So there is a lot of talk about velocity via radar gun readings. Everyone is always talking about Stalker vs Jugs. These guns are several hundred dollars each...and well worth it I'm sure. I went out and bought the inexpensive Bushnell radar gun (can be had for ~$100). What is the difference? In terms of reading velocity I mean. I don't care about durability, range, or accessories. I'm talking about pure accuracy. If I get a reading of 50mph on the bushnell for 10 consecutive throws, can I assume I would get the same reading from a Jugs or Stalker?

Sorry to tell you this, Irishdad, but the Bushnell IMHO is pure junk. Mine is collecting dust.

There is no need to purchase a Bushnell radar gun. Why? #1 in my experience the only people who had them had kids 9 y.o - 13 y.o. and the velocity of a kid at that age is immaterial to their future success. It doesn't matter how hard a 12 y.o. throws. Pay more attention to HOW (mechanics) a 12 y.o. throws. If the kid becomes a stud at 16, 17 believe me, you'll know how hard he throws. Stand behind home plate and read the scouts' guns.

P.S., the Stalker is the best gun on the planet. Nearly all scouts use them. The Jugs gun typically reads about 2 MPH higher.

Yeah, I've heard that from many, and all everyone says is, Bushnell is bad, Jugs/Stalker is good. No real explanation.

I mean, radar is radar, right? Compression is compression, right? A computer is a computer. Does it just throw out a random number, or is the accuracy +/- 25mph?

quote:

Originally posted by Bum:


P.S., the Stalker is the best gun on the planet. Nearly all scouts use them. The Jugs gun typically reads about 2 MPH higher.

Bum, I respectfully disagree. If the guns are calibrated properly there is no difference. I have both (Stalker & Jugs) and have used them side by side on many occassions from many different distances. They both always read the same. I really can't comment on the Bushnell other than to wonder at $795-$895 less how good can it really be?

I like the Stalker Gun---one great reason is that the State troopers around here use them and I can have mine calibrated by the people that take care of the Staties--

Thus-- what Dad will argue the readings

This has been kicked around before, and my recollection is that PGstaff (who likely has had much more opportunity to compare than most of us) believes that a Juggs gun reads a little higher. However, my experience is similar, but not identical to DelawareDad's: On average, the two guns give the same reading. However, in my experience, looking at other people's guns, the Juggs gun has more variability in its readings. So if the Stalker is showing a pitcher's fast balls as consistently 83-84mph, the Juggs (depending on distance to the pitcher, metal or fabric mesh in the backstop, etc.) might read in the range 81-86. Human nature being what it is, we tend to ignore the 81mph pitches and remember the 86mph pitch. And that makes the Juggs gun read 2mph faster, unless reading conditions are favorable.

My own preference, were I to buy a gun, would be to get a Stalker. For about 10-15% more money, one gets a gun that matches what the pros use, and which, in my experience, is the more reproducible in readings. The Stalker also can read successfully from further away.

My son was gunned by another school's JUGS at 83 consistently a little over a month ago. He was gunned on a Stalker at a camp over the holidays and registered 80-81. It was a quite windy and the pitchers were struggling with their balance that day. I gunned him in a game yesterday with my JUGS and he was mostly 82-83 with 1 or 2 at 84. He'll be gunned with a Stalker tomorrow so that should give me a pretty good idea what the comparison is. My guess is that he'll be mostly 80-81 and hopefully hit 82 once or twice tomorrow but it wouldn't shock me if he's at 79-80. His control would certainly improve if he'd stay down at 81-82 on the JUGS instead of 82-83.

My Bushnell is doing the same thing as Bum's. It had so little range that it was almost impossible to get a reading on more than 1 out of 3 pitches even from up close.

I will say the range is quite low on the bushnell. Low enough that I actually stand beside him when he pitches and get readings from the ball going in the other direction so the shortened range will still collect peak velocity.

Again, though, my question is, when the Busnell captures the velocity, is it accurate?

For example...my son throws ~70. If I gun him at 68-71-69-70, can I accurately say those speeds were spot-on?

Irishdad I took mine back a few days after I got it. Pur juck.

IrishDad, Please go to the Radar Gun site. There are some info about Bushnell gun. The range for this "Toy" gun is about 70 feet. And you must have a straight angle against the pitching direction. 20degree angle to the side will cause a 3 mph drop. IMO, you have to stay behind a catcher to get a good reading for a pitch.
So it's basiclly not usable for real games.
At www.radargun.com, it sells for $78.99 with free UPS. What a deal for a "PJ"!

Irish dad, yes I had to stand behind the kids to gun them, too. Some scientific-types can chime in here but wouldn't the doppler effect (of standing behind the pitcher) cause false-high readings?

Bum,
I don't think so. I think the problem is that when you are right behind the pitcher the angle between the gun and the path of the ball can get rather large resulting in false low readings.

