Saw some new Callaway Woods last night (The Epic Thread)

[Dscvrr St Louis]

Will never ever ever replace my BBA 816 3 wood. But very interested in the driver! They better make the sub zero in left handed or they've lost me tho

 

I play the 816 Alpha, and consider it my best 3 wood ever...but it is really in danger of being replaced...no joke. Epic SZ Fw has similar weighting system and again, seemed easier to hit and better mishits. I only hit it about 12-15 times...but there will be more testing ASAP!!

[Noke]

internal rib

[GC70]

internal rib

 

Cavity back! ;)

[adfrick]

This new Epic sounds intriguing. I need all the extra ball speed technology can buy me!!!

[Boydr12]

Will never ever ever replace my BBA 816 3 wood. But very interested in the driver! They better make the sub zero in left handed or they've lost me tho

 

I play the 816 Alpha, and consider it my best 3 wood ever...but it is really in danger of being replaced...no joke. Epic SZ Fw has similar weighting system and again, seemed easier to hit and better mishits. I only hit it about 12-15 times...but there will be more testing ASAP!!

 

I will give it a swing, but I've gone a longgggg time being uncomfortable with the 3 wood, then found this thing and 3 wood is now my favorite club. Would loveee a nice callaway 5 wood tho!

[Ivyguy]

So we're looking for more yardage? Aren't low spin drivers "theoretically" harder to hit straight?

[SwingMan]

So we're looking for more yardage? Aren't low spin drivers "theoretically" harder to hit straight?

 

I would bet the more friendly (of the two) EPIC is not low spin unfriendly.

[Pure745]

Pure wrote this in the Rory M2 thread.....read the last line as it seems that he has already tested them.

 

"I 100% believe these guys are picking up ball speed with the M2 - both in the driver and the fairway. I also 100% believe they can see 5-6 mph ball speed increases on off center hits. I don't think that Nike drivers and fairways are as "hot as anything" on the market, especially at the consumer level. A good friend of mine is a Nike athlete and has been going through this equipment switch circus - at TPI the 917D2 and D3 beat his Flex 440 in ball speed by about 2 in average, the new Callaway Epic and M1/M2 beat that 917 driver by another 2-3 mph in ball speed."

JJ Spaun has tested them, not Tai.

 

Yeah. He had great things to say about everything at Callaway, the irons and this driver were his favorites. The last Callaway setup I had in the bag was the RFE and the XHP 3 wood, neither lasted very long and then got a bit turned off to the brand after that. After hearing about the new stuff from a credible source, I'm definitely interested in trying it out. Sounds promising, but also was mentioned to be in the arena of the M1/M2, which I already have, so I'm not sure what gains I can realistically expect to see.

[TaylorMadeLuv]

I love how someone with a tag name of Taylormadeluv is arguing with a callaway guy about a product he's never seen or hit. I'm pretty sure the club designers at callaway wouldn't put a product out that intentionally doesn't conform with USGA testing, unless that was their goal.

 

But I did hear that in there testing callaway saw a significant increase with the new design, truth or marketing, we won't know until we hit it.

 

Manufacturers are irrelevant. We have been capped on cor/ct since the mid 2000's. biggest changes have been ball and the ability to create high launch/low spin combos. Every club needs to be custom fit to be able to unlock or create distance gains.

 

You can say that the ability to get closer to 17/1700 is what every club manufacture is trying to do. With the limits the USGA has placed on clubs, any and all distance gain is STRICTLY on getting better launch conditions. Anyone that thinks otherwise is drinking the Koolaid.

 

This is 100% wrong. I've never been around any club builder, master fitter or brand rep that has fit to those specs, except when TMade's marketing came out and that's what they tried to spew to us at the shop. It doesn't work in real world, on course conditions.....

