Wilson Calls Out TaylorMade on "new" RocketBladez Technology

[jwolfe15]

[quote name='BeTheBall' timestamp='1351108987' post='5840439']
[quote name='displayname' timestamp='1351095302' post='5839209']
I mentioned this in the RocketBladez thread, but I thought this was enough to post on it's own.
When the RocketBladez were announced yesterday, I thought the tech looked familiar. My first thought was the Nike CCI Cast. That was also funny because the Nike did a compression channel in a driver before Adams and TM did it in woods.

But Wilson Staff was kind enough to let everyone know the truth on their Facebook page. They did this exact technology, and same basic marketing DECADES ago with the Wilson Reflex.
[url="https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10151125009477675&set=a.80492297674.80818.55676157674&type=1&theater"]https://www.facebook...&type=1[/url]

I love that Wilson just called them out. It was a bold move, and I hope they get some notice for it. Sadly they probably will still get beat out by TM in the sales area. TM has amazing marketing, and it's hard to deny it. But hats off to Wilson for this move. It made me laugh.


[attachment=1395021:Reflex.JPG]
[/quote]

Oh, another 6 months must have gone by as TM puts out ANOTHER model. A trampoline effect, like loose strings in a tennis racket, will create more distance but much less control. I don't use my calendar any more, I just watch for new TM "marketing breakthroughs". So curious, do you golfers here really fall for this crap? Make a "lighter grip for more distance" and "hit our 49" shaft and we'll get YOU 15 MORE YARDS", yeah, in the woods! Who remembers the huge marketing campaign of the "BUBBLE SHAFT"? Hmmm, I bought in and got one and saw 0 change, apparently I'm not the only one as the "new great bubble shaft" was never used again. I guess being lied to during these political times has me short fused for "marketing schemes/slants", it' all about the $$$. BTW, I hit R11's so I am not anti-TM, just anti TM marketing promises every other month.
[/quote]

Wow, totally agree. I didn't know there was this technology to still be discovered. TM must have some crazy engineers that have figured out things no one else in the world can. It's so great to get on here and see that people aren't dumb enough to buy into all this hype, that some people can see beyond the commercials and the 5000+ pros they sponsor.

[GooseHook]

[quote name='TheDarkOne' timestamp='1351119890' post='5841255']
[quote name='displayname' timestamp='1351095302' post='5839209']
I mentioned this in the RocketBladez thread, but I thought this was enough to post on it's own.
[/quote]

I was in the thread where you were the first to bring this up so I gave you a big plus one, great catch sir.

Also, can someone PLEASE get Tom Wishon to give his opinion of this new technology? That's the kind of reading a golf equipment nut dreams of. Heck I'd love to hear Tad Moore's view also.
[/quote]

What's Tad Moore's interest? Not really familiar with him, just curious.

[GooseHook]

[quote name='jwolfe15' timestamp='1351120523' post='5841289']
[quote name='BeTheBall' timestamp='1351108987' post='5840439']
[quote name='displayname' timestamp='1351095302' post='5839209']
I mentioned this in the RocketBladez thread, but I thought this was enough to post on it's own.
When the RocketBladez were announced yesterday, I thought the tech looked familiar. My first thought was the Nike CCI Cast. That was also funny because the Nike did a compression channel in a driver before Adams and TM did it in woods.

But Wilson Staff was kind enough to let everyone know the truth on their Facebook page. They did this exact technology, and same basic marketing DECADES ago with the Wilson Reflex.
[url="https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10151125009477675&set=a.80492297674.80818.55676157674&type=1&theater"]https://www.facebook...&type=1[/url]

I love that Wilson just called them out. It was a bold move, and I hope they get some notice for it. Sadly they probably will still get beat out by TM in the sales area. TM has amazing marketing, and it's hard to deny it. But hats off to Wilson for this move. It made me laugh.


[attachment=1395021:Reflex.JPG]
[/quote]

Oh, another 6 months must have gone by as TM puts out ANOTHER model. A trampoline effect, like loose strings in a tennis racket, will create more distance but much less control. I don't use my calendar any more, I just watch for new TM "marketing breakthroughs". So curious, do you golfers here really fall for this crap? Make a "lighter grip for more distance" and "hit our 49" shaft and we'll get YOU 15 MORE YARDS", yeah, in the woods! Who remembers the huge marketing campaign of the "BUBBLE SHAFT"? Hmmm, I bought in and got one and saw 0 change, apparently I'm not the only one as the "new great bubble shaft" was never used again. I guess being lied to during these political times has me short fused for "marketing schemes/slants", it' all about the $$$. BTW, I hit R11's so I am not anti-TM, just anti TM marketing promises every other month.
[/quote]

Wow, totally agree. I didn't know there was this technology to still be discovered. TM must have some crazy engineers that have figured out things no one else in the world can. It's so great to get on here and see that people aren't dumb enough to buy into all this hype, that some people can see beyond the commercials and the 5000+ pros they sponsor.
[/quote]

I can assure you that any engineers worth their salt already have the next 2-3 years of products designed, or they're at least in prototype phase. It's the marketeers and bean counters that tell them what to release and when.

