Garmin Approach R10 Portable Golf Launch Monitor

[North Butte]

54 minutes ago, lakecowboy said:

Anyone selling their MEVO+ to get this?  Mine is VERY lightly used and I think this R10 would do what I need and I could pocket the difference.

If you're happy with the performance of the MEVO+, seems like a bit of a risk to get rid of it assuming that Version 1.0 of a brand-new device will work correctly and meet your needs.

 

If you're not satisfied with MEVO+ then maybe get rid and hope for better luck with the R10.

 

It would be an extremely rare tech product if there are not various problems, delays and bugs during the first few months after it is introduced. Probably mostly minor, probably will be straightened out in the end but we won't know until people actually start using the production units. 

[mpliang]

On 7/18/2021 at 9:16 AM, U4IC said:

why does anyone build a device in 2021 with a micro usb port???

 

people are still building devices with mini usb ports...

[tezzlacoil]

On 7/16/2021 at 4:27 AM, J13 said:

 

Nice for him to say it is but theres zero evidence shown in the super long video filled with no real info.  Hopefully someone serious does a video with a live comparison.

 

Crazy huh that the only reviews are from one dude and his "accuracy test" is a massive hype job. No display of results except a very brief comparison table. No driver (are you serious?) data, no woods or Hybrids. No irons. Even the sub-100 yard shots are just cherry picked instead of a table with a population of shots. Like you said just a lot of conclusions and opinions with nothing to let people form their own views.

 

It's like he's been paid to hype it up and everyone else is on embargo. I really want this device to be a decent substitute to the more expensive launch monitors but its very strange and suspicious that there aren't a ton of reviews from more well known and dare i say it legitimate golf reviewers. I also think some of the people in the youtube chats need to temper their expectations Hehe... they are expecting it, at its price point, to be 95% as accurate as trackman/qc2 in all scenarios with all clubs... If its even close to that across the board then rapsodo, mevo and skytrak are going broke lol

[North Butte]

5 hours ago, tezzlacoil said:

 

Crazy huh that the only reviews are from one dude and his "accuracy test" is a massive hype job. No display of results except a very brief comparison table. No driver (are you serious?) data, no woods or Hybrids. No irons. Even the sub-100 yard shots are just cherry picked instead of a table with a population of shots. Like you said just a lot of conclusions and opinions with nothing to let people form their own views.

 

It's like he's been paid to hype it up and everyone else is on embargo. I really want this device to be a decent substitute to the more expensive launch monitors but its very strange and suspicious that there aren't a ton of reviews from more well known and dare i say it legitimate golf reviewers. I also think some of the people in the youtube chats need to temper their expectations Hehe... they are expecting it, at its price point, to be 95% as accurate as trackman/qc2 in all scenarios with all clubs... If its even close to that across the board then rapsodo, mevo and skytrak are going broke lol

I think the target is for it to do the basics (club speed, ball speed, distance, launch angle) as accurately as a MEVO or Rapsodo MLM (competing devices in the same price category) and to give clubface angle and direction numbers that have similar accuracy to the basic launch stats. If it can do that, we're talking as good or better device as MEVO+ or Skytrak at 1/3 the price. That's a win and it would make a heck of a budget sim platform (which is what Garmin are hoping IMO). 

 

I'd put the odds of it being that good at about one in four but it seems possible even if not likely. Nothing about those hype videos make me think one thing or the other, there's no information on which to judge accuracy in the videos. 

[prusd]

Hi,

 

So I was just browsing golf sim stuff as that is an interest of mine, and I noticed this in a patent filing by GArmin for their low speed camera based launch monitor (it may or may not come to market...I dont know).  In any case, it throws a little cold water on their R10 device.  Under section 0022:  >>>High-speed camera systems can directly observe spin axis within moments of impact allowing accurate performance while indoors and outdoors. However, high-speed camera systems require high-speed image sensors and high processing power and are thus expensive. Further, high-speed camera systems have a limited field of view that does not allow for observation of entire swing path and flight path. Radar systems can utilize less-expensive hardware and simpler processing and provide an enormous field of view that allows for tracking of entire swings and long observation of environmental impacts on ball flight. But, radar systems are limited in that they can only observe the result of spin axis by observing a long period of ball flight. Thus, radar systems are only practical outdoors. Further, without direct observation of the spin axis, radar systems lack the accuracy of high-speed camera systems and are more susceptible to errors from weather and other external factors.<<<

 

