Jump to content

M5 and M6 CT Numbers


JStang

Recommended Posts

We have all seen the ads about how TM has manufactured these clubs beyond the legal limit and then brought them back to legal with their resin.

 

I just saw a tour issue head with a CT of 240 on the label. Wouldn't you think that TM would keep all of the tour issue stuff as high as possible so their claims dont seem so outrageous? I was shocked to see the CT number on a tour issue product.

 

I know the legal limit was set at 239 with a tolerance of +18 giving the maximum allowable CT at 257. Are they just shooting for the 239 number?

TSR3 TSi3 3 Wood | 915H 18 |  T150 4-PW Vokey SM9  50, 54, 58 |  Ping PLD Anser 2D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 52
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I watched a video from TM and they constantly talk about COR testing and not CT when talking about the new drivers being maxed out. I don’t know how much correlation those numbers would have to one another.

[color=#000000][b]TM 2016 M2 10.5 w/KK Silver 60 S [/b][/color]
[color=#000000][b]TM 2016 M1 3(15) w/KK Black 70 S [/b][/color]
[b][color=#0000ff]TM Rescue 11 3(18) w/NVS Org Next Gen 85 S
Nike VPC 4-PW w/Nippon Modus Tour 120 Stiff[/color][/b]
[color=#000000][b]TM MG2 52 SB and 58 LB w/DGS200  [/b]
[b]TM Spider X Copper [/b][/color]
[b][color=#000000]TM TP5 Pix[/color][/b]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep. I saw that too OP. I grabbed a screen shot of that head and label. If I can get it resized I’ll post.

 

Pretty clear proof that the TM marketing campaign is all lies. The tour heads aren’t even at max.

Callaway epic max LS 9* GD-M9003 7x 

TM Sim2 max tour  16* GD  ADHD 8x 

srixon zx 19* elements 9F5T 

Cobra king SZ 25.5* KBS TD cat 5 70 

TM p7mc 5-pw Mmt125tx 

Mizuno T22 raw 52-56-60 s400

LAB Mezz Max armlock 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did some research on how CT translates to distance and found this from Tom Wishon:

 

"So that means a CT 257 is equivalent to a COR 0.830.  For the comparison sake, a CT 239 correlates to a COR of 0.822.   So that means a driver head with a 245 CT and another head with a 255 CT are only going to be separated in COR by 0.0045.   255 CT will be 0.8285 and 245 CT will be 0.8240.   In terms of ball speed that is really REALLY small and hardly even worth worrying about - basically you are talking about a 1 to 1.5 mph difference in ball speed at the very most.   1mph increase in ball speed is equivalent to about 1.8 yards in carry distance."

TSR3 TSi3 3 Wood | 915H 18 |  T150 4-PW Vokey SM9  50, 54, 58 |  Ping PLD Anser 2D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wait... so the limit manufacturers are legally required to shoot for is 239. They are given a little leeway for manufacturing tolerances. Taylormade comes up with a superior manufacturing technique that allows for tighter tolerances. They shoot for 239 and hit 240 (very impressive in my opinion), and people are upset about that? Honestly, I am more convinced that the resin works now. If I saw a bunch of heads with 250/248/245 I would say that the resin doesn’t work and they still have industry standard flaws in their manufacturing tolerances.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wait... so the limit manufacturers are legally required to shoot for is 239. They are given a little leeway for manufacturing tolerances. Taylormade comes up with a superior manufacturing technique that allows for tighter tolerances. They shoot for 239 and hit 240 (very impressive in my opinion), and people are upset about that? Honestly, I am more convinced that the resin works now. If I saw a bunch of heads with 250/248/245 I would say that the resin doesn’t work and they still have industry standard flaws in their manufacturing tolerances.

 

1 single tour issue head is all it takes to convince you? I can find several tour issue Taylormade heads at 240 going back several years. Doesn't that just mean that they have been at the limit all along, and this is just marketing hype?

 

The tour issue heads we get on ebay are the duds that the tour players don't want. As stated above, 257 correlates to .830 cor, and tour players want to maximize distance. The fact that they claim they can now make heads at the limit all around and have to dial them down, yet still produce clubs that fall below the limit, suggests that the speed injection is more of the same gimmick marketing.