It's a big frustration for engineers in a corporate environment, but that's just the way it is.

[OUZO Power]

[quote name='displayname' timestamp='1351117557' post='5841089']
I think I should update, and TaylorMade's social media staff had a very detailed response in regards to this photo from Wilson.

From TM:
"[color=#333333]The Wilson Reflex iron was introduced more than 30 years ago. Iron design has progressed significantly from that time. The Reflex incorporates a slot that enhances face flexibility to increase COR (a term that wasn’t used back then). All i[/color][color=#333333]ron heads back then were rigid, with a COR measuring around .760. The Reflex measured around .800. RocketBladez COR is about 20 points higher. [/color]
[color=#333333]Also, the Reflex didn’t have enhancements like the RocketBladez’ complex face design, Inverted Cone, high MOI and low and centered CG location. The Reflex had a constant face thickness of about 3mm, while RocketBladez’ varying face thickness is 1.6 mm at its thinnest. The Reflex’s vertical CG was relatively high, about 20 mm above the ground, and the set didn’t employ progressive head design in terms of topline, sole width and MOI."[/color]

[color=#333333]Obviously TM didn't appreciate the joke, but they did take the time to respond, so I thought it was worth mentioning to all the technically inclined people here. [/color]
[/quote]From this response I still don't see how TM proves they didn't "copy" wilson.

[BigHook25]

[quote name='596' timestamp='1351119423' post='5841219']
All this for distance claims and the forgotten 26.5* lofted 6 iron. Will the resulting distance gain be from the iron itself or the 4.5* less loft in the 6 iron? My 5 iron (27*) has more loft then the TM 6 iron. Pretty soon the TM 6 iron will have 23* of loft and be claimed as the longest irons yet!!! That would make the 4 iron 15* and a total rocket. No longer need a 3 wood!!

TM engineers are total freaks of nature. Come out with ground breaking technology every 4-6 months.

Com' on Man!!!!!!!!!!
[/quote]

Yes, and this new 3-iron has 18 degrees of loft (can we say 2-iron) and has a shaft that is about an inch longer than my 3-iron now. Their steel shaft in these clubs are only 85 grams and the graphite are in the 60 gram range. So between the longer shaft, lower loft, and lighter shaft these new TM clubs will probably hit 2 clubs longer than what a real 6, 7, 8, etc. iron will. Unfortunately for the people who don't know any better, they will love the new fake distance, but will miss more greens. Some people just don't realize your irons are to perform at specific gaps and are more for accuracy. What good is hitting your PW 165 yards when now you have to fill that more many gaps below that yardage.

Yea, TM is definitely overhyping their stuff when the differences in golf technology from year to year is very minimal.

[Fore_Man]

Seriously!?

[KYMAR]

[quote name='Flyersby99' timestamp='1351109628' post='5840477']
I have a few TM clubs so I am not a hater....but.......TM "innovation" and their clubs are no better than others. They are a marketing machine. I always hear well tour pros would not play their driver if it was not good. Any manufacturer can make a prototype driver to anyone's specs. Cleveland could turn around and make Dustin Johnson a driver as good as he has now. Although it seems[b] every year TM claims their players are hitting the new driver 10-15 yards further yet it does not show up in their stats.[/b] Ahhhh marketing again.

As said before, they did not have any "innovation" with the slot in the RBZ line. Nike and Adams had versions before them but they would make you believe they started it all. Funny they bought Adams so their could be no issues with that technology. Similar scenario in the irons. They just make stuff that is a little different, sell to the public and then on to the next.
[/quote]

Where did they make this claim?

The most comical part of the "taylormade is pure marketing" type is their incessant need to misquote what they have said. I am not sure if this is intentional and done out of irrational hate, or people just don't pay attention, or think for themselves. Or maybe if they hear someone bang TM for their "marketing" and join in because there is a rebel element in it. Either way these posts are still funnier than any [i]actual [/i]claim TM has made. The weirdest part is TM has done and said plenty of real things that are worthy of criticism. The bottom line is, misquoting their marketing campaigns dont make [i]them [/i]look ridiculous at all.

