gps range finders

[TheTrueReview]

I think for amateurs a GPS is going to be more useful. Distances to traps, distances to hazards, front/back/middle green measurements are something that we don't get because we don't have professional caddies.

Distance to the pin? I know I'm not good enough to be pin seeking. Get me on the green. Choosing the best club to hit the middle of the green is much better for my score than choosing the club to try to stick it close to that tight pin.

Just my opinion.

It's probably the same in the US but in my neck of he woods; front, middle and back of the green are indicated by different coloured flags. GPS devices show those distances. It's never a problem.

I get a laugh on a lot of golf forums at the arguments that break out over the two types of DMDs. Weekend hackers acting as they hit 18 greens in regulation.

 

[eclark53520]

Same here, but if the green is (for ease of numbers) 90 feet deep. A white flag designating middle, could be anywhere from 33 feet on the green, to 66 feet on the green.

But yeah, that's plenty for most people. Unless one knows their distances down to the yard, a laser range finder isn't probably as useful as a GPS device.

A GPS device for me is just too expensive to justify. It would only serve golf and is more expensive than my laser range finder that serves multiple sports.

 

[trumb1mj]

Is there a point in there somewhere?

You said "Invariably we compare distance readings" but there is no point in comparing a GPS reading to a laser range finder--they are measuring different things.

 

[TheTrueReview]

You said "Invariably we compare distance readings" but there is no point in comparing a GPS reading to a laser range finder--they are measuring different things.

We do? I could've sworn we compare distance to the location of the pin.

It usually goes something like this.

"Hey [golf partner], the pin's at the front, what've you got to the pin?"

"I've got 120. What've you got?"

"I've got 119".

We then usually hit perfectly executed shots that go 120 and 119 respectively ...

I can carry on this senseless back and forth if I could be f***ked carrying on senseless back and forth. Enjoy whatever it is you use to read distance on a golf course. What others use as a DMD is on my "couldn't care less" list ...

 

[MattyB]

 

[TheTrueReview]

The break's over. Back to your party.

 

[MattyB]

The break's over. Back to your party.

Not enough rump for a kiwi ewe, looks like one of your dust fed sheep tbh

 

[Splunge]

I recently came into use of a Nikon/callaway xhot laser, and love the thing, you can use it to see yard eves to backs of traps, to trees, or even a random place on the ground, just point and shoot.

 

[limpalong]

Now have 3 in our group with distance devices. One is a GPS device. The other two are rangefinders. I'll take any one of the three players head to head and score better than they. But, our course has 200, 150, and 100 yard markers. And, playing the course hundreds of times, I know what I hit from most anywhere on the course.
I have no problem with players using either type device. Some will swear by one. Some the other. As TTR says, most can't hit it anywhere near the plus/minus accuracy factor of either type device. So, why argue over it?
If I were to purchase a distance device, it would be a rangefinder. I understand that most courses would be available on a laser device. However, no matter where you are on what course, a rangefinder should give you pinpoint accuracy to any physical structure it can zero in on.

 

[trumb1mj]

What others use as a DMD is on my "couldn't care less" list ...

I guess that's why when I added my 2 cents you argued with me (and anyone else that didn't agree with you)? All I'm saying is, one measures distance to the flag, bunker, tree, etc and another measures distance to pre-marked points (front/middle/back of green, edges bunkers/water, etc.).

As others have said, measuring to front/middle/back is great for most people and courses. If you want to accurately measure (with a degree of slippage that you mention) to the pin, you cannot always do this effectively with a GPS.

Here are the reasons I would buy a laser range finder vs. a GPS:

a) There is human error and variance when placing the flag (is it really front? looks more middle to me...).
b) Large greens could throw off even the most perfectly placed flags
c) Courses are not always mapped
d) Intermediate points (tree/rock in the middle of the fairway, front edge of the hazard) are rarely mapped
e) A range finder is good for the practice range

I don't think anyone is right or wrong, but after trying both devices, the laser rangefinder fits my needs a little better.

 

[anonymous golfaholic]

I guess that's why when I added my 2 cents you argued with me (and anyone else that didn't agree with you)? All I'm saying is, one measures distance to the flag, bunker, tree, etc and another measures distance to pre-marked points (front/middle/back of green, edges bunkers/water, etc.).

As others have said, measuring to front/middle/back is great for most people and courses. If you want to accurately measure (with a degree of slippage that you mention) to the pin, you cannot always do this effectively with a GPS.

Here are the reasons I would buy a laser range finder vs. a GPS:

a) There is human error and variance when placing the flag (is it really front? looks more middle to me...).
b) Large greens could throw off even the most perfectly placed flags
c) Courses are not always mapped
d) Intermediate points (tree/rock in the middle of the fairway, front edge of the hazard) are rarely mapped
e) A range finder is good for the practice range

I don't think anyone is right or wrong, but after trying both devices, the laser rangefinder fits my needs a little better.

I respectfully have to disagree. While I think rangefinders are good, I would rather have gps. My Skycaddie gives me numbers to any place on the course. It has preloaded hazards, traps and bunkers. If it isn't preloaded I can just scroll my cursor to any spot on the course and get a number. You can't shoot a range finder in a lot of situations. You can always get a number with a gps.

Now if we're talking about Golf Logix....I would rather step off my distances, lol. That app is a f'ing POS.

 

[trumb1mj]

And I would never try and persuade you in a different direction. It works great for you

 

[Splunge]

I till I got my laser, I found that pacing worked rather well for me

 

[Queball915]

I would probably go with a good gps. I have no complaints with my range finder, if I can shoot the flag I usually just shoot the front of the green and add a few yards from there. Even if I'm a few yards long or short I'm still happy if it was online. The range fingers that lock on and estimate elevation are awesome though.

 

[Splunge]

I would probably go with a good gps. I have no complaints with my range finder, if I can shoot the flag I usually just shoot the front of the green and add a few yards from there. Even if I'm a few yards long or short I'm still happy if it was online. The range fingers that lock on and estimate elevation are awesome though.

I just like the stand point and shoot simplicity of a range finder, also, we can use optical lasers, and not GPS for highschool match play, so there's that too.