Connect with us

Reviews

Fujikura Motore Speeder VC 7.2 Tour Spec Review

Published

on

Review by member: MTF

I find myself reading a lot of reviews from GolfWRX but I rarely post a review.  I felt the need to post my opinion of this shaft as I recently put it into my Titleist 910 D3 9.5* driver.

Prior to receiving the shaft from Titleist I was looking for information and opinions on this shaft and had a hard time finding a lot of good info.  I found one pretty detailed review but I don’t think it did this shaft justice so I want to give my opinion of this shaft.

Click here to read the discussion in the forums

I’ll start by giving some info about myself.  I am 43 years old, 5’7″, 160 lbs.  I am fairly athletic but by no means strong.  I started playing golf around 14 years old but never took it seriously or got very good at it until 2005 when I started dedicating myself to practicing 7 days a week.  I got down to a 6 handicap and then rarely played until the beginning of this year when I took up the game again.  I have a swing speed radar device that was around $100 and it tells me my swing speed is around 104 – 108 mph.

With a correctly fit shaft, my drives are usually around 280 yards total distance with a few drives going 300 – 310 total distance.  I’ve always migrated to X flex because I can’t control anything softer.  In 2003 I was fit for a driver with a radical fitting device that was a little black box that connects to the shaft.  I was astonished to recently find out that this little device is Mizuno’s primary fitting tool now.  It calculates how you load and release the shaft to determine proper bend profile and flex.  This device told me that based on my swing characteristics I should be in the stiffest shaft possible regardless of swing speed.

A few month ago at the beginning of my quest for a new driver, I met with a Titleist fitting rep in Arizona where I live.  Titleist sent several shafts for me to try.  However, only one matched the specs that I requested, which are the same specs that I have played for many years.  Those specs are mid 70 gram weight in X flex.  Of course, the one shaft they sent that met those specs happened to be the one I hit the best.  it was a Graphite Design Tour AD DI 7 X flex.  So, I ordered my new Titleist driver with that shaft.  I never had any consistency with that shaft.  Even when I would hit one perfect, I’d find out that the most I ever got out of it was 275 yards and I’d find the ball sitting one foot behind it’s pitch mark in the fairway on most drives.  I was getting zero roll in Arizona.  I was again on the hunt for a new driver shaft.  I spent countless hours researching shafts to determine which shaft might be right for me and decided to try an Aldila RIP alpha 70.  That didn’t work either.  The torque was way too low.  I decided to call Fujikura Golf directly since they were the makers of the shaft that was probably the best shaft I have ever hit, the Motore F1 75.  I was very interested in the speeder line thinking I would likely fall into the 7.1 based on specs and trajectory claims.  It would be something I could get the ball up in the air with but with a mid ball flight.   The rep started asking me a lot of very detailed questions about my swing.  I told him about shafts that I had success with in the past and shafts that I didn’t like and why I didn’t like them.  By the time we were done with our 15-20 minute conversation he said he would recommend the vc 7.2 Tour Spec.  I was shocked but decided to go out on a limb and buy the shaft because I trusted him based on the types of questions he was asking and his analysis of my answers.
Click here to read the discussion in the forums

Finally, here are my thoughts on this shaft.  The shaft is a Fujikura Motore Speeder vc 7.2 Tour Spec.  It came from Titleist as an off menu offering and was tipped 1/2″ as is standard for Titleist.  Since I have been doing my own club work for well over 10 years and I am the only one I trust to work on my clubs, I had Titleist send the shaft uncut for length.  I cut the shaft to 44 3/8 on my Mitchell measuring device and put the grip on and got a finished length of about 44 5/8 which I just call 44 1/2.  I play all of my clubs at D3 swingweight except my wedges which are at D5.  Based on other reviews of this shaft I was scared to death of what it was going to be like.  I was expecting it to be so stiff that I wouldn’t even be able to get it to kick.  I was expecting every drive to be a bullet 5 feet off the ground.  This is based on other reviews I read saying it was a super low launching shaft.  After I got the shaft in the head, cut it to length and put the grip on, I took exactly 1 swing on the swing speed radar with no warm up just to see what I would get.  Keep in mind that my first few swings are usually around 96-98 mph because I’m not warmed up yet.

