103a37c51050319b841c4350d847e

 At Address: 16-degree Tight Lies (Left), 14.5-degree Tight Lies Tour (right)

Adams will launch a 16-degree version of the Tight Lies fairway woods at retail on August 15 for $199, and follow shortly afterward with a 3 wood (14 degrees), 5 wood (19 degrees) and 7 wood (22 degrees) for the same price. The clubs will come stock with a Mitsubishi Rayon Bassara shaft that will measure 42.5 inches in the 3 wood.

Adams is also planning to release a lower-launching, lower-spinning tour version ($229) in early September, which will be available in 14.5- and 18-degree models and come stock with an Aldila Tour Blue ATX shaft.

Think you’re a shoo-in the for the tour model? Maybe not. According to Fox, Adams Golf Staff Members Tom Watson and Kenny Perry both preferred the standard Tight Lies fairway wood during testing this week at The Greenbrier Classic, and they are planning to use them this week in the tournament.

Click here to see what members are saying about the new Tight Lies in the forums.

 

Click here to see what members are saying about the new Tight Lies in the forums.

 

Your Reaction?
  • 6
  • LEGIT0
  • WOW0
  • LOL0
  • IDHT0
  • FLOP0
  • OB0
  • SHANK0

Zak is the Editor-in-Chief of GolfWRX.com. He's been a part of the company since 2011, when he was hired to lead GolfWRX's Editorial Department. Zak developed GolfWRX's Featured Writer Program, which supports aspiring writers and golf industry professionals. He played college golf at the University of Richmond (Go Spiders!) and still likes to compete in tournaments. You can follow Zak on Twitter @ZakKoz, where he's happy to discuss his game and all the cool stuff that's part of his job.

39 Comments

39 Comments

  1. Pingback: Best Buy Adams Women Speedline Lp

  2. George Leopold

    Oct 18, 2013 at 10:41 am

    I need advice on the best way to hit the Adams tight lies 16° fairway wood. If I hit it off my front foot with a sweeping motion like a driver I get no consistency. If I put it in mid stance and hit down on it like a wedge it seems to improve trajectory and distance. Any suggestions.

    • DBO

      Dec 3, 2013 at 6:11 am

      Hi George,

      My suggestion is to play it two balls in front of centered. This should be halfway between driver and low iron set up. With proper swing and rotation you should make contact with the ball at the lowest part of your swing. This is the setup that I was taught from my pro and has helped me hit my 3wood and 3 hybrid more consistently straight and longer than ever.. (I used to hit 3hybrid 185-190 and now can hit it 210-220 consistent with long of 230+)

      Hope this helps.

      DBO

  3. Pingback: Sneak Peak - Adams 2014 XTD line - Wow!!!!

  4. alan

    Aug 6, 2013 at 8:51 pm

    Great concersation guys, except for the one jerk who shall remain nameless.
    My take is that Adams is making freat fairway matals and hybrids with or without TM. Their new management may be changing the color pallete of the clubs, BUT the R&D efforts are still seperate. (my friend works at Adams and he should know)
    My only comment is that while the new tight lies soundslike it will help a number of golfers hit better fairway shots, some of us have another issue. I have a very accute doenward attack angle and I need deep faced fairway metals to make solid contact with the ball. I have tried a number of shallow faced woods and I hit the ball way too high on the face.
    Believe it or not, the fairway woods that have “fixed” this swing error for me are 2005 Cobra SZ’s. I got them in 3+ (13.5*) 4+ (16.5*) and a 7 (21*). Their faces are deeper than EVEN the new Calli X hot !!!!
    Just another point of infoe their face inserts are 355 Carpenter steel Which may not even be conforming. I reshafted all three with Fuji Motore 65 gram F1 shafts and they blow away any new clubs when I try out the latest and greatest at my local Golfsmith on their launch monitor !!!!!1

