Post Your Driver Face-Depth/Width Measurements

Hello WRXers,

As driver faces have become shallower and wider to push CG back and lower, deep face drivers have become scarce (especially in full 460cc heads) outside of the JDM market.

My miss is consistently high on the face because I struggle with a negative attack angle later in rounds, which results in massive ball speed loss and hybrid-like spin. With those launch conditions, the CG on my G400 Max actually works against me (by launching it even higher). Obviously, this is a swing fault and fitness problem, but I'd like to experiment with a deep face driver to see if it's actually more forgiving for my mishits.

That said, given the rarity of modern deep face drivers from major OEMs and the general lack of information/familiarity suggested by my search results, I thought it would be awesome to create a thread compiling the face measurements of each commenter's driver(s) - _even shallow face drivers_. I've never been able to find any OEM information or any article/comparison of driver face sizes. I think it's actually really important in determining why a particular driver fits a certain player.

Hopefully, others would find this useful and people decide to contribute. I'll be posting my G400 Max measurements/photos when I get home later today.

Well, it was worth a shot I guess. I probably just have to go to golf stores and compile my own measurements and create a post displaying the comparison. Then, maybe people can fill out the ones I can't find.

I'll try to grab some measurements, but I share your frustration. My miss is high on the face also, and the Cobra Fly Z is much more accepting of that miss than many other drivers I've tried. It also isn't rounded on the top edge, so it still provides decent contact if you accidentally catch one up near the crown.

A few of the Cobras are known for face depth, particularly the Bio Cell plus and Fly Z plus models. Another driver that always comes up in the deep face discussion is the Cleveland Classic.

My Callaway Big Bertha Alpha is pretty deep-faced to my eye and I do like a compact-looking head which, again to my eye, it does. I have no measurements vis-a-vis height v length but the sweetspot seems to be very slightly high on the face and a little bit towards the toe. Unfortunately, my miss is low and near the heel so I only benefit on very rare occasions. Golf gods really have it in for me!!

> @mwcallison said:

> My miss is consistently high on the face because I struggle with a negative attack angle later in rounds, which results in massive ball speed loss and hybrid-like spin. With those launch conditions, the CG on my G400 Max actually works against me (by launching it even higher). ...

For the short run, why not tee the ball a bit lower on the back 9? It appears you are more of a _driver_ than a _launcher_ on the tee box, esp. with negative attack angle. Why not have your pro check over your driver swing? I did this two months ago, and found I was losing distance with two contradictory set-up actions.

I've always avoided shallow-face drivers since **the previous century** (persimmon heads).

For what it's worth, my last three (all Callaway) drivers:

* Current CG16 Pro: face depth = 2.3125" / face width = 4.125" / head depth = 4.25"

* Prior RazrFit: face depth = 2.25" / face width = 4.125" / head depth = 4.35"

* Long past HyperX Tour: face depth = 2.3125" / face width = 4.25" / head depth = 4.25"

>... With those launch conditions, the CG on my G400 Max actually works against me (by launching it even higher). Obviously, **this is a swing fault and fitness problem,** but I'd like to experiment with a deep face driver to see if it's actually more forgiving for my mishits.

I would suggest you'll get minimal results from your survey. The head dimensions you're requesting do not address the internal structure of the clubhead, or the effects of moving around weights or adjusting lie angle.

I think you would be better served by taking a golf lesson than conducting a dubious math analysis.

> @ChipNRun said:

> > @mwcallison said:

> > My miss is consistently high on the face because I struggle with a negative attack angle later in rounds, which results in massive ball speed loss and hybrid-like spin. With those launch conditions, the CG on my G400 Max actually works against me (by launching it even higher). ...

> For the short run, why not tee the ball a bit lower on the back 9? It appears you are more of a _driver_ than a _launcher_ on the tee box, esp. with negative attack angle. Why not have your pro check over your driver swing? I did this two months ago, and found I was losing distance with two contradictory set-up actions.

>

> I've always avoided shallow-face drivers since **the previous century** (persimmon heads).

>

> For what it's worth, my last three (all Callaway) drivers:

> * Current CG16 Pro: face height = 2.3125" / depth (face to back) = 4.25"

> * Prior RazrFit: face height = 2.25" / depth (face to back) = 4.35"

> * Long past HyperX Tour: face height = 2.3125" / depth (face to back) = 4.25"

>

> >... With those launch conditions, the CG on my G400 Max actually works against me (by launching it even higher). Obviously, **this is a swing fault and fitness problem,** but I'd like to experiment with a deep face driver to see if it's actually more forgiving for my mishits.

>

> I would suggest you'll get minimal results from your survey. The head dimensions you're requesting do not address the internal structure of the clubhead, or the effects of moving around weights or adjusting lie angle.

>

> I think you would be better served by taking a golf lesson than conducting a dubious math analysis.

Thanks for your response. Not trying to conduct math analysis, just thought it would be nice for people to have a thread to reference if they're wanting to compare driver dimensions. I'm not trying to draw any correlations, etc. - I was just giving some background information for context.

I agree that it'd be ridiculous to think that finding out driver face dimensions is going to fix my driving woes.

Just grab a Cleveland Classic XL Custom as a cheap experiment. Total sleeper of a driver. Super deep face. Perfect to test your theory.

You are walking over the river to find water....

Ball speed is a question of COR value vs club speed on the actual impact spot.

Launch and spin numbers is a question of location of VCOG, and RCOG vs actual impact spot.

You can measure face height and wide all you like, and want be able to find the numbers that answer your question, because you are measuring the wrong parameters.

Most modern clubs has a shaft we can remove in a minute, so start by removing the shaft.