 

Variable face thickness has been around for awhile now. Almost all clubs will be close to .830 cor in the sweet spot, and almost all clubs will do what they can to spread that .830 cor across the face as far as possible. This concept is nothing new, and Taylormade is taking advantage of a lot of people with deceptive marketing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wait... so the limit manufacturers are legally required to shoot for is 239. They are given a little leeway for manufacturing tolerances. Taylormade comes up with a superior manufacturing technique that allows for tighter tolerances. They shoot for 239 and hit 240 (very impressive in my opinion), and people are upset about that? Honestly, I am more convinced that the resin works now. If I saw a bunch of heads with 250/248/245 I would say that the resin doesn’t work and they still have industry standard flaws in their manufacturing tolerances.

Look at Ebay. The heads are certainly all over the place in regards to CT. If you have the ability to dial back the heads to maximize ball speeds, then do it. Do we really think that they test every single head?

 

I thought the idea was brilliant but only if they are doing it to maximize ball speeds which they clearly are not doing.

TSR3 TSi3 3 Wood | 915H 18 |  T150 4-PW Vokey SM9  50, 54, 58 |  Ping PLD Anser 2D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look at Ebay. The heads are certainly all over the place in regards to CT. If you have the ability to dial back the heads to maximize ball speeds, then do it. Do we really think that they test every single head?

 

I thought the idea was brilliant but only if they are doing it to maximize ball speeds which they clearly are not doing.

 

The only thing M5/M6 is accomplishing is fitting the current trend of injecting foam into a hollow body cavity. They're taking something trendy and familiar with irons and applying it to woods. All it is doing is accomplishing a variable thickness face in a different way. Maybe it is a subtle improvement, but it isn't anything that's going to give you a 1.5 smash dead off the low heel.

 

COR has been maximized for awhile now. The next number that manufacturers need to reach is the 5900 g/cm^2 MOI, while keeping launch and spin down. Find the right hottest face/loft/face angle/weight with the right shaft combo that takes the highest MOI head (G400 Max) and gives you the most ideal launch and spin numbers for your swing speed. That's the key to getting the most consistent driver performance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look at Ebay. The heads are certainly all over the place in regards to CT. If you have the ability to dial back the heads to maximize ball speeds, then do it. Do we really think that they test every single head?

 

I thought the idea was brilliant but only if they are doing it to maximize ball speeds which they clearly are not doing.

 

The only thing M5/M6 is accomplishing is fitting the current trend of injecting foam into a hollow body cavity. They're taking something trendy and familiar with irons and applying it to woods. All it is doing is accomplishing a variable thickness face in a different way. Maybe it is a subtle improvement, but it isn't anything that's going to give you a 1.5 smash dead off the low heel.

 

COR has been maximized for awhile now. The next number that manufacturers need to reach is the 5900 g/cm^2 MOI, while keeping launch and spin down. Find the right hottest face/loft/face angle/shaft combo that takes the highest MOI head (G400 Max) and gives you the most ideal launch and spin numbers for your swing speed. That's the key to getting the most consistent driver performance.

COR limit is maximized. Manufacturing to the limit is still not happening and I'm sure tolerances make it extremely different for mass produced heads.

TSR3 TSi3 3 Wood | 915H 18 |  T150 4-PW Vokey SM9  50, 54, 58 |  Ping PLD Anser 2D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look at Ebay. The heads are certainly all over the place in regards to CT. If you have the ability to dial back the heads to maximize ball speeds, then do it. Do we really think that they test every single head?

 

I thought the idea was brilliant but only if they are doing it to maximize ball speeds which they clearly are not doing.

 

The only thing M5/M6 is accomplishing is fitting the current trend of injecting foam into a hollow body cavity. They're taking something trendy and familiar with irons and applying it to woods. All it is doing is accomplishing a variable thickness face in a different way. Maybe it is a subtle improvement, but it isn't anything that's going to give you a 1.5 smash dead off the low heel.

 

COR has been maximized for awhile now. The next number that manufacturers need to reach is the 5900 g/cm^2 MOI, while keeping launch and spin down. Find the right hottest face/loft/face angle/shaft combo that takes the highest MOI head (G400 Max) and gives you the most ideal launch and spin numbers for your swing speed. That's the key to getting the most consistent driver performance.

