Teeuplo feat. Average Golfer: M4 stunning results - smash factor > 1.54!

Well, this guy had more than epic numbers - especially dispersion and smash factor ( > 1.54!) wise - with the M4:

[media=]

The average golfer seems to be a better ball striker, than Rick Shiels... :D

Most of this golf forum are better ball strikers than Rick Shiels.

Most of this golf forum THINKS THEY are better ball strikers than Rick Shiels.

Fixed it for you.

Was just watching this and noticed his ball speeds seemed way higher than possible, i'm guessing it's the machine he's using in that shop, noticed since he's changed places he's been getting some weird numbers, i think he was hitting 7 irons the other week with 1.51 smash factors.

Being honest though, i think he still does a decent job of explaining the clubs he's testing even with the weird numbers.

Do people really watch this guy?

I watch him, I think he is one of the better YouTube reviewers.

The only way to achieve a true smash factor above 1.5 is to have a machine variance or an illegal clubhead.

The only way to achieve a true smash factor above 1.5 is to have a machine variance or an illegal clubhead.

Yeah, i think he was pointing towards Justin Thomas having hit 1.52 during the season, but that's one of the best golfers on the planet, using a driver that was set up to the COR limit to start with, a normal guy like us getting a club off the shelf in a store would struggle to get close to 1.50, let alone have an average over 1.50 across the board.

Ive been hitting off a GC2 indoors and my smash factor has always been about 1.43-1.45 with poor hits at 1.41 and great hits at 1.46. I was beginning to believe i was a very poor striker of the golf ball ( which i am ) but i saw a couple reviews online and most of these guys only get 1.44-1.46 and they definitely are better ball strikers and possess more ball speed than me, This reviewer in particular hits the ball a long way but he seems to have the worst smash factor even though he middles quite a few balls according to his ball strike location ?

So we have an average golfer who got good results and a well above average golfer who didn't. Shiels results are what scares me about the m3/m4 lines. Playing a fade, I don't want a toe miss to head right.

So, do you fade with an open or closed clubface? Is your miss towards the heel or toe?

1.54? That’s balls out ! Lol. And impossible.

So, do you fade with an open or closed clubface? Is your miss towards the heel or toe?

Are you asking if my face is open or closed to target line?

I honestly don't know where my misses are. I hit a an occasional drive out of the heel when I get quick but I pepper the sweetspot a lot with the driver. Without trackman or hmt data I have no idea if I'm slightly toe side or heel side of center.

Actually, decided to check my driver. Tee marks indicate I'm in the center or slightly right of center. Furthering my thought that the m3/4 line won't be good for me.

Most faders of the golf ball play a slightly closed face with out to in swing. Please bear in mind these are faders not slicers. These folks want a controlled ball flight they trust and eliminate the left side of the course. Twist Face will be very beneficial to these golfers. We've all read the reasons so I won't rehash them here. I am this golfer as well. I can work the ball both ways but my scary miss is a double cross left because I am always lining up down the center of fairway, playing a slight pull fade. I just think so many on here are over thinking the technology. If you truly hit high toe with an open club face, that ball is going way right anyway. That is one of the worst strikes you can have for loss of power and direction.

Most faders of the golf ball play a slightly closed face with out to in swing. Please bear in mind these are faders not slicers. These folks want a controlled ball flight they trust and eliminate the left side of the course. Twist Face will be very beneficial to these golfers. We've all read the reasons so I won't rehash them here. I am this golfer as well. I can work the ball both ways but my scary miss is a double cross left because I am always lining up down the center of fairway, playing a slight pull fade. I just think so many on here are over thinking the technology. If you truly hit high toe with an open club face, that ball is going way right anyway. That is one of the worst strikes you can have for loss of power and direction.

Closed face relative to target line, yes. But the face has to be open relative to clubhead path to hit a fade. If my face is open to clubpath and I hit high toe then the face is more open relative to clubhead path. That will result in a ball that goes further right.

I don't feel I'm overthinking it. Shiels testing shows my concern. The design was not intended to help everyone and understanding face to path and ballstrike location will tell you that a fader who misses toe side of center will not typically benefit from the technology.

I've learned watching Andy that although he does a good job explaining things as far as clubs go, you can rarely trust his numbers be it the machine or whatever but things normally do not add up. I like him and his channel but have started to watch him less because of this. If I am going to watch an "average" golfer, I think Ali Taylor is a better example and his numbers seem to at least translate from shot to shot.

Most faders of the golf ball play a slightly closed face with out to in swing. Please bear in mind these are faders not slicers. These folks want a controlled ball flight they trust and eliminate the left side of the course.

This is not true.

So we have an average golfer who got good results and a well above average golfer who didn't. Shiels results are what scares me about the m3/m4 lines. Playing a fade, I don't want a toe miss to head right.

It's worth taking his results with a pinch of salt. Watch any of his driver reviews, or the combine tests he does, and he struggles to hit a 40-yard fairway at the best of times

So we have an average golfer who got good results and a well above average golfer who didn't. Shiels results are what scares me about the m3/m4 lines. Playing a fade, I don't want a toe miss to head right.

