Titleist 917D2 and 917D3 Drivers: In-hand photos

[GolfWRX]

Comparison Photos

 

 

917D2

 

 

917D3

 

[tr881430]

I'm sticking with my 910. Best Titleist driver I've owned. Better than 913 and 915 IMO. Surefit doesn't entice for the price. Lead tape is my friend. Lol I'll wait for the 919. ?

[nbigg]

I'm all over that D3!

[Pigems]

It looks a lot like that Titleist driver released in Japan last year, the $1000 one. Can't remember the name of it??

[craz-e]

Will put up against my 910 and see it the results tempt me

So far the only new driver out there tempting me is the cobra Ltd after testing most out there

[Stew@scotland]

It seems nike golf isn't dead, the 917 has the compression channel from the 2010 vr driver & the tube weighting from the original vapor flex, clearly no new tecnology has been used & now golfwrx's own testing shows it's 4 yards shorter than the 915. I certainly won't waste my time testing any of the 917 range.

[dxb]

Those testing results numbers v the 915 are fairly embarrassing!

[JStang]

Judging by the numbers posted on the home page, the 915 line was just as good if not better. Sound and feel might be improved but it doesn't look like performance has been. Spin numbers were actually a little higher with the 917 D2 than the 915 D2 with this player.

 

*individual results may vary

[2012BFT]

Wow, I know its only ONE test... but going backwards in distance? hmm.... if this is the case I am losing interest pretty quickly

[Edinburghgolfer]

I don't think one can read too much into the performance of a club based on one review. Go out and try it. If it's better than your current driver and can justify the cost, buy it. If not, don't.

[kyle75]

I do like the looks of the new 917's, but the test data from the front page is a little eye opening. Faster swing speeds, lower spin, and 5 yards shorter than the 915. It reminds a little of when I tried the C16 driver, 1 yard longer than my 915 D3.

[2012BFT]

I don't think one can read too much into the performance of a club based on one review. Go out and try it. If it's better than your current driver and can justify the cost, buy it. If not, don't.

 

Oh trust me, I 100% agree with you on this, and would even add how important it is to be properly fit to optimize results... but a few different (non-related) sources are showing early reports of lessened performance than its predecessor... that might be worrisome to some people...

[andrew_m]

Titleist reps are scrambling this morning to get those numbers off the front page....

[RonSwanson]

Looking at the numbers a little deeper than just comparing the carry and total distances, smash factor was 1.49 for the 915D2 and only 1.46 for the 917D2. Smash factor is looked at by many as an indicator of the quality of hit. So there is probably a little more going on with the numbers than it appears on the surface. Launching the ball 1.6* lower with essentially the same spin(50 rpm difference) is obviously going to cost you distance. D3 numbers essentially the same, 917 launches 1.5* lower with similar spin (34 rpm difference) with smash at 1.45 for the 917 and 1.48 for the 915. More data, especially AOA and ball flight (draw/fade/straight), would be interesting to see here.

[masegolf1978]

More data needed, but I'm almost a little sad that the test confirms what we've known all along: when properly fit, drivers are pretty much maxed out.

[cinnepa]

...hoping the "new" paint hooks some people.

[ctgolfnut66]

Before we jump all over Titleist for making an under performing club, it doesn't look like dispersion is taken into account in the results. 296 in the fairway after properly being properly fit for the Sure-Fit CG is better than 299 with inconsistency. I mean we are talking 3 yards.

[Puppetmaster]

Love the profile of the D3. Interesting how they've moved away from the pear shape to a rounder, more symmetrical footprint.

[Bob57]

The only thing I would draw from the comparison is if you attempt to remove differences from one model to the other you are not likely to get a comparison of each model being optimized. Using the neutral weight and the same shaft isn't necessarily an accurate comparison of one club being an improvement or lack of improvement over the other. The irony is the article does recommend getting fit for the clubs. The better way would have been to optimize fit for each of the four clubs (possible that was done with the 915s). But that would probably have taken a much longer time and people would then say it wasn't apples to apples if the shaft wound up being different and the weight plug was anything but neutral. So I draw the conclusion when attempting to have the specs be the same it appears the 917 is a step back in distance. Since the C16 was better distance wise than any of the 915s (except the D4) when properly fit (4 pieces/people of data), I imagine there is more distance to be had with a properly fit 917.

