What is actually a forgiving driver in reality?

After a lot of testing I have started to questioning the concept of a so called forgiving high moi drivers.

I have a TM m1 10,5 2017 driver that I tested in a lot of different setups with. I have moved both weights from front track to rear track and tried all sort of loft settings and different shafts. My typical miss would be an open face at impact and slightly hit it from the toe with this club. Lets compare the two most extreme set ups in the M1.

1. Both weights in rear track position "high". This will generat the highest possible MOI setting and would produce the most forgiveness in the M1 head. Low back CG.

2.Both weights in front track centered. This will generate Low front CG and least amount of moi.

So what will happen when I swing those clubs with my typical swing fault?

Setting 1. will create a push slice certainly going out of bounds. The high MOI will reduce the horizontal gear effect and stop the ball from turning into the fairway again. Starting right turning more right!

Setting 2. will create a push with draw turning the ball into the fairway again. The lower moi increase gear effect and the ball turns in again. Starting right turning left to into target.

The question is what is really the point with high MOI and forgiveness if the result only will be a longer shot out of bounds at maintained ballspeed.

I started golf a young age and have been playing some persimmon drivers. The bulge and rounding of the face was very important to be fitted to the player at that time to create the correct amount of gear effect. This seems to be completely forgotten today.

At the end a low MOI driver seems to be finding more fairways for me than a high MOI driver cause of increased gear effect. I want my driver to correct my faulty face angles and paths not exaggerate them to the worse.

So what is in reality "forgiveness" in a driver today?

What are your experiences regarding high and low MOI drivers?

Great post. I will just add that I have been playing my Epic SZ driver in standard setting for over a year, front weight light and rear weight heavy for highest MOI. I was ready to give up on the driver, as it had too much spin for me and my draws would hook on me in the worst moments.

But I swapped weights, and saw huge reduction spin. I now play a fade with the driver and my misses tend to be a weak fade/slice. But I feel like i keep the ball in play a lot more now, and find more fairways as well. If anything, I am definitely more confident with the driver on this lower MOI setting. For reference I draw every other club in my bag.

First of all, MOI and forgiveness are really only connected IF you have poor or inconsistent face contact. If you can get consistent center face contact, then the higher MOI doesn't really help as much. At least it doesn't help in the context of face orientation or path inconsistencies.

FWIW, it sounds like your problem is more related to controlling the face orientation going into impact and not really related to gear effect. Have you actually checked your face impact position with the weights in those two different configurations? Is it really shifting from the heel in setting 1 to the toe in setting 2? By any chance does your swing have a late release and a higher face closure rate? Do you have any tendencies to 'get stuck' in the down swing into impact?

As Stuart said, MOI's gear effect impact is only realized on mishits, so if you are relying on a toe impact to create your draw then there is a possibility that higher MOI would be reducing your draw, but that would require pretty precise and consistent impact position.

Objectively a forgiving driver is one with high MOI, regardless of anecdotal evidence. Gear effects on mishits lead to hooks/slices which are reduced with higher MOI heads, and it takes a "two wrongs making a right" swing e.g. an open face with a toe impact to potentially NOT want what is traditionally accepted as "forgiving". A high MOI driver will only reduce gear effects, not eliminate them, so a draw would never become a slice based on that alone.

In all likelihood though Stuart is right and this is a product of either face control problems or contact problems, or maybe both. Feel sensitive players can also be impacted by the different CG locations which can change how you deliver the club as well.

? I play a 913D3 9.5 with a 44.25 inch length. I can hit very straight and accurate. By all the numbers I shouldn’t be able to hit a 440 cc with that low of loft. But for me that club is forgiving.

I play a 913D3 9.5 with a 44.25 inch length .... By all the numbers I shouldn’t be able to hit a 440 cc with that low of loft. But for me that club is forgiving.

Sorry, there are no actual numbers that would says any such thing.

I play a 913D3 9.5 with a 44.25 inch length .... By all the numbers I shouldn’t be able to hit a 440 cc with that low of loft. But for me that club is forgiving.

 

Sorry, there are no actual numbers that would says any such thing.

Yes there is. My hcp is around 15 my swing speed below 95. You take that to a fitter and see what they say.

I play a 913D3 9.5 with a 44.25 inch length .... By all the numbers I shouldn’t be able to hit a 440 cc with that low of loft. But for me that club is forgiving.

 

Sorry, there are no actual numbers that would says any such thing.

 

Yes there is. My hcp is around 15 my swing speed below 95. You take that to a fitter and see what they say.