  5. RickStone

    Jul 26, 2013 at 12:51 am

    Strip’d nailed it. I play that ’02 Tight Lies 3 strong (13.5) with the tungsten face. Love this club. I actually considered replacing it with all the recent hype about RBZ stage 2 and the x-hot. So I went in to try them all out, and overall was impressed the most by the Nike Covert, standard non adjustable model (who knew?) because I hit it very consistent. Then I decided to do what most of us should do but often overlook because we get new club fever… I went and got that “old thing” out of the car and compared it to the new 3 woods. It was amazing what happened next… I hit that one consistently further than any of the newer models. The newer ones were a lil more forgiving off the tee, but shorter, and substantially shorter off the deck. Iknow, I know… it’s my club that’s why… and that is why that wasn’t the amazing part… The guys who work their started hitting my club, and the same thing happened with them! They even taped up the xhot 13 degree 3 wood… still couldn’t get it longer! At this point a small crowd had gathered around the simulator to see them try and dethrone the “old Adams ovation tight lies.” Then the manager came and broke up the action. Guess it’s not very good for selling new clubs when a club you can snag on eBay for $20 is outperforming all the new clubs…

  6. Im nobody:(

    Jul 26, 2013 at 12:37 am

    Is the average age on bere really 15 ?0

  7. t120

    Jul 25, 2013 at 8:59 pm

    “Think you’re a shoo-in the for the tour model? Maybe not. According to Fox, Adams Golf Staff Members Tom Watson and Kenny Perry both preferred the standard Tight Lies fairway wood… ”

    Yes, well, no offense to the talents of either of these guys, but they ARE in fact playing on the senior tour and are also over the age of 50 with declining power/stamina, etc. I highly doubt either would have gamed the standard version in their prime.

    Which brings me to the real question. “Could you please define ‘standard’?” – because they didn’t say OTR, and I’ve heard some companies are willing to actually make a club for a pro. Just saying.

  8. Brockohol

    Jul 25, 2013 at 5:51 pm

    Is that some sort of Adams version of the “TP” logo?

    I always wondered why no one has tried copying the TP “concept” for their higher end shafts/tour heads.

  9. pinhigh

    Jul 16, 2013 at 3:45 pm

    Actually, I welcome this and just may have to give it a shot. I did experiment with the original Tight Lies way back with much success..but with something akin to a DGS steel shaft in it, the distances would not compete with today’s woods. I don’t know about you but the modern, low spinning and strong lofted 3W are really frustrating me and are begining to possibly be a misfit for many players today. Sure I can bomb them off the tee (currently an Adams 14.5* XTD with the Fubuki A) – that is if I catch it with a nice sweeping blow. But off the deck, I am more inconsistent with this kind of club than ever. Furthermore, there are very few times I need it with today’s long driver and long ball. When I don’t hit the driver off the tee, then it means I usually hit the hybrid off the tee because I am needing to layup from a hazard or to a yardage and the new 3W goes too far anyway. This shallow Tight Lies might give me (you) a better option off the deck on the longest par-5s and get a little more backspin and a little more carry (since the modern designers typically guard the par-5 approach anyway). Interesting!

  10. strip'd

    Jul 5, 2013 at 12:18 pm

    well if there anything like the tungsten tight lies that came with the aldila shafts from back in like 02…..they should be amazing. Still have mine in the bag and its the best club ive ever owned

  11. Joe Golfer

    Jul 3, 2013 at 11:06 pm

    Seems like a decent idea overall. For those dissenting, keep in mind that they also have the other two models, the LS and Super S. It’s just a third option: it’s not like it is the only model from which to choose.
    I’ve found, like many, that the bigger headed 3 wood is more difficult to hit off the fairway.
    While I always thought the original Tight Lies was too shallow faced for my taste, I do approve of going to a smaller head. Just maybe not this small.
    Something around 150 cc’s seems about right for my taste, but it’s a subjective game, so whatever floats your boat.

  12. Ozzie88

    Jul 3, 2013 at 7:48 pm

    Will the 16* be released in left handed?

    • Alex

      Jul 11, 2013 at 3:58 pm

      16* and a 19* will be offered in LH i believe.

