Sei Young Kim's Driver Used to win last week

gunmetalgunmetal Members Posts: 1,817 ✭✭
Original SLDR which is about 5 years old this month. Thought that was interesting. And quite telling in a way. Incidentally she broke the lpga scoring victory for a tournament at -31. She must not need all of the performance gains the newer drivers obviously would give her.





😏

Comments

  • MelloYelloMelloYello Members Posts: 3,057 ✭✭
    edited Jul 12, 2018 #2
    Dude, I watched that tournament!. She was on fire over the weekend. It's was ludicrous how much better she was than people who were themselves beating up the course and shooting 15-under, LOL. It was insane.



    SYK does that though. She catches fire certain weeks and just can't be caught. You can sense it when it's starting to happen. I am glad she was able to hang on and not falter towards the end. It was amazing to see someone do that.



    The LPGA isn't as OCD with equipment as the PGA (and not nearly GolfWRX, haha).



    Isn't Ariya still pounding that same Aeroburner 3w?
    Driver: TaylorMade M3 (10.5)
    Fairway: TaylorMade RBZ Black (16.5)
    Hybrid: Adams Pro Black 9031 (20 / 23)
    Irons: Titleist 716 CB (5-Pw)
    Wedges: Vokey SM6 52 (F) / 56 (F) / 60 (S)
    Putter: Nike Method Milled 003
  • gunmetalgunmetal Members Posts: 1,817 ✭✭
    MelloYello wrote:


    Dude, I watched that tournament!. She was on fire over the weekend. It's was ludicrous how much better she was than people who were themselves beating up the course and shooting 15-under, LOL. It was insane.



    SYK does that though. She catches fire certain weeks and just can't be caught. You can sense it when it's starting to happen. I am glad she was able to hang on and not falter towards the end. It was amazing to see someone do that.



    The LPGA isn't as OCD with equipment as the PGA (and not nearly GolfWRX, haha).



    Isn't Ariya still pounding that same Aeroburner 3w?




    Right. And I don't care where the pins were located. -31 is -31. Long live SLDR, lol!
  • Sean2Sean2 #TheWRX (Callaway Trip) Members Posts: 30,826 ✭✭
    Steve Stricker uses a Titleist driver that came out in 2010, and there are many other stores of players using "old" equipment. They are smart enough to play what works for them, and realize that newer isn't always better.
    [font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]Callaway Rogue[/font]
    [font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]Callaway GBB Epic 16º/20º/24º[/font]
    [font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]Callaway Steelhead XR 25º[/font]
    [font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]Callaway Apex CF16 6-AW [/font]
    [font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]Callaway MD3/MD-PM 54º/58º[/font]
    [font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]Callaway "O" Works #7[/font]
  • ValtielValtiel Konica-Minolta Bizhub Members Posts: 1,793 ✭✭
    edited Jul 12, 2018 #5
    gunmetal wrote:


    She must not need all of the performance gains the newer drivers obviously would give her.




    Sarcasm aside, there have been significant gains since the SLDR, just not in relation to potential spin reduction which if you've grooved your strike point on the face means that your sarcasm is actually correct; she would not need the performance gains that other drivers would provide. An SLDR struck properly (high) that is properly fitted would be one of the longest, if not THE longest drivers still out there due to its ability to murder spin rates (Low MOI). That same low MOI makes it the bad kind of murder when mishit, but if you're consistent enough then that wouldn't matter. Fred Couples is still using an SLDR too I believe.
    Taylormade M1 430 8.5* Tensei Pro Orange V2 70TX || Titleist 915D3 8.5* Diamana Kai'li 80x
    Callaway XHot 3Deep Pro 14.5* Fujikura Motore VC 8.3 Tour Spec X || Nike SQ2 13* Diamana Blueboard 83x
    Nike Tour Issue SQ2 17* Diamana Blueboard 103x || SQ2 15* Diamana Blueboard 93x
    PING Anser 20* Aldila Rogue Black 110MSI 105h Tour-X || Taylormade V-Steel 21* Project X Rifle Satin 6.5
    Mizuno MP-H4 3i 21* Project X PXi 7.0
    Mizuno MP-H4 4i 24* Project X PXi 7.0
    Mizuno MP-59 4i-PW 24*- 48* Brunswick Precision Rifle FCM 7.0
    Vokey Mild Raw 8620 54* Brunswick Precision Rifle FCM 7.0
    Vokey  SM6 58* Oil Can Low Bounce K-Grind Brunswick Precision FCM 7.3 SSx1
    Vokey Special 62* Black Oxide V-Grind Brunswick Precision FCM 7.3 SSx2
    Scotty Cameron Santa Fe Bullseye shaft

    WITB Thread
  • NokeNoke Members Posts: 2,083 ✭✭
    The bad kind of murder...lol...I like that usage.
  • kiw1982kiw1982 Members Posts: 1,174 ✭✭
    I am so glad that she won and made a record!