They are not much of a fitter if they base that decision on what size head or loft you should play just on swing speed. And there's no actual numbers or real data that would back or support any such recommendation.

OP, I hear you and find comfort in deep face, slightly open head designs. Best on course performance comes with those and like you played persimmon and early generation metals. I thin that past experience matters in this.Getting square face is not as hard as squaring path and often the two can work together to straighten out shot. Generally my miss is in the vertical of face & consistency of path. But getting stuck or being OTT is secondary to being too steep in approach to ball which is my dragon to slay.

I've stumbled upon back weighting my driver with a heavier grip and I seem to get better results. That or go another 10g on shaft. I replaced my R510 that had an oversize corded grip w/ a modern ti head that did not. The old TM worked better even though new one has better head and same shaft.weight. So I just added 15g of butt weight to new one and found fairways a lot easier this past weekend. So maybe look into the rest of your specs too and not just the head.

I don't think there are any manufacturers out there who claim that their more forgiving products are specifically intend to straighten out shots that are hit dead center but with a poor face/path angle. Forgiveness is mainly intended to reduce the negative effects of mishits and often also to give lower-swing-speed players help in getting the ball up in the air, and that is how the clubs are generally pitched and marketed.

I'm with the OP on the concept that some players might not get as much benefit from max GI clubs as others -- my own primary "miss" is a dead pull, and I often don't mind if I lose some distance from a toe hit on one of those -- but I don't know that it makes sense to call out forgiving clubs in general for something they aren't even intended or expected to correct.

I had my first true run-in with forgiveness this weekend when I hit a drive as far and high on the toe as possible with my G400 Max. I mark my ball with a red and blue dot, and there was only one dot present as far as possible at the top of the toe.

The ball had no business being in the fairway, and certainly no business being ~80% as deep as with center face contact, however that's where it was.

This driver is as good as everyone says (and the Fujikura Evo 5 is proving a beautiful match for me).

What was the question again?

I always question the whole theory of a forgiving driver, until I hit one that is unforgiving.

I play a 913D3 9.5 with a 44.25 inch length .... By all the numbers I shouldn’t be able to hit a 440 cc with that low of loft. But for me that club is forgiving.

 

Sorry, there are no actual numbers that would says any such thing.

 

Yes there is. My hcp is around 15 my swing speed below 95. You take that to a fitter and see what they say.

 

They are not much of a fitter if they base that decision on what size head or loft you should play just on swing speed. And there's no actual numbers or real data that would back or support any such recommendation.

https://golfsidekick.com/drivers/best-driver-90-mph-swing-speed/

One of many .

I play a 913D3 9.5 with a 44.25 inch length .... By all the numbers I shouldn’t be able to hit a 440 cc with that low of loft. But for me that club is forgiving.

 

Sorry, there are no actual numbers that would says any such thing.

 

Yes there is. My hcp is around 15 my swing speed below 95. You take that to a fitter and see what they say.

 

They are not much of a fitter if they base that decision on what size head or loft you should play just on swing speed. And there's no actual numbers or real data that would back or support any such recommendation.

 

https://golfsidekick...ph-swing-speed/

 

One of many .

I think I am with Stuart on this one. Choosing clubs based on internet articles versus a professional fitting isn't best practice.

First of all, MOI and forgiveness are really only connected IF you have poor or inconsistent face contact. If you can get consistent center face contact, then the higher MOI doesn't really help as much. At least it doesn't help in the context of face orientation or path inconsistencies. FWIW, it sounds like your problem is more related to controlling the face orientation going into impact and not really related to gear effect. Have you actually checked your face impact position with the weights in those two different configurations? Is it really shifting from the heel in setting 1 to the toe in setting 2? By any chance does your swing have a late release and a higher face closure rate? Do you have any tendencies to 'get stuck' in the down swing into impact?

As Stuart said, MOI's gear effect impact is only realized on mishits, so if you are relying on a toe impact to create your draw then there is a possibility that higher MOI would be reducing your draw, but that would require pretty precise and consistent impact position. Objectively a forgiving driver is one with high MOI, regardless of anecdotal evidence. Gear effects on mishits lead to hooks/slices which are reduced with higher MOI heads, and it takes a "two wrongs making a right" swing e.g. an open face with a toe impact to potentially NOT want what is traditionally accepted as "forgiving". A high MOI driver will only reduce gear effects, not eliminate them, so a draw would never become a slice based on that alone. In all likelihood though Stuart is right and this is a product of either face control problems or contact problems, or maybe both. Feel sensitive players can also be impacted by the different CG locations which can change how you deliver the club as well.