 

It's worth taking his results with a pinch of salt. Watch any of his driver reviews, or the combine tests he does, and he struggles to hit a 40-yard fairway at the best of times

To be fair he does state he's an average golfer. His previous M3 test showed more realistic numbers, i'd still say the machine has been changed between that test and this one, as i seriously doubt the M4 would be giving him 1.52-1.54 smash whilst the M3 was down at 1.4s.

So we have an average golfer who got good results and a well above average golfer who didn't. Shiels results are what scares me about the m3/m4 lines. Playing a fade, I don't want a toe miss to head right.

 

It's worth taking his results with a pinch of salt. Watch any of his driver reviews, or the combine tests he does, and he struggles to hit a 40-yard fairway at the best of times

 

To be fair he does state he's an average golfer. His previous M3 test showed more realistic numbers, i'd still say the machine has been changed between that test and this one, as i seriously doubt the M4 would be giving him 1.52-1.54 smash whilst the M3 was down at 1.4s.

Apologies, I meant Rick Shiels rather than Teeuplo as the target of my statement

The only way to achieve a true smash factor above 1.5 is to have a machine variance or an illegal clubhead.

I believe Trackman it's possible to get over 1.5, by striking the ball out of the toe. Since the toe end of the club is moving slightly faster than the center (where trackman is measuring to) toe strikes will result in slightly inflated smash, while heel strikes will be slightly under.

Most faders of the golf ball play a slightly closed face with out to in swing. Please bear in mind these are faders not slicers. These folks want a controlled ball flight they trust and eliminate the left side of the course.

This is not true.

Not true, but also not completely wrong. What would you assume the percentages are? You have....

1. Ball starting left of path and fading back to path line or possibly just right or path line.

2. Ball starting at path line are fading right of the path line.

3. Ball starting right of path line and fading even further right.

I think it is safe to say that not many really successful players start the ball right of path and fade it further right. These type of shots will not have very good energy transfer (low smash factor) and not travel as far as the other two(all things considered equal)

Most good players based on working with my Teacher that play a fade fall into category 1 or 2. Based on talking to him a higher majority of good players(Handicaps less that 5) fall into category 1 rather than category 2.

I play a fade, I start the ball left of path majority of the time and fade it back. Most of the guys that I played with in college that played a fade were the same way. I said most, not all. My guess would be that 60-65% or so are category 1, close to 35-40% are category 2 and 1% or less are category 3. Now if you include the entire gambit of faders I would imagine the numbers for category 1 are even higher.

My big miss is a toe ball that hooks when I am already aiming left or left center of the fairway. SO far the two best drivers that help mitigate this big miss for me have been the 816 DBD and the Cobra LTD. I am hoping that maybe the F8+ could help more or that the M3 or M4 could help even more as well.

Most faders of the golf ball play a slightly closed face with out to in swing. Please bear in mind these are faders not slicers. These folks want a controlled ball flight they trust and eliminate the left side of the course.

This is not true.

Can you elaborate? Somebody like a DJ, He'd have a path of say -2 and a face of -1. This pretty much means out to in path... slightly closed face.

Drawers of the ball, exact opposite.

Most faders of the golf ball play a slightly closed face with out to in swing. Please bear in mind these are faders not slicers. These folks want a controlled ball flight they trust and eliminate the left side of the course.

This is not true.

Agree to disagree and we are probably talking semantics. The closed face is relative to path straight down the middle. This implies out to in path. See DJ for example. Anyone starting in to out with open face relative to path straight down the middle is hitting a push and many times will impart draw spin on the ball.

Any reviewers with a Tennessee accent out there?

That's nothing, I routinely get a smash factor of 1.6.

Ho hum, once again results will vary for each golfer outside in warmer conditions. Everyone was praising Epic last year and I tried for an hour with rep and trackman and club could not give results that justified buying. At least club is no longer white on top!

Was just watching this and noticed his ball speeds seemed way higher than possible, i'm guessing it's the machine he's using in that shop, noticed since he's changed places he's been getting some weird numbers, i think he was hitting 7 irons the other week with 1.51 smash factors.

 

Being honest though, i think he still does a decent job of explaining the clubs he's testing even with the weird numbers.

Well, you might have mixed up 7 irons with the Rogue driver:

[media=]

...because he had smash factors around 1.51 with the Rogue - topping at 1.52...

...which is not bad, but not as good as 1.54+.

-

Thus, even if you don't trust 1.54+ as a absolute number, it is better than 1.52-.

Can't remember which one, but it was an iron that was being hit with smash in the high 1.40s and 1.50/1, which for me pointed at it being the machine they were using not being set up for the test.

Hate to say it, but Mark Crossfield had a point that was pretty much proved, as you see most doing 'on the course' testing now, which tends to show a lot of variances on hits that monitors weren't.

Well, it may be, that the absolute numbers are not very precise,

but the relative numbers are meaningful, if the setup doesn't change.

On course testing is a entertaining addition...

...some sort of hybrid between course vlog and data sheets.

-

Anyway, that is what makes head to head testing not only interesting, but also useful:

[media=]

...the relative performance between two clubs under pretty much the same conditions.