 

So are you saying the closer you get to those numbers it's false your driver distance go up? Tom Wishon would call you a fool if so, he even talks about it in a Golf WRX article..

http://www.golfwrx.com/62891/the-practical-facts-about-spin-and-shaft-design/

Trackman and Flightscope both use similar launch and spin numbers in their optimizer. The 17/1700 was a marketing line used by TaylorMade. BUT it is not incorrect to say the closer you get to those numbers the better off you are when talking about distance. There's much more to it than just two numbers. Many more variables come into play. You could simply change your attack angle from -5 to +5 and gain 30 yards with the same club and swing speed. Show me a fitter that isn't trying to get a golfer to launch the ball into a higher window with less spin and you will have a fitter that isn't selling clubs and is doing their clients a disservice. Of course if the golfer is already at their most efficient and achievable launch and spin then they are good to go, but if they are not 14-15 launch and close to 2000-2200 spin then there is opportunity for them. And we all know golfers are always searching for more. Just ask Rory.

 

Nick Watney and Michael Bradley had similar distance numbers and watney swings 10+ mph faster. Bradley is closer to the 17/1700 with slower speed but way more efficient. Watney hits down on the ball and spins it too much.

 

Regardless of what TaylorMade says. The only way to get more distance in the post .83 cor era is launch conditions. You are not magically going to swing the same speed and get more ball speed from a maxed out driver unless it's non conforming. I'll say it again launch conditions and the ability to get higher launch and lower spin are what has changed. This is the same for all manufacturers. Higher launch, lower spin and an emphasis on upward attack angle is all that has changed.

 

Golfers that talk about gaining distance need to talk about their improved launch conditions and not about 5-10 yards longer because of a drivers "new" technology. Everyone is maxed out. Everyone is focusing on custom fitting and improving launch conditions. And yes that is what works on the course as well.

[scratchswinger]

Pure wrote this in the Rory M2 thread.....read the last line as it seems that he has already tested them.

 

"I 100% believe these guys are picking up ball speed with the M2 - both in the driver and the fairway. I also 100% believe they can see 5-6 mph ball speed increases on off center hits. I don't think that Nike drivers and fairways are as "hot as anything" on the market, especially at the consumer level. A good friend of mine is a Nike athlete and has been going through this equipment switch circus - at TPI the 917D2 and D3 beat his Flex 440 in ball speed by about 2 in average, the new Callaway Epic and M1/M2 beat that 917 driver by another 2-3 mph in ball speed."

JJ Spaun has tested them, not Tai.

 

Yeah. He had great things to say about everything at Callaway, the irons and this driver were his favorites. The last Callaway setup I had in the bag was the RFE and the XHP 3 wood, neither lasted very long and then got a bit turned off to the brand after that. After hearing about the new stuff from a credible source, I'm definitely interested in trying it out. Sounds promising, but also was mentioned to be in the arena of the M1/M2, which I already have, so I'm not sure what gains I can realistically expect to see.

 

Is the definition of "not long" one round? ?

[Llortamaisey]

 

Moveable weight has also been done before and of course with lead tape. A good club builder could do anything (and more) to a club that an adjustable sleeve can do. The adjustable sleeve just makes it more consumer friendly. None of those were really a game changer. More refinement than revolution or even evolution.

 

I don't know of many club builders that will bend woods and hybrids anymore, do you?

 

Very few out there now but they still exist. I was referencing the time before adjustable sleeves in my post. Taylormade didn't invent adjustability, or the sleeves for that matter.

[spr298]

I heard that the new Driver with have what they call Jailbreak. Callaway filled a copy write app for it.

[BIG STU]

It has driver technology that uses bars to stabilize the top crown and sole of the driver to deliver more energy back to the face, and create an insane amount of ball speed. Tony Finau apparently gained 20 yards of carry distance testing it last week.

It has driver technology that uses bars to stabilize the top crown and sole of the driver to deliver more energy back to the face, and create an insane amount of ball speed. Tony Finau apparently gained 20 yards of carry distance testing it last week.

 

Jim furyk went from 261 carry to 280 carry if that's the case look out

HOLY CRAP!!! That sounds like some T-Mag claims

[BIG STU]

I love how someone with a tag name of Taylormadeluv is arguing with a callaway guy about a product he's never seen or hit. I'm pretty sure the club designers at callaway wouldn't put a product out that intentionally doesn't conform with USGA testing, unless that was their goal.

 

But I did hear that in there testing callaway saw a significant increase with the new design, truth or marketing, we won't know until we hit it.