  13. David

    Jul 3, 2013 at 7:04 pm

    If I could find one of those little yellow faces that makes a “puke face” I would use it right now. The “White Devil” (TMAG) is killing this company. The last good thing from Adams was their MB irons and Super line. That titanium stuff was amazing. Now we are re-releasing stuff?!?!?!

    • Tom

      Jul 3, 2013 at 10:32 pm

      Pretty sure they will still release titanium stuff. This sounds like it is just a special edition legacy club or something. Everybody talks about how TMAG is screwing this company up, but i don’t get that. Adams is still putting out quality clubs and I’m sure their next lineup will be no exception. I agree that the white clubs was kind of a fail, but this club is matte black so maybe they are going back. 🙂

    • DBO

      Dec 3, 2013 at 6:18 am

      Taylor made has nothing to do with what the engineers at Adams do.. Adams makes superior products and this club is a beast…

  14. GSark

    Jul 3, 2013 at 12:26 pm

    Wow! Adams just keeps bringing it. Yes they are called fairway metals for a reason, and I think these look hot. If the tech talk gets backed up these should be epic.The hole top end of my bag is Adams ( 9064ls, Bul and A-12) and Im not one to switch up because of how a club looks or sounds, its all feel and performance for me. Having said that I feel a change coming on!

    • Sebastian

      Sep 29, 2014 at 5:42 am

      As a prospective buyer of ADAMS Toght-Lie set, I’m coencrned about the shaft length of the set fitting a six-foot, strong senior player with a long history of serious duffing, just now settling down to maintain focus throughout the swing. Anybody out there to give a little counsel??Thanx in advance for intelligence on this issue!!

  15. Jerry

    Jul 3, 2013 at 12:04 pm

    I used to play the original Tight Lies 3 & 5 woods. LOVED THEM! Very easy to hit. I am so sorry that I was influenced by the siren song of “improved” technology. I currently carry the Adams Speedline LP fairway woods. The 5 wood is my “go to” from most lies. The 3 is very hard for me to hit consistently off the deck altho it really goes when I get it flush. I will be very interested to try the new Tight Lies. Maybe I can regain that extra 15-20 yards over the 5. The small heads don’t bother me as I grew up with “real woods”. My old driver was smaller than today’s 9 metal.

  16. JD

    Jul 3, 2013 at 11:56 am

    Wrote comment on iPhone sorry for the typos

  17. JD

    Jul 3, 2013 at 11:55 am

    My take us that fairway woods are little if any better that classics like the Callaway BB with the Warbird sole plate , the Orlimar tri metal or the original tight lies , especially out of tough rough or less than optimal lies .

    This was reinforced when I dusted off an old tri metsl to play Torrey Pines with the rough up – it vastly outperformed “modern” stuff – the 12 degree Warbird went back in the bag as a short driver – par 5 attacker as well -,and I hit a high draw and play to a 4.3 so don’t need much help – just think fairway woods “advances” are hyoe not performance – anyone else agree?

    Hope this is an exception

    • Jack

      Jul 3, 2013 at 9:49 pm

      I agree on that. The biggest difference may be the shaft that’s going into the head. I’m thinking the biggest difference though is the development of hybrid heads. I think in most situations a hybrid beats a 5W. Though I’ve normally had a 5W in the bag. I guess I’m not really thinking get on the green from 200 plus yards and from the rough.

  18. Asleep

    Jul 3, 2013 at 11:51 am

    Nice to see Adams bring back the Tight Lies line with a small headed 3-wood. I always preferred the smaller head size. I bet sound & feel is excellent.

  19. michael

    Jul 3, 2013 at 9:24 am

    dont like the cursive adams logo… i hope thats not there new logo…looks old and weak.

    • Launcher

      Jul 3, 2013 at 2:40 pm

      It is their new logo, and I agree, it’s hideous!
      R.I.P. to the real AdamsGolf.
      TM is f-ing things up at a record pace.

    • benseattle

      Jul 9, 2013 at 3:00 pm

      <>

      I agree completely. This is a perfect reason to hate a golf club.

      (Golf would be a great game if we didn’t have to put up with the “golfers.”)