COR limit is maximized. Manufacturing to the limit is still not happening and I'm sure tolerances make it extremely different for mass produced heads.

 

Well, just like any process, you'll get some that come out too low and some that come out over the limit. It's possible that you could get either of those off the rack, as they aren't sorting and testing tens of thousands of heads. All tour issue accomplishes is hand picking and measuring heads that fit the specs that the golfer needs, including picking the hottest head possible. The reason you see sub 245 ct heads on ebay is because whoever the golfer the head was picked for didn't want it due to the less hot face.

 

Either way, speed injection is a gimmick, and variable face thickness to spread the sweet spot across the greatest portion of a head has been around for awhile now. The OEMs are just taking one possible measure of forgiveness in the form of retained ball speeds across the face, attempting to do it a little bit better (you'll never get a 1.5 smash off the low heel, for example) and calling it something new.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tom has also stated that manufacturers are supposed to shoot for the actual limit which is 239 miliseconds. In fact there have been cases where manufacturers have been put on notice for products consistently approaching the 257 number. If TM was to start manufacturing clubs at the 257 limit consistently they would get in trouble. 257 is meant to be a buffer, not the goal.

Let me tell you what Wooderson is packin'
Sim Max 12° Speeder NX 6s
Sim2 Max 15°
Ping G410 21° 
Ping G425 22°/25°
Ping G430 6-PW AWT Stiff
Ping Glide 3.0 GW/SW

Ping Eye 2 XG LW

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wait... so the limit manufacturers are legally required to shoot for is 239. They are given a little leeway for manufacturing tolerances. Taylormade comes up with a superior manufacturing technique that allows for tighter tolerances. They shoot for 239 and hit 240 (very impressive in my opinion), and people are upset about that? Honestly, I am more convinced that the resin works now. If I saw a bunch of heads with 250/248/245 I would say that the resin doesn’t work and they still have industry standard flaws in their manufacturing tolerances.

Look at Ebay. The heads are certainly all over the place in regards to CT. If you have the ability to dial back the heads to maximize ball speeds, then do it. Do we really think that they test every single head?

 

I thought the idea was brilliant but only if they are doing it to maximize ball speeds which they clearly are not doing.

 

That’s been my point all along. Tm hints and leads us to believe that hey are testing every single retail head. They most certainly are not. This new manufacturing process isn’t what it’s being advertised to be.

Callaway epic max LS 9* GD-M9003 7x 

TM Sim2 max tour  16* GD  ADHD 8x 

srixon zx 19* elements 9F5T 

Cobra king SZ 25.5* KBS TD cat 5 70 

TM p7mc 5-pw Mmt125tx 

Mizuno T22 raw 52-56-60 s400

LAB Mezz Max armlock 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tom has also stated that manufacturers are supposed to shoot for the actual limit which is 239 miliseconds. In fact there have been cases where manufacturers have been put on notice for products consistently approaching the 257 number. If TM was to start manufacturing clubs at the 257 limit consistently they would get in trouble. 257 is meant to be a buffer, not the goal.

 

A lot of amateur golfers would be better off going to a Tom Wishon certified fitter and playing Wishon components. Until you get into the 100+ mph swing speed/very aggressive tempo transition area, his components can fit just about anyone well. I personally haven't been able to find anything that beats Wishon fairway woods, hybrids, and irons. My only gripe is that his component designs don't include a lot of heavier shaft options.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wait... so the limit manufacturers are legally required to shoot for is 239. They are given a little leeway for manufacturing tolerances. Taylormade comes up with a superior manufacturing technique that allows for tighter tolerances. They shoot for 239 and hit 240 (very impressive in my opinion), and people are upset about that? Honestly, I am more convinced that the resin works now. If I saw a bunch of heads with 250/248/245 I would say that the resin doesn’t work and they still have industry standard flaws in their manufacturing tolerances.

 

You may have seen where it's been discussed a little in a different TM M5/M6 thread. I linked to Tom Wishon's post on this from a few years ago.

 

Other thread: http://www.golfwrx.c...0#entry18625602

 

Part of what I quoted from Mr. Wishon's original post:

 

I'm not sure if the USGA would even allow all heads to be right at 257ct, based on this post by Tom Wishon in late 2015.