I think I hit the ball quite consistent in the same spot but I tend to go to the toe if I go somewhere outside the hitting box. The push slice I am talking about is coming from a late release and getting stucked as mentioned Stuart.

If you say that I can't explain the improved result with front CG drivers by gear effect the only possible other reason is what Valtiel wrote, the back CG location offsets my face orientation making me think the club face is further away from the ball than it is in reality? This misconception leads to miss-timing and an even more open face than with a front CG driver head would have had. At the same time a back CG driver is supposed to have a higher closure rate. Something I don't feel at all. But this theory also sounds a bit far-fetched to believe in.

Don't get me wrong I was changing driver to make life easier and gain some forgiveness and It is quite annoying to not be able to benefit more from the back CG designs that gained in popularity. For info my previous drivers have been R15 and 913D3, both worked good, Before that a Cobra S3 that I never really liked and in fact had similar issues with.

I think I am with Stuart on this one. Choosing clubs based on internet articles versus a professional fitting isn't best practice.

That was one . But I’ve been fitted and told I should use a D2 sized (460 head) and at least set it to or over 11.0 degrees . My thesis of discontent with Stewie starts there , the article reaffirms my fitters recommendation. But I didn’t follow his rec.

If you don't think modern drivers are forgiving, you've never hit a wooden driver out past the insert.

After a lot of testing I have started to questioning the concept of a so called forgiving high moi drivers.

 

... The question is what is really the point with high MOI and forgiveness if the result only will be a longer shot out of bounds at maintained ballspeed.

 

I started golf a young age and have been playing some persimmon drivers. The bulge and rounding of the face was very important to be fitted to the player at that time to create the correct amount of gear effect. This seems to be completely forgotten today.

 

At the end a low MOI driver seems to be finding more fairways for me than a high MOI driver cause of increased gear effect. I want my driver to correct my faulty face angles and paths not exaggerate them to the worse.

 

So what is in reality "forgiveness" in a driver today?

 

What are your experiences regarding high and low MOI drivers?

To me, forgiveness means that the driver has a predictable trajectory, and a modest miss doesn't kill the hole for me.

I had sporadic weeks with left misses with my old driver, which had a bit too much offset.

I play my current XR16 Pro with head set 1* open, with a lower torque R-flex shaft than in my old driver. With a slightly closed stance, I aim for the right side of the fairway. On a solid hit, the ball draws back toward the middle of the fairway. A slight miss will put me in the first-cut of right rough, which I can handle, or if I jerk it I can get a low pull.

I'm rather on the line with drivers. I do best with a Pro or Tour head and an R-flex shaft. Not so with fairway woods - I have trouble getting enough loft with Tour heads.

If you don't think modern drivers are forgiving, you've never hit a wooden driver out past the insert.

I agree.

I grew up playing persimmons and blades. I’m baffled how people struggle with a modern 460 cc driver?

Even my Epic SZ strong 3 wood is quite remarkable off the tee and deck, and to me, that is a gigantic club.

I can shape my driver and 3 wood either way and low or high.

First of all, MOI and forgiveness are really only connected IF you have poor or inconsistent face contact. If you can get consistent center face contact, then the higher MOI doesn't really help as much. At least it doesn't help in the context of face orientation or path inconsistencies. FWIW, it sounds like your problem is more related to controlling the face orientation going into impact and not really related to gear effect. Have you actually checked your face impact position with the weights in those two different configurations? Is it really shifting from the heel in setting 1 to the toe in setting 2? By any chance does your swing have a late release and a higher face closure rate? Do you have any tendencies to 'get stuck' in the down swing into impact?

As Stuart said, MOI's gear effect impact is only realized on mishits, so if you are relying on a toe impact to create your draw then there is a possibility that higher MOI would be reducing your draw, but that would require pretty precise and consistent impact position. Objectively a forgiving driver is one with high MOI, regardless of anecdotal evidence. Gear effects on mishits lead to hooks/slices which are reduced with higher MOI heads, and it takes a "two wrongs making a right" swing e.g. an open face with a toe impact to potentially NOT want what is traditionally accepted as "forgiving". A high MOI driver will only reduce gear effects, not eliminate them, so a draw would never become a slice based on that alone. In all likelihood though Stuart is right and this is a product of either face control problems or contact problems, or maybe both. Feel sensitive players can also be impacted by the different CG locations which can change how you deliver the club as well.