Link is here:  https://patents.google.com/patent/US20200398138A1/en?assignee=garmin&oq=assignee:garmin&sort=new

[Murdock]

1 hour ago, prusd said:

Hi,

 

So I was just browsing golf sim stuff as that is an interest of mine, and I noticed this in a patent filing by GArmin for their low speed camera based launch monitor (it may or may not come to market...I dont know).  In any case, it throws a little cold water on their R10 device.  Under section 0022:  >>>High-speed camera systems can directly observe spin axis within moments of impact allowing accurate performance while indoors and outdoors. However, high-speed camera systems require high-speed image sensors and high processing power and are thus expensive. Further, high-speed camera systems have a limited field of view that does not allow for observation of entire swing path and flight path. Radar systems can utilize less-expensive hardware and simpler processing and provide an enormous field of view that allows for tracking of entire swings and long observation of environmental impacts on ball flight. But, radar systems are limited in that they can only observe the result of spin axis by observing a long period of ball flight. Thus, radar systems are only practical outdoors. Further, without direct observation of the spin axis, radar systems lack the accuracy of high-speed camera systems and are more susceptible to errors from weather and other external factors.<<<

 

Link is here:  https://patents.google.com/patent/US20200398138A1/en?assignee=garmin&oq=assignee:garmin&sort=new

 

Why does it throw cold water on it?  It's known to be a doppler based system and not camera.  Or are you saying that because the statement says 'they are only practical outdoors'?

 

The FS Mevo seems to track spin fairly decently, but requires the silver dots while indoors (i.e. limited flight path).  For me personally, I only use it outdoors and have never used the silver dots and the spin seems somewhat accurate.  Albeit not as accurate as a high speed camera (but doesn't cost 15k+ either).  

 

 

Edited July 20, 2021 by Murdock
deleted wrong info

[Murdock]

On 7/19/2021 at 11:46 AM, lakecowboy said:

Anyone selling their MEVO+ to get this?  Mine is VERY lightly used and I think this R10 would do what I need and I could pocket the difference.

 

No but I'm selling my regular Mevo to get this.  Mainly because I'm already on the Garmin 'ecosystem' with a Instinct Solar watch and Z82 rangefinder (so I'm already using the Garmin Golf app to get full functionality out of the Z82).  

 

Speaking of which, does anyone know any info about the paid 'premium' Garmin Golf app?  I don't know what that gives on top of the free Garmin Golf app?  Unless it's strictly used for the simulator function

Edited July 20, 2021 by Murdock
clarity

[North Butte]

4 minutes ago, Murdock said:

 

Why does it throw cold water on it?  It's known to be a doppler based system and not camera.  Or are you saying that because the statement says 'they are only practical outdoors'?

 

The FS Mevo seems to track spin fairly decently, but requires the silver dots while indoors (i.e. limited flight path).  For me personally, I only use it outdoors and have never used the silver dots and the spin seems somewhat accurate.  Albeit not as accurate as a high speed camera (but doesn't cost 15k+ either).  

Just one quibble to point out...

 

R10 does not report spin at all. Possibly because Garmin believes what it says in that patent application that you really need a camera to do spin right. 

 

As I mentioned upthread, if they (Garmin) are really not getting a decent estimate of spin with the R10 they are going to need some majorly awesome algorithms to do all the ball flight stuff they're claiming and do it accurately without knowing spin.

[Murdock]

6 minutes ago, North Butte said:

Just one quibble to point out...

 

R10 does not report spin at all. Possibly because Garmin believes what it says in that patent application that you really need a camera to do spin right. 

 

As I mentioned upthread, if they (Garmin) are really not getting a decent estimate of spin with the R10 they are going to need some majorly awesome algorithms to do all the ball flight stuff they're claiming and do it accurately without knowing spin.

 

Well FS and Rapsodo do that already, right?  Both of them use the same radar based system and can provide spin numbers, and in Rapsodo's case doesn't it provide ball flight as well?  (I know FS shows 2D ball flight but not 3D).

 

Plus if they (Garmin) did incorporate an additional camera or two into their unit, then you'd have to imagine it would outperform those other 2?  Maybe I'm just being optimistic 🙂

[North Butte]

Well, there's no camera in the R10.

 

Rapsodo MLM does not measure spin to the best of my knowledge. It derives spin from the flight of the ball as observed using your phone camera. It is a radar based unit tethered to your phone as a way of getting visual information without putting a camera in the device. 

