Connect with us

Accessory Reviews

TRUE linkswear adds to its collection with Proto

Published

on

Rob Rigg, president of TRUE Linkswear, and the rest of the TRUE team dusted off their high school biology education to help build a better golf shoe.

“Our thought process in making the shoes was if humans are supposed to have heels, they would have evolved with one,” Rigg said. “We don’t have heels for a reason.”

Naturally, the company created a barefoot shoe with what they call “zero drop,” keeping the heel and forefoot at the same level. TRUE released its first shoe, the TRUE tour, in 2011 and has grown since, most recently releasing the TRUE proto.

By not having a heel in the shoe, Rigg explained how it helps give golfers better posture and better form on their swings.

The proto has received a good deal of attention since Ryan Moore, a part owner of TRUE, won the 2012 JT Shriner’s Open in Las Vegas in a pair. The shoe design was based largely on input from Moore, and was released to the public earlier this year.

“Ryan wanted something he could really hit into, so the shoe’s still very barefoot but we decided to add a little more outer ridge to the side so when he’s transferring to the left side, he can really power through,” Rigg said.

The proto sells for $169.99 and has what TRUE calls a “sensei” outsole to provide more stability and traction.

[youtube id=”-1Z4O3N2HTU” width=”620″ height=”360″]

Other TRUE shoes, such as the tour, have TRUE’s “ninja” outsole, which gives more flexibility and feel for the golfer.

The proto meets TRUE’s five requirements for being a barefoot shoe. It has the zero drop, a thin outsole, flexibility, a wide toebox and is light weight.

On the bottom of the proto, there is a three-millimeter thick rubber outsole and five-millimeter thick traction elements spread throughout as if they were spikes. This allows for an easier walk on pavement while also allowing grass to pass through the traction elements and allowing the golfer to feel the sand or green on the course.

“It’s pretty intense if you haven’t tried our shoes before,” Rigg said.

Another benefit to TRUE shoes is that buyers do not have to worry about getting the right shoe width. TRUE shoes keep the foot stable with memory foam in the back, a sock-fit liner in the middle and the wide toebox at the top. The toe box allows for the toes to spread out which also promotes stability.

The release of the proto gives TRUE six different men’s shoes on the market, ranging in price from $99.99 for the phx and sensei to $209.99 for the chukka. There are also two TRUE women’s shoes — the isis and jade, each for $99.99 — and in March, it will release its first shoe for children called the padawan ($59.99).

Your Reaction?
  • 0
  • LEGIT0
  • WOW1
  • LOL0
  • IDHT0
  • FLOP0
  • OB0
  • SHANK2

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.

13 Comments

13 Comments

  1. girithara

    Dec 3, 2014 at 11:03 pm

    Great shoes. Fits perfectly. Very comfortable.

  2. Johnny

    Nov 24, 2013 at 1:00 am

    These shoes are terrible. Not only do they look bad, they also have terrible traction. I would be better off wearing running shoes. My back foot slips just about every time I hit my driver. I do not recommend these. They are seriously ugly and cheap

  3. Lykato

    Apr 21, 2013 at 7:56 am

    I was disappointed with these shoes. They don’t grip very well in wet conditions in the morning. Sometimes you may feel yourself slip even when it’s not wet.

  4. https://Twitter.com/

    Mar 28, 2013 at 5:35 am

    It’s actually a great and helpful piece of information. I am satisfied that you shared this useful info with us. Please keep us informed like this. Thank you for sharing.

  5. Patrick

    Feb 15, 2013 at 1:02 am

    I purchased a pair of True Tour shoes 6 months ago. They are so comfortable, they are like wearing slippers.Because I have a broad foot , size 9US, I bought the 10US and they fitted like a glove. No !! I won’t be updating… I LOVE THESE ones. Thanks to True Linkswear.