 

I think I hit the ball quite consistent in the same spot but I tend to go to the toe if I go somewhere outside the hitting box. The push slice I am talking about is coming from a late release and getting stucked as mentioned Stuart.

 

If you say that I can't explain the improved result with front CG drivers by gear effect the only possible other reason is what Valtiel wrote, the back CG location offsets my face orientation making me think the club face is further away from the ball than it is in reality? This misconception leads to miss-timing and an even more open face than with a front CG driver head would have had. At the same time a back CG driver is supposed to have a higher closure rate. Something I don't feel at all. But this theory also sounds a bit far-fetched to believe in.

 

Don't get me wrong I was changing driver to make life easier and gain some forgiveness and It is quite annoying to not be able to benefit more from the back CG designs that gained in popularity. For info my previous drivers have been R15 and 913D3, both worked good, Before that a Cobra S3 that I never really liked and in fact had similar issues with.

To address the theory about CG and closure rate you have to look at how the CG impacts the shaft. The idea is that the further back the CG, the more that center tries to "catch up" when the shaft has been unloaded and starts deflecting forward at impact. More "catch up" causes more forward deflection which adds loft (which is why the rearward weight adjustments are always labeled some form of "higher") and a small amount of face closure. However, if you are as consistent as you claim then I have a different theory:

The 2017 M1's center of gravity actually raises a decent amount when you put weight back since the weight isn't only moving away from the face but towards the crown as well due to the shape of the head. putting BOTH weights back there would move the CG even higher, and a higher CG will, all strikes being equal, produce more spin due to vertical gear effects. More vertical gear effect spin = a more stable ball flight since more vertical spin needs a greater degree of axis tilt to make the ball curve and thus you could be losing your draw that way. Just a thought!

I think I am with Stuart on this one. Choosing clubs based on internet articles versus a professional fitting isn't best practice.

You mean you don't automatically believe everything you read on the internet ??? Isn't that sacrilege :-)

NoTalentLefty - slower swing speed generally need more DYNAMIC loft. That's the number a good fitter will be paying attention to, not the number on the head. And that's very different than more static loft - which completely disregards the specifics of the individual's swing.

To address the theory about CG and closure rate you have to look at how the CG impacts the shaft. The idea is that the further back the CG, the more that center tries to "catch up" when the shaft has been unloaded and starts deflecting forward at impact. More "catch up" causes more forward deflection which adds loft (which is why the rearward weight adjustments are always labeled some form of "higher") and a small amount of face closure. However, if you are as consistent as you claim then I have a different theory:

 

The 2017 M1's center of gravity actually raises a decent amount when you put weight back since the weight isn't only moving away from the face but towards the crown as well due to the shape of the head. putting BOTH weights back there would move the CG even higher, and a higher CG will, all strikes being equal, produce more spin due to vertical gear effects. More vertical gear effect spin = a more stable ball flight since more vertical spin needs a greater degree of axis tilt to make the ball curve and thus you could be losing your draw that way. Just a thought!

I'd be more likely to buy into the theory that the change in a different MOI might be responsible - the MOI about the shaft axis. Which results in a change in the ability of the player to manage the face closure into impact.

But they are all just theories. Sometimes the 'why' can help in the fitting process but in the context of a player who will occasionally get stuck in the swing, I'm not sure I'd expect a whole lot of help or forgiveness from the head selection. There are some things that may (or may not) help that but I'd look more at shaft weight, shorter length, swing weight - the things that are known to potentially contribute to rhythm, tempo, and timing. It's much better to see if you can find something that might help prevent getting stuck in the first place (and no, I'm not ignoring lessons) than something that might try and help you recover when you do get stuck (which is pretty much impossible).

To address the theory about CG and closure rate you have to look at how the CG impacts the shaft. The idea is that the further back the CG, the more that center tries to "catch up" when the shaft has been unloaded and starts deflecting forward at impact. More "catch up" causes more forward deflection which adds loft (which is why the rearward weight adjustments are always labeled some form of "higher") and a small amount of face closure. However, if you are as consistent as you claim then I have a different theory:

 

The 2017 M1's center of gravity actually raises a decent amount when you put weight back since the weight isn't only moving away from the face but towards the crown as well due to the shape of the head. putting BOTH weights back there would move the CG even higher, and a higher CG will, all strikes being equal, produce more spin due to vertical gear effects. More vertical gear effect spin = a more stable ball flight since more vertical spin needs a greater degree of axis tilt to make the ball curve and thus you could be losing your draw that way. Just a thought!