My one swing with the 7.2 Tour Spec was 106 mph.  A few hours later I was at the range.  I warmed up with my irons and then after several shots I pulled out the big stick.  I have to say, for me, this is one of the best shafts I have ever hit.  The feel was phenomenal.  It feels soft yet crisp at the same time.  Compared to the Diamana Blue Board, which had a good feel but always felt mushy to me.  I have always had success with shafts that have a very quick load and release as compared to a shaft that when you swing to the top you have to wait 5 minutes for the shaft to load before you can start the down swing.  This shaft was exactly that.  It plays like it is an exotic sports car.  It is always ready to launch the second you put the pedel to the metal.  I didn’t feel that it was demanding at all.  It had a smooth yet snappy feel.

According to Fujikura… With efficient energy transfer and enhanced structural stability from 7-Axis Technology, the Motore Speeder allows you to swing with confidence. That’s because the uniform reinforcement provided by our Quadra Axis Composite and Triax woven material helps you return the head more consistently to impact. This translates into longer and straighter drives.

Through impact, it unleashed its stored energy with ferocious power.  It is the only shaft I’ve ever hit that caused the club head to get to the ball at the same times as my hands.  This shaft is also incredibly straight.  I was watching the golf tournament today on TV and they were saying that Steve Stricker was complaining that his tee shots with this shaft were going too straight.  When I tried to hit the ball straight or draw it, I got what I would call a medium ball flight and the ball went very straight or had an ever so slight draw.  There were no low bullets 5 feet off the ground.  What I really liked about this shaft is that I could hit a high sweeping cut that seemed to fly forever but I had complete control of the ball.  I hit 3 straight drives on the course that afternoon that went 300-305 and one of those was a slight drop kick.  I also hit a few high cut shots that went to places on the course I’ve never been to off the tee before.  Regardless of how high or low I hit the ball with this shaft, I got a very penetrating trajectory, probably due to low spin.
Click here to read the discussion in the forums

The bottom line, don’t be intimidated by this shaft.  It’s a great shaft with great feel and great kick.  I didn’t feel it was demanding at all even in a 74 gram X flex. But, like anything, it has to be the right shaft for your swing.  Personally, I can’t figure out what shaft is right for me in a one hour session.  I have taken months to put my latest set of clubs together.  I did a lot of testing of different shafts for irons and woods.  I wanted to find what was most consistant over time, not based on how I was swinging on one particular day.  Think outside the golf industry box when getting fit.  Most people will benefit more from a shorter driver than a longer one.  I personally get more distance from shorter heavier clubs than longer and lighter clubs.  I was golfing with my dad one time who was 60 years old at the time and not a golfer or an athlete for that matter.  I’m guessing his swing speed was around 75 mph.  He has a POS sporting good store driver and he was in the trees all day.  On the 10th tee he wanted to try my driver which had a 44.5″ Diamana Blue 73 X at the time.  He hit that driver about 230 yards straight down the middle of the fairway.  He was hitting his driver about 180 into the trees.  I’ve heard of a lot of guys that swing 115 mph that are playing S flex.  I couldn’t control an S flex if my life depended on it and I don’t swing 115, at least I don’t think I do.  Keep an open mind and experiment with flex, weight and length.  Being in the fairway is much better than being 10 yards longer in the trees or out of bounds.  The average driver length on the PGA Tour is 44.5″ which means for every guy that is playing a 45.5″ driver, there is someone playing a 43.5″ driver.  I absolutely love this shaft and felt it needed a review that did it justice.  I hope this review was helpful.

motore-speeder
Click here to read the discussion in the forums
Company Line: Fujikura Motore Speeder 6.2 Tour Spec-  The design concept was to keep the same unique feel of the VC.2 Motore Speeder but increase tip strength for lower spin plus eliminate the left with high ball speeds.  The S flex design will have almost the same tip stiffness as the X flex but the butt will be 7-10 CPM’s weaker to accommodate the high swing speed player who needs the tip strength but needs the handle a bit softer for smoother transitions.   We expect this shaft to accommodate the better golfer that wants to keep the spin low and not loose control of their shots.  Each Motore Speeder is equipped with our Proprietary Quadra Axis Composite and Triax Woven material creating a revolutionary 7-Axis Technology. This uniformity throughout the shaft assists with eliminating deformation (ovaling) yet provides the maximum amount of feel through the entire swing increasing overall performance and stability.
Click here to read the discussion in the forums