  20. Jonathen

    Jul 3, 2013 at 3:32 am

    shawn…adams has always made great hybrids. I dont like that taylormade influenced adams to make their clubs with a white crown, i dont like the white crown.
    mike…i am going to agree with mr.carroll on this one. it seems like adams designed this club for the tight fairway lies and it shouldnt be used from thick stuff.
    i do find the slot on the top a little big for such a small head but i would be interested in hitting it to see what it can do. i myself have a fast10 3 wood and an a12 hybrid and find them to be great additions to my bag. we shall see. low profile irons would be an interesting idea. do you mean small top line..?

  21. Mike B

    Jul 3, 2013 at 1:18 am

    I hate low profile small headed woods! try using them in thick rough and watch the club go under the ball! What’s next Adams… Low profile irons? TMaG is trying to kill you off!

    • Shawn Carroll

      Jul 3, 2013 at 3:22 am

      Mike B – the club is called “Tight Lies” for a reason. I don’t think the Adams R&D department designed this club to be hit out of thick ruff and bermuda and fescue. This club should be used from tight fairway lies…And since Taylormade Golf bought Adams Golf, they have together produced some of the best adams woods including the Super LS series and Fast12 series.

    • GSark

      Jul 3, 2013 at 12:31 pm

      They are called fairway metals for a reason. You should not even be thinking about trying to hit a “fairway metal” from the rough.

      • Michael Benjamin

        Jul 25, 2013 at 6:28 pm

        GSark… you are a knuckle head. If people can hit a wood out of the rough then they should take advantage of it. What about when the rough is thin (like when a tree blocks the sun and grass thins out around it), or when the rough is burnt out, or when the lie is perfect in the rough, or when the ground is firm and you can absolutely get enough club face on the ball without worrying about the rough grabbing your club head, or when you do not suck at golf? The only concession I will give you is that there ARE definitely times when you should not be hitting a wood out of the rough, but to make a blanket statement like you did is pretty bush league.

        • brian

          Jul 25, 2013 at 8:47 pm

          seriously? dude dont name call. Calling other people names like we are kids out on the playground is really something thats bush league. Its cool to disagree, but no need to do that

          I am really excited for this club to come out i definitely could use a fairway to help me get the ball up in the air out of the fairway. I really cant wait to get my hands on this bad boy at a demo day

          • Michael Benjamin

            Jul 29, 2013 at 3:52 pm

            Brian, learn to hit a 3 or a 4 iron…

            BT

            Definition of “Knuckle Head” – (informal) ill-informed; a person of questionable judgement.

    • John

      Jul 3, 2013 at 9:06 pm

      Well if you actually played golf for any time you’d know how amazing the are from any lie.

  22. Blanco

    Jul 2, 2013 at 7:49 pm

    I thought the slot on top didn’t help distance enough to matter? I just can’t stand that scooped slot on the crown but otherwise looks like a nice product. I especially like the 16º loft at 42.5″… that’s hot.

    What’s the Tour Blue ATX? Is that the retail name for the tour blue?

  23. Jeff

    Jul 2, 2013 at 7:12 pm

    that’s hot

    • Dave

      Jul 23, 2013 at 1:45 pm

      I’m excited about these. I’m sure they won’t be anything over the top but they will be easier for the average player to hit out of the rough and fairway.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

pga tour

Ian Poulter WITB 2018

Published

on

Equipment is accurate as of the 2018 Honda Classic (2/20/2018).

Driver: Titleist 917D2 (9.5 degrees)
Shaft: Mitsubishi Tensei Orange CK 60TX

3 Wood: Titleist 917F2 (16.5 degrees)
Shaft: Matrix Ozik TP7HDe 7X

Hybrid: Titleist 816 H2 (21 degrees)
Shaft: Aldila Tour Green ATX85H TX

Irons: Titleist 716 T-MB (4), Titleist 718 AP2 (5-PW)
Shaft: Project X LZ 130 7.0

Wedges: Titleist Vokey SM7 (52-12F, 56-14F, 60-04L)
Shaft: Project X LZ 7.0 (52), True Temper Dynamic Gold Tour Issue S400 (56, 60)

Putter: EvnRoll Tour ER
Grip: Odyssey Pistol

Putter: Rife Antigua Island Series
Grip: Odyssey Pistol

Ball: Titleist Pro V1x

Related:

Discussion: See what GolfWRX members are saying about Poulter’s clubs. 