 

MEVO does report radar-derived spin numbers although the quality of that measurement is pretty dodgy if you don't use the metal dot on the ball.  

 

As promising as the R10 appears to be, it is still using the same technology as other short-range Doppler radar units. Rapsodo's unique feature is leveraging the phone's camera to do a shot-tracer type thing without having to actually know spin and club angle/path. R10 claims to be able to get that with radar only without having to "cheat" and use your phone camera. That's a bold claim.

[Red4282]

7 hours ago, tezzlacoil said:

 

Crazy huh that the only reviews are from one dude and his "accuracy test" is a massive hype job. No display of results except a very brief comparison table. No driver (are you serious?) data, no woods or Hybrids. No irons. Even the sub-100 yard shots are just cherry picked instead of a table with a population of shots. Like you said just a lot of conclusions and opinions with nothing to let people form their own views.

 

It's like he's been paid to hype it up and everyone else is on embargo. I really want this device to be a decent substitute to the more expensive launch monitors but its very strange and suspicious that there aren't a ton of reviews from more well known and dare i say it legitimate golf reviewers. I also think some of the people in the youtube chats need to temper their expectations Hehe... they are expecting it, at its price point, to be 95% as accurate as trackman/qc2 in all scenarios with all clubs... If its even close to that across the board then rapsodo, mevo and skytrak are going broke lol

The agree with alot of what you are saying but one thing that you have to keep in mind is garmin has a track record of really good products, being innovative and affordable. They also make fishing products and their livescope was groundbreaking, and their pricepoints are much cheaper than the main competitors. Im hoping this is true with this product because it will shake up the market and its competitors and we all win.

[Red4282]

52 minutes ago, North Butte said:

Just one quibble to point out...

 

R10 does not report spin at all. Possibly because Garmin believes what it says in that patent application that you really need a camera to do spin right. 

 

As I mentioned upthread, if they (Garmin) are really not getting a decent estimate of spin with the R10 they are going to need some majorly awesome algorithms to do all the ball flight stuff they're claiming and do it accurately without knowing spin.

Well if it accurately measures path and face angle and aoa, then calculating spin shouldnt be that big of an issue. You have enough variables to get pretty close. The only variables it couldnt account for that would effect spin would be flyers/wet ball, or just different ball types. 

[Murdock]

38 minutes ago, North Butte said:

Well, there's no camera in the R10.

 

Rapsodo MLM does not measure spin to the best of my knowledge. It derives spin from the flight of the ball as observed using your phone camera. It is a radar based unit tethered to your phone as a way of getting visual information without putting a camera in the device. 

 

MEVO does report radar-derived spin numbers although the quality of that measurement is pretty dodgy if you don't use the metal dot on the ball.  

 

As promising as the R10 appears to be, it is still using the same technology as other short-range Doppler radar units. Rapsodo's unique feature is leveraging the phone's camera to do a shot-tracer type thing without having to actually know spin and club angle/path. R10 claims to be able to get that with radar only without having to "cheat" and use your phone camera. That's a bold claim.

 

Sorry, you're correct, I just looked through the R10 manual online and it captures the video the same way Rapsodo and FS do...through your smartphone.  I thought it had a native camera/lens, silly me.  

 

 

[North Butte]

5 minutes ago, Red4282 said:

Well if it accurately measures path and face angle and aoa, then calculating spin shouldnt be that big of an issue. You have enough variables to get pretty close. The only variables it couldnt account for that would effect spin would be flyers/wet ball, or just different ball types. 

Yep, entirely possible.

 

How well they can measurements face angle, path, and AoA will determine how well they can estimate spin and ball flight. But if you're going to do that sort of mathematical triangulation without measuring spin the requirements of those club parameters become pretty demanding. 

 

It all comes down to a lot of "if this and this are good enough then this will be good enough" type requirements. Which is why we won't know how well it works until someone does actual accuracy reviews. 

[Murdock]

40 minutes ago, North Butte said:

Well, there's no camera in the R10.

 

Rapsodo MLM does not measure spin to the best of my knowledge. It derives spin from the flight of the ball as observed using your phone camera. It is a radar based unit tethered to your phone as a way of getting visual information without putting a camera in the device. 

 

MEVO does report radar-derived spin numbers although the quality of that measurement is pretty dodgy if you don't use the metal dot on the ball.  