 

http://www.golfwrx.com/forums/topic/1241826-ct-scores-on-tour-issue-heads-and-clubs/#entry12379114

 

Lots of good info in that post, but a few interesting quotes from it:

 

The reason that there is a designation for 239 vs 257 in CT measurements is because the USGA wants club companies to design their high COR clubheads so that the design specs point to a 239 CT when every spec in the production of the head model is achieved perfectly. They do not want companies to design their faces so that the CT would be 257 if all specs are hit perfectly.

 

In fact, when you send high COR models into the USGA for conformity testing, if the driver/wood is found to have a CT over 239 but less than 257, it is ruled provisionally conforming - which means the USGA is warning the company to watch their specs on the heads or to dial down the face specs so as to avoid the possibility of heads coming off the line over the CT/COR limit when the +/- tolerances affecting the CT/COR come into play. If your test samples are at 239 or lower for the USGA CT test, then you get a fully conforming, no warning, letter from the USGA.

 

Now it will be true that when it comes to the tour players' drivers and high COR clubs, the companies will perform repeated CT measurements to be 100% sure that no club they give a tour player would be over the 257CT limit. Most will not even get that close to 257 with their tour players' clubs and will keep their clubheads not higher than 250 CT. Reason is because whoever is putting on the tournament in which the pros are playing, whether that be the USGA, PGA Tour or whoever, does have the right to perform their own CT testing at the tournament - should there be any suspicion that a player might be using a club with a CT over the limit.

 

So it looks like, if this hasn't been updated by the USGA to accommodate TaylorMade's new manufacturing process, that the USGA wants the clubs to be closer to 239 than 257 to qualify as "fully conforming". Especially if they (manufacturer) won't even typically issue heads to Tour players that cross 250 CT, as the last quote states.

 

ADDED: The way that I read all of that suggests that 239 is the mark the USGA wants clubs at (or below), but there's some headroom if a few come in slightly over. So anything above 239 (again, my opinion) would be a "spicy" or "hot" (but still legal) head...looks like this is traditionally what Tour pros were given...all the heads above 239. TaylorMade's process is probably just insuring that all heads are at least 239.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wait... so the limit manufacturers are legally required to shoot for is 239. They are given a little leeway for manufacturing tolerances. Taylormade comes up with a superior manufacturing technique that allows for tighter tolerances. They shoot for 239 and hit 240 (very impressive in my opinion), and people are upset about that? Honestly, I am more convinced that the resin works now. If I saw a bunch of heads with 250/248/245 I would say that the resin doesn't work and they still have industry standard flaws in their manufacturing tolerances.

Look at Ebay. The heads are certainly all over the place in regards to CT. If you have the ability to dial back the heads to maximize ball speeds, then do it. Do we really think that they test every single head?

 

I thought the idea was brilliant but only if they are doing it to maximize ball speeds which they clearly are not doing.

 

That's been my point all along. Tm hints and leads us to believe that hey are testing every single retail head. They most certainly are not. This new manufacturing process isn't what it's being advertised to be.

 

We know this how? I also have no way of really knowing if it's true or not, but I have also had far too many people within the company that I trust tell me it is something they are doing for me NOT to believe it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wait... so the limit manufacturers are legally required to shoot for is 239. They are given a little leeway for manufacturing tolerances. Taylormade comes up with a superior manufacturing technique that allows for tighter tolerances. They shoot for 239 and hit 240 (very impressive in my opinion), and people are upset about that? Honestly, I am more convinced that the resin works now. If I saw a bunch of heads with 250/248/245 I would say that the resin doesn't work and they still have industry standard flaws in their manufacturing tolerances.

Look at Ebay. The heads are certainly all over the place in regards to CT. If you have the ability to dial back the heads to maximize ball speeds, then do it. Do we really think that they test every single head?

 

I thought the idea was brilliant but only if they are doing it to maximize ball speeds which they clearly are not doing.

 

That's been my point all along. Tm hints and leads us to believe that hey are testing every single retail head. They most certainly are not. This new manufacturing process isn't what it's being advertised to be.

 

We know this how? I also have no way of really knowing if it's true or not, but I have also had far too many people within the company that I trust tell me it is something they are doing for me NOT to believe it.

 

By looking at the known spec heads out there. They aren’t all 240. If all the tour heads aren’t adjusted then why would we expect alll the retail heads to be ?