Bum,
Perhaps you're thinking that since the ball is moving away from the gun instead of toward it, the reading is different? That actually isn't the case. If the ball is coming toward the gun, the reflected microwaves are higher in frequency than what th egun sends out, and if the ball is going away, the reflected frequency is lower. But the gun doesn't measure the emitted or reflected frequencies; it simply measures how different they are, so the gun doesn't know if the ball is coming or going. (Sort of like my own state of mind at times!)
As CADad points out, if the gun is off axis from the direction of the pitch, the gun will give a lower reading than actual. The extreme example of this would be to try to gun a pitcher while standing on third base. Roughly speaking the ball is traveling perpendicular to the emitted radar direction, and is neither going away from nor toward the gun, so it would give reading of about zero.

Here are some values of the errors in recorded speed due to off-axis radar guns: If the gun is 100 feet away from the pitcher, and 10 feet off to the side or above the release point, the gun will read 0.5% low. Negligible.
14 feet to the side or above: 1% low
20 feet to the side or above: 2% low
25 feet to the side or above: 3% low

These lowered readings are a consequence of trigonometry, and aren't dependent or type or brand of radar gun.

See, if I could have forseen Trigonometry's relation to baseball I wouldn't have skipped that class so many times!

What is the impact of being higher than the pitcher - e.g. at the top of the stands, perhaps 50ft above and 200 feet from the mound. Assuming that the gun has the range to reach out to the pitcher's mound and that you are in a perfectly straight line with the throw.

08

OK Class time for this morning’s lesson on Trigonometry….

To get the real velocity of a measurement you need to know a) The measured velocity b) The angle you are away from the actual path of the ball.

Once you know those two values just go to your handy dandy pocket cosign table that I know all of you carry to baseball games and look it up and multiple it by the reading you have on your gun. (assuming it is a Stalker or Jugs – take the Bushnell and throw it in the trash)

In the unlikely event you forgot your trig tables at home I will help you.

Angle(deg) Cosn Gun Reading of 80MPH actual pitch
5 .996 79.7
10 .985 78.8
15 .966 77.3
20 .940 75.2
25 .906 72.5
30 .866 69.3

So for small angles you won’t see much difference, once you get beyond 5-10 degrees they start to impact your accuracy. So for our friend in the stands who was at an angle of 20 degrees or so he would get a reading of 75.

class……Class…..CLasss….CLASSSSS….zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

50 feet above and 200 feet away? It's the same reduction that I showed for 25 feet above and 100 feet away: 3% low. To compare to BOF's numbers, this is a 14 degree angle.

Here I have assumed that 200 feet away means 200 feet horizontally; if you meant 200 feet on a direct line from the gun to the pitcher, then the gun would read 3.18% low. I personally find it easier to estimate horizontal and vertical distances.

Most Windows computers have a calculator program in Accessories; if you click on View and select Scientific, you can enter an angle in degrees, and click cos. Since you probably don't have a protractor in your pocket, you can estimate the feet above or to the side, estimate the feet away, and follow the following example using 50 feet and 200 feet and a gun reading of 81mph:
50/200 -->0.25
click Inv check box
click tan -->14.036 (this is the angle in degrees)
click cos -->0.9701
click 1/x -->1.03077
click * (or type *, also known as capital 8 )
type in 81
click = -->83.49 (or press the enter key)

So an indicated 81 results from an actual 83.5mph pitch if the gun is 200 feet away and 50 feet above, or any other distances which give the ratio 0.25.

Want to quickly approximate how much to multiply the reading by?
Take, for this example, 0.25, square it (0.0625) and divide by 2 (about 0.03). So add about 3% of reading to the reading to get the actual speed.

IrishDad, I own a Bushnell that's about 5 years old. The last time I took it to a lesson, where I was able to use a Stalker to compare, my measurements were practically the same. The stalker was easier to use and obtained readings every pitch. Where my Bushnell, when it got a reading, was at most 1 mph off.

Actually that 50' above from 200' away won't give such a bad reading on most pitches. Most pitches are released on an upward trajectory making difference between the release angle and the gun angle negligible in most cases. That's also why sometimes low pitches get higher readings. They are released closer to level putting them more in line with the gun.

CASon was gunned with a Stalker at a showcase today. He didn't work at as high a speed as I expected. He was mostly 78 to 79, mostly 78, on the Stalker with a few down at 77, a few at 80, a couple at 81, 1 or 2 at 82 and 1 at 83. He also dropped down to about 76 when a little guy was at the plate. Overall, I would guess that means that my JUGS usually reads about 2 mph faster than the Stalker they used at the showcase. I think CASon was facing better hitters today and trying to do a better job of pitching, so I think the Stalker readings were pretty legit.

Make sense - the angle that we are measuring is the flight of the ball vs radar "beam". Being above the flight is no different than being left or right of the flight. My 200 feet away and 50 feet up is no different than being 200 feet away and 50 feet down the first base line.

3FG and BOF Thanks for the math lesson - been way too long for me...

CADad - interesting point about the pitch path being up - I think that is another variable I'll consider in trying to calculate actual pitch speeds.

BTW - I use a stalker and find that it is lower than a Jugs pretty consistently. Have not seen a Bushnell. Stalkers do appear to be the gun of choice for college coaches and pro scouts... kind of the iPod of radar guns