 

As promising as the R10 appears to be, it is still using the same technology as other short-range Doppler radar units. Rapsodo's unique feature is leveraging the phone's camera to do a shot-tracer type thing without having to actually know spin and club angle/path. R10 claims to be able to get that with radar only without having to "cheat" and use your phone camera. That's a bold claim.

 

and FWIW, I definitely would have tried the Rapsodo, except I'm not on the Apple ecosystem and they didn't have any options for Windows or Android based devices.  I have (currrently selling) a FS Mevo, so I have experience with that device.  

[Red4282]

9 minutes ago, North Butte said:

Yep, entirely possible.

 

How well they can measurements face angle, path, and AoA will determine how well they can estimate spin and ball flight. But if you're going to do that sort of mathematical triangulation without measuring spin the requirements of those club parameters become pretty demanding. 

 

It all comes down to a lot of "if this and this are good enough then this will be good enough" type requirements. Which is why we won't know how well it works until someone does actual accuracy reviews. 

Yes agree, and lofts would have to be known. Its alot of information to calcuate but its possible at least. Heck to be honest, id rather take accurate club data over spin data. 

[North Butte]

10 minutes ago, Red4282 said:

Yes agree, and lofts would have to be known. Its alot of information to calcuate but its possible at least. Heck to be honest, id rather take accurate club data over spin data. 

One thing I'm interesting in finding out is for sure whether it is measuring club path and face angle versus calculating club path and face angle from other measures. They are implying "measured" but I've also seen some claims online that one or both of those is "calculated". 

 

So far I've seen nothing to suggest they are using a Raspodo-like strategy of requiring information from your phone camera in order to calculate the lateral variables. But given the hype-iness of the information so far that's another think we won't know until we see a real review. 

 

If they're legit getting measured club path and/or face angle from a radar only that is a heck of an accomplishment and a true game changer. 

[Red4282]

Not alot of info here but if im understanding him correctly it wont be measuring path/face…

 

 

[whumber]

5 hours ago, North Butte said:

One thing I'm interesting in finding out is for sure whether it is measuring club path and face angle versus calculating club path and face angle from other measures. They are implying "measured" but I've also seen some claims online that one or both of those is "calculated". 

 

So far I've seen nothing to suggest they are using a Raspodo-like strategy of requiring information from your phone camera in order to calculate the lateral variables. But given the hype-iness of the information so far that's another think we won't know until we see a real review. 

 

If they're legit getting measured club path and/or face angle from a radar only that is a heck of an accomplishment and a true game changer. 

 

The measured vs calculated information that was provided earlier in the thread certainly seemed to suggest that face angle was calculated, it was just path angle that it claimed was measured.

[Sandhurst241069]

4 minutes ago, whumber said:

 

The measured vs calculated information that was provided earlier in the thread certainly seemed to suggest that face angle was calculated, it was just path angle that it claimed was measured.

Yep.. copied below for convenience.. hope that info was correct as I’ve pre ordered based on a combination of that and faith in Garmin 😉 If I can get a reasonable sense of where solid shots are finishing relative to each other, and with a semi reasonable degree of general accuracy.. then I’m not fussed about extreme misses that might confuse the algorithm. In theory, if the club and ball path reading in all dimensions is ok then calculated face angle and spin should be close enough to do the job.. not using it for club fitting etc..

 

 

[Sandhurst241069]

4 hours ago, Red4282 said:

Not alot of info here but if im understanding him correctly it wont be measuring path/face…

 

 

Not sure he’s telling us anything we couldn’t speculate on ourselves from the website.. I’m hanging on Rick Sheils’ review .. he’s in Garmin’s pocket of course but is generally pretty straight up..

[Red4282]

4 minutes ago, Sandhurst241069 said:

Yep.. copied below for convenience.. hope that info was correct as I’ve pre ordered based on a combination of that and faith in Garmin 😉 If I can get a reasonable sense of where solid shots are finishing relative to each other, and with a semi reasonable degree of general accuracy.. then I’m not fussed about extreme misses that might confuse the algorithm. In theory, if the club and ball path reading in all dimensions is ok then calculated face angle and spin should be close enough to do the job.. not using it for club fitting etc..

 

 

If this is true, and its as accurate as the competition, it will be a must get. Just having measured path and aoa is worth the extra 100 bucks

[Hacker9]

9 minutes ago, Sandhurst241069 said:

Yep.. copied below for convenience.. hope that info was correct as I’ve pre ordered based on a combination of that and faith in Garmin 😉 If I can get a reasonable sense of where solid shots are finishing relative to each other, and with a semi reasonable degree of general accuracy.. then I’m not fussed about extreme misses that might confuse the algorithm. In theory, if the club and ball path reading in all dimensions is ok then calculated face angle and spin should be close enough to do the job.. not using it for club fitting etc..