    But, when I followed her group like 2 yrs ago at Kinsmill, her driving was horrible. The misses were so bad.



    I had 3 SLDR and still it has my longest record. When I am on fire, I can tear the course apart but that was rare. lol
    Mizuno        ST-180 Driver w/KuroKage HBP 50 S+
    Taylormade  M6 3 Wood w/NV 2KXV Blue 75 S+
    Mizuno        CLK 3 Hybrid w/Tensei CK Blue HY 80 S+(P790 UDI is sitting on the bench)
    Taylormade  P790 4-G Irons w/KBS tour S+
    Mizuno        T7 56/10 Wedge w/KBS tour S+
    Mizuno        S18 60/06 Wedge w/KBS tour S+
    Odyssey      O-Works 1WS Putter
  • andrieddleandrieddle Posts: 1,798 ✭✭
    the ladies are the best chance to look at JDM clubs....they're just solid
    [font=comic sans ms,cursive]Cobra Fly Z+ (11)
    Cobra Bio Cell 4W (16)
    TaylorMade R15 4H (21)
    FourteeN TC 606 (5-P/A)

    Bridgestone J15 (50)
    Callaway MD2 (56/60)
    Odyssey EXO 7S
    [/font]
  • gunmetalgunmetal Members Posts: 1,817 ✭✭
    kiw1982 wrote:


    I am so glad that she won and made a record!



    But, when I followed her group like 2 yrs ago at Kinsmill, her driving was horrible. The misses were so bad.



    I had 3 SLDR and still it has my longest record. When I am on fire, I can tear the course apart but that was rare. lol




    That's the trade off with SLDR - the misses are awful. And what Valtiel was alluding to when he/she said "there have been significant gains since the SLDR." While I don't totally agree with that, there has been some improvement on ball speed on off center hits, though I don't think it's tangible on the course. Possibly measurable in a dry fitting.
  • gunmetalgunmetal Members Posts: 1,817 ✭✭
    Valtiel wrote:

    gunmetal wrote:


    She must not need all of the performance gains the newer drivers obviously would give her.




    Sarcasm aside, there have been significant gains since the SLDR, just not in relation to potential spin reduction which if you've grooved your strike point on the face means that your sarcasm is actually correct; she would not need the performance gains that other drivers would provide. An SLDR struck properly (high) that is properly fitted would be one of the longest, if not THE longest drivers still out there due to its ability to murder spin rates (Low MOI). That same low MOI makes it the bad kind of murder when mishit, but if you're consistent enough then that wouldn't matter. Fred Couples is still using an SLDR too I believe.




    Well even the best players in the world don't strike it perfectly every time so whatever performance gains (slightly faster ball speeds outside the center of the face???) the new models offer, it clearly doesn't offset or compensate for the loss of distance she would be sacrificing. We also need to remember that faster ball speeds outside of the middle usually just means that the ball goes a bit farther offline for most of us. The data doesn't lie. Driving distances have been flat for the past 10 years on the PGA tour - never varying year to year more than a few yards. Driving accuracy is also the same over the past 10 years always around 75% for the best. You are right that there are performance gains being made. They're just tiny and incremental and only show up in a laboratory - not on the course. Clearly. Most pros (not Striker or Kim) switch for the same reason we go through gear - we're looking for something different. Mentally that can be all it takes to get us out of a funk (and there's NOTHING wrong with that). There's also that seven figure number many of these guys are getting to rep the product, too. That kinda helps them want to put it in the bag.
  • ValtielValtiel Konica-Minolta Bizhub Members Posts: 1,793 ✭✭
    edited Jul 13, 2018 #11
    gunmetal wrote:

    Valtiel wrote:

    gunmetal wrote:


    She must not need all of the performance gains the newer drivers obviously would give her.




    Sarcasm aside, there have been significant gains since the SLDR, just not in relation to potential spin reduction which if you've grooved your strike point on the face means that your sarcasm is actually correct; she would not need the performance gains that other drivers would provide. An SLDR struck properly (high) that is properly fitted would be one of the longest, if not THE longest drivers still out there due to its ability to murder spin rates (Low MOI). That same low MOI makes it the bad kind of murder when mishit, but if you're consistent enough then that wouldn't matter. Fred Couples is still using an SLDR too I believe.




    Well even the best players in the world don't strike it perfectly every time so whatever performance gains (slightly faster ball speeds outside the center of the face???) the new models offer, it clearly doesn't offset or compensate for the loss of distance she would be sacrificing. We also need to remember that faster ball speeds outside of the middle usually just means that the ball goes a bit farther offline for most of us. The data doesn't lie. Driving distances have been flat for the past 10 years on the PGA tour - never varying year to year more than a few yards. Driving accuracy is also the same over the past 10 years always around 75% for the best. You are right that there are performance gains being made. They're just tiny and incremental and only show up in a laboratory - not on the course. Clearly. Most pros (not Striker or Kim) switch for the same reason we go through gear - we're looking for something different. Mentally that can be all it takes to get us out of a funk (and there's NOTHING wrong with that). There's also that seven figure number many of these guys are getting to rep the product, too. That kinda helps them want to put it in the bag.




