Connect with us

Equipment

Callaway’s new high-end Epic, Epic Pro irons and hybrids

Published

on

How does Callaway follow up the most popular new drivers on the market? It introduces a set of players irons built like game-improvement irons with never-before-seen technology, of course.

With its new Epic and Epic Pro irons, Callaway is introducing a new weighting system that starts with tungsten-powder pellets to dial in the performance and feel of each iron. It’s also bringing more distance and forgiveness into Pro-style irons (re: smaller frames, toplines and sole widths), helping the Epic Pro irons create more ball speed than the company’s popular Apex CF ’16 irons.

It’s no accident that irons called “Epic” are introducing new technology to the world of golf clubs. With its GBB Epic and GBB Epic Sub Zero drivers, Callaway gave the golfing world “Jailbreak,” or two titanium rods that connected the crown and the sole to produce more ball speed and overall distance.

Discussion: See what GolfWRX members are saying about Callaway’s Epic irons

Discussion: See Callaway’s Epic iron in hand photos and comparison pics with other irons

EXOCage

Like Callaway’s Big Bertha irons, the Epic and Epic Pro irons use Callaway’s Exo-Cage design.

For the irons also bearing the Epic name, Hocknell and a team of 70 or more engineers had no boundaries or budget to create game-changing irons. Hocknell’s goal was to create a Pro iron with distance-enhancing technologies. As such, “Doc’s Irons,” as the Pro irons were referred to internally at Callaway, were given Face Cups and an “Exo Cage” steel structure (pictured above) to support the Face Cups. While Callaway has used Face Cups to increase ball speeds in its metal woods and game-improvement irons, it has never before added the technology to a set of players irons like the Epic Pro.

Epic Pro Irons Gallery

The Epic Pro irons also employ a tungsten-steel weighting system that yields greater control over where center of gravity is placed inside each iron. The weights start as tungsten and steel powders, which are then cooked for 51 hours at 2,500 degrees Fahrenheit before they’re injection molded into the center of the irons. The long irons use the intricately-shaped weights that are positioned low and toe-ward in the heads to influence a higher ball flight, while the shorter irons have the weights placed higher in the heads to encourage more spin, control and workability. This means each individual iron has a specialized center of gravity that plays to the needs of that iron.

TungstenWeighting

This weighting system also allows Callaway to control the weight of the heads. The company can make the club heads up to 5 grams heavier or lighter depending on a golfer’s needs, which gives consumers the same head-weight options as Callaway’s Tour players, the company says.

HoselThe two-piece structured irons also have a hosel that weighs nearly 30 grams less than the Apex 2016 irons. Eliminating weight from the hosel allowed Callaway to use that weight more efficiently, and helped to build up a stronger Exo Cage backbone.

The result of the new design is 0.5 mph of added ball speed compared to the Callaway Apex irons, according to Callaway, which are widely considered one of the longest-flying game-improvement irons available. As a reminder, the Epic Pro irons are more of a players irons, making those ball speeds quite impressive.

Epic Irons Gallery

Although the original intent of Hocknell’s design was for a Pro-style iron, he asked himself “What would happen if you enlarged the size?” Thus, the Epic game-improvement irons were birthed. The Epic irons have the same Exo Cage and tungsten-infused weight system that the Epic Pro irons utilize, except they have more offset, wide soles, larger club faces and slightly stronger lofts. Golfers can expect these irons to be a half-club longer than Callaway’s Apex irons, according to Callaway. They will suit the fancy of golfers who need a bit more forgiveness and distance than the Epic Pro offering.

The Epic and Epic Pro irons will sell for $250 apiece with steel shafts and $280 each with graphite shafts. If those price tags shock you — and we don’t blame you if they do — welcome to the current state of the market where high-end irons are more common than ever.

Epic Hybrid Gallery

To round out the line of Epic clubs, Callaway is also introducing Epic hybrids that use the same technologies as Epic fairway woods. That’s to say they have lightweight, carbon crowns and the company’s Face Cup technology to produce distance and forgiveness. They’re available for $279.99 each in 2, 3, 4 and 5 hybrid options.

Epic, Epic Pro and Epic hybrids will be available in stores and through Callaway’s website June 16.

Discussion: See what GolfWRX members are saying about Callaway’s Epic irons

Discussion: See Callaway’s Epic iron in hand photos and comparison pics with other irons

 

Your Reaction?
  • 163
  • LEGIT30
  • WOW22
  • LOL26
  • IDHT9
  • FLOP29
  • OB24
  • SHANK395

Andrew Tursky is the Editor-in-Chief of GolfWRX. He played on the Hawaii Pacific University Men's Golf team and earned a Masters degree in Communications. He also played college golf at Rutgers University, where he graduated with a Bachelor of Arts in Journalism.