  6. Scott

    Feb 14, 2013 at 8:20 pm

    Why do they have to sell them for such a high price if they are minimalist shoes? 🙂

  7. TWShoot67

    Feb 3, 2013 at 2:23 pm

    Great job Zach although I would have liked to do the interview with my boy Rob. This guy has changed the game when it comes to shoes in the golf industry. Now every single company out there is trying to catch up and ay they have the best lightweight shoe or best ground connection. You have to give this guy credit as he’s changed the footwear industry. I haven’t tried the NEW Sensei Proto but will soon for sure. I’ve been wearing these shoes as i was probably one of the first to tout this company. Now it looks like the rest of the golfing world has finally found them out. You can’t find a better more comfortable golf shoe. PERIOD!

    • john k

      Feb 6, 2013 at 7:16 pm

      First off let me start out by saying I have a son and daughter and wife who play. I put all 4 of us in spikeless shoes years back when Etonic came out with the G-SOK series. Well made shoe for the money and while many would comment that they looked comfortable, it was hard for many golf purists to comprehend that they would hold up on sidehill lie’s or wet conditions. Honestly they did. Whne True came along I jumped on the bandwagon immediately as I saw a company taking the no spike shoe to another level. I own 2 of the original soled shoes that have a nubby like bottom. Comfort and traction were fine, but the appearance I wouldn’t say was in line with what most players would commit to(almost a clown look to the shoe). I then upgraded to the Phx line last year and from my experience the shoe held up just as well as the original version but had a better look to attract the masses. I recently bought the True Sensei when it was released and have consistently used them while walking outdoors, playing golf and also working out(normal gym exercises). Quite honestly I find the Sensei platform to be far superior to the other lines and previous lines that are and were offered. I just ordered the Proto in brown and white. Tried the white out yesterday on the range…great look…much improved in my opinion and the best all around shoe True has made to date! I have viewed the new FJ(didn’t get a chance to try on)(ECCO)nothing to write home about and a few others that I can’t recal the maufacturers name…All in, this shoe delivers…and possibly most importatly, it allows you to walk in comfort and feel the ground as intended. Signed, a True fan for life!!

  8. Steffan Perry

    Feb 2, 2013 at 10:06 pm

    Actually humans are suppose to have “heels”. The correct way to run for example is technically to never let your “heels” touch the ground. Footwear have negated to need to keep our heals off the ground, however the longest distance runners in the world in rual South America run without the heals ever touching the ground, arching them up like “heels” in a shoe.

  9. Troy Vayanos

    Feb 2, 2013 at 3:24 pm

    I’ve got issues with too much pronating in my feet. Will the TRUE Linkswear give me enough support to combat the problem?

    Thanks for the review

  10. Kyle

    Feb 2, 2013 at 11:01 am

    My Grandma would love the look of these shoes.

  11. Pete

    Feb 1, 2013 at 5:00 pm

    I’m a big fan of my True Linkswear Tours from 2011 and will be looking into the protos as a replacement.

Leave a Reply

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

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?
  • 72
  • LEGIT12
  • WOW6
  • 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
  • LEGIT15
  • WOW4
  • LOL11
  • IDHT2
  • FLOP9
  • OB4
  • SHANK33

Continue Reading

Accessory Reviews

Choose Your Tartan: Enter now to win a Sunfish Tartan headcover

Published

on

Sunfish, well known for its stylish headcover designs, is offering up free Tartan-style headcovers to five GolfWRX Members. All you have to do to apply is become a GolfWRX member, if you’re not already, and then reply in the forum thread with your favorite the Tartan pattern.

TartanPatternsSunfish

The five winners will receive a free headcover in the pattern that they select. Winners will be selected on Friday, so don’t wait.

Click here to enter into the giveaway and pick your favorite style.

Reminder: Commenting on this post WILL NOT enter you into the giveaway.

Your Reaction?
  • 7
  • LEGIT0
  • WOW0
  • LOL1
  • IDHT0
  • FLOP0
  • OB1
  • SHANK7

Continue Reading

19th Hole

Facebook

Trending