I also have to say that while I am a huge fan of Wilson and hope for their success, the idea that POS reflex iron is the same tech is silly. From a practical standpoint, it's not even close to the same thing.

For the record, I have like 8 brands in my bag, 1 taylormade club which may sit out tomorrow as I have an itch to bust out the 9015D.

[justodd]

I hope they don't come after my dad, he has a slot on the bottom of his ping putter.

[xabia]

Good lord its amazing how people think TM bogarted something from 30 years ago, and that's the ONLY thing that makes those irons superior, It's clear that they are not the only ones to use a speed slot in any of their clubs so stop getting all torn up about it.. oh wait I forgot, THE LOFTS ARE JACKED UP!!! OMG WHAT WILL WE AL DO

[Jamboy72]

Kind of get the feeling TM got caught with their hand in the cookie jar...yes, designs have changed...in some ways a lot and in others not so much...but to give people any impression that this slot idea is entirely original and solely the work of TM is misleading...

[waaayright]

It is very evident from TM's response that they knew all about the Wilson Reflex irons and their specifications. No doubt they had a few on hand for "research" purposes.

We have reached the age of tweaks and everything old is new again....

[G N R]

[quote name='topekareal' timestamp='1351124062' post='5841553']
...but to give people any impression that this slot idea is entirely original and solely the work of TM is misleading...
[/quote]

I think that's the point that needs to be highlighted. Your average guy who will pick this up in a store, hear all the marketing crap that comes along with it, will have no idea about what Wilson did 30 years ago. To this guy, TMag has "done it again".

[Jamboy72]

Right...the marketing piece is always very interesting to me...don't get me wrong, there are wonderful and creative new ideas in the golf industry each year...but those true breakthrough type introductions are not the norm...

what will be really interesting to see is if other companies follow suit as they did with the adjustable driver, which imo, is one of the only significant product releases in the last 10 years...

[idiotbox]

imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.

[smackygolf]

OK. I want you whiners to post what company has new product coming out that isn't a descendant of a past product. I'll hang up and listen.

[Jamboy72]

I guess it depends on what you mean by "descendant" because if we're just talking about a hunk of metal at the end of a shaft with some kind of grip, then I guess there really can't be any revolutionary ideas...I think the better question is to come up with a list of advancements in the game in the last 50 years and define which of those changes had the greatest impact...and which were truly unique...I don't think Rocketbladez would qualify...

[jholz]

[quote name='KYMAR' timestamp='1351123040' post='5841483']
[quote name='Flyersby99' timestamp='1351109628' post='5840477']
I have a few TM clubs so I am not a hater....but.......TM "innovation" and their clubs are no better than others. They are a marketing machine. I always hear well tour pros would not play their driver if it was not good. Any manufacturer can make a prototype driver to anyone's specs. Cleveland could turn around and make Dustin Johnson a driver as good as he has now. Although it seems[b] every year TM claims their players are hitting the new driver 10-15 yards further yet it does not show up in their stats.[/b] Ahhhh marketing again.

As said before, they did not have any "innovation" with the slot in the RBZ line. Nike and Adams had versions before them but they would make you believe they started it all. Funny they bought Adams so their could be no issues with that technology. Similar scenario in the irons. They just make stuff that is a little different, sell to the public and then on to the next.
[/quote]

Where did they make this claim?

The most comical part of the "taylormade is pure marketing" type is their incessant need to misquote what they have said. I am not sure if this is intentional and done out of irrational hate, or people just don't pay attention, or think for themselves. Or maybe if they hear someone bang TM for their "marketing" and join in because there is a rebel element in it. Either way these posts are still funnier than any [i]actual [/i]claim TM has made. The weirdest part is TM has done and said plenty of real things that are worthy of criticism. The bottom line is, misquoting their marketing campaigns dont make [i]them [/i]look ridiculous at all.

I also have to say that while I am a huge fan of Wilson and hope for their success, the idea that POS reflex iron is the same tech is silly. From a practical standpoint, it's not even close to the same thing.

For the record, I have like 8 brands in my bag, 1 taylormade club which may sit out tomorrow as I have an itch to bust out the 9015D.
[/quote]

Man, I think you are the one who needs to read what people are saying. If you look at flyersby99's post he isn't quoting anyone, he is offering a broad and general characterization of TM's marketing that I think many would argue is fairly accurate - that's what the "it seems as though..." preface to his comment indicates.