65 Comments

65 Comments

  1. John Krug

    Aug 30, 2017 at 10:25 am

    Why does the 2 hybrid have a loft of 18 degrees instead of 16 degrees?

  2. Mikee

    Jun 9, 2017 at 9:37 am

    I hit the new Epic CF17 last night. I was impressed. They don’t look great but………numbers don’t lie!

  3. TeeBone

    Jun 8, 2017 at 2:58 am

    Congratulations…your first post that made sense!

  4. TeeBone

    Jun 8, 2017 at 2:56 am

    “No boundaries or budget”? Ahh, the “PXG Effect”. $250 – 280 per iron? Ahh, the “PXG effect”. If the herd didn’t still think they can buy a game, these ridiculous prices wouldn’t fly.

  5. cray

    May 25, 2017 at 10:37 am

    Guys like you are boring. Hate to hate. First tee baby. My 250 3 iron down the center with high flight will be nice as you bang your 200 straight down the center.

  6. Lob Wedge

    May 25, 2017 at 3:53 am

    Dear Callaway,

    Congrats on picking up the Taylormade Marketing department.

  7. KK

    May 24, 2017 at 10:06 pm

    So all of these golf pioneers were just lying crooks cheating uninformed golfers: Ping with their Eye2 irons, Callaway with their Big Bertha drivers, TaylorMade with their R drivers, Vokey with his wedges. Right. I see your brilliance. I really do.

  8. Dave R

    May 24, 2017 at 5:32 pm

    Tom you are right on well said. Hope some one in the golf market understands and starts to listen. Seems the billionaire is the one calling the shots with his screws in the clubs, the other companies just jumping on board . What’s the limit the market will bear? Only time will tell. I’ll continue to hack with my cheap 5 year discounted mizuno. They still work sometimes.

  9. Tom54

    May 24, 2017 at 3:45 pm

    $250 a club? What are they thinking when they plop this price on ? A nice set of irons might be worth $1200-1400 Even at that price it’s up there. Good irons last several years with proper care and grip changes. Only problem nowadays is if you’ve got a nice set for couple of years it is now 3-4 models old and no longer relevant. Let’s face it all clubs are maxed out technology wise so all they are doing is a cosmetic change here and there but you’ve just got to have it. Best way to go is wait 6 months and get today’s hot item for a fraction of the cost. I believe they have not found the holy grail club if it has to be changed twice a year.

  10. dcorun

    May 24, 2017 at 1:36 pm

    I’m not a hater of any golf company but, I just don’t understand what’s going on. They say the game is going in the tank and then can’t understand why. People may think the economy is getting better but, $2000 for a set of irons better? As a previous member posted, practice and getting some lessons will help more than any club you buy. They have a driverless car but, haven’t invented the golf club that swings for you. What they need is another category for clubs.

    Players Clubs
    Game Improvement Clubs
    Super Game Improvement Clubs
    I HAVE MONEY TO BURN CLUBs.

  11. King of Carlsbad

    May 24, 2017 at 1:01 pm

    Seem fantastic. Same haters had Callaway going out of business years ago.

    • Me

      May 24, 2017 at 3:21 pm

      It wasn’t haters, Callaway was practically a penny stock a few years ago. Poor distribution, 100s laid off, way over inventoried, low demand, marketing was awful, and retail prices were falling. Speculation was Nike was ready to pounce and probably should have. Nothing to do with hatred, just a grim reality of business.

  12. Dave R

    May 24, 2017 at 12:28 pm

    Really $250.00 a club COM ON BOYS ? ONLY THE RICH PLAY GOLF IN THE FURTURE!!!!!!!! . Thought we were trying to promote the game not get rid of it.

  13. Joro

    May 24, 2017 at 10:36 am

    They are for people with way more money than a game. They are just continuing on their quest to buy a better game. Find a good teacher instead. You will not see very many real players with these, at least after a month. Part of their contract may require playing them for a while, but then back to the Gamers. Just another marketing scam for a production Club.

  14. MySlice

    May 24, 2017 at 7:26 am

    I guess in keeping with tradition, they HAD to release them but they are definitely ugly. Someone will like them im sure.

  15. Matt

    May 24, 2017 at 3:14 am

    Wow, those irons are really fugly. 70 engineers but obviously none with a good eye.