[stuart374]

I love new golf equipment and I'm going to give the 917 a try but that is a lot of money for a club which arguably does not have any better results than my current Titlest 913, which is great. I'm pretty sure that it is the results that count on a golf course. I will probably put the money into lessons instead.

[wilavic]

I watched Mark Crossfield's review on these clubs and found it to be interesting. When he went from a neutral 12 gram weight to a neutral 8 gram weight he dropped the spin by 300 rpm's and picked up about about ten yards in carry. The lower swing weight and cg slightly forward made a marked difference. I think a good fitter would be key to getting this club dialled in. Sounds better than the 915 too.

[Punchdraw]

Would have liked to see the tester “loft up" ( based on launch angle) with the 917 instead of keeping the same settings as his 915. While he may have been properly fit for the 915, those settings may not be properly fit for the 917.

[gvogel]

Would have liked to see the tester “loft up" ( based on launch angle) with the 917 instead of keeping the same settings as his 915. While he may have been properly fit for the 915, those settings may not be properly fit for the 917.

 

Good point.

 

Did you also notice that most of the strike marks on the faces of the two 917 drivers were near the bottom of the face? That is a sure way to lower launch and lower distance.

 

It may be that with these heads, Andrew would need a different shaft to put the sweet spot on the ball; or perhaps a different hosel setting.

 

The results were certainly inconclusive.

[melo]

I'm troubled by the spin more than anything...a drastic reduction in launch should have had an accompanying decrease in spin, but it didn't...I'd be interested to see if lofting up created an increase in spin, as it normally does, or if it would stay about the same. If it goes up, then the loss of distance would continue due to too much spin....now if it stays the same, we may see some something closer, or even better than the 915 results.

[edryer3]

OMG, spins not 1800 and not carrying 325. Psshh throw that POS in the garbage!!

 

Go get fit!! With all the different weights and hosel settings, you can dial that thing in!!

 

My spin wasn't crazy low I was spinning about 2500 and still carrying the ball 285-290 and total distance about 305. I'll take that every time!

[kekoa]

Love the profile of the D3. Interesting how they've moved away from the pear shape to a rounder, more symmetrical footprint.

 

I agree, I wish the D2 was more pear shaped and less rounded/bulged.

[rainkingjr]

I don't think one can read too much into the performance of a club based on one review. Go out and try it. If it's better than your current driver and can justify the cost, buy it. If not, don't.

 

How dare you post on Golfwrx and make sense? I'm with you 100%. It just amazes me how many people dismiss a clubs performance off of a review by a single individual. As much as I enjoy seeing Shiels and others review clubs, I can never take him or anyone else too serious. Their swing is not my swing. I actually laugh because Shiels will talk about how this club or that club shouldn't fit his swing, then he hits it and has fantastic results. The Cobra Fly Z is one of the drivers that comes to mind. It just shows that even he has preconceived notions going in to any test. The bottom line is, you have to just hit the club and decide.

[cane700]

Club tests almost always prove irrelevant to me. The drivers that everyone rave about lenght come up short and the one that are supposedly short go long. It all depends on the swing.

[oneover73]

Taxi for Titleist R & D dept ?

[sofla]

I don't think one can read too much into the performance of a club based on one review. Go out and try it. If it's better than your current driver and can justify the cost, buy it. If not, don't.

 

How dare you post on Golfwrx and make sense? I'm with you 100%. It just amazes me how many people dismiss a clubs performance off of a review by a single individual. As much as I enjoy seeing Shiels and others review clubs, I can never take him or anyone else too serious. Their swing is not my swing. I actually laugh because Shiels will talk about how this club or that club shouldn't fit his swing, then he hits it and has fantastic results. The Cobra Fly Z is one of the drivers that comes to mind. It just shows that even he has preconceived notions going in to any test. The bottom line is, you have to just hit the club and decide.

 

I will happily take that tester's lowest of the 4 numbers