Your Reaction?
  • 4
  • LEGIT0
  • WOW0
  • LOL1
  • IDHT0
  • FLOP0
  • OB0
  • SHANK1

Continue Reading

Equipment

10 interesting photos from Wednesday at the Honda Classic

Published

on

From our featured image of Rory McIlroy putting in a different kind of work on the range in the pre-dawn hours of Wednesday morning, to shots of Tiger Woods’ similarly early pre-pro-am range work, to some intriguing shots Patrick Reed’s prototype Bettinardi putter, GolfWRX has plenty of fantastic photo content from PGA National.

Here are some of the best shots from Wednesday.

Tiger Woods at work prior to his crack-of-dawn pro-am tee time. Gentleman in the foreground: You do know that as the sun has not yet risen, you do not need a hat to aggressively combat its rays, right?

“My feet do not look like that at impact.”

All eyes on the Big Cat…except those focused on the live video on their cell phone screens…

Let’s take a closer look at Patrick Reed’s yardage book cover. Yep. As expected.

Do you think these two ever talk?

It looks like Captain Furyk already has some pre-Ryder Cup swag in the form of a putter cover.

If you’ve ever wondered why Rickie Fowler selected these interesting locations for his tattoos, this may be the answer: Visible when he holds his finish.

We’ve got a Pistol Pete sighting!

Patrick Reed’s droolworthy Bettinardi Dass prototype.

Fun fact: Wedges double as magnetic putter cover holders, as Jon Curran illustrates here. Healthy application of lead tape, as well, from the tour’s resident graffiti artist.

Wednesday’s Photos

Discussion: See what GolfWRX members are saying about the photos in our forums.

Your Reaction?
  • 11
  • LEGIT3
  • WOW1
  • LOL2
  • IDHT0
  • FLOP0
  • OB0
  • SHANK6

Continue Reading

Accessory Reviews

Review: FlightScope Mevo

Published

on

In 100 Words

The Mevo is a useful practice tool for amateur golfers and represents a step forward from previous offerings on the market. It allows golfers to practice indoors or outdoors and provides club speed, ball speed, smash factor, launch angle, spin rate, carry distance and flight time.

It also has a video capture mode that will overlay swing videos with the swing data of a specific swing. It is limited in its capabilities and its accuracy, though, which golfers should expect at this price point. All in all, it’s well worth the $499 price tag if you understand what you’re getting.

The Full Review

The FlightScope Mevo is a launch monitor powered by 3D Doppler radar. With a retail price of $499, it is obviously aimed to reach the end consumer as opposed to PGA professionals and club fitters.

The Mevo device itself is tiny. Like, really tiny. It measures 3.5-inches wide, 2.8-inches tall and 1.2-inches deep. In terms of everyday products, it’s roughly the size of an Altoids tin. It’s very easy to find room for it in your golf bag, and the vast majority of people at the range you may be practicing at won’t even notice it’s there. Apart from the Mevo itself, in the box you get a quick start guide, a charging cable, a carrying pouch, and some metallic stickers… more on those later. It has a rechargeable internal battery that reaches a full charge in about two hours and lasts for about four hours when fully charged.

As far as software goes, the Mevo pairs with the Mevo Golf app on your iOS or Android device. The app is free to download and does not require any subscription fees (unless you want to store and view videos of your swing online as opposed to using the memory on your device). The app is very easy to use even for those who aren’t tech savvy. Make sure you’re using the most current version of the firmware for the best results, though (I did experience some glitches at first until I did so). The settings menu does have an option to manually force firmware writing, but updates should happen automatically when you start using the device.

