John Weeks

Web developer who built Golf Sim Oracle after trying to work out whether a launch monitor would fit in his own garage and finding that nobody publishes the number. The site does not test equipment. It reads the manufacturer’s own manual, quotes the figure, dates it, and says plainly when a maker publishes nothing at all.

What I can claim, and what I cannot

I have not hit a ball into any of this equipment, and nothing on this site says I have. The competitors in this category buy every unit and test it, and they are better than us at that — permanently. What they mostly do not do is publish the specification, which is why a buyer can read four reviews of a launch monitor and still not learn whether it fits in their garage.

So the work here is reading manuals. Every ceiling height, room depth, throw ratio and subscription price is quoted from the maker's own documentation with the date it was read, and where a maker publishes nothing the page says so rather than filling the gap with an estimate. That is a smaller claim than a review, and it is one I can actually defend.

The other site

I also built and run Ebike Oracle, which does the same job for electric bikes: sourced specifications, cited and dated, rather than opinion. Both sites are independent, both are funded by affiliate commission, and neither accepts payment for coverage or placement.

Mentioned here because it is true and because you should know who is behind a site before you trust its numbers — not as an endorsement of either one.

Corrections

If a figure here is wrong, it is worth more to me than it is to you to have it fixed. Every specification carries the source it came from and the date it was read, so a correction is usually a matter of checking whether the maker has updated their document. How the sourcing works is set out on the about and methodology page.

Elsewhere

• X: @johnweeksdev
• LinkedIn: jonathanweeks007