Perhaps you could develop a point of criticism that is more substantive and a manner of communication that isn't so insulting. The venom with which you defend TaylorMade borders on the ridiculous.

[Llortamaisey]

[quote name='displayname' timestamp='1351117557' post='5841089']
I think I should update, and TaylorMade's social media staff had a very detailed response in regards to this photo from Wilson.

From TM:
"[color=#333333]The Wilson Reflex iron was introduced more than 30 years ago. Iron design has progressed significantly from that time. The Reflex incorporates a slot that enhances face flexibility to increase COR (a term that wasn’t used back then). All i[/color][color=#333333]ron heads back then were rigid, with a COR measuring around .760. The Reflex measured around .800. RocketBladez COR is about 20 points higher. [/color]
[color=#333333]Also, the Reflex didn’t have enhancements like the RocketBladez’ complex face design, Inverted Cone, high MOI and low and centered CG location. The Reflex had a constant face thickness of about 3mm, while RocketBladez’ varying face thickness is 1.6 mm at its thinnest. The Reflex’s vertical CG was relatively high, about 20 mm above the ground, and the set didn’t employ progressive head design in terms of topline, sole width and MOI."[/color]

[color="#333333"]Obviously TM didn't appreciate the joke, but they did take the time to respond, so I thought it was worth mentioning to all the technically inclined people here. [/color]
[/quote]

Thanks for posting. I would have never seen this if you hadn't. If TM truly didn't copy Wilson's idea, it's pretty convenient they had the Reflex's COR specs handy.

[KYMAR]

[quote name='jholz' timestamp='1351130720' post='5842037']
[quote name='KYMAR' timestamp='1351123040' post='5841483']
[quote name='Flyersby99' timestamp='1351109628' post='5840477']
I have a few TM clubs so I am not a hater....but.......TM "innovation" and their clubs are no better than others. They are a marketing machine. I always hear well tour pros would not play their driver if it was not good. Any manufacturer can make a prototype driver to anyone's specs. Cleveland could turn around and make Dustin Johnson a driver as good as he has now. Although it seems[b] every year TM claims their players are hitting the new driver 10-15 yards further yet it does not show up in their stats.[/b] Ahhhh marketing again.

As said before, they did not have any "innovation" with the slot in the RBZ line. Nike and Adams had versions before them but they would make you believe they started it all. Funny they bought Adams so their could be no issues with that technology. Similar scenario in the irons. They just make stuff that is a little different, sell to the public and then on to the next.
[/quote]

Where did they make this claim?

The most comical part of the "taylormade is pure marketing" type is their incessant need to misquote what they have said. I am not sure if this is intentional and done out of irrational hate, or people just don't pay attention, or think for themselves. Or maybe if they hear someone bang TM for their "marketing" and join in because there is a rebel element in it. Either way these posts are still funnier than any [i]actual [/i]claim TM has made. The weirdest part is TM has done and said plenty of real things that are worthy of criticism. The bottom line is, misquoting their marketing campaigns dont make [i]them [/i]look ridiculous at all.

I also have to say that while I am a huge fan of Wilson and hope for their success, the idea that POS reflex iron is the same tech is silly. From a practical standpoint, it's not even close to the same thing.

For the record, I have like 8 brands in my bag, 1 taylormade club which may sit out tomorrow as I have an itch to bust out the 9015D.
[/quote]

Man, I think you are the one who needs to read what people are saying. If you look at flyersby99's post he isn't quoting anyone, he is offering a broad and general characterization of TM's marketing that I think many would argue is fairly accurate - that's what the "it seems as though..." preface to his comment indicates.

Perhaps you could develop a point of criticism that is more substantive and a manner of communication that isn't so insulting. The venom with which you defend TaylorMade borders on the ridiculous.
[/quote]

LOL well if you could read you would note that the "seems" he used referenced the "every year" and not the claim of 15 yard gain. Otherwise, there would be zero need to reference the 15 yard gain not showing up in players stats. Clearly, he expected to see it based on a false belief that that's what they told him to expect. So, if someone is going to make a statement criticizing what they say. They can at least get the claims correct. Are you all that familiar with what they claim? I must admit to being skeptical when you call the above quoted post as "fairly accurate" There is nothing accurate about the part I bolded. How much more substance do you want? I have ZERO allegiance to any OEM. I do however have an allegiance to truth. And the amount of untrue statements about what they have actually said far outnumber the true ones.