    I definitely agree with the mental component, lord knows lots more pros would likely stick with older equipment if it weren't for contracts.



    But its important to understand the little box that contains all the potential performance a driver can have based on restrictions and how this all relates to pros vs. amateurs. We have head size (460cc), COR (.830), MOI (5900), and CG location. Most of the performance gains are geared towards the amateurs with things like variable face thicknesses for ball speeds on mishits, higher MOI for accuracy on mishits, and CG location for strike location optimized launch conditions. The most important thing to recognize is that these aren't all "sliders" that can continually be pushed higher and higher to make a "better" driver. Raising MOI increases forgiveness but takes away the spin reduction potential of optimized strikes (slightly high and slightly toe side). Lowering MOI maximizes potential spin reduction on optimized strikes while sacrificing performance and accuracy on non-optimized strikes. Shrinking head size tends to facilitate lower potential MOI. Raising CG creates more face real estate below the sweet spot which raises spin, lowering CG does the reverse.



    So its a balancing act that all in all is less important to the pros who may not hit it perfectly every time but they sure are darn close. When we speak of performance gains it is typically around less than optimal scenarios, this is why the G400 Max is such a popular driver as it is the highest MOI production driver on the market without being square! This is a very big gain for the average player and really only a small and largely psychological one for the pro. The same goes for all the customization options. Pros have long had access to the types of services that are now widely available on the clubs themselves (moveable weights, adjustable hosels etc) which was a HUGE gain for the amateur but didn't really matter for the pro because they could always have things bent and hotmelted.
    Taylormade M1 430 8.5* Tensei Pro Orange V2 70TX || Titleist 915D3 8.5* Diamana Kai'li 80x
    Callaway XHot 3Deep Pro 14.5* Fujikura Motore VC 8.3 Tour Spec X || Nike SQ2 13* Diamana Blueboard 83x
    Nike Tour Issue SQ2 17* Diamana Blueboard 103x || SQ2 15* Diamana Blueboard 93x
    PING Anser 20* Aldila Rogue Black 110MSI 105h Tour-X || Taylormade V-Steel 21* Project X Rifle Satin 6.5
    Mizuno MP-H4 3i 21* Project X PXi 7.0
    Mizuno MP-H4 4i 24* Project X PXi 7.0
    Mizuno MP-59 4i-PW 24*- 48* Brunswick Precision Rifle FCM 7.0
    Vokey Mild Raw 8620 54* Brunswick Precision Rifle FCM 7.0
    Vokey  SM6 58* Oil Can Low Bounce K-Grind Brunswick Precision FCM 7.3 SSx1
    Vokey Special 62* Black Oxide V-Grind Brunswick Precision FCM 7.3 SSx2
    Scotty Cameron Santa Fe Bullseye shaft

    WITB Thread
  • gunmetalgunmetal Members Posts: 1,817 ✭✭
    Valtiel wrote:

    gunmetal wrote:

    Valtiel wrote:

    gunmetal wrote:


    She must not need all of the performance gains the newer drivers obviously would give her.




    Sarcasm aside, there have been significant gains since the SLDR, just not in relation to potential spin reduction which if you've grooved your strike point on the face means that your sarcasm is actually correct; she would not need the performance gains that other drivers would provide. An SLDR struck properly (high) that is properly fitted would be one of the longest, if not THE longest drivers still out there due to its ability to murder spin rates (Low MOI). That same low MOI makes it the bad kind of murder when mishit, but if you're consistent enough then that wouldn't matter. Fred Couples is still using an SLDR too I believe.




    Well even the best players in the world don't strike it perfectly every time so whatever performance gains (slightly faster ball speeds outside the center of the face???) the new models offer, it clearly doesn't offset or compensate for the loss of distance she would be sacrificing. We also need to remember that faster ball speeds outside of the middle usually just means that the ball goes a bit farther offline for most of us. The data doesn't lie. Driving distances have been flat for the past 10 years on the PGA tour - never varying year to year more than a few yards. Driving accuracy is also the same over the past 10 years always around 75% for the best. You are right that there are performance gains being made. They're just tiny and incremental and only show up in a laboratory - not on the course. Clearly. Most pros (not Striker or Kim) switch for the same reason we go through gear - we're looking for something different. Mentally that can be all it takes to get us out of a funk (and there's NOTHING wrong with that). There's also that seven figure number many of these guys are getting to rep the product, too. That kinda helps them want to put it in the bag.




    I definitely agree with the mental component, lord knows lots more pros would likely stick with older equipment if it weren't for contracts.