  16. Judge mental

    May 24, 2017 at 3:06 am

    Golf clubs for rich kids

  17. Mat

    May 24, 2017 at 1:44 am

    Even
    Phil
    Is
    Cringing

  18. Mat

    May 24, 2017 at 1:43 am

    Embodied
    PXG
    In
    China

  19. Mat

    May 24, 2017 at 1:41 am

    Engineering
    Poor;
    Insane
    Cost

  20. tlmcik

    May 23, 2017 at 9:05 pm

    Rube Goldberg would be proud.

  21. TWShoot67

    May 23, 2017 at 7:58 pm

    I just find it hilarious that they are trying to sell us on SEVENTY I mean over SEVENTY engineers have worked on this aeronautical design. to get 0.5 mph increased ball speeds. And will that mean that crazy ECO Cage frame be Casted or forged? CNC’d? All this cost must be paying for those over 70 engineers. lol. I guess you really can’t blame them because if you listen to PXG they are killing it with a one of a kind tech, that’s why I see at least 1-2 sets being sold every week in the BST ( because the owners are so happy with this product). I see the same thing happening here with this Callaway product. They’re betting on those individuals that have that big bank account who still thinks its better to spend thousands of dollars on high end clubs then to buy lessons. As hard work and dedication is just that hard. It’s easier to try a hopefully buy a game. Have fun boys. all of this wonderful tech and still amateur golfers scores are no better then when they went out and picked up 200.00 sets of irons. Now they pay 2,000.00 a set and still can’t break a 100. I think maybe Callaway has too many engineers at one company to design a set of clubs.

  22. Mark

    May 23, 2017 at 7:58 pm

    Are those the new RBZ irons?

  23. MrPoopoo

    May 23, 2017 at 7:49 pm

    hmm… Epic Ugly from a decal/graphics side, but at least they look pretty good from address… which is more important anyway.

    Better players don’t care about ball speed on irons. Distance control, consistency and workability are more important. Trajectory is important, but that can be adjusted with shaft fittings.

  24. Eric B

    May 23, 2017 at 7:46 pm

    Lol cast clubs at Japanese forged prices. FoH Callaway.

  25. Duk Koo Kim

    May 23, 2017 at 7:13 pm

    He said “Nickent!” Great call!!

  26. Sam

    May 23, 2017 at 6:58 pm

    These irons are just compact hybrids. With Callaway’s reputation for quality, you’re going to get some real heaters that fly 20 yards past the green

  27. John

    May 23, 2017 at 5:13 pm

    Yes, golfers are looking for GI irons that look like players irons. Like Ping I200. Now those are some nice looking irons.

  28. AceW7Iron

    May 23, 2017 at 4:05 pm

    Yep..Im die-hard in the prime of my buying life but these are outside the boundary. I did reach for the Epic driver used off the Bay but $280 for just 1 iron? Off the hizzy…
    Im out… Enjoy them Gates & Company

  29. brian

    May 23, 2017 at 3:57 pm

    haha, I wouldn’t bag those ugly sticks for $800 a set, let alone $2k. Good luck with that, Callaway.

  30. Joey5Picks

    May 23, 2017 at 3:28 pm

    Their target market: people with more money than sense.

  31. Bob Jacobs

    May 23, 2017 at 3:14 pm

    I guess their figuring that PXG irons go for a ton of money, so what they heck, let’s go for it!! Silly

    I just dont get why these manufacturers dont go for a cleaner look all around. Also who came up with this incredibly gross green color theme?? I own an Epic and love it, but certainly not from an aesthetics standpoint.

    C’mon guys, give us less marketing, labels and phony tech looking stuff on the outside of the club!!

  32. Minnesota golfer

    May 23, 2017 at 2:06 pm

    It’s ridiculous the lofts of the Epic Irons are even stronger (lower number) than Apex cf16 irons. Definitely game improvement irons. PASS.

  33. alexdub

    May 23, 2017 at 12:42 pm

    Lolz. $2k for face cups. I bet these are no different than the XR Pros. Callaway is doing is their own litmus market test for a higher price point — something akin to what Titleist did with the C16 line.

    • LH

      May 23, 2017 at 8:31 pm

      You mean no different to the original Fusions.

  34. Steve

    May 23, 2017 at 11:11 am

    Titleist sold their full stock of C16 irons so Callaway jumps on the bandwagon.

    In 2 years the “standard” set of irons will cost $1500.

  35. Prut

    May 23, 2017 at 11:00 am

    They have Nickent look to them.

  36. Dat

    May 23, 2017 at 10:25 am

    “If those price tags shock you — and we don’t blame you if they do — welcome to the current state of the market where high-end irons are more common than ever.”