Moving through the menus, beginning sessions, editing shots (good for adding notes on things like strike location or wind) are all very easy. Video mode did give me fits the first time I used it, though, as it was impossible to maintain my connection between my phone and the Mevo while having the phone in the right location to capture video properly. The only way I could achieve this was by setting the Mevo as far back from strike location as the device would allow. Just something to keep in mind if you find you’re having troubles with video mode.

Screenshot of video capture mode with the FlightScope Mevo

Using the Mevo

When setting up the Mevo, it needs to be placed between 4-7 feet behind the golf ball, level with the playing surface and pointed down the target line. The distance you place the Mevo behind the ball does need to be entered into the settings menu before starting your session. While we’re on that subject, before hitting balls, you do need to select between indoor, outdoor, and pitching (ball flight less than 20 yards) modes, input your altitude and select video or data mode depending on if you want to pair your data with videos of each swing or just see the data by itself. You can also edit the available clubs to be monitored, as you will have to tell the Mevo which club you’re using at any point in time to get the best results. Once you get that far, you’re pretty much off to the races.

Testing the Mevo

I tested the FlightScope Mevo with Brad Bachand at Man O’ War Golf Center in Lexington, Kentucky. Brad is a member of the PGA and has received numerous awards for golf instruction and club fitting. I wanted to put the Mevo against the best device FlightScope has to offer and, luckily, Brad does use his $15,000 FlightScope X3 daily. We had both the FlightScope Mevo and Brad’s FlightScope X3 set up simultaneously, so the numbers gathered from the two devices were generated from the exact same strikes. Brad also set up the two devices and did all of the ball striking just to maximize our chances for success.

The day of our outdoor session was roughly 22 degrees Fahrenheit. There was some wind on that day (mostly right to left), but it wasn’t a major factor. Our setup is pictured below.

Outdoor testing setup with FlightScope X3 (foreground) and Mevo

The results of our outdoor testing are shown below. The testing was conducted with range balls, and we did use the metallic stickers. The range balls used across all the testing were all consistently the same brand. Man O’ War buys all new range balls once a year and these had been used all throughout 2017.  The 2018 batch had not yet been purchased at the time that testing was conducted.

Raw outdoor data captured with range balls including metallic stickers. Mevo data (blue) and X3 data (orange) were both generated from the same exact shots.

You’ll notice some peculiar data in the sand wedge spin category. To be honest, I don’t fully know what contributed to the X3 measuring such low values. While the Mevo’s sand wedge spin numbers seem more believable, you could visibly see that the X3 was much more accurate on carry distance. Below is a quick summary of the percent differences between each of the parameters as presented by the Mevo and the X3 in our outdoor session when separated out for each club. As previously mentioned, though, take sand wedge spin with a grain of salt.

Table showing the percent difference of each parameter between Mevo and X3 grouped by club (outdoor testing).

The first thing we noticed was that the Mevo displays its numbers while the golf ball is still in midair, so it was clear that it wasn’t watching the golf ball the entire time like the X3. According to the Mevo website, carry distance, height and flight time are all calculated while club speed, ball speed, launch angle and spin rate are measured. As for the accuracy of the measured parameters, the Mevo’s strength is ball speed. The accuracy of the other measured ball parameters (launch angle and spin rate) is questionable depending on certain factors (quality of strike, moisture on the clubface and ball, quality of ball, etc). I would say it ranges between “good” or “very good” and “disappointing” with most strikes being categorized as “just okay.”

As for the calculated parameters of carry distance, height and time, those vary a decent amount. Obviously, when the measurements of the three inputs become less accurate, the three outputs will become less accurate as a result. Furthermore, according to FlightScope, the Mevo’s calculations are not accounting for things like temperature, humidity, and wind. The company has also stated, though, that future updates will likely adjust for these parameters by using location services through the app.

Now, let’s talk about those metallic stickers. According to the quick start guide, the Mevo needs a sticker on every golf ball you hit, and before you hit each ball, the ball needs to be placed such that the sticker is facing the target. It goes without saying that it doesn’t sound like a whole lot of fun to spend time putting those stickers on every ball, let alone balls that will never come back to you if you’re at a public driving range. Obviously, people are going to want to avoid using the stickers if they can, so do they really matter? Below is a table of data showing the percent difference between the Mevo’s data and the X3’s data of what we collected outdoors with a driver and range balls with and without the use of the stickers.

