Rick Shiels 5 years driver test concern

[MattyO1984]

I swear some of you guys wouldn't be happy if he hit 10,000 shots with her every single golf ball on the market in a variety of different tee hits aiming to hit a variety of different spots on the club.

[KYMAR]

I see your point but it would be better taken If in the last 5 years every one of the oem's only claims in advertising were "more forgiving on off center hits!" and not "Waaaaaay Longer than our last longest driver ever!."

 

I mean they know we're suckers, we know we're suckers, and we know that they know that we know we're suckers. Some yahoo in the interwebs hitting a few off the toe isn't going to be some great awakening.

 

Anyone know when the Super Epic Xtreme comes out?

[Llortamaisey]

I swear some of you guys wouldn't be happy if he hit 10,000 shots with her every single golf ball on the market in a variety of different tee hits aiming to hit a variety of different spots on the club.

 

... at different elevations.

[TheInfidel]

A limited sample size is better than no sample at all. Rick pointed out in the video that it was designed to mitigate fatigue since all the drivers were hit in one session. For people who don't produce any content whatsoever there's a lot of criticism.

[DeCuchi]

Yeah sure guys, plan your whole process around mistakes. Good gawd.

So I guess what that logic..

 

We all should have 300cc drivers

No hybrids and 1 iron thru PW and blades!

No lob wedge just a sand wedge

And a bullseye putter -

 

All the least forgiving

 

 

Pretzel logic. Buy wedges based on best shankability?

 

I prefer planning on best case scenarios only! It’s the only way to succeed!!!! But if you have one of those shank proof wedges, I’ll take one. Ya know, just in case.

[DeCuchi]

I mean they know we're suckers, we know we're suckers, and we know that they know that we know we're suckers. Some yahoo in the interwebs hitting a few off the toe isn't going to be some great awakening.

 

Anyone know when the Super Epic Xtreme comes out?

 

This should be pinned at the top of every section here. So much truth. Still it helps pass the time when work is slow and Facebook is political meme wasteland.

[xjohnx]

A limited sample size is better than no sample at all. Rick pointed out in the video that it was designed to mitigate fatigue since all the drivers were hit in one session. For people who don't produce any content whatsoever there's a lot of criticism.

 

Agree with your defense of the samples provided. But, those who produce will never improve their content without criticism. If you haven't noticed, media caters to what the people want to see/hear.

[Exactice808]

I see your point but it would be better taken If in the last 5 years every one of the oem's only claims in advertising were "more forgiving on off center hits!" and not "Waaaaaay Longer than our last longest driver ever!."

 

I mean they know we're suckers, we know we're suckers, and we know that they know that we know we're suckers. Some yahoo in the interwebs hitting a few off the toe isn't going to be some great awakening.

 

Anyone know when the Super Epic Xtreme comes out?

 

In fear of an intelligent retribution of a response from you KYMAR, LOL and for the last 3 years your freaking avatar scares the living crap out of me, im just responding to the point not you! =)

 

 

 

OEM claims of longer than last year actually has its truths.... JUST not in the well informed GolfWRX standards.

 

 

I brought this up in another thread and per some additional post and KjBowens point. There is some truth that needs to be edified. About longer and how we interpret it.

 

1) Lets face it, the Majority of golfers do NOT achieve 1.5 smash factor.

2) the Majority of Golfers do NOT achieve a Dime size wear on their irons or driver for that matter

3) the Majority of Golfers do NOT get properly fit, they buy a rack club and expect to play better.

 

 

With that above, the manufacturers through technology and R&D have been able to "expand" the sweet spot, for the listed golfers above, Sorta like bladehunters reply about a the dude that has a dime size wear spot on the toe of the club and for what ever reason he just doest take a half step backwards.

 

 

With that, 1.5 smash being the optimize strike in the center and clubs from lets say 2 years, ago, if you moved outwards 1/2" from center that smash factor could drop down to 1.4 smash, if we used 100mph swing speed as an example, just a half inch from center could be 10mph ball speed loss.

 

With that, old drives would amplify the miss through spin and launch effects. so lets say center strike nets 2500rpms of spin but that half inch off center jumps it 3500rpms. the loss of 10mph ball speed in addition to the increase of 1000rpms of spin, could be dramatic to distance.

 

 

NOW with current and new tech, the ability to keep spin down and retain max ball speed on that off center strike, (AS AN EXAMPLE ONLY) say the new drivers are able to retain 1.45 smash factor from the 1/2" off center strike and only an increase of 500rpms of spin rather than 1000rpms. The net less is "Half" of what older drivers from 5 years ago could produce. This is what I think KjBowen is looking for?

 

In all fairness, though, no one expects to know what their 1.45 of center strike is. We want to know what our 1.5 smash center strike is.

 

 

Per my previous post, CT being the measuring factor and that being maxed out for YEARS @ 257units, that means a 1.5 smash on X driver from ALL years from 2005 forward with all units being the same, would NET exactly the same distances.