    The prices don’t shock me at all. Especially from a cheesy marketing company like Callaway Golf – which is exactly that. Their clubs, aside from the Rory MB protos, are purely built on technology that is over a decade old in new skin and fancy graphics. The market will only bear this for so long; so take advantage while you can, Callaway. Ride is about to end. Golf is in for a rude awakening when these clubs fizzle at retail. Everyone saying, “I told you so” is going to be correct here. Most players want a set of irons at $1000 or less, not $2000 or more.

    • Vanessa Carlysle

      May 23, 2017 at 2:59 pm

      +1000

      The last two announcements on WRX from Callaway/Odyssey have been embarrassing.
      1. The red putters – copied exact color from TM – Pathetic
      2. High Price, Ugly look Irons – copied idea from PXG – Pathetic

      Would like to see more imagination, innovation and origination from this company, but not going to hold my breath

    • setter02

      May 23, 2017 at 4:46 pm

      Just makes them seem like a bargain when they are 50% off in 6-8 months and they are still making money off of them. Retailers not to much, but the OEM’s don’t care about them as the ‘cost’ pricing keeps going up and up and up for no real reason.

    • Feel the Bern

      May 23, 2017 at 7:47 pm

      I agree with you, but I would add that the Rory MB’s are built on technology over 4 decades old!

      • Me

        May 24, 2017 at 3:30 pm

        Rory no longer plays with Callaway blades….he now plays Taylormade. Just sayin

  37. C

    May 23, 2017 at 10:05 am

    That’s a lot of offset.

  38. SoCalSlicer

    May 23, 2017 at 10:02 am

    How many levels of approval do these go through, before they are given a green light? Those have to be some of the worst, and I mean the most hideous irons I’ve ever seen. Ever. Good god.

  39. BB

    May 23, 2017 at 9:52 am

    $250 an iron? Overpriced junk.

  40. Leon

    May 23, 2017 at 9:22 am

    Callaway will be the next Taylormade, that’s it.

  41. Golferguy

    May 23, 2017 at 9:21 am

    I would’ve loved to see these clubs dressed up in plain steel, a la Srixon, Mizuno, etc. Going forward, I’m considering a set of Miura clubs if I choose to go high-end, though my Mizuno sticks are working for me really well.

  42. Tyson Rochambeau

    May 23, 2017 at 9:17 am

    High end? They look like a set from Wal-Mart.

  43. J C

    May 23, 2017 at 9:14 am

    Those of you who are saying these are ugly you need to seem them in person. The pro’s look great. I would like to know what shafts are available for the hybrids.

  44. DJ

    May 23, 2017 at 8:32 am

    My goodness those are hideous. Callaway making it very hard to become a fan

  45. Teaj

    May 23, 2017 at 8:24 am

    A players iron that looks like a GI iron, I’m not sure the market for players irons wants a busy looking club head, I have been wrong before though. I am sure people will bring up the fact that you do not see the back of the club when at address but there is something to be said about looking at your bag from a far and seeing a nice clean looking set of clubs (my opinion)

    • Steve

      May 23, 2017 at 11:15 am

      The funny thing is I think the market wants the EXACT opposite – GI irons that look like players irons.

  46. Greg V

    May 23, 2017 at 8:24 am

    They look cheap.

  47. LH

    May 23, 2017 at 8:22 am

    Gorgeous. Count me in for Epic Pro

  48. Nath

    May 23, 2017 at 7:51 am

    I really like the shape of the hybrid

  49. Corey

    May 23, 2017 at 7:49 am

    I like Cally, but not gonna sell a whole lot at that price. If your gonna be expensive, you better be pretty.

  50. Desmond

    May 23, 2017 at 7:35 am

    Assume the pics at address and that overly thick topline (reminiscent of the Big Bertha OS) are of the normal Epic, not the Epic Pro.

  51. Duk Koo Kim

    May 23, 2017 at 7:35 am

    +2……..and at 2 grand a set? As the kids used to say, REALLY? Callaway needs to get tossed away!

    And what may I ask is “high end?” What a riot!

  52. Powder skier

    May 23, 2017 at 6:46 am

    Hope they work better then they look uugh

  53. Mr Muira

    May 23, 2017 at 6:32 am

    Fugly.

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?
  • 10
  • 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?
  • 113
  • LEGIT10
  • WOW2
  • LOL5
  • IDHT0
  • FLOP7
  • OB3
  • SHANK24

Continue Reading

19th Hole

Facebook

Trending