 

What you guys don't understand is the difference between 257 and 239 is literally like a yard. Aka it doesn't matter. Buy a tour head because you wanna know the specs exactly not because of ct which is a microscopic difference

 

That’s not the argument. The argument is that Tm is using fluff yet again to sell drivers. They aren’t doing anything they didn’t do with m3-4 except inject two small spots with goo.

Callaway epic max LS 9* GD-M9003 7x 

TM Sim2 max tour  16* GD  ADHD 8x 

srixon zx 19* elements 9F5T 

Cobra king SZ 25.5* KBS TD cat 5 70 

TM p7mc 5-pw Mmt125tx 

Mizuno T22 raw 52-56-60 s400

LAB Mezz Max armlock 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

An extremely quick eBay search just yeilded a 242, 243 , 3 248s and a 237. Same exact range I’ve always shopped and seen. And I’ve looked since the sldr days.

Callaway epic max LS 9* GD-M9003 7x 

TM Sim2 max tour  16* GD  ADHD 8x 

srixon zx 19* elements 9F5T 

Cobra king SZ 25.5* KBS TD cat 5 70 

TM p7mc 5-pw Mmt125tx 

Mizuno T22 raw 52-56-60 s400

LAB Mezz Max armlock 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

By looking at the known spec heads out there. They aren't all 240. If all the tour heads aren't adjusted then why would we expect alll the retail heads to be ?

 

 

 

According to Tom Wishon's post, all heads cannot test greater than 239 for a manufacturer, or the are ruled "provisionally conforming" and not fully conforming. So the mark is 239 or less, with an allowance for some to be above that 239. Again, I'm assuming this hasn't changed with the USGA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

By looking at the known spec heads out there. They aren't all 240. If all the tour heads aren't adjusted then why would we expect alll the retail heads to be ?

 

 

 

According to Tom Wishon's post, all heads cannot test greater than 239 for a manufacturer, or the are ruled "provisionally conforming" and not fully conforming. So the mark is 239 or less, with an allowance for some to be above that 239. Again, I'm assuming this hasn't changed with the USGA.

 

Right. Not arguing that.

 

What irks me is the commercials for retail heads. They lead us to believe each head is illegal. , then injected and tuned to the limit. Spec stickers say that’s not true. They are just injecting a measured amount and backing them back into the range of legal. No tuning or measurements to get the amount of injection same. Some even less than 239. They aren’t measuring or tuning Or else they’d all be same spec. Which nets us the exact same specs as m3-m4. It’s just no different.

Callaway epic max LS 9* GD-M9003 7x 

TM Sim2 max tour  16* GD  ADHD 8x 

srixon zx 19* elements 9F5T 

Cobra king SZ 25.5* KBS TD cat 5 70 

TM p7mc 5-pw Mmt125tx 

Mizuno T22 raw 52-56-60 s400

LAB Mezz Max armlock 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

TM has come up with a process that works/trys to ensure that nobody gets a dud head, and I think that's a great idea.

The problem with all this is the marketing, but that's totally understandable... "Everybody get faster!" sounds a lot lot better than "Nobody gets a dud!"

 

Marketing of pretty much anything and everything, regardless of manufacturer or segment, is all a bunch of fluff. We all know that. It just doesn't really bother me.

Rogue ST LS 10.5 | TSi2 15 | G425 4H 20.5 | ZX4 4 | ZX5 5-P | CBX ZC 48 & 52.5 | RTX ZC TR 58 | Itsy Bitsy Spider | TP5x

Link to comment
Share on other sites

By looking at the known spec heads out there. They aren't all 240. If all the tour heads aren't adjusted then why would we expect alll the retail heads to be ?

 

 

 

According to Tom Wishon's post, all heads cannot test greater than 239 for a manufacturer, or the are ruled "provisionally conforming" and not fully conforming. So the mark is 239 or less, with an allowance for some to be above that 239. Again, I'm assuming this hasn't changed with the USGA.

 

Right. Not arguing that.

 

What irks me is the commercials for retail heads. They lead us to believe each head is illegal. , then objected and tuned to the limit. Spec stickers say that's not true. They are just injecting a measured amount and backing them back into the range of legal. No tuning or measurements to get the amount of injection same. Or else they'd all be same spec. Which nets is the exact same specs as m3-m4. It's just no different.

