Full Swing's Bold Bet: Testing the KIT Against Trackman and GCQuad in Front of Everyone
|
|
|
|
Full Swing didn't hold back. They invited a bunch of other content creators out to Carlsbad for something nobody in the golf tech world has ever attempted, a head-to-head-to-head launch monitor shootout they're calling the "Ultimate Launch Monitor Challenge." The whole point? Put their brand-new KIT Launch Monitor up against the industry's heavyweights and let the chips fall where they may. That takes guts, because they genuinely didn't know how the results would shake out. If you want the full breakdown, go watch the video, but I'll tell you right now, the numbers spoke for themselves, and they were impressive.
Unlock Tour-level accuracy with the Full Swing KIT. Track 16 points of radar data and 4K video to perfect your game. Trusted by Tiger Woods. Shop now!
I've spent years testing launch monitors, both in my sim setup and out on the range, and I can tell you it's never simple. Getting truly accurate, reliable data takes forever, and there's always a chance the units won't cooperate or the numbers will go sideways on you. So when Full Swing said they were going to run three premium launch monitors side by side and measure everything against real-world distances, I knew this wasn't going to be your average press event.
They chose the Oceanside Sports Complex in California as the testing ground, a sprawling 52-acre facility that's normally home to about 22 full-sized soccer fields. The terrain's completely flat, which makes it ideal for this kind of testing. Full Swing's crew reworked several of those fields into a temporary driving range where they could run the Trackman 4, the Foresight GCQuad, and the KIT all at once. They even brought in a former tour pro to stripe shots downrange.
And yes, we content creators had to hit too. Look, I'm a 15 handicap when things are going well, so standing up there with 40-plus people watching, measuring, and analyzing every swing? Absolutely terrifying. It got even worse knowing I was following guys like Matt Fisher (Mr. Short Game), Chris Ryan, and Chris Trott (TrottieGolf). But hey, you don't say no when you're in Carlsbad.
Full Swing went above and beyond to keep everything honest. They positioned trained spotters far down the range to mark the exact landing spot of every ball. Once a spotter flagged where the ball came down, they'd use multiple rangefinders to lock in the precise distance. That real-world measurement then got compared against what each of the three launch monitors reported. Every device was running its latest software, and they used Titleist Pro V1x balls across the board to eliminate variables. Any bad shots or misreads from a monitor got thrown out; they wanted clean, trustworthy data only.
Master your game with TrackMan Golf. Get industry-leading accuracy on ball flight, swing DNA, and yardage. The choice of PGA pros is now yours.
Think about what Full Swing was really doing here. They put a $4,999 launch monitor up against the $25,000 Trackman 4 and the $18,000 GCQuad, and they did it in front of media who'd report on whatever happened, good or bad. Nobody's ever captured simultaneous shot data from three major launch monitor brands and stacked it against actual measured distances before. Full Swing believed the KIT could hang, but they weren't certain. That's a seriously gutsy move.
This whole event launched Full Swing's "The New Truth" campaign, and their message is straightforward: the KIT delivers tour-level accuracy without the tour-level price tag. Tiger Woods actually had a hand in designing it, with the goal of creating the most complete launch monitor that everyday golfers could realistically afford.
The KIT tracks 16 data points using Doppler radar, the same technology that weather stations rely on to track storms. It captures high-res video of every swing, features a customizable full-color display, and pairs with a solid app. The newest addition is the Full Swing Combine, powered by Clippd, which uses AI to generate a "Shot Quality" score after each swing. Instead of drowning in a sea of numbers you're not sure how to interpret, you get a clear, simple read on how well you struck the ball, so you can actually improve.
Beyond the challenge itself, they opened up their headquarters and gave us a full tour, something most companies won't do. I'm not exaggerating when I say it's the coolest office I've ever walked through. They've got two hidden speakeasys tucked away inside, complete with full bars and simulators. We also got early looks at upcoming simulator updates and their Virtual Green technology, which is the same synthetic putting surface that'll be installed in TGL's custom arena.
Master your game with the Foresight GCQuad. Get precise ball and club data using Quadrascopic imaging. Trusted by pros for ultimate indoor/outdoor accuracy.
What is the main technical difference between these three systems?
The primary difference lies in the tracking technology: Trackman uses Dual Radar technology to follow the ball's entire flight from impact to landing.
Foresight (GCQuad/GC3) uses High-Speed Quadrascopic Cameras to take thousands of images of the ball and club at the moment of impact. Full Swing uses a Patented Dual-Tracking System that combines high-speed cameras (for initial data) with infrared light waves (to track the ball mid-flight).
Which system is most accurate for indoor vs. outdoor use?
Outdoors: Trackman is widely considered the gold standard because its radar can track the actual ball flight for hundreds of yards. Indoors: Foresight and Full Swing often have the edge. Radars (Trackman) can sometimes struggle in small indoor spaces due to "signal noise," whereas cameras only need to see the first few feet of flight to calculate data with extreme precision.
Do these systems provide "Measured" or "Calculated" data?
Foresight measures almost everything directly at impact, including high-fidelity club head data. Trackman measures the full flight but uses algorithms to "normalize" data (e.g., showing what a shot would do in zero wind). Full Swing measures the ball's transition from the club to the screen using infrared sensors, meaning it doesn't have to "guess" as much as a pure camera system might regarding speed and trajectory.
Which one is best for a home simulator setup?
Full Swing is often the preferred choice for high-end, permanent home installs because their software is built specifically for a "theatre" experience and integrates with multi-sport packages. However, Foresight is favored by players with limited space, as it requires the least amount of "distance to screen." Trackman is the choice for the serious golfer who spends equal time on the outdoor range and the indoor bay.
Why is there a significant price difference between them?
Price usually reflects the hardware complexity and software ecosystem: Trackman and Foresight are professional-grade launch monitors used by PGA Tour pros for practice; you are paying for portable, military-grade accuracy.
Full Swing is typically sold as a complete, integrated "sim-in-a-box" or custom install, meaning the cost often includes the enclosure, hitting mat, projector, and the physical infra-red sensor overheads.
Full Swing put their money where their mouth is, and from what I saw, the gamble paid off big time. They let independent observers test their product against the two biggest names in the business with complete transparency, no smoke, no mirrors. In an industry where most companies play things close to the vest, that kind of confidence is invigorating. For those of us who aren't made of money but still want accurate data to get better, the KIT looks like it deserves serious consideration.