 

Manufacturers are irrelevant. We have been capped on cor/ct since the mid 2000's. biggest changes have been ball and the ability to create high launch/low spin combos. Every club needs to be custom fit to be able to unlock or create distance gains.

 

You can say that the ability to get closer to 17/1700 is what every club manufacture is trying to do. With the limits the USGA has placed on clubs, any and all distance gain is STRICTLY on getting better launch conditions. Anyone that thinks otherwise is drinking the Koolaid.

 

This is 100% wrong. I've never been around any club builder, master fitter or brand rep that has fit to those specs, except when TMade's marketing came out and that's what they tried to spew to us at the shop. It doesn't work in real world, on course conditions.....

 

So are you saying the closer you get to those numbers it's false your driver distance go up? Tom Wishon would call you a fool if so, he even talks about it in a Golf WRX article..

http://www.golfwrx.c...shaft-design/

Trackman and Flightscope both use similar launch and spin numbers in their optimizer. The 17/1700 was a marketing line used by TaylorMade. BUT it is not incorrect to say the closer you get to those numbers the better off you are when talking about distance. There's much more to it than just two numbers. Many more variables come into play. You could simply change your attack angle from -5 to +5 and gain 30 yards with the same club and swing speed. Show me a fitter that isn't trying to get a golfer to launch the ball into a higher window with less spin and you will have a fitter that isn't selling clubs and is doing their clients a disservice. Of course if the golfer is already at their most efficient and achievable launch and spin then they are good to go, but if they are not 14-15 launch and close to 2000-2200 spin then there is opportunity for them. And we all know golfers are always searching for more. Just ask Rory.

 

Nick Watney and Michael Bradley had similar distance numbers and watney swings 10+ mph faster. Bradley is closer to the 17/1700 with slower speed but way more efficient. Watney hits down on the ball and spins it too much.

 

Regardless of what TaylorMade says. The only way to get more distance in the post .83 cor era is launch conditions. You are not magically going to swing the same speed and get more ball speed from a maxed out driver unless it's non conforming. I'll say it again launch conditions and the ability to get higher launch and lower spin are what has changed. This is the same for all manufacturers. Higher launch, lower spin and an emphasis on upward attack angle is all that has changed.

 

Golfers that talk about gaining distance need to talk about their improved launch conditions and not about 5-10 yards longer because of a drivers "new" technology. Everyone is maxed out. Everyone is focusing on custom fitting and improving launch conditions. And yes that is what works on the course as well.

Well stated and true

[BIG STU]

Moveable weight has also been done before and of course with lead tape. A good club builder could do anything (and more) to a club that an adjustable sleeve can do. The adjustable sleeve just makes it more consumer friendly. None of those were really a game changer. More refinement than revolution or even evolution.

 

I don't know of many club builders that will bend woods and hybrids anymore, do you?

I know of one down here and he is a Master Builder and also a Miura dealer. Tom Wishon will bend one at his factory to spec you want I do know

[SwingMan]

I love how someone with a tag name of Taylormadeluv is arguing with a callaway guy about a product he's never seen or hit. I'm pretty sure the club designers at callaway wouldn't put a product out that intentionally doesn't conform with USGA testing, unless that was their goal.

 

But I did hear that in there testing callaway saw a significant increase with the new design, truth or marketing, we won't know until we hit it.

 

Manufacturers are irrelevant. We have been capped on cor/ct since the mid 2000's. biggest changes have been ball and the ability to create high launch/low spin combos. Every club needs to be custom fit to be able to unlock or create distance gains.

 

You can say that the ability to get closer to 17/1700 is what every club manufacture is trying to do. With the limits the USGA has placed on clubs, any and all distance gain is STRICTLY on getting better launch conditions. Anyone that thinks otherwise is drinking the Koolaid.

 

This is 100% wrong. I've never been around any club builder, master fitter or brand rep that has fit to those specs, except when TMade's marketing came out and that's what they tried to spew to us at the shop. It doesn't work in real world, on course conditions.....