And as i said, there is plenty to criticize TM for (the ATV wedge comes to mind imo) Hate how they pay players? Criticize and boycott! Don't like the white? Blast away! Hate the name Rocketballz? Make [i]another[/i] post about how stupid it is, Think the Adjustable sole plate on the R11 is a pure gimmick? CRUSH 'em for it! Think the updated sole plate on the R11S is even MORE of a gimmick? Hang the designer in effigy!! At least those are [i]actual things[/i] you can be mad at. Being mad at fiction is what is really ridiculous.

[hef63303]

Been a long time since there was something that was really new.

[golfware]

When I saw their Facebook post I was LMAO!!

[lunny]

Wilson needs to make those irons again!!!!!

[SteveL1]

Am I missing something here? If the 3-6 irons have the slot but the 7-SW don't, won't that create a huge gap between the 6 & 7. I can just see it now......I have a 170 yards to the pin but my 7 only goes 160 and the 6 goes 195, 5 goes 210, 4 goes 220. Hmmmmm, don't need that 4 or 3 hybrid any more so I can now get away with carrying just 12 clubs. But, I'm gonna have to learn how to hit a 3/4 six iron.

Makes absolutely no sense to me.

[jholz]

[quote name='KYMAR' timestamp='1351132264' post='5842181']


LOL well if you could read you would note that the "seems" he used referenced the "every year" and not the claim of 15 yard gain. Otherwise, there would be zero need to reference the 15 yard gain not showing up in players stats. Clearly, he expected to see it based on a false belief that that's what they told him to expect. So, if someone is going to make a statement criticizing what they say. They can at least get the claims correct. Are you all that familiar with what they claim? I must admit to being skeptical when you call the above quoted post as "fairly accurate" There is nothing accurate about the part I bolded. How much more substance do you want? I have ZERO allegiance to any OEM. I do however have an allegiance to truth. And the amount of untrue statements about what they have actually said far outnumber the true ones.

And as i said, there is plenty to criticize TM for (the ATV wedge comes to mind imo) Hate how they pay players? Criticize and boycott! Don't like the white? Blast away! Hate the name Rocketballz? Make [i]another[/i] post about how stupid it is, Think the Adjustable sole plate on the R11 is a pure gimmick? CRUSH 'em for it! Think the updated sole plate on the R11S is even MORE of a gimmick? Hang the designer in effigy!! At least those are [i]actual things[/i] you can be mad at. Being mad at fiction is what is really ridiculous.
[/quote]

You are parsing the sentence in a manner that gives it a meaning that is contrary to its construction. Maybe you can read the OP's mind and assume that he intends to say something that he actually isn't. If the OP had really intended to apply the "it seems" preface to only part of the sentence, he probably would have split the statement into two sentences, something like "TM claims 15 yard gains and yet the stats do not bear this out. It seems like they make this claim every year." But, this isn't what the OP wrote. The writing he supplied indicates that the "it seems" must be applied to the entire first clause of the compound sentence construction. Grammar is not something that we simply make up as we go along.

Beyond this, I do agree with you on a certain level concerning the nature of this particular line of criticism that is often leveled at TaylorMade. It is the kind of criticism that could, indeed, be leveled at any and all manufacturers of golf equipment. Every company claims that every new product cycle will provide greater distance and accuracy. The thing that generally separates TM from these other companies is not their claims. It is the frequency and volume with which TM dispenses this message. TaylorMade also often forwards this message coupled with chimeric and gimmicky technological innovations that the vast majority of serious golfers don't take very seriously. It isn't all about what someone or some company materially does or does not do. It also has to do with what those companies say and what those words represent. Clearly TaylorMade represents something that a lot of golfers find irritating. That thing that people find irritating about TaylorMade might be simply representative of a larger character within the golf industry as a whole (if not all industries), but TaylorMade is most certainly the poster-child for that kind of marketing within the golf industry. Thus, TaylorMade becomes a whipping boy of sorts and they clearly both invite and deserve this.

While you may disagree with this position, it is nonetheless a reasonable and reasoned position. As such it cannot be simply dismissed by claiming that people who hold that position are simply too stupid to understand. Clearly they do understand. You choose not to.

[KDMullins]

[quote name='Llortamaisey' timestamp='1351131475' post='5842111']
[quote name='displayname' timestamp='1351117557' post='5841089']
I think I should update, and TaylorMade's social media staff had a very detailed response in regards to this photo from Wilson.

