Non-conforming USGA equipment available at retail?

Just throwing this out there... When TaylorMade introduced the RBZ series A few years ago I bought the standard 15 degree 3 wood. As a +10 handicap athletic golfer, my 3 wood distance increased from 225 yds to 240+ yds with a mechanically inferior swing. The next year, after making adjustments to the stock club that didn't improve performance, I bought the 2nd generation RBZ tour 3-wood w yellow, not green, detail. I was never able to replicate the distance or performance.

My question: Is it possible that clubs released at retail (Golfsmith, GolfMart, etc.) sometimes do not meet the USGA standard? And what happens when the USGA and the original equipment manufacturer find out? Do mfrs quietly discontinue or continue selling? Something is going on, given the state of the game, technology and equipment available.

Recently, I purchased a discounted Big Bertha Alpha driver with the reversible core weight and am now carrying drives 280+. With an inferior swing. Roughly five months after it was released it was discontinued and discounted. Totally understand product release schedules but this seems very quick. Does the new Big Bertha version go as far?

PS - would love to get a RocketBallz v1 3 wood in food condition. PM me!

very good question..... Ive seen taylor made tour issue heads with a COR rating out of spec for sale at times..I would assume this meant the head was too "hot" and couldn't be used on tour... Im sure if quality control lets those slip out it could have happened with a Retail head as well....

There are margins of error in the manufacturing process, It is possible that either the loft was off or it was a hot head. It could also be the perfect combo of shaft and head for your swing.

I noticed this when I was testing the Covert Tour 1.0 I could never replicate the huge gains I saw with the first one I demo'd heads up against my 9064

psss...

you're a -10 not a +10

[quote name='golf1931' timestamp='1420088320' post='10668883']
psss...

you're a -10 not a +10
[/quote]

Damn you, autocorrect!!That is correct! Doesn't change the question.

Based on older posts on this subject, most OEMs target spec is much lower than .830 limit so that even the maximum range of their manufacturing tolerance will still be conforming. Now I am sure that non-conforming heads will slip through from time to time considering that the major OEMs do not test/measure every retail head, but my guess is that is very uncommon. I wouldn't worry about fairways as even those marketed as "high COR" by the big OEMs are still designed well below the USGA limit. Also keep in mind that a .01 increase in COR under optimal driver launch conditions equates to a 2-3 yard distance increase, so even if some retail heads are slightly hotter than others the ultimate difference in performance would be negligible.

As for the club model examples that the OP posted about, those models were replaced due to the short product cycles that those OEMs run with not likely manufacturing related issues. In the past when a major post release manufacturing issue popped up that impacted conformance, the OEM would correct the issue and do a recall of impacted product but I guess it would depend on where the particular product was in its life cycle.

[quote name='bladehunter' timestamp='1420088083' post='10668865']
very good question..... Ive seen taylor made tour issue heads with a COR rating out of spec for sale at times..I would assume this meant the head was too "hot" and couldn't be used on tour... Im sure if quality control lets those slip out it could have happened with a Retail head as well....
[/quote]

Any head that ends up on a tour van is going to be thoroughly tested simply due to the consequences of a player accidentally playing something that does not conform (not to mention thicker, lower COR faces tend to be more reliable under high stress and the last thing a player needs to worry about is the face caving in in the middle of a round). In terms of COR/CT, they tend to error on the low side to be safe as if some player were to win and have their clubs tested, even 1 CT over the limit (which is basically no difference in performance) would result in a disqualification.

This is generally not a concern at the retail level as the average player is A) not playing for such high stakes B) not having their clubs tested. Not to mention the higher production volumes that would make it far too costly to test/measure every single head that gets shipped.

The real question is, why do most amateurs even care? As a 10 handicap, you'll never see high level USGA play as an am or a pro. Play what works.

I'm guessing outside of this forum that many probably dont realize that their irons are not conforming to the 2010 groove rule. Yet, it doesn't matter because they wont ever play in events that adopt the rule.