Your Reaction?
  • 32
  • LEGIT0
  • WOW0
  • LOL3
  • IDHT1
  • FLOP0
  • OB0
  • SHANK1

GolfWRX is the world's largest and best online golf community. Expert editorial reviews, breaking golf tour and industry news, what to play, how to play and where to play. GolfWRX surrounds consumers throughout the buying, learning and enrichment process from original photographic and video content, to peer to peer advice and camaraderie, to technical how-tos, and more. As the largest online golf community we continue to protect the purity of our members opinions and the platform to voice them. We want to protect the interests of golfers by providing an unbiased platform to feel proud to contribute to for years to come. You can follow GolfWRX on Twitter @GolfWRX and on Facebook.

12 Comments

12 Comments

  1. chad

    Aug 27, 2014 at 1:01 am

    A 105 mph swing speed going over 300?

  2. Cole

    Jul 11, 2013 at 2:19 pm

    try the new project x prototype. i hit the tour spec before i bought the prototype and the project x is unbelievable. can’t go wrong with either though

  3. akshots

    Nov 10, 2012 at 3:40 pm

    great review thanks, i think im gonna get one, im in club buying mode right now

  4. Gabriel

    Nov 5, 2012 at 4:32 am

    he swings rahter upright, and stands closer to the ball at address compared to what the thought of a traditional one planer is but this is very well loved at the moment. if you want to see the difference between is shaft slant at address and how it relates to the angles right through his swing, take a look at wanyne defrancesco’s swing analysis here on youtube, you’ll see the his angles match up better than some of the more traditional one planers, its similar to say and anthony kim

  5. Big Bopper

    Sep 28, 2012 at 11:27 pm

    Nice review, I play this shaft tipped an extra inch (1.5 total) in my 910 D3 and I do like it but the ball just stops, no roll at all. It carries a mile and has low spin but i am looking to try something with a lower launch, any suggestions?? Just got fitted and stumped the fitter ball speed of 182 and 327 carry( I know you think I’m BSing the #s but I am not, dabbled in Long Drive, avg clubhead speed of 127-135). He says stay where I am but I would like to squeeze out a little roll if possible. Help….??

  6. hty3210

    Sep 26, 2012 at 1:09 am

    you have no idea what you are talking about!!!

    • Alain

      Nov 3, 2012 at 3:57 am

      hi. take the shoe . right shoe . the shoemaker puts a small piece of pltasic . 3 inches long . 3/4 inch hi9gh. at the back of the shoe to the sarch. this causes legs to stay stable, forces right knee to stay stable , and foot connected to rthe ground . it does work. please stay away from shoemakers in a mall just go to a small shop. a very high number of medical staff have the same thing done to thier shoes. when you tell the shoemaker what it is for. he will understand. it is a very simple illegal adjustment . the shoemaker will have you wait . cost under ten bucks. go for a walk before playing with the brace. after two months you could have it removed . there were shoes built this way early 90s . they worked so usga banned them . ken venturi, ben hogan, sam snead and byron nelson to name a few used this method . good luck . sorry spelling eyes screrwed up from cancer hack saw surgery .

  7. Kalob

    Sep 18, 2012 at 1:03 am

    Great review, I have been really interested in this shaft, do you know how it plays compared to the white board?

  8. Neil Harvey

    Aug 26, 2012 at 1:51 pm

    Excellent review been looking at the Rombax and the Oban prototype for my D3 but think this has swayed me to the Motore Speeder 7.2 tour

    • MdHoney

      May 25, 2013 at 1:42 pm

      Did you try hitting it against the oban or the rombax?

  9. Matt C

    Aug 17, 2012 at 9:26 am

    Great write up! I purchased this shaft from Will Peoples after a fitting suggested a low launch, low flight shaft would suit my swing best. I could not get over what a difference this shaft made in my 910D. To quote Chazz Michaels “No exaggeration, I could not love a human baby more then I love this shaft.”

  10. Alex K

    Aug 16, 2012 at 9:04 am

    Great in depth review thanks, will definitively help me in my on going search for the perfect shaft.