    But its important to understand the little box that contains all the potential performance a driver can have based on restrictions and how this all relates to pros vs. amateurs. We have head size (460cc), COR (.830), MOI (5900), and CG location. Most of the performance gains are geared towards the amateurs with things like variable face thicknesses for ball speeds on mishits, higher MOI for accuracy on mishits, and CG location for strike location optimized launch conditions. The most important thing to recognize is that these aren't all "sliders" that can continually be pushed higher and higher to make a "better" driver. Raising MOI increases forgiveness but takes away the spin reduction potential of optimized strikes (slightly high and slightly toe side). Lowering MOI maximizes potential spin reduction on optimized strikes while sacrificing performance and accuracy on non-optimized strikes. Shrinking head size tends to facilitate lower potential MOI. Raising CG creates more face real estate below the sweet spot which raises spin, lowering CG does the reverse.



    So its a balancing act that all in all is less important to the pros who may not hit it perfectly every time but they sure are darn close. When we speak of performance gains it is typically around less than optimal scenarios, this is why the G400 Max is such a popular driver as it is the highest MOI production driver on the market without being square! This is a very big gain for the average player and really only a small and largely psychological one for the pro. The same goes for all the customization options. Pros have long had access to the types of services that are now widely available on the clubs themselves (moveable weights, adjustable hosels etc) which was a HUGE gain for the amateur but didn't really matter for the pro because they could always have things bent and hotmelted.




    Totally agree. However, some, if not most, of the time more "forgiveness" on off center hits isn't always great for amateurs as it has very little, if anything, to do with direction. It simply means they hit it further offline, lol. But yes, you are spot on about give and take and in regards specifically to the G400 Max and MOI that is a big deal to the average golfer.
  • Gilmore-HappyGilmore-Happy Posts: 93 ✭✭
    kiw1982 wrote:


    I am so glad that she won and made a record!



    But, when I followed her group like 2 yrs ago at Kinsmill, her driving was horrible. The misses were so bad.



    I had 3 SLDR and still it has my longest record. When I am on fire, I can tear the course apart but that was rare. lol




    Same here. Some days I had no problem hitting fairways and hitting absolute BOMBS. Then there were those days I never hit a single fairway and found myself OB off the tee most of the time. By far the most "risk reward" type driver I have ever hit.
  • ValtielValtiel Konica-Minolta Bizhub Members Posts: 1,793 ✭✭
    gunmetal wrote:

    Valtiel wrote:

    gunmetal wrote:

    Valtiel wrote:

    gunmetal wrote:


    She must not need all of the performance gains the newer drivers obviously would give her.




    Sarcasm aside, there have been significant gains since the SLDR, just not in relation to potential spin reduction which if you've grooved your strike point on the face means that your sarcasm is actually correct; she would not need the performance gains that other drivers would provide. An SLDR struck properly (high) that is properly fitted would be one of the longest, if not THE longest drivers still out there due to its ability to murder spin rates (Low MOI). That same low MOI makes it the bad kind of murder when mishit, but if you're consistent enough then that wouldn't matter. Fred Couples is still using an SLDR too I believe.




    Well even the best players in the world don't strike it perfectly every time so whatever performance gains (slightly faster ball speeds outside the center of the face???) the new models offer, it clearly doesn't offset or compensate for the loss of distance she would be sacrificing. We also need to remember that faster ball speeds outside of the middle usually just means that the ball goes a bit farther offline for most of us. The data doesn't lie. Driving distances have been flat for the past 10 years on the PGA tour - never varying year to year more than a few yards. Driving accuracy is also the same over the past 10 years always around 75% for the best. You are right that there are performance gains being made. They're just tiny and incremental and only show up in a laboratory - not on the course. Clearly. Most pros (not Striker or Kim) switch for the same reason we go through gear - we're looking for something different. Mentally that can be all it takes to get us out of a funk (and there's NOTHING wrong with that). There's also that seven figure number many of these guys are getting to rep the product, too. That kinda helps them want to put it in the bag.




    I definitely agree with the mental component, lord knows lots more pros would likely stick with older equipment if it weren't for contracts.



    But its important to understand the little box that contains all the potential performance a driver can have based on restrictions and how this all relates to pros vs. amateurs. We have head size (460cc), COR (.830), MOI (5900), and CG location. Most of the performance gains are geared towards the amateurs with things like variable face thicknesses for ball speeds on mishits, higher MOI for accuracy on mishits, and CG location for strike location optimized launch conditions. The most important thing to recognize is that these aren't all "sliders" that can continually be pushed higher and higher to make a "better" driver. Raising MOI increases forgiveness but takes away the spin reduction potential of optimized strikes (slightly high and slightly toe side). Lowering MOI maximizes potential spin reduction on optimized strikes while sacrificing performance and accuracy on non-optimized strikes. Shrinking head size tends to facilitate lower potential MOI. Raising CG creates more face real estate below the sweet spot which raises spin, lowering CG does the reverse.