 

So are you saying the closer you get to those numbers it's false your driver distance go up? Tom Wishon would call you a fool if so, he even talks about it in a Golf WRX article..

http://www.golfwrx.c...shaft-design/

Trackman and Flightscope both use similar launch and spin numbers in their optimizer. The 17/1700 was a marketing line used by TaylorMade. BUT it is not incorrect to say the closer you get to those numbers the better off you are when talking about distance. There's much more to it than just two numbers. Many more variables come into play. You could simply change your attack angle from -5 to +5 and gain 30 yards with the same club and swing speed. Show me a fitter that isn't trying to get a golfer to launch the ball into a higher window with less spin and you will have a fitter that isn't selling clubs and is doing their clients a disservice. Of course if the golfer is already at their most efficient and achievable launch and spin then they are good to go, but if they are not 14-15 launch and close to 2000-2200 spin then there is opportunity for them. And we all know golfers are always searching for more. Just ask Rory.

 

Nick Watney and Michael Bradley had similar distance numbers and watney swings 10+ mph faster. Bradley is closer to the 17/1700 with slower speed but way more efficient. Watney hits down on the ball and spins it too much.

 

Regardless of what TaylorMade says. The only way to get more distance in the post .83 cor era is launch conditions. You are not magically going to swing the same speed and get more ball speed from a maxed out driver unless it's non conforming. I'll say it again launch conditions and the ability to get higher launch and lower spin are what has changed. This is the same for all manufacturers. Higher launch, lower spin and an emphasis on upward attack angle is all that has changed.

 

Golfers that talk about gaining distance need to talk about their improved launch conditions and not about 5-10 yards longer because of a drivers "new" technology. Everyone is maxed out. Everyone is focusing on custom fitting and improving launch conditions. And yes that is what works on the course as well.

Well stated and true

 

Let me add in addition to improved launch conditions, improved face technology -- "not so sweet" contact retains more ballspeed and improves consistency. You see a "hot face" over more of the face.

[Boydr12]

It has driver technology that uses bars to stabilize the top crown and sole of the driver to deliver more energy back to the face, and create an insane amount of ball speed. Tony Finau apparently gained 20 yards of carry distance testing it last week.

It has driver technology that uses bars to stabilize the top crown and sole of the driver to deliver more energy back to the face, and create an insane amount of ball speed. Tony Finau apparently gained 20 yards of carry distance testing it last week.

 

Jim furyk went from 261 carry to 280 carry if that's the case look out

HOLY CRAP!!! That sounds like some T-Mag claims

 

If I could gain just 7-8 yards carry I would buy it in a heartbeat!!

[Cwing]

Where are the photos and will this work for the 12-15 capper?

[SwingMan]

Where are the photos and will this work for the 12-15 capper?

 

Patience, grasshopper. This one is being kept under wraps very well as to pics. :-)

[Noke]

I'm curious to see what they do with the internal structure. I mean- if Callaway found out that the Gravity Core gave better energy transfer, then aren't all drivers with the Core already utilizing that piece of tech?

 

And also, the internal stiffening of the driver structure is nothing new. Zevo, Nike, Powerbilt, that double-wall driver, etc. I dunno, color me skeptical.

 

Can someone inform me how ball speed can be upped when COR/CT is maxed? Improved aerodynamics, yes, but outside of changing launch/spin what can manufacturers do? Makes me think that big manufacturers' off the rack drivers aren't all at .83 COR.

 

I know my Wishon 919 gets tested 6x for max COR, but I'd guess it's hard for large OEM's to do that much quality control.

[TravAz]

I'm curious to see what they do with the internal structure. I mean- if Callaway found out that the Gravity Core gave better energy transfer, then aren't all drivers with the Core already utilizing that piece of tech?

 

And also, the internal stiffening of the driver structure is nothing new. Zevo, Nike, Powerbilt, that double-wall driver, etc. I dunno, color me skeptical.

 

Can someone inform me how ball speed can be upped when COR/CT is maxed? Improved aerodynamics, yes, but outside of changing launch/spin what can manufacturers do? Makes me think that big manufacturers' off the rack drivers aren't all at .83 COR.

 

I know my Wishon 919 gets tested 6x for max COR, but I'd guess it's hard for large OEM's to do that much quality control.