[quote name='storm319' timestamp='1420124614' post='10669749']
Based on older posts on this subject, most OEMs target spec is much lower than .830 limit so that even the maximum range of their manufacturing tolerance will still be conforming. Now I am sure that non-conforming heads will slip through from time to time considering that the major OEMs do not test/measure every retail head, but my guess is that is very uncommon. I wouldn't worry about fairways as even those marketed as "high COR" by the big OEMs are still designed well below the USGA limit. Also keep in mind that a .01 increase in COR under optimal driver launch conditions equates to a 2-3 yard distance increase, so even if some retail heads are slightly hotter than others the ultimate difference in performance would be negligible.

As for the club model examples that the OP posted about, those models were replaced due to the short product cycles that those OEMs run with not likely manufacturing related issues. In the past when a major post release manufacturing issue popped up that impacted conformance, the OEM would correct the issue and do a recall of impacted product but I guess it would depend on where the particular product was in its life cycle.
[/quote]
Just to add to storm319's comment (100% accurate btw), the actual COR limit is .822 with a tolerance of .008 (CT is 239 with tol. of 18) When an OEM sends clubs to be tested, any club that comes anywhere close to .822 results in the USGA contacting the OEM and telling them they run the risk of further testing could result in a failure in the production model. The USGA now tests retail products as well as the "samples" OEM's send them. Early on in Nike's golf venture, they had a production model test over the limit and had to deal with the fall out. As far as I know, they were the first and last major OEM to have that happen.

No. No manufacturer would risk intentionally putting NC product on the shelf.

[quote name='To72' timestamp='1420093082' post='10669053']
[quote name='golf1931' timestamp='1420088320' post='10668883']
psss...

you're a -10 not a +10
[/quote]

Damn you, autocorrect!!That is correct! Doesn't change the question.
[/quote]

I thought Tiger had a GolfWRX account for a bit!! Haha

Don't think it has anything to do with COR, all shaft and head combo.

RBZ (gen 1) has Matrix Xcon5 and the Stage 2 has Fuji something.

Some play well with one and some others play well with the other.

[quote name='Altiman94' timestamp='1420138247' post='10670597']
The real question is, why do most amateurs even care? As a 10 handicap, you'll never see high level USGA play as an am or a pro. Play what works.

I'm guessing outside of this forum that many probably dont realize that their irons are not conforming to the 2010 groove rule. Yet, it doesn't matter because they wont ever play in events that adopt the rule.
[/quote]

True, but I do care, or, more accurately, am interested in how technology impacts performance. Marketing and advertising certainly lead the average player to believe that innovation should result in improved performance, but this is only part of the equation. I do know that when RBZ was released it led to crazy distance gains with fairway woods for the average player. And then they were gone, replaced with a not as long RBZ 2 series. Yes, dialing in the right combination is the best way to go but the conspiracy theorist in me wonders, what if, what if a club mfr varied from the standard to solidify a reputation as the longest brand in the bag? Remember when Jordan was banned from the NBA for gambling? (:

[quote name='To72' timestamp='1420259791' post='10677815']
[quote name='Altiman94' timestamp='1420138247' post='10670597']
The real question is, why do most amateurs even care? As a 10 handicap, you'll never see high level USGA play as an am or a pro. Play what works.

I'm guessing outside of this forum that many probably dont realize that their irons are not conforming to the 2010 groove rule. Yet, it doesn't matter because they wont ever play in events that adopt the rule.
[/quote]

True, but I do care, or, more accurately, am interested in how technology impacts performance. Marketing and advertising certainly lead the average player to believe that innovation should result in improved performance, but this is only part of the equation. I do know that when RBZ was released it led to crazy distance gains with fairway woods for the average player. And then they were gone, replaced with a not as long RBZ 2 series. Yes, dialing in the right combination is the best way to go but the conspiracy theorist in me wonders, what if, what if a club mfr varied from the standard to solidify a reputation as the longest brand in the bag? Remember when Jordan was banned from the NBA for gambling? (:
[/quote]
I would more readily believe that all these tales of great distance gains were hyperbole and anecdotal with no real data to support it. The USGA would have tested the RBZ like crazy and do test retail clubs regularly (not just what the OEM provides) so there is no chance of a club that "varied from the standard".

signed: O. Stone

[quote name='Socrates' timestamp='1420261514' post='10677917']
[quote name='To72' timestamp='1420259791' post='10677815']
[quote name='Altiman94' timestamp='1420138247' post='10670597']
The real question is, why do most amateurs even care? As a 10 handicap, you'll never see high level USGA play as an am or a pro. Play what works.