    So its a balancing act that all in all is less important to the pros who may not hit it perfectly every time but they sure are darn close. When we speak of performance gains it is typically around less than optimal scenarios, this is why the G400 Max is such a popular driver as it is the highest MOI production driver on the market without being square! This is a very big gain for the average player and really only a small and largely psychological one for the pro. The same goes for all the customization options. Pros have long had access to the types of services that are now widely available on the clubs themselves (moveable weights, adjustable hosels etc) which was a HUGE gain for the amateur but didn't really matter for the pro because they could always have things bent and hotmelted.




    Totally agree. However, some, if not most, of the time more "forgiveness" on off center hits isn't always great for amateurs as it has very little, if anything, to do with direction. It simply means they hit it further offline, lol. But yes, you are spot on about give and take and in regards specifically to the G400 Max and MOI that is a big deal to the average golfer.




    That depends, when I say "forgiveness" i'm referring to "reduction in gear effect on off center hits" which translates to less hook on toe hits, less slice on heel hits, and less spin increase on low hits. When you start playing the game of millimeters when it comes to your actual strike location this translates in to tighter dispersion and better overall shots. More forgiveness does not usually mean "further in the wrong direction" unless the person is actually aiming the driver in the wrong direction in which case I agree, but no driver is going to be able to compensate for that. image/biggrin.png' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':D' />



    In a way the whole Taylormade Twist Face concept is trying to accomplish the same thing that higher MOI accomplishes. Instead of decreasing the gear effect on off center hits they are simply using a different bulge and roll to to start the ball further in the opposite direction that the gear effects want to start the ball. Different means of achieving a similar goal, however one of the other benefits of higher MOI that wouldn't be captured by this is the feel component. The higher the MOI, the slower the clubhead twists on off center hits and this translates to less feeling of torque in the hands.
    Taylormade M1 430 8.5* Tensei Pro Orange V2 70TX || Titleist 915D3 8.5* Diamana Kai'li 80x
    Callaway XHot 3Deep Pro 14.5* Fujikura Motore VC 8.3 Tour Spec X || Nike SQ2 13* Diamana Blueboard 83x
    Nike Tour Issue SQ2 17* Diamana Blueboard 103x || SQ2 15* Diamana Blueboard 93x
    PING Anser 20* Aldila Rogue Black 110MSI 105h Tour-X || Taylormade V-Steel 21* Project X Rifle Satin 6.5
    Mizuno MP-H4 3i 21* Project X PXi 7.0
    Mizuno MP-H4 4i 24* Project X PXi 7.0
    Mizuno MP-59 4i-PW 24*- 48* Brunswick Precision Rifle FCM 7.0
    Vokey Mild Raw 8620 54* Brunswick Precision Rifle FCM 7.0
    Vokey  SM6 58* Oil Can Low Bounce K-Grind Brunswick Precision FCM 7.3 SSx1
    Vokey Special 62* Black Oxide V-Grind Brunswick Precision FCM 7.3 SSx2
    Scotty Cameron Santa Fe Bullseye shaft

    WITB Thread
  • gunmetalgunmetal Members Posts: 1,817 ✭✭
    Valtiel wrote:




    That depends, when I say "forgiveness" i'm referring to "reduction in gear effect on off center hits" which translates to less hook on toe hits, less slice on heel hits, and less spin increase on low hits. When you start playing the game of millimeters when it comes to your actual strike location this translates in to tighter dispersion and better overall shots. More forgiveness does not usually mean "further in the wrong direction" unless the person is actually aiming the driver in the wrong direction in which case I agree, but no driver is going to be able to compensate for that. image/biggrin.png' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':D' />



    In a way the whole Taylormade Twist Face concept is trying to accomplish the same thing that higher MOI accomplishes. Instead of decreasing the gear effect on off center hits they are simply using a different bulge and roll to to start the ball further in the opposite direction that the gear effects want to start the ball. Different means of achieving a similar goal, however one of the other benefits of higher MOI that wouldn't be captured by this is the feel component. The higher the MOI, the slower the clubhead twists on off center hits and this translates to less feeling of torque in the hands.




    OK, but TM's implementation of "Twist Face" is FAR more a marketing pitch than it is tangible help the average consumer will notice. I'm an 8 who is basically helpless with a driver in my hand. I demo'd all of the M3 and M4's hoping for a miracle and was just as terrible as ever off the tee. We both know bulge and roll have been around since forever. Wishon eliminated roll with its 515 GRT over 10 years ago to improve consistency on launch conditions. I saw more results with that than TM's attempt to modify bulge. Taylormade tweaking bulge and calling it revolutionary really is as pathetic as Callaway saying you'll get Epic distance gains over GBB Alpha 816. And now you can even go Rogue for more distance. Dustin Johnson's driving accuracy was 56% last year and 58% this year. Rahm was 58% last, 59% this year - hardly revolutionary. Bottom line is what Schiels and Crossfield preach and demonstrate time and time again - strike is king and the golfer, not the equipment, is 90%+ responsible for strike. Fitting is critical, but people shouldn't be expecting miracles when they buy the latest and greatest.
  • 4rheel4rheel OC, CaliforniaMembers Posts: 1,796 ✭✭
    No mention of the UST Mamiya ATTAS 3 shaft she was using? Probably one of the straightest hitting shafts I ever owned.
  • gunmetalgunmetal Members Posts: 1,817 ✭✭
    4rheel wrote:


    No mention of the UST Mamiya ATTAS 3 shaft she was using? Probably one of the straightest hitting shafts I ever owned.