HOW TO FIND VCOG

Use a standard pen of the type we push a button in the back to get the tip out.

Place the pen in a vise, tip up as strait as you can.

Add 3 to 7 grams for the connector to the empty hosel.

Place the head face down against the pen, and move it around until you find the balance point, thats VCOG. Hold the head steady with one hand, push the button of the pen with the other to set a mark on VCOG.

If your typical miss is very high on the face, and older head from 10 years ago or earlier would fit the bill. Their VCOG is very high compare to driver heads of 2019.

Measure the club head you got, and compare to where you make impact, thats how you can solve this, and choose "better" next time, that cant be done by a measurement of face height or how wide it is, its got nothing to do with it and dont tell much about how weight is distributed in that head.

Today many heads is combined carbon fiber and titanium who makes geometrical measurement even more useless to "guess" where COG is located, but its not needed either, we can go strait to the actual job needed, and measure both VCOG and RCOG, thats where we find the answers.

Reason for mis hit.

If impact move higher during the round, its a sign of a Head or Total weight higher than your body can handle, so take a look at those parameters too,

I agree decrease your swingweight or shorten your shaft

> @"Howard Jones" said:

> You are walking over the river to find water....

>

> Ball speed is a question of COR value vs club speed on the actual impact spot.

> Launch and spin numbers is a question of location of VCOG, and RCOG vs actual impact spot.

>

> You can measure face height and wide all you like, and want be able to find the numbers that answer your question, because you are measuring the wrong parameters.

>

> Most modern clubs has a shaft we can remove in a minute, so start by removing the shaft.

>

> HOW TO FIND VCOG

> Use a standard pen of the type we push a button in the back to get the tip out.

> Place the pen in a vise, tip up as strait as you can.

> Add 3 to 7 grams for the connector to the empty hosel.

> Place the head face down against the pen, and move it around until you find the balance point, thats VCOG. Hold the head steady with one hand, push the button of the pen with the other to set a mark on VCOG.

>

> If your typical miss is very high on the face, and older head from 10 years ago or earlier would fit the bill. Their VCOG is very high compare to driver heads of 2019.

>

> Measure the club head you got, and compare to where you make impact, thats how you can solve this, and choose "better" next time, that cant be done by a measurement of face height or how wide it is, its got nothing to do with it and dont tell much about how weight is distributed in that head.

>

> Today many heads is combined carbon fiber and titanium who makes geometrical measurement even more useless to "guess" where COG is located, but its not needed either, we can go strait to the actual job needed, and measure both VCOG and RCOG, thats where we find the answers.

>

> Reason for mis hit.

> If impact move higher during the round, its a sign of a Head or Total weight higher than your body can handle, so take a look at those parameters too,

Well, I understand what you're saying about VCOG and I have read the articles of certain competitors, and I agree with what you're saying. It's just a different point that the one I am making.

I'm specifically looking to add height to my driver face with VCOG being a secondary benefit (most likely - due to the general shapes of deep-face drivers). So, I was just trying to compile driver face heights.

My miss is a result of stalling my turn at the low point of my swing because I start using my upper body when my lower body gets fatigued, so I'm essentially "lunging" at the ball as opposed to swinging up and through with a full turn. It results in pushing my irons right, too.

Love your posts and general knowledge. I have learned a lot from your contributions to this site. I appreciate you responding.

In case you did not notice, there is a PM from me in your mailbox with some further info.

About fatigue and lower body rotation issues.

During fitting i try to watch the players hip rotation during transition of the club, and if the club is too heavy, the player will just like when we get tired, have a lack of hip rotation, it starts too late. Top get the club moving/tuned at the top, the player will use his body weight, "shooting his hips and back" target line. We all have "some" hip movement target line, but its very visible that the hips move too much target line instead of starting the rotation they should. Let someone take a video of you from the front you can study yourself. if the back ground has some "helping lines" as contrast, its even easier to see it, so your issues is most likely WEIGHT related, thats could be both total or head weight, since both is part of the resistance on the club we try to move.

Many will be surprised that it only takes a few grams up or down to make a difference here, so be very careful with how much weight we use on our clubs. The best video example of this i can offer you is a LPGA player i been making equipment for who dont have a brand contract, so im free to use her as reference.

Look at this Video, this is (IMO) how a good golf swing looks like, when total weight, balance and shaft profiles is right for the player. Watch it all the way to the end, and pay attention to the last 2 strokes with her driver. We have added ONLY 3 grams on the shafts balance point to simulate a higher shaft weight, and its enough to mess up her hip rotation, her hips shoot way to much target line, and if you pay attention to her FACE (9 to 7 o clock in the swing), you can clearly see the difference, she get that "i will kill that ball look", so our body language never lies about this things, it has no training doing so, but speak a clear language we can judge it all from.

Despite what some people responding said, I think this was a great question. I found after hitting a few balls with my driver (not well warmed up) using impact tape on the face, that the vertical distance between the topmost ball impression to the bottom-most ball position was 1.75".  Now, comments to the contrary, I think it's rather important to get a driver with a face at least that large, since any smaller than that would be a guaranteed mishit, regardless of how forgiving the face might be.

I hope to tighten up that distribution, and I think if I was more warmed up I could dial it in more tightly already, but buying a new driver with a face depth less than 1.75" wouldn't make much sense right now. As it happens, my current old driver has a face depth (a.k.a. height) of 1.75", so I'm somewhat encouraged that I might not need a new driver after all. All I need to do is to tighten up that distribuion a little bit.

A friend of mine who rarely plays golf was given a Cleveland classic xl and he had a much easier time making decent contact due to the massive height of the face. I do think it’s a club worth looking into if someone really struggles with driver.