I'm guessing outside of this forum that many probably dont realize that their irons are not conforming to the 2010 groove rule. Yet, it doesn't matter because they wont ever play in events that adopt the rule.
[/quote]

True, but I do care, or, more accurately, am interested in how technology impacts performance. Marketing and advertising certainly lead the average player to believe that innovation should result in improved performance, but this is only part of the equation. I do know that when RBZ was released it led to crazy distance gains with fairway woods for the average player. And then they were gone, replaced with a not as long RBZ 2 series. Yes, dialing in the right combination is the best way to go but the conspiracy theorist in me wonders, what if, what if a club mfr varied from the standard to solidify a reputation as the longest brand in the bag? Remember when Jordan was banned from the NBA for gambling? (:
[/quote]
I would more readily believe that all these tales of great distance gains were hyperbole and anecdotal with no real data to support it. The USGA would have tested the RBZ like crazy and do test retail clubs regularly (not just what the OEM provides) so there is no chance of a club that "varied from the standard".

signed: O. Stone
[/quote]

Be wary the player that swings right but putts left...

Only kidding!

When Jordan left the NBA the first time there was rumor suggesting that a secret meeting between Stern and Jordan occurred where it was determined Jordan would be banned from the league for a certain period due to Jordan's heavy gambling. Lack of data aside, is it possible for a club manufacturer to plead "no harm no foul" to the USGA against found irregularities and pledge to discontinue a line in return for committal to walk a straighter one?

Personally, I think there's something there.

Also, I'm done responding to the TaylorMade apologists that have inundated my account with hate mail but do think this might be a great plot line for a Sandra Bullock/Kevin Costner vehicle...

Happy New Year everyone!

[quote name='To72' timestamp='1420339332' post='10682095']
Be wary the player that swings right but putts left...

Only kidding!

When Jordan left the NBA the first time there was rumor suggesting that a secret meeting between Stern and Jordan occurred where it was determined Jordan would be banned from the league for a certain period due to Jordan's heavy gambling. Lack of data aside, is it possible for a club manufacturer to plead "no harm no foul" to the USGA against found irregularities and pledge to discontinue a line in return for committal to walk a straighter one?

Personally, I think there's something there.

Also, I'm done responding to the TaylorMade apologists that have inundated my account with hate mail but do think this might be a great plot line for a Sandra Bullock/Kevin Costner vehicle...

Happy New Year everyone!
[/quote]

#1 Keep in mind that the USGA has no actual governing power.

#2 Based on past equipment based rulings, do you really believe that the USGA cares enough about the impact to equipment manufacturers to cut a deal to let them quietly save face? No way. Public humiliation & financial pain would be far more effective in ensuring that it does not happen again.

[quote name='To72' timestamp='1420339332' post='10682095']
Be wary the player that swings right but putts left...

Only kidding!

When Jordan left the NBA the first time there was rumor suggesting that a secret meeting between Stern and Jordan occurred where it was determined Jordan would be banned from the league for a certain period due to Jordan's heavy gambling. Lack of data aside, is it possible for a club manufacturer to plead "no harm no foul" to the USGA against found irregularities and pledge to discontinue a line in return for committal to walk a straighter one?

Personally, I think there's something there.

Also, I'm done responding to the TaylorMade apologists that have inundated my account with hate mail but do think this might be a great plot line for a Sandra Bullock/Kevin Costner vehicle...

Happy New Year everyone!
[/quote]
Putting left is a last resort kind of thing. Everyone comments on how well I putt left, but I think they just pity me. Most of those have seen me putt right in the last few years.

I can believe that the Jordan situation happened. They didn't want another Pete Rose fiasco. Just like I believe DJ was quietly told to take a hike. TM on the other hand, I think, just had too many designs in the queue and that led to a quick replacement. Better to strike while the iron was hot, so to speak and I think if they had waited too long the impetus of the RBZ line might have been squandered.