Leave a Reply

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

Accessory Reviews

I tried the great Golfboarding experiment… here’s how it went

Published

on

Corica Park Golf Course is not exactly the first place you’d expect to find one of the most experimental sports movements sweeping the nation. Sitting on a pristine swath of land along the southern rim of Alameda Island, deep in the heart of the San Francisco Bay, the course’s municipal roots and no-frills clubhouse give it an unpretentious air that seems to fit better with Sam Snead’s style of play than, say, Rickie Fowler’s.

Yet here I am, one perfectly sunny morning on a recent Saturday in December planning to try something that is about as unconventional as it gets for a 90-year-old golf course.

It’s called Golfboarding, and it’s pretty much exactly what it sounds like: an amalgam of golf and skateboarding, or maybe surfing. The brainchild of surfing legend Laird Hamilton — who can be assumed to have mastered, and has clearly grown bored of, all normal sports — Golfboarding is catching on at courses throughout the country, from local municipal courses like Corica Park to luxury country clubs like Cog Hill and TPC Las Colinas. Since winning Innovation Of the Year at the PGA Merchandising Show in 2014, Golfboards can now be found at 250 courses and have powered nearly a million rounds of golf already. Corica Park currently owns eight of them.

The man in pro shop gets a twinkle in his eyes when our foursome tells him we’d like to take them out. “Have you ridden them before?” he asks. When we admit that we are uninitiated, he grins and tells us we’re in for a treat.

But first, we need to sign a waiver and watch a seven-minute instructional video. A slow, lawyerly voice reads off pedantic warnings like “Stepping on the golfboard should be done slowly and carefully” and “Always hold onto the handlebars when the board is in motion.” When it cautions us to “operate the board a safe distance from all…other golfboarders,” we exchange glances, knowing that one of us will more than likely break this rule later on.

Then we venture outside, where one of the clubhouse attendants shows us the ropes. The controls are pretty simple. One switch sends it forward or in reverse, another toggles between low and high gear. To make it go, there’s a throttle on the thumb of the handle. The attendant explains that the only thing we have to worry about is our clubs banging against our knuckles.

“Don’t be afraid to really lean into the turns,” he offers. “You pretty much can’t roll it over.”

“That sounds like a challenge,” I joke. No one laughs.

On a test spin through the parking lot, the Golfboard feels strong and sturdy, even when I shift around on it. It starts and stops smoothly with only the slightest of jerks. In low gear its top speed is about 5 mph, so even at full throttle it never feels out of control.

The only challenge, as far as I can tell, is getting it to turn. For some reason, I’d expected the handlebar to offer at least some degree of steering, but it is purely for balance. The thing has the Ackerman angle of a Mack Truck, and you really do have to lean into the turns to get it to respond. For someone who is not particularly adept at either surfing or skateboarding, this comes a little unnaturally. I have to do a number of three-point turns in order to get back to where I started and make my way over to the first tee box.

We tee off and climb on. The fairway is flat and wide, and we shift into high gear as we speed off toward our balls. The engine had produced just the faintest of whirrs as it accelerated, but it is practically soundless as the board rolls along at full speed. The motor nevertheless feels surprisingly powerful under my feet (the drivetrain is literally located directly underneath the deck) as the board maintains a smooth, steady pace of 10 mph — about the same as a golf cart. I try making a couple of S curves like I’d seen in the video and realize that high-speed turning will take a little practice for me to get right, but that it doesn’t seem overly difficult.

Indeed, within a few holes I might as well be Laird himself, “surfing the earth” from shot to shot. I am able to hold the handlebar and lean way out, getting the board to turn, if not quite sharply, then at least closer to that of a large moving van than a full-sized semi. I take the hills aggressively (although the automatic speed control on the drivetrain enables it to keep a steady pace both up and down any hills, so this isn’t exactly dangerous), and I speed throughout the course like Mario Andretti on the freeway (the company claims increased pace-of-play as one of the Golfboard’s primary benefits, but on a Saturday in the Bay Area, it is impossible avoid a five-hour round anyway.)

Gliding along, my feet a few inches above the grass, the wind in my face as the fairways unfurl below my feet, it is easy to see Golfboards as the next evolution in mankind’s mastery of wheels; the same instincts to overcome inertia that brought us bicycles, rollerblades, scooters, skateboards, and more recent inventions such as Segways, Hoverboards and Onewheels are clearly manifest in Golfboards as well. They might not offer quite the same thrill as storming down a snowy mountainside or catching a giant wave, but they are definitely more fun than your standard golf cart.