    100%



    Still have one in my 5 wood. One of the rare shafts that performs as good if not better than it looks.
  • DavidvDavidv Posts: 690 ✭✭
    I guess it is as simple as whatever works for you and gives you the results you want.
  • larciellarciel I play for eagle Members Posts: 2,206 ✭✭
    I am going back to my beloved supertri when titleist releases ts2.
  • ValtielValtiel Konica-Minolta Bizhub Members Posts: 1,793 ✭✭
    edited Jul 21, 2018 #20
    gunmetal wrote:

    Valtiel wrote:


    That depends, when I say "forgiveness" i'm referring to "reduction in gear effect on off center hits" which translates to less hook on toe hits, less slice on heel hits, and less spin increase on low hits. When you start playing the game of millimeters when it comes to your actual strike location this translates in to tighter dispersion and better overall shots. More forgiveness does not usually mean "further in the wrong direction" unless the person is actually aiming the driver in the wrong direction in which case I agree, but no driver is going to be able to compensate for that. image/biggrin.png' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':D' />



    In a way the whole Taylormade Twist Face concept is trying to accomplish the same thing that higher MOI accomplishes. Instead of decreasing the gear effect on off center hits they are simply using a different bulge and roll to to start the ball further in the opposite direction that the gear effects want to start the ball. Different means of achieving a similar goal, however one of the other benefits of higher MOI that wouldn't be captured by this is the feel component. The higher the MOI, the slower the clubhead twists on off center hits and this translates to less feeling of torque in the hands.




    OK, but TM's implementation of "Twist Face" is FAR more a marketing pitch than it is tangible help the average consumer will notice. I'm an 8 who is basically helpless with a driver in my hand. I demo'd all of the M3 and M4's hoping for a miracle and was just as terrible as ever off the tee. We both know bulge and roll have been around since forever. Wishon eliminated roll with its 515 GRT over 10 years ago to improve consistency on launch conditions. I saw more results with that than TM's attempt to modify bulge. Taylormade tweaking bulge and calling it revolutionary really is as pathetic as Callaway saying you'll get Epic distance gains over GBB Alpha 816. And now you can even go Rogue for more distance. Dustin Johnson's driving accuracy was 56% last year and 58% this year. Rahm was 58% last, 59% this year - hardly revolutionary. Bottom line is what Schiels and Crossfield preach and demonstrate time and time again - strike is king and the golfer, not the equipment, is 90%+ responsible for strike. Fitting is critical, but people shouldn't be expecting miracles when they buy the latest and greatest.




    I don't disagree regarding the marketing, I think its a fairly simple idea that is not likely to make much of a difference and is certainly not revolutionary. However DJ/Rahms driving accuracy is not a good measure of anything here as they are not slapping it off the toe/heel in the way the average golfer would be which is what the concept is meant to help address.



    Regarding the Callaway drivers, that is a completely different story and should not be lumped in with the Taylormade discussion. The GBB 815 and 816 were pretty unforgiving (lower MOI) and somewhat high CG drivers. This is a recipe for feast and famine when it comes to driver performance; strike it high on the face and you get bombs, strike it even slightly low and it will spin up and loose distance. It seems clear to me that they were riding on a bit of the SLDR formula here whereas the Sub Zeroes (XR16, Epic, Rogue) has been both MUCH more forgiving in terms of MOI which will make for more consistent distance across the face but also much lower CG which makes for more feast and less famine when it comes to spin reduction. I would say those drivers were a legit step forward from the previous GBB models.
    Taylormade M1 430 8.5* Tensei Pro Orange V2 70TX || Titleist 915D3 8.5* Diamana Kai'li 80x
    Callaway XHot 3Deep Pro 14.5* Fujikura Motore VC 8.3 Tour Spec X || Nike SQ2 13* Diamana Blueboard 83x
    Nike Tour Issue SQ2 17* Diamana Blueboard 103x || SQ2 15* Diamana Blueboard 93x
    PING Anser 20* Aldila Rogue Black 110MSI 105h Tour-X || Taylormade V-Steel 21* Project X Rifle Satin 6.5
    Mizuno MP-H4 3i 21* Project X PXi 7.0
    Mizuno MP-H4 4i 24* Project X PXi 7.0
    Mizuno MP-59 4i-PW 24*- 48* Brunswick Precision Rifle FCM 7.0
    Vokey Mild Raw 8620 54* Brunswick Precision Rifle FCM 7.0
    Vokey  SM6 58* Oil Can Low Bounce K-Grind Brunswick Precision FCM 7.3 SSx1
    Vokey Special 62* Black Oxide V-Grind Brunswick Precision FCM 7.3 SSx2
    Scotty Cameron Santa Fe Bullseye shaft

