FlightScope brings accuracy, affordability to launch monitor market

I have owned and tested the Vector2 and Kudu side by side. Latest models of both with the latest firmware, literally side by side.
For personal use, the parameters are fine for both and accurate enough for an enthusiast. I'm not going to worry about a 100rpm difference in spin, I'm not consistent enough. Here are a bunch of random opinions and thoughts based on usage:

The Vector also has great support, free software upgrades, and a team of great guys to communicate with. EDH feels like a smaller company and felt more personable. I'd give the slight edge to EDH on this one. The software is a mixed bag. I found the Vector to be more user friendly but by only a slight margin. The reportong function on both machines are poor and there's not a whole lot of features for data analysis, I think they can all improve upon that. Useful data is more important than just lots of data. This is where Trackman excels. Not only do they produce useful data, they also help with analysis as well as free monthly newsletters on helping their users understand how to use it better. Documentation on both machines is poor. The FS software seems to be more stable and easier to setup. I don't like the proprietary cables that EDH uses, the Vector uses a regular USB cable that you pick up at the store. The Vector has a built in battery which makes it portable, the Kudu requires an external power source, however the Kudu is much easier to setup. Once you setup the Vector and calibrate it properly, it'll work indefinitely...very reliable. What I don't like about the Vector is that you have to setup for hitting a driver and then redo it for iron shots, that's a pain, imo. That is the thing that bothers me the most. The Kudu allows you to just hit it and not worry about it. However the Kudu requires more space which is a deal breaker for most that don't have the room. What happens is that even if you do have the room, you can't really hit wedges, they go too high and will go over the net. I have a 9ft net. So for indoor use, because the net has to be far away, high shots is not possible. It'll work fine outdoors. I find that with the Vector software, it allows me to easily do what-if scenarios, it's not so obvious on the Kudu. The Kudu has a neat video capture feature which is useless. You can't draw lines for analysis, etc...

I think Kudu is a slightly better product and can really gain ground by having much better documentation. There are a lot of features and functions which isn't explained in the documentation. For example, how do you use analyze and undertand the club head acceleration and path data, etc... It would be much more useful if they provided more data for the clubhead, not just the ball flight. All the information is already captured and can be calculated. Things like angle of attack in degrees, where the divot starts, actual loft at impact, shaft lean, sweet spot hit, face angle, etc.... A lot can be learned from using Vector2 and the P3Pro, which I have for the last 5 years. Unfortunately, I haven't found one LM that encompasses all the good things of each one.

Sorry for all the random thoughts, but in interest of my time and wanting to voice my opinion, here it is.
You can't go wrong with the Vector or Kudu, I think the space limitation is really what you need to consider. The newer Vectors have an automatic calibration feature which minimizes the annoying setup, at an additional cost!!

For my usage here's my order:
1- Kudu
2- Vector2
3- P3Pro

There's a lot of potential with Kudu, just needs better software and documentations and training material to help create power users.