 

I think they are testing...something. Not sure what it is, or if they are testing every head. Again, I've not seen that process with my own eyes. But I do know that heads (M5/M6, either one) can have differing amounts of resin in them, and in different locations...some having it only in the toe side port, some only in the heel, and some in both ports. So there's something that determines where resin goes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe true. And I’ll stop my ranting by saying I’m not down on TM. At least not their equipment. I’ve tested a low lofted m5 titanium 3 wood and it’s rediculous how long it is. I could not carry driver on most any course locally I’ve played if I had one in the bag. But their marketing just puts me off. Feels like shaking hands with the devil playing one of their sticks.

Callaway epic max LS 9* GD-M9003 7x 

TM Sim2 max tour  16* GD  ADHD 8x 

srixon zx 19* elements 9F5T 

Cobra king SZ 25.5* KBS TD cat 5 70 

TM p7mc 5-pw Mmt125tx 

Mizuno T22 raw 52-56-60 s400

LAB Mezz Max armlock 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

By looking at the known spec heads out there. They aren't all 240. If all the tour heads aren't adjusted then why would we expect alll the retail heads to be ?

 

 

 

According to Tom Wishon's post, all heads cannot test greater than 239 for a manufacturer, or the are ruled "provisionally conforming" and not fully conforming. So the mark is 239 or less, with an allowance for some to be above that 239. Again, I'm assuming this hasn't changed with the USGA.

 

Right. Not arguing that.

 

What irks me is the commercials for retail heads. They lead us to believe each head is illegal. , then objected and tuned to the limit. Spec stickers say that's not true. They are just injecting a measured amount and backing them back into the range of legal. No tuning or measurements to get the amount of injection same. Or else they'd all be same spec. Which nets is the exact same specs as m3-m4. It's just no different.

 

I think they are testing...something. Not sure what it is, or if they are testing every head. Again, I've not seen that process with my own eyes. But I do know that heads (M5/M6, either one) can have differing amounts of resin in them, and in different locations...some having it only in the toe side port, some only in the heel, and some in both ports. So there's something that determines where resin goes.

 

How are you able to tell where the foam is injected?

Ping G430 Max 10K 10.5° driver - Diamana GT 60S

Ping G430 Max 15° #3 fairway - Diamana TB 70S

Ping G430 Max 21° #7 fairway - Diamana TB 80S

Ping G430 Max 26° #5 hybrid - MMTh 90S

Mizuno Pro 243 4-PW irons - MMT 105S

Mizuno T24 Raw 48°-10S wedge - MMT 105S

Mizuno T24 Raw 54°-10S and 60°-06X wedges - MMT Scoring Wedge 105S

Ping PLD Ally Blue 4

Titleist Pro V1x

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most of the Tour issue TM heads we have/had are 245-255 in the CT range. Occasionally you'll get one a little lower but honestly it equates to a yard or two.

 

I want that yard though... I want all the yards I can get ?

 

Haha. As long as the CT is in the 240's somewhere I am satisfied. The really high CT ones over 252 or so sell for a super premium even though it's less than a yard of carry from 245 to 255. Still guys will pay 15% more or so for that yard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting topic. In to read responses.

Callaway Epic MAX 10.5*
Callaway Mavrik MAX 15*
Taylor Made M4 19* & 22* hybrids
PING G410 5-U w/DG 105s 
Cleveland RTX 54* & 58*
Odyssey Stroke Lab Big Seven Toe Up vs MEZZ1 vs Seemore
Precision Pro Nx7 Pro, Garmin S60 (watch)


https://forums.golfwrx.com/discussion/1580770/recaps-the-taylormade-twistfaceexperience-7-golfwrx-members-visit-the-kingdom-for-an-exclusive-m3/p1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

By looking at the known spec heads out there. They aren't all 240. If all the tour heads aren't adjusted then why would we expect alll the retail heads to be ?

 

 

 

According to Tom Wishon's post, all heads cannot test greater than 239 for a manufacturer, or the are ruled "provisionally conforming" and not fully conforming. So the mark is 239 or less, with an allowance for some to be above that 239. Again, I'm assuming this hasn't changed with the USGA.

 

Right. Not arguing that.