 

I'd be more likely to buy into the theory that the change in a different MOI might be responsible - the MOI about the shaft axis. Which results in a change in the ability of the player to manage the face closure into impact.

 

But they are all just theories. Sometimes the 'why' can help in the fitting process but in the context of a player who will occasionally get stuck in the swing, I'm not sure I'd expect a whole lot of help or forgiveness from the head selection. There are some things that may (or may not) help that but I'd look more at shaft weight, shorter length, swing weight - the things that are known to potentially contribute to rhythm, tempo, and timing. It's much better to see if you can find something that might help prevent getting stuck in the first place (and no, I'm not ignoring lessons) than something that might try and help you recover when you do get stuck (which is pretty much impossible).

I feel as I somehow find it harder to square and release through with a back CG driver. The push slice scenario seems to get worse the more back CG and higher loft I have. The feel is that the ball slides over the face on the side instead of getting a push forward and more gear effect with a front CG driver. Most probably I need to be in the 8-9 degree loft area with back CG designs. Thats why i lowered the loft and got some better result. But cranking down the M1 also opens the face by 3-4 degrees most probably contributing to the push slice as well. I am also used to 430-440 cc heads. The R15 was the TP Version. Smaller heads seems to increase my focus at striking the ball in the middle compared to 460 cc.

So any ideas? Is it worth testing more back CG designs in lower lofts or should I stick to more front CG designs sacrificing ball speed occasionally for better dispersion?

I have a fitting session for the new Titleist drivers in about 2 weeks. It will be interesting to see if the TS2 or TS3 will perform best for me. Anybody knows the CG location for the TS lines compared to M1-17?

Edit: link to picture of my old drivers wear pattern to give an idea of my typical strike.

https://imgur.com/a/Vmr4pmQ

I play a 913D3 9.5 with a 44.25 inch length .... By all the numbers I shouldn’t be able to hit a 440 cc with that low of loft. But for me that club is forgiving.

 

Sorry, there are no actual numbers that would says any such thing.

 

Yes there is. My hcp is around 15 my swing speed below 95. You take that to a fitter and see what they say.

 

They are not much of a fitter if they base that decision on what size head or loft you should play just on swing speed. And there's no actual numbers or real data that would back or support any such recommendation.

I agree with Stuart - Head loft is irrelevant without considering angle of attack. I play the same driver as the OP but my launch angle is around 15 degrees so I'm hitting up between 3 and 4 degrees.

For my SS which hovers just above 100mph, I'm probably hitting a bit high but i'm comfortable with it as my drives are on the fairway most of the time.

With my M1 I've got the weights totally neutral. I tend to hit a tad towards high toe and get a slight draw. I've tried the weights back (too many balloons) and forward (hate the feel) and tried in draw setting too (to negate my old overfade). I found messing with the draw bias totally changed how the head felt in swing, like there was too much weight at the extremities.

The only setting I've changed from neutral is having the lie upright. This really helped me negate the overfade.

As I say, I hit reasonably consistently. For me, you can only really get to what your driver is (isn't) doing for you if you can get a consistent strike pattern. Not necessarily dead centre, but consistent.

OP, I hear you and find comfort in deep face, slightly open head designs. Best on course performance comes with those and like you played persimmon and early generation metals. I thin that past experience matters in this.Getting square face is not as hard as squaring path and often the two can work together to straighten out shot. Generally my miss is in the vertical of face & consistency of path. But getting stuck or being OTT is secondary to being too steep in approach to ball which is my dragon to slay.

 

I've stumbled upon back weighting my driver with a heavier grip and I seem to get better results. That or go another 10g on shaft. I replaced my R510 that had an oversize corded grip w/ a modern ti head that did not. The old TM worked better even though new one has better head and same shaft.weight. So I just added 15g of butt weight to new one and found fairways a lot easier this past weekend. So maybe look into the rest of your specs too and not just the head.

I have not tried this but I have tried counterbalanced shafts and they work pretty well until I overcook one to the left. Did you compensate for swingweight when you tested the 15g weight?