 

I read a quote from a callayway engineer at some point saying that he wasnt happy with the wasted weight taken by the gravity core chamber(s).

 

My guess on the improved ball speeds would be that the driver superstructure absorbs and distrbutes energy at impact better, thus resisting twisting etc.

 

Dont they just drop a ball bearing on the center of a driver face for cor testing? Does/says nothing about how stable the overall head is at impact.

[JaxBeachNole]

So this is the Big Bertha type release we're talking about now, when would the equivalent of the XR for 2017 come out? PGA Show?

[SwingMan]

So this is the Big Bertha type release we're talking about now, when would the equivalent of the XR for 2017 come out? PGA Show?

 

It is a GBB/Alpha replacement.

 

As to XR16, they are extending cycles -- August 2017??

[Noke]

I'm curious to see what they do with the internal structure. I mean- if Callaway found out that the Gravity Core gave better energy transfer, then aren't all drivers with the Core already utilizing that piece of tech?

 

And also, the internal stiffening of the driver structure is nothing new. Zevo, Nike, Powerbilt, that double-wall driver, etc. I dunno, color me skeptical.

 

Can someone inform me how ball speed can be upped when COR/CT is maxed? Improved aerodynamics, yes, but outside of changing launch/spin what can manufacturers do? Makes me think that big manufacturers' off the rack drivers aren't all at .83 COR.

 

I know my Wishon 919 gets tested 6x for max COR, but I'd guess it's hard for large OEM's to do that much quality control.

 

I read a quote from a callayway engineer at some point saying that he wasnt happy with the wasted weight taken by the gravity core chamber(s).

 

My guess on the improved ball speeds would be that the driver superstructure absorbs and distrbutes energy at impact better, thus resisting twisting etc.

 

Dont they just drop a ball bearing on the center of a driver face for cor testing? Does/says nothing about how stable the overall head is at impact.

 

Sure, but don't they measure the speed at which the ball bearing rebounds off the face to determine the COR? Ball speed? Am I missing something?

[braincramp52]

Doesn't every new release have more distance and more forgiveness ?

[percymon]

Doesn't every new release have more distance and more forgiveness ?

 

the green keeper from the TM M1 launch video had better walk a few extra yards lol!

[Warrick]

Doesn't every new release have more distance and more forgiveness ?

 

The more I tumble down this path, chasing something special, really starting to grasp the importance of the right shaft.

[Lacey Underall]

To the lucky dogs that have already had a chance to see/test: any info on the stock shafts?

[autronicdsm]

lol what...they drop ball bearings on the face to test c.o.r.???

[gunmetal]

It has driver technology that uses bars to stabilize the top crown and sole of the driver to deliver more energy back to the face, and create an insane amount of ball speed. Tony Finau apparently gained 20 yards of carry distance testing it last week.

 

And yet how much do you want to bet that Finau's driving distance doesn't change more than 3-5 yards for the upcoming season. Dustin Johnson's driving dropped 3 yards in 2016 from 2015. It went up from 2014 to 2015. By everyone's account on this site and everywhere else the M1/M2 lineup is infinitely superior to the R15/Aeroburner lineup. Why the drop off? Especially considering the level that DJ raised his game to in 2016? All these guys have been optimized for quite some time. The mild fluctuation from year to year has NOTHING to do with the driver head they are using and EVERYTHING to do with what they ate for breakfast, how their body is doing (see Jason Day's numbers), shaft characteristics, and most importantly strike.

 

We have every right to get excited about the new Epic lineup from Callaway. I am. It's a new club, with new looks, feel, and design. These genuinely are things to get pumped for. But we need to pump the breaks on what the actual benefits of these new clubs really do for us. Someone else put it very well in this thread when they said that basically the only way to find more distance is to optimize your launch conditions. Tour pros have done so for quite a while which is why they don't gain distance by switching from one model to another.

 

I played the JPX 850 for the past 18 months but couldn't stand the sound/feel and wasn't fond of the blue. But accuracy and distance were too good. The JPX 900 is infinitely better sounding and feeling and the blue isn't as annoying as it is a matte finish and I now LOVE it. Distance is about the same as the 850. Shocking.