    WITB Thread
  • denvergolfdenvergolf Members Posts: 1,403 ✭✭
    edited Jul 22, 2018 #21
    Valtiel wrote:

    gunmetal wrote:

    Valtiel wrote:


    That depends, when I say "forgiveness" i'm referring to "reduction in gear effect on off center hits" which translates to less hook on toe hits, less slice on heel hits, and less spin increase on low hits. When you start playing the game of millimeters when it comes to your actual strike location this translates in to tighter dispersion and better overall shots. More forgiveness does not usually mean "further in the wrong direction" unless the person is actually aiming the driver in the wrong direction in which case I agree, but no driver is going to be able to compensate for that. image/biggrin.png' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':D' />



    In a way the whole Taylormade Twist Face concept is trying to accomplish the same thing that higher MOI accomplishes. Instead of decreasing the gear effect on off center hits they are simply using a different bulge and roll to to start the ball further in the opposite direction that the gear effects want to start the ball. Different means of achieving a similar goal, however one of the other benefits of higher MOI that wouldn't be captured by this is the feel component. The higher the MOI, the slower the clubhead twists on off center hits and this translates to less feeling of torque in the hands.




    OK, but TM's implementation of "Twist Face" is FAR more a marketing pitch than it is tangible help the average consumer will notice. I'm an 8 who is basically helpless with a driver in my hand. I demo'd all of the M3 and M4's hoping for a miracle and was just as terrible as ever off the tee. We both know bulge and roll have been around since forever. Wishon eliminated roll with its 515 GRT over 10 years ago to improve consistency on launch conditions. I saw more results with that than TM's attempt to modify bulge. Taylormade tweaking bulge and calling it revolutionary really is as pathetic as Callaway saying you'll get Epic distance gains over GBB Alpha 816. And now you can even go Rogue for more distance. Dustin Johnson's driving accuracy was 56% last year and 58% this year. Rahm was 58% last, 59% this year - hardly revolutionary. Bottom line is what Schiels and Crossfield preach and demonstrate time and time again - strike is king and the golfer, not the equipment, is 90%+ responsible for strike. Fitting is critical, but people shouldn't be expecting miracles when they buy the latest and greatest.




    I don't disagree regarding the marketing, I think its a fairly simple idea that is not likely to make much of a difference and is certainly not revolutionary. However DJ/Rahms driving accuracy is not a good measure of anything here as they are not slapping it off the toe/heel in the way the average golfer would be which is what the concept is meant to help address.



    Regarding the Callaway drivers, that is a completely different story and should not be lumped in with the Taylormade discussion. The GBB 815 and 816 were pretty unforgiving (lower MOI) and somewhat high CG drivers. This is a recipe for feast and famine when it comes to driver performance; strike it high on the face and you get bombs, strike it even slightly low and it will spin up and loose distance. It seems clear to me that they were riding on a bit of the SLDR formula here whereas the Sub Zeroes (XR16, Epic, Rogue) has been both MUCH more forgiving in terms of MOI which will make for more consistent distance across the face but also much lower CG which makes for more feast and less famine when it comes to spin reduction. I would say those drivers were a legit step forward from the previous GBB models.
    We can call it marketing, a gimmick, whatever, but I do believe twist-face has been beneficial for me. I'm a good striker of the ball and play anywhere from 0-2, but my miss is always a little bit toward the heel. Very, very infrequently will I hit it toe side of center. The M3 is the first TaylorMade driver in a while that I have a lot of confidence in from a forgiveness perspective. Those slightly inside strikes turn out infinitely better than the SLDR or M1 for me.
    Taylormade M5, 9*, Tensei Pro Orange 70TX, 44.75"
    Taylormade M5, 15*, 80TX, 42.75"
    TaylorMade P790 UDI, 17*, Project X Hzrdus Black 85 - 6.5 or M3 20* Hybrid, Kuro Kage XT 100TX
    TaylorMade P760, 4-W, KBS DG Tour Issue X100
    Cleveland RTX 4 Raw, 52-mid, 56-mid and 60-low
    Titleist Cameron Tour Rat 1-M or NP2 Timeless
    2019 TM TP5x
  • ValtielValtiel Konica-Minolta Bizhub Members Posts: 1,793 ✭✭
    denvergolf wrote:

    Valtiel wrote:

    gunmetal wrote:

    Valtiel wrote:


    That depends, when I say "forgiveness" i'm referring to "reduction in gear effect on off center hits" which translates to less hook on toe hits, less slice on heel hits, and less spin increase on low hits. When you start playing the game of millimeters when it comes to your actual strike location this translates in to tighter dispersion and better overall shots. More forgiveness does not usually mean "further in the wrong direction" unless the person is actually aiming the driver in the wrong direction in which case I agree, but no driver is going to be able to compensate for that. image/biggrin.png' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':D' />



    In a way the whole Taylormade Twist Face concept is trying to accomplish the same thing that higher MOI accomplishes. Instead of decreasing the gear effect on off center hits they are simply using a different bulge and roll to to start the ball further in the opposite direction that the gear effects want to start the ball. Different means of achieving a similar goal, however one of the other benefits of higher MOI that wouldn't be captured by this is the feel component. The higher the MOI, the slower the clubhead twists on off center hits and this translates to less feeling of torque in the hands.