 

What irks me is the commercials for retail heads. They lead us to believe each head is illegal. , then injected and tuned to the limit. Spec stickers say that's not true. They are just injecting a measured amount and backing them back into the range of legal. No tuning or measurements to get the amount of injection same. Some even less than 239. They aren't measuring or tuning Or else they'd all be same spec. Which nets us the exact same specs as m3-m4. It's just no different.

 

So you're irked by the truth, because the process they advertise is exactly what's happening. Every single head is tested for face hotness after construction. The test results are run through an algorithm that determines how much resin to add into the heel and toe ports for that head based on the head's test results. So yes, the amount of resin is tuned for that specific head. After injection, the head is tested again to insure it's as close to the limit as they can currently get it. Some heads will need more resin, some less. Some will need more in the toe than the heel, some the opposite. The goal is not to inject the same amount of resin in each head; rather, the goal is to inject the correct amount of resin into each head to bring that head as close to the limit as they can get it. These are facts, not marketing BS. If this was a lie or stretch of the truth, their VP of Product Creation would be in a lot of hot water for describing it as such. Obviously that's not the case.

 

This injection process has far tighter tolerances than simply constructing a head, which is why they can get every head hotter than they could before. There is still going to be a tolerance with the resin injection and the performance of the algorithm, so every head will not measure exactly the same. This means you will see different CT values on spec stickers. But all heads at retail will be right up close to the highest legal value, whereas before the normal head construction process resulted in heads with a wider variance. With M3/M4 and all prior heads, the target face hotness value had to be intentionally dialed back below the limit so that too many heads didn't end up over the limit.

 

One thing to keep in mind is that TaylorMade has never advertised anything about CT scores. When I first head about the process, I too assumed we were talking about heads close to 257, but then I did some research and found Tom Wishon's comments about the USGA and provisional conformance. I even asked TaylorMade specifically about CT and the response was framed as "legal limit" rather than a specific CT score. But this doesn't invalidate the claims. Manufacturers have to target 239 and not 257. There is no lie or marketing handwaving here on the part of TaylorMade. They're now making every head as hot as they can currently make them, just as they claim.

 

You keep saying you don't bag on TM, but you really do. You seldom take the time to understand what's actually going on and instead spread FUD around based on your dislike of the marketing. That's not helpful for anyone.

TaylorMade Stealth2 Plus 9.0, Ventus Black 6X, 45.5"

TaylorMade Stealth2 Plus 4 (16.5), HZRDUS Smoke Blue RDX 6.5 70g, 42.5"

TaylorMade P790 3 (2021), DG X100 (SSx2)

TaylorMade P7MC Raw 4-PW, DG Mid X100 (SSx1)
TaylorMade MG4 50, 54 - DG S400

Titleist SM9 58T - DG S400
Scotty Cameron Oil Can Newport, 34"
TaylorMade TP5x (2021)

My WITB Post

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Our picks

    • 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open - Discussion and links to Photos
      Please put any questions or Comments here
       
       
       
      General Albums
       
      2024 Texas Children's Houston Open - Monday #1
      2024 Texas Children's Houston Open - Monday #2
      2024 Texas Children's Houston Open - Tuesday #1
      2024 Texas Children's Houston Open - Tuesday #2
      2024 Texas Children's Houston Open - Tuesday #3
       
       
       
       
      WITB Albums
       
      Thorbjorn Olesen - WITB - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Ben Silverman - WITB - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Jesse Droemer - SoTX PGA Section POY - WITB - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      David Lipsky - WITB - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Martin Trainer - WITB - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Zac Blair - WITB - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Jacob Bridgeman - WITB - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Trace Crowe - WITB - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Jimmy Walker - WITB - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Daniel Berger - WITB(very mini) - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Chesson Hadley - WITB - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Callum McNeill - WITB - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Rhein Gibson - WITB - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Patrick Fishburn - WITB - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Peter Malnati - WITB - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Raul Pereda - WITB - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Gary Woodland WITB (New driver, iron shafts) – 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Padraig Harrington WITB – 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
       
       
       
       
      Pullout Albums
       
      Tom Hoge's custom Cameron - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Cameron putter - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Piretti putters - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Ping putter - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Kevin Dougherty's custom Cameron putter - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Bettinardi putter - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Cameron putter - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Erik Barnes testing an all-black Axis1 putter – 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Tony Finau's new driver shaft – 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
       
       
       
       
       
      • 7 replies
    • 2024 Valspar Championship WITB Photos (Thanks to bvmagic)- Discussion & Links to Photos
      This weeks WITB Pics are from member bvmagic (Brian). Brian's first event for WRX was in 2008 at Bayhill while in college. Thanks so much bv.
       