 

 

Is club path +/- 2 degrees a pretty big

margin of error?

[Sandhurst241069]

18 minutes ago, Hacker9 said:

Is club path +/- 2 degrees a pretty big

margin of error?

Yep I guess .. its strange that the claim is +|- 1 on the vertical axis (AOA) but +/- 2 on the horizontal… It would be more of an issue if the calculated club face angle was being used to estimate ball direction which it isn’t. For the purposes of calculating spin axis however its not enough of an issue to put me off personally .. particularly with balls these days!

Edited July 21, 2021 by Sandhurst241069

[mgoblue83]

10 hours ago, Sandhurst241069 said:

Yep I guess .. its strange that the claim is +|- 1 on the vertical axis (AOA) but +/- 2 on the horizontal… It would be more of an issue if the calculated club face angle was being used to estimate ball direction which it isn’t. For the purposes of calculating spin axis however its not enough of an issue to put me off personally .. particularly with balls these days!

 

Agreed. It shouldn't be an issue as long as it can determine whether the path is right vs left vs neutral with high accuracy. However it will be a huge problem if the +/- 2 means that it could mistake a 1 degree left path with a 1 degree right.

Edited July 21, 2021 by mgoblue83

[prusd]

I posted this in another area, but I thought I would post it here too for those that may find it intriguing.

 

Hi,

 

Just saw this.  Looks like Bushnell is getting into the game, partnered with Foresight.  Not sure how much it will cost?  2k? 3k? 4k?  Hopefully lower than a used GC2.  In any case, the floodgates are opening for indoor personal LMs/SIMS.  Good times are coming. 

 

https://golfsimulatorvideos.com/2021/07/bushnell-announces-launch-pro-partnership-with-foresight-sports/

[Stevie989]

1 hour ago, prusd said:

I posted this in another area, but I thought I would post it here too for those that may find it intriguing.

 

Hi,

 

Just saw this.  Looks like Bushnell is getting into the game, partnered with Foresight.  Not sure how much it will cost?  2k? 3k? 4k?  Hopefully lower than a used GC2.  In any case, the floodgates are opening for indoor personal LMs/SIMS.  Good times are coming. 

 

https://golfsimulatorvideos.com/2021/07/bushnell-announces-launch-pro-partnership-with-foresight-sports/

i think I heard on a txg podcast that foresight were looking at entering g the personal launch monitor market - dude interviews mailed a veiled reference to it. 
 

The dawn of the personal launch monitor is coming - trickle down technology always happens. 
 

i pre ordered the garmin and I’m sure will get good use out of it but I’d an optical system appears around the 2/3k mark that can provide actual measured data points that’s a cost I can probably justify to myself. 

[r.yan163]

2 hours ago, prusd said:

I posted this in another area, but I thought I would post it here too for those that may find it intriguing.

 

Hi,

 

Just saw this.  Looks like Bushnell is getting into the game, partnered with Foresight.  Not sure how much it will cost?  2k? 3k? 4k?  Hopefully lower than a used GC2.  In any case, the floodgates are opening for indoor personal LMs/SIMS.  Good times are coming. 

 

https://golfsimulatorvideos.com/2021/07/bushnell-announces-launch-pro-partnership-with-foresight-sports/

 

Now this is exciting! Probably warrants its own thread haha 

[Sandhurst241069]

8 hours ago, mgoblue83 said:

 

Agreed. It shouldn't be an issue as long as it can determine whether the path is right vs left vs neutral with high accuracy. However it will be a huge problem if the +/- 2 means that it could mistake a 1 degree left path with a 1 degree right.

I get the mental sticking point .. but +/- 2 degrees is +/- 2 degrees no matter where your swing path falls .. quantifiably speaking .. remember too that this is just spin axis being impacted .. not ball direction which is a measured metric. 

[Red4282]

8 hours ago, Sandhurst241069 said:

I get the mental sticking point .. but +/- 2 degrees is +/- 2 degrees no matter where your swing path falls .. quantifiably speaking .. remember too that this is just spin axis being impacted .. not ball direction which is a measured metric. 

Yea and law of averages should tell you where you are at as far as the +/-2