From TM:
"[color=#333333]The Wilson Reflex iron was introduced more than 30 years ago. Iron design has progressed significantly from that time. The Reflex incorporates a slot that enhances face flexibility to increase COR (a term that wasn't used back then). All i[/color][color=#333333]ron heads back then were rigid, with a COR measuring around .760. The Reflex measured around .800. RocketBladez COR is about 20 points higher. [/color]
[color=#333333]Also, the Reflex didn't have enhancements like the RocketBladez' complex face design, Inverted Cone, high MOI and low and centered CG location. The Reflex had a constant face thickness of about 3mm, while RocketBladez' varying face thickness is 1.6 mm at its thinnest. The Reflex's vertical CG was relatively high, about 20 mm above the ground, and the set didn't employ progressive head design in terms of topline, sole width and MOI."[/color]

[color=#333333]Obviously TM didn't appreciate the joke, but they did take the time to respond, so I thought it was worth mentioning to all the technically inclined people here. [/color]
[/quote]

Thanks for posting. I would have never seen this if you hadn't. If TM truly didn't copy Wilson's idea, it's pretty convenient they had the Reflex's COR specs handy.
[/quote]

Of course they did. I'm sure their engineers have looked at every iron head ever made (at least in the "modern" golf era). Their job is to design clubs.

I just don't understand the notion that TM got caught with their pants down. To the contrary, they knew all about the Reflex, embraced the concept, and made it significantly better with new technology. It's kind of like Scotty Cameron's 009. There no doubt it's an Anser, and it's a fairly blatant reproduction...not like he's getting it by anyone. The deal is it's a better Anser than the Anser ever was.

What's funny to me is that people think running with old ideas is somehow underhanded or something. Let's face it, there are very few ideas that haven't been thought of in nearly every industry, not just golf. It's the improvements and subtle refinements on old ideas that create truly refined products IMO.

[KDMullins]

[quote name='SteveL1' timestamp='1351135969' post='5842451']
Am I missing something here? If the 3-6 irons have the slot but the 7-SW don't, won't that create a huge gap between the 6 & 7. I can just see it now......I have a 170 yards to the pin but my 7 only goes 160 and the 6 goes 195, 5 goes 210, 4 goes 220. Hmmmmm, don't need that 4 or 3 hybrid any more so I can now get away with carrying just 12 clubs. But, I'm gonna have to learn how to hit a 3/4 six iron.

Makes absolutely no sense to me.
[/quote]

Yeah, I think you are. The purpose of the slot isn't to make the ball go farther on center hits.

[Jamboy72]

I guess the part which hits me a bit funny is the "little thing that changes the iron forever" has already, at least in part, happened...and it wasn't TM's original idea..just seems a bit contrived I guess...but yes, it does appear they took a basic idea and tossed some 2012 engineering at it...

[SteveL1]

[quote name='KDMullins' timestamp='1351136213' post='5842471']
[quote name='SteveL1' timestamp='1351135969' post='5842451']
Am I missing something here? If the 3-6 irons have the slot but the 7-SW don't, won't that create a huge gap between the 6 & 7. I can just see it now......I have a 170 yards to the pin but my 7 only goes 160 and the 6 goes 195, 5 goes 210, 4 goes 220. Hmmmmm, don't need that 4 or 3 hybrid any more so I can now get away with carrying just 12 clubs. But, I'm gonna have to learn how to hit a 3/4 six iron.

Makes absolutely no sense to me.
[/quote]

Yeah, I think you are. The purpose of the slot isn't to make the ball go farther on center hits.
[/quote]

Then why is the marketing tag line...."Freakishly longer"

[dunn]

The slot does nothing...... It's not even behind the face.... Lol


You have a face then pocket of air then steel wall, then the slot...... The slot ( if it did work) rebounds on the steel behind the pocket before the face....... It rebounds into a void pocket.....

Nah, not buying it............ Next!...

LOL

[hoganfan924]

People are missing the point of the slot in the TM design, IMO. In the Wilson reflex, the slot was cut right behind the face in order to create a thin face and trampoline effect. In the TM design, the cross section is completely different, with the bottom 1/3rd of the (already thin) face being supported by a U-channel of steel which itself acts as a spring element. In effect, the bottom 1/3rd of the clubface is a cantilevered beam (at least in a center face cross section), while the entire face is still thin enough to have trampoline effect. Yes, the TM design is an enhancement of the prior art, but what iron clubhead isn't? It'd be like trying to design an all-new fork. Even if Wison had a patent on the reflex it probably expired over 10 years ago