      Please put your comments or question on this thread. Links to all the threads are below...
       
       
       
       
        • Like
      • 31 replies
    • 2024 Arnold Palmer Invitational - Discussion and Links to Photos
      Please put any questions or comments here
       
       
       
      General Albums
       
      2024 Arnold Palmer Invitational - Monday #1
      2024 Arnold Palmer Invitational - Monday #2
      2024 Arnold Palmer Invitational - Monday #3
       
       
       
       
      WITB Albums
       
      Matt (LFG) Every - WITB - 2024 Arnold Palmer Invitational
      Sahith Theegala - WITB - 2024 Arnold Palmer Invitational
       
       
       
       
       
      Pullout Albums
       
      New Cameron putters (and new "LD" grip) - 2024 Arnold Palmer Invitational
      New Bettinardi MB & CB irons - 2024 Arnold Palmer Invitational
      Custom Bettinardi API putter cover - 2024 Arnold Palmer Invitational
      Custom Swag API covers - 2024 Arnold Palmer Invitational
      New Golf Pride Reverse Taper grips - 2024 Arnold Palmer Invitational
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
        • Like
      • 15 replies
    • 2024 Cognizant Classic - Discussion and Links to Photos
      Please put any questions or comments here
       
       
       
       
      General Albums
       
      2024 Cognizant Classic - Monday #1
      2024 Cognizant Classic - Monday #2
      2024 Cognizant Classic - Monday #3
      2024 Cognizant Classic - Monday #4
       
       
       
      WITB Albums
       
      Brandt Snedeker - WITB - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Max Greyserman - WITB - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Eric Cole - WITB - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Carl Yuan - WITb - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Russell Henley - WITB - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Justin Sun - WITB - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Alex Noren - WITB - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Shane Lowry - WITB - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Taylor Montgomery - WITB - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Jake Knapp (KnappTime_ltd) - WITB - - 2024 Cognizant Classic
       
       
       
      Pullout Albums
       
      New Super Stoke Pistol Lock 1.0 & 2.0 grips - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      LA Golf new insert putter - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      New Garsen Quad Tour 15 grip - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      New Swag covers - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Jacob Bridgeman's custom Cameron putter - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Bud Cauley's custom Cameron putters - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Ryo Hisatsune's custom Cameron putter - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Chris Kirk - new black Callaway Apex CB irons and a few Odyssey putters - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Alejandro Tosti's custom Cameron putter - 2024 Cognizant Classic
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
        • Like
      • 2 replies
    • 2024 Genesis Invitational - Discussion and Links to Photos
      Please put any questions or comments here
       
       
       
      General Albums
       
      2024 Genesis Invitational - Monday #1
      2024 Genesis Invitational - Monday #2
      2024 Genesis Invitational - Tuesday #1
      2024 Genesis Invitational - Tuesday #2
      2024 Genesis Invitational - Tuesday #3
      2024 Genesis Invitational - Tuesday #4
       
       
       
       
      WITB Albums
       
      Rory McIlroy - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Sepp Straka - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Patrick Rodgers - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Brendon Todd - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Denny McCarthy - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Corey Conners - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Chase Johnson - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Tiger Woods - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Tommy Fleetwood - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Matt Fitzpatrick - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Si Woo Kim - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Viktor Hovland - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Wyndham Clark - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Cam Davis - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Nick Taylor - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Ben Baller WITB update (New putter, driver, hybrid and shafts) – 2024 Genesis Invitational
       
       
       
       
       
      Pullout Albums
       
      New Vortex Golf rangefinder - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      New Fujikura Ventus shaft - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Tiger Woods & TaylorMade "Sun Day Red" apparel launch event, product photos – 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Tiger Woods Sun Day Red golf shoes - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Aretera shafts - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      New Toulon putters - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Tiger Woods' new white "Sun Day Red" golf shoe prototypes – 2024 Genesis Invitational
       
       
       
       
       
      • 22 replies

×
×
  • Create New...