Table showing how the percent difference of each parameter changes between Mevo and X3 when you use the metallic stickers and when you don’t

The FlightScope website says that the metallic stickers “are needed in order for the Mevo to accurately measure ball spin.” We observed pretty much the same as shown in the table above. The website also states they are working on alternative solutions to stickers (possibly a metallic sharpie), which I think is wise.

Another thing we thought would be worth testing is the impact of different golf balls. Below is a table of data showing the percent difference between the Mevo’s data and the X3’s data of what we collected outdoors with a driver and range balls as compared to Pro V1’s. All of this data was collected using the metallic stickers.

Table showing how the percent difference of each parameter changes between Mevo and X3 when you switch from range balls to Pro V1’s

As shown above, the data gets much closer virtually across the board when you use better quality golf balls. Just something else to keep in mind when using the Mevo.

Indoor testing requires 8 feet of ball flight (impact zone to hitting net), which was no problem for us. Our setup is pictured below. All of the indoor testing was conducted with Titleist Pro V1 golf balls using the metallic stickers.

Indoor testing setup with FlightScope X3 (foreground) and Mevo

The results of our indoor session are shown below.

Raw indoor data captured with Pro V1’s including metallic stickers. Mevo data (blue) and X3 data (orange) were both generated from the same exact shots.

Below is a quick summary of the percent differences between each of the parameters as presented by the Mevo and the X3 in our indoor session when separated out for each club.

Table showing the percent difference of each parameter between Mevo and X3 grouped by club (indoor testing)

On the whole, the data got much closer together between the two devices in our indoor session. I would think a lot of that can be attributed to the use of quality golf balls and to removing outdoor factors like wind and temperature (tying into my previous comment above).

As far as overall observations between all sessions, the most striking thing was that the Mevo consistently gets more accurate when you hit really good, straight shots. When you hit bad shots, or if you hit a fade or a draw, it gets less and less accurate.

The last parameter to address is club speed, which came in around 5 percent different on average between the Mevo and X3 based on all of the shots recorded. The Mevo was most accurate with the driver at 2.1 percent different from the X3 over all strikes and it was the least accurate with sand wedge by far. Obviously, smash factor accuracy will follow club speed for the most part since ball speed is quite accurate. Over every shot we observed, the percent difference on ball speed was 1.2 percent on average between the Mevo and the X3. Again, the Mevo was least accurate with sand wedges. If I remove all sand wedge shots from the data, the average percent difference changes from 1.2 percent to 0.7 percent, which is very, very respectable.

When it comes to the different clubs used, the Mevo was by far most accurate with mid irons. I confirmed this with on-course testing on a relatively flat 170-yard par-3 as well. Carry distances in that case were within 1-2 yards on most shots (mostly related to quality of strike). With the driver, the Mevo was reasonably close, but I would also describe it as generous. It almost always missed by telling me that launch angle was higher, spin rate was lower and carry distance was farther than the X3. Generally speaking, the Mevo overestimated our driver carries by about 5 percent. Lastly, the Mevo really did not like sand wedges at all. Especially considering those shots were short enough that you could visibly see how far off the Mevo was with its carry distance. Being 10 yards off on a 90 yard shot was disappointing.

Conclusion

The Mevo is a really good product if you understand what you’re getting when you buy it. Although the data isn’t good enough for a PGA professional, it’s still a useful tool that gives amateurs reasonable feedback while practicing. It’s also a fair amount more accurate than similar products in its price range, and I think it could become even better with firmware updates as Flightscope improves upon its product.

This is a much welcomed and very promising step forward in consumer launch monitors, and the Mevo is definitely worth a look if you’re in the market for one.

Your Reaction?
  • 116
  • LEGIT10
  • WOW2
  • LOL5
  • IDHT0
  • FLOP7
  • OB3
  • SHANK25

Continue Reading

19th Hole

Facebook

Trending