 

Again the biggest difference is those of the off centered strikes. I feel the Biggest example of that? Titleist 915 series with the introduction of the "Active Recoil Channel" this is why the NOD from Shiels in my opinion.

[xjohnx]

I think the above is a fantastic explanation of a lot of variables most don't consider. It must be tough being in R&D and make advancements that seem significant when defined by data and physics, only to be deemed worthless by the general hack golfing public.

 

I think your point on ball speed loss compounded by increase in spin is an easy one to understand and hard to oppose. That was the #1 thing I got from my driver fitting this year. I'm a high spin player regardless and saw similar spin rates from both heads tested. However, it was a no-brainer to choose the one that consistently provides lower spin rates on my bad hits which kept my average overall distance and accuracy higher.

 

People want to see a huge gain and walk out of the store with a cannon. Almost any PGA player would bag a new driver if his AVERAGE distance and fairways hit improved by 5% but, the rest of the population only cares about one shot at a time.

[KYMAR]

I see your point but it would be better taken If in the last 5 years every one of the oem's only claims in advertising were "more forgiving on off center hits!" and not "Waaaaaay Longer than our last longest driver ever!."

 

I mean they know we're suckers, we know we're suckers, and we know that they know that we know we're suckers. Some yahoo in the interwebs hitting a few off the toe isn't going to be some great awakening.

 

Anyone know when the Super Epic Xtreme comes out?

 

In fear of an intelligent retribution of a response from you KYMAR, LOL and for the last 3 years your freaking avatar scares the living crap out of me, im just responding to the point not you! =)

 

 

 

OEM claims of longer than last year actually has its truths.... JUST not in the well informed GolfWRX standards.

 

 

I brought this up in another thread and per some additional post and KjBowens point. There is some truth that needs to be edified. About longer and how we interpret it.

 

1) Lets face it, the Majority of golfers do NOT achieve 1.5 smash factor.

2) the Majority of Golfers do NOT achieve a Dime size wear on their irons or driver for that matter

3) the Majority of Golfers do NOT get properly fit, they buy a rack club and expect to play better.

 

 

With that above, the manufacturers through technology and R&D have been able to "expand" the sweet spot, for the listed golfers above, Sorta like bladehunters reply about a the dude that has a dime size wear spot on the toe of the club and for what ever reason he just doest take a half step backwards.

 

 

With that, 1.5 smash being the optimize strike in the center and clubs from lets say 2 years, ago, if you moved outwards 1/2" from center that smash factor could drop down to 1.4 smash, if we used 100mph swing speed as an example, just a half inch from center could be 10mph ball speed loss.

 

With that, old drives would amplify the miss through spin and launch effects. so lets say center strike nets 2500rpms of spin but that half inch off center jumps it 3500rpms. the loss of 10mph ball speed in addition to the increase of 1000rpms of spin, could be dramatic to distance.

 

 

NOW with current and new tech, the ability to keep spin down and retain max ball speed on that off center strike, (AS AN EXAMPLE ONLY) say the new drivers are able to retain 1.45 smash factor from the 1/2" off center strike and only an increase of 500rpms of spin rather than 1000rpms. The net less is "Half" of what older drivers from 5 years ago could produce. This is what I think KjBowen is looking for?

 

In all fairness, though, no one expects to know what their 1.45 of center strike is. We want to know what our 1.5 smash center strike is.

 

 

Per my previous post, CT being the measuring factor and that being maxed out for YEARS @ 257units, that means a 1.5 smash on X driver from ALL years from 2005 forward with all units being the same, would NET exactly the same distances.

 

Again the biggest difference is those of the off centered strikes. I feel the Biggest example of that? Titleist 915 series with the introduction of the "Active Recoil Channel" this is why the NOD from Shiels in my opinion.

No from a practical/real world perspective I totally agree with you (and KJ by extension) but if it's difficult to convince internet golf sensations to take 10 swings and try to miss the middle, it's going to be impossible to convince your average 15 hc that's important information somehow.

[TravAz]

This thread turned so peak WRX. Who knew so many people hit their driver out of dime sized spot perfectly located for their individual driver and weight settings?

[Exactice808]

I think the above is a fantastic explanation of a lot of variables most don't consider. It must be tough being in R&D and make advancements that seem significant when defined by data and physics, only to be deemed worthless by the general hack golfing public.

 

I think your point on ball speed loss compounded by increase in spin is an easy one to understand and hard to oppose. That was the #1 thing I got from my driver fitting this year. I'm a high spin player regardless and saw similar spin rates from both heads tested. However, it was a no-brainer to choose the one that consistently provides lower spin rates on my bad hits which kept my average overall distance and accuracy higher.