To address the theory about CG and closure rate you have to look at how the CG impacts the shaft. The idea is that the further back the CG, the more that center tries to "catch up" when the shaft has been unloaded and starts deflecting forward at impact. More "catch up" causes more forward deflection which adds loft (which is why the rearward weight adjustments are always labeled some form of "higher") and a small amount of face closure. However, if you are as consistent as you claim then I have a different theory:

 

The 2017 M1's center of gravity actually raises a decent amount when you put weight back since the weight isn't only moving away from the face but towards the crown as well due to the shape of the head. putting BOTH weights back there would move the CG even higher, and a higher CG will, all strikes being equal, produce more spin due to vertical gear effects. More vertical gear effect spin = a more stable ball flight since more vertical spin needs a greater degree of axis tilt to make the ball curve and thus you could be losing your draw that way. Just a thought!

 

I'd be more likely to buy into the theory that the change in a different MOI might be responsible - the MOI about the shaft axis. Which results in a change in the ability of the player to manage the face closure into impact.

 

But they are all just theories. Sometimes the 'why' can help in the fitting process but in the context of a player who will occasionally get stuck in the swing, I'm not sure I'd expect a whole lot of help or forgiveness from the head selection. There are some things that may (or may not) help that but I'd look more at shaft weight, shorter length, swing weight - the things that are known to potentially contribute to rhythm, tempo, and timing. It's much better to see if you can find something that might help prevent getting stuck in the first place (and no, I'm not ignoring lessons) than something that might try and help you recover when you do get stuck (which is pretty much impossible).

Yeah I definitely agree with that, fixing equipment is only really worth diving into if the swing is fundamentally sound and consistent enough for sure. I was just trying to look at the tech side of why one CG setting produced a draw and one a straight ball/slice from a technical perspective. Feel definitely has a big impact on the average player's ability to accurately close the face so that is the easiest explanation.

I play a 913D3 9.5 with a 44.25 inch length .... By all the numbers I shouldn’t be able to hit a 440 cc with that low of loft. But for me that club is forgiving.

 

Sorry, there are no actual numbers that would says any such thing.

 

Yes there is. My hcp is around 15 my swing speed below 95. You take that to a fitter and see what they say.

 

They are not much of a fitter if they base that decision on what size head or loft you should play just on swing speed. And there's no actual numbers or real data that would back or support any such recommendation.

 

https://golfsidekick...ph-swing-speed/

 

One of many .

There are no numbers or data at that web site- just opinion. And you might question the opinions based on this disclaimer from the web site:

Copyright text 2018 by Golf Sidekick.

Golfsidekick.com is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com.

I play a 913D3 9.5 with a 44.25 inch length .... By all the numbers I shouldn’t be able to hit a 440 cc with that low of loft. But for me that club is forgiving.

 

Sorry, there are no actual numbers that would says any such thing.

 

Yes there is. My hcp is around 15 my swing speed below 95. You take that to a fitter and see what they say.

 

They are not much of a fitter if they base that decision on what size head or loft you should play just on swing speed. And there's no actual numbers or real data that would back or support any such recommendation.

 

https://golfsidekick...ph-swing-speed/

 

One of many .

I hope you're not really basing any decisions you make on websites like that one... its clear whoever wrote that knows basically nothing about club fitting and really should read some of Tom Wishon's posts on golfwrx.

Saying that getting a regular shaft is the most important thing ignores that 1) there is no standard for what "regular" means in terms of flex and 2) not everyone swings the same way, even if they all have 90 mph swings, so people swinging at 90 mph could potentially be fit into a variety of shaft flexes. Plus, for some golfers getting the shaft weight and/or length correct can be more important than shaft flex.

As Stuart pointed out, the printed loft is not the most important thing, it is your dynamic loft at impact. So, the article stating that a 90 mph swing needs 11-13* loft is completely ignoring *how* someone swings the club. Generally a slower swinger needs help getting and keeping the ball in the air, but that's a guideline to use as a starting point only and will vary by individual.

Also, I find it odd that their suggestions for best drivers for 2018 are all previous generation drivers.

I care way less about forgiveness that yields more distance on heel/toe misses than I care about accuracy. The courses I play demand tee shots be in the fairway. Bomb and gouge just puts me in a neighbor's yard (OB). Give me a driver that finds the fairway.

Yeah I definitely agree with that, fixing equipment is only really worth diving into if the swing is fundamentally sound and consistent enough for sure. I was just trying to look at the tech side of why one CG setting produced a draw and one a straight ball/slice from a technical perspective. Feel definitely has a big impact on the average player's ability to accurately close the face so that is the easiest explanation.

Unfortunately the easiest isn't always the right one :-) But sometimes all we can do is provide an educated guess until someone wants to take the time to study it in a more in depth manner.