Yet, there are obvious downsides as well. The attendant’s warning notwithstanding, my knuckles are in fact battered and sore by the time we make the turn, and even though I rearrange all my clubs into the front slots of my bag, they still rap my knuckles every time I hit a bump. Speaking of which, the board’s shock absorber system leaves something to be desired, as the ride is so bumpy that near the end I start to feel as if I’ve had my insides rattled. Then there is the unforgivable fact of its missing a cup holder for my beer.

But these are mere design flaws that might easily be fixed in the next generation of Golfboards. (A knuckle shield is a must!) My larger problem with Golfboards is what they do to the game itself. When walking or riding a traditional cart, the moments in between shots are a time to plan your next shot, or to chat about your last shot, or to simply find your zen out there among the trees and the birds and the spaciousness of the course. Instead, my focus is on staying upright.

Down the stretch, I start to fade. The muscles in my core have endured a pretty serious workout, and it’s becoming increasingly difficult to muster the strength for my golf swing. It is no coincidence that my game starts to unravel, and I am on the way to one of my worst rounds in recent memory.

Walking off the 18th green, our foursome agrees that the Golfboards were fun — definitely worth trying — but that we probably wouldn’t ride them again. Call me a purist, but as someone lacking Laird Hamilton’s physical gifts, I’m happy to stick to just one sport at a time.

Your Reaction?
  • 92
  • LEGIT14
  • WOW0
  • LOL8
  • IDHT2
  • FLOP5
  • OB2
  • SHANK19

Continue Reading

Accessory Reviews

Review: The QOD Electric Caddy

Published

on

If you want an electric golf caddy that doesn’t require that you wear a sensor or carry a remote — one that will be reliable and allow you to focus on your game, and not your cart — then the Australian-manufactured QOD is worth checking out.

The QOD (an acronym for Quality of Design and a nod to its four wheels) is powered by a 14.4-volt lithium battery, good for 36 holes or more on a single charge. It has nine different speeds (with the fastest settings moving closer to jogging velocity) so the QOD can handle your ideal pace, whether that be a casual stroll or a more rapid clip around the course.

The QOD is also built to last. Its injection-molded, aircraft-grade aluminum frame has no welded joints. Steel bolts and locking teeth take care of the hinging points. The battery and frame are both guaranteed for three full years. If you need a new battery after the three-year window, the folks at QOD will replace it at cost.

Its front-wheel suspension gives the QOD a smooth ride down the fairway, and the trolley is easy to navigate with a gentle nudge here and there. The QOD is always in free-wheel mode, so it is smooth and easy to maneuver manually in tight spaces and around the green.

The caddy also features three timed interval modes for situations where you might wish to send it up ahead on its own: when helping a friend find a lost ball or when you will be exiting on the far side of the green after putting, for example. The clip below includes a look at the caddy in timed mode.

When folded, the QOD measures a mere 17-inches wide, 15-inches deep and 12-inches tall.

Another area where the QOD excels is in its small size and portability. When folded, it measures a mere 17-inches wide, 15-inches deep and 12-inches tall, making it the smallest electric caddy on the market.

Folks Down Under have been enjoying the QOD for some time, but it wasn’t until a few years ago when Malachi McGlone was looking for a way to continue walking the course without putting undue strain on an injured wrist that the QOD found U.S. fairways. After first becoming a satisfied customer, McGlone convinced CEO Collin Hiss, who developed the product and oversees its production in Australia, to allow him to distribute and service the QOD here in the states.

The QOD has no self-balancing gyroscope, bluetooth sensor or remote control. Bells and whistles just aren’t its thing — though it does have a USB port for cell phone charging that can come in handy. However, if you are looking for a no-fuss workhorse to move your bag down the fairway, the QOD should be on your radar.

The 2018 model has begun shipping and will be on sale at $1,299 for a limited time. It normally retails at $1,499.

Your Reaction?
  • 78
  • LEGIT13
  • WOW7
  • LOL2
  • IDHT0
  • FLOP1
  • OB1
  • SHANK2

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?
  • 175
  • LEGIT16
  • WOW4
  • LOL11
  • IDHT2
  • FLOP9
  • OB4
  • SHANK34

Continue Reading

19th Hole

Facebook

Trending