    OK, but TM's implementation of "Twist Face" is FAR more a marketing pitch than it is tangible help the average consumer will notice. I'm an 8 who is basically helpless with a driver in my hand. I demo'd all of the M3 and M4's hoping for a miracle and was just as terrible as ever off the tee. We both know bulge and roll have been around since forever. Wishon eliminated roll with its 515 GRT over 10 years ago to improve consistency on launch conditions. I saw more results with that than TM's attempt to modify bulge. Taylormade tweaking bulge and calling it revolutionary really is as pathetic as Callaway saying you'll get Epic distance gains over GBB Alpha 816. And now you can even go Rogue for more distance. Dustin Johnson's driving accuracy was 56% last year and 58% this year. Rahm was 58% last, 59% this year - hardly revolutionary. Bottom line is what Schiels and Crossfield preach and demonstrate time and time again - strike is king and the golfer, not the equipment, is 90%+ responsible for strike. Fitting is critical, but people shouldn't be expecting miracles when they buy the latest and greatest.




    I don't disagree regarding the marketing, I think its a fairly simple idea that is not likely to make much of a difference and is certainly not revolutionary. However DJ/Rahms driving accuracy is not a good measure of anything here as they are not slapping it off the toe/heel in the way the average golfer would be which is what the concept is meant to help address.



    Regarding the Callaway drivers, that is a completely different story and should not be lumped in with the Taylormade discussion. The GBB 815 and 816 were pretty unforgiving (lower MOI) and somewhat high CG drivers. This is a recipe for feast and famine when it comes to driver performance; strike it high on the face and you get bombs, strike it even slightly low and it will spin up and loose distance. It seems clear to me that they were riding on a bit of the SLDR formula here whereas the Sub Zeroes (XR16, Epic, Rogue) has been both MUCH more forgiving in terms of MOI which will make for more consistent distance across the face but also much lower CG which makes for more feast and less famine when it comes to spin reduction. I would say those drivers were a legit step forward from the previous GBB models.
    We can call it marketing, a gimmick, whatever, but I do believe twist-face has been beneficial for me. I'm a good striker of the ball and play anywhere from 0-2, but my miss is always a little bit toward the heel. Very, very infrequently will I hit it toe side of center. The M3 is the first TaylorMade driver in a while that I have a lot of confidence in from a forgiveness perspective. Those slightly inside strikes turn out infinitely better than the SLDR or M1 for me.




    I have no doubt that is true, but we have to look at the MOI factor at play there. Twist Face or no Twist Face, just about any modern driver is going to perform better on off center strikes over the SLDR, The original SLDR's MOI was VERY low for a modern driver meaning that the gear effects from heel/toe hits were always going to be much worse. Now regarding the M1, i'm not sure which one you're referring to or how you had it configured or how you have your M3 configured either but I do know that from the M1 16' -> M1 17' -> M3 the general push was for higher MOI and getting those weights back further and further which each version. Odds are you are seeing much more of the MOI related benefit than the Twist Face related one.
    Taylormade M1 430 8.5* Tensei Pro Orange V2 70TX || Titleist 915D3 8.5* Diamana Kai'li 80x
    Callaway XHot 3Deep Pro 14.5* Fujikura Motore VC 8.3 Tour Spec X || Nike SQ2 13* Diamana Blueboard 83x
    Nike Tour Issue SQ2 17* Diamana Blueboard 103x || SQ2 15* Diamana Blueboard 93x
    PING Anser 20* Aldila Rogue Black 110MSI 105h Tour-X || Taylormade V-Steel 21* Project X Rifle Satin 6.5
    Mizuno MP-H4 3i 21* Project X PXi 7.0
    Mizuno MP-H4 4i 24* Project X PXi 7.0
    Mizuno MP-59 4i-PW 24*- 48* Brunswick Precision Rifle FCM 7.0
    Vokey Mild Raw 8620 54* Brunswick Precision Rifle FCM 7.0
    Vokey  SM6 58* Oil Can Low Bounce K-Grind Brunswick Precision FCM 7.3 SSx1
    Vokey Special 62* Black Oxide V-Grind Brunswick Precision FCM 7.3 SSx2
    Scotty Cameron Santa Fe Bullseye shaft

    WITB Thread
Sign In or Register to comment.