 

People want to see a huge gain and walk out of the store with a cannon. Almost any PGA player would bag a new driver if his AVERAGE distance and fairways hit improved by 5% but, the rest of the population only cares about one shot at a time.

.

 

The messed up part is.... PEOPLE DO! And that is the humor to all of this. Marketing is NOT to GolfWRX players, they are to the other 90% golfers out there that SUCK. Man how many times do I walk into hitting bays next to me with a box store fitter and the guy in the bay is claiming how long he is over his gamer.

 

 

Well YES.... sure if you hit it on the toe consistently....and you only achieve 1.38 smash with your current driver, But get a G30 LS and hit the same place but it bumps up your smash to 1.41 you are seeing about 5mph ball speed increase,.... SURE you hit it better than your current gamer, BUT no where near optimized...

 

 

case and point to the above post...... as a matter of fact I would say that a good percentage of players HERE on GolfWRX actually has spec-ed out equipment JUST for them that would allow them some pretty darn high smash factors and consistent wear patterns.

 

I know I do, my driver is hella speced out to me specific and I get some damn good numbers..... it just when I miss, its BAD and I have a day job.... so I dont get enough practice to warrant good scores.

[xjohnx]

I think the above is a fantastic explanation of a lot of variables most don't consider. It must be tough being in R&D and make advancements that seem significant when defined by data and physics, only to be deemed worthless by the general hack golfing public.

 

I think your point on ball speed loss compounded by increase in spin is an easy one to understand and hard to oppose. That was the #1 thing I got from my driver fitting this year. I'm a high spin player regardless and saw similar spin rates from both heads tested. However, it was a no-brainer to choose the one that consistently provides lower spin rates on my bad hits which kept my average overall distance and accuracy higher.

 

People want to see a huge gain and walk out of the store with a cannon. Almost any PGA player would bag a new driver if his AVERAGE distance and fairways hit improved by 5% but, the rest of the population only cares about one shot at a time.

.

 

The messed up part is.... PEOPLE DO! And that is the humor to all of this. Marketing is NOT to GolfWRX players, they are to the other 90% golfers out there that SUCK. Man how many times do I walk into hitting bays next to me with a box store fitter and the guy in the bay is claiming how long he is over his gamer.

 

 

Well YES.... sure if you hit it on the toe consistently....and you only achieve 1.38 smash with your current driver, But get a G30 LS and hit the same place but it bumps up your smash to 1.41 you are seeing about 5mph ball speed increase,.... SURE you hit it better than your current gamer, BUT no where near optimized...

 

 

case and point to the above post...... as a matter of fact I would say that a good percentage of players HERE on GolfWRX actually has spec-ed out equipment JUST for them that would allow them some pretty darn high smash factors and consistent wear patterns.

 

I know I do, my driver is hella speced out to me specific and I get some damn good numbers..... it just when I miss, its BAD and I have a day job.... so I dont get enough practice to warrant good scores.

 

I guess it's all ironic if you think about it. I was once at an industry training event with regional reps and VP's from four or five top manufacturers. This was 2014 I believe so the TM VP was there telling us about how great the SLDR was and forward CG was the future, loft up, yadda yadda yadda. I'm not particularly shy, so I asked his thoughts on the early reports about how unforgiving it is and also his explanation for the lack of mention of MOI, forgiveness etc. which was so prevalent in all ads only a few years before. I commend his honesty and respect his answer. He simply said "Well John, distance sells golf clubs". And I guess he's right huh? It's sad but true and your examples above cover about 90% of the guys that walk into the few golf shops that are left today.

 

So the irony here is that people ignore, or some even openly admit that forgiveness is secondary to the distance they'd like to gain with the purchase of a new driver. When you take a step back like we've done here, you realize that forgiveness IS THE REASON most amateurs are able to see notable increases with a new driver. Marketing and (lack of) proper consumer education will always be the losing battle here. It's unfortunate but, I can obviously see the reasons why it's all the way that it is.

[DeCuchi]

All of these responses are exactly why I’d like to see these online review guys post some expanded results. Of course they aren’t machines. So how long would it take to record 5-10 shots missed half a ball towards the toe, or “just a bit heely” as I often here Rick say? If they hit 50 balls I’m sure they could pull out 10 or more slight misses, edit that down, and analyze the data. It’s not absolutely conclusive data, but neither is what they are putting up now. Doesn’t need to be their main content, just something to add to the mix. I’d be interested in seeing those results.

[rawdog]

All of these responses are exactly why I'd like to see these online review guys post some expanded results. Of course they aren't machines. So how long would it take to record 5-10 shots missed half a ball towards the toe, or "just a bit heely" as I often here Rick say? If they hit 50 balls I'm sure they could pull out 10 or more slight misses, edit that down, and analyze the data. It's not absolutely conclusive data, but neither is what they are putting up now. Doesn't need to be their main content, just something to add to the mix. I'd be interested in seeing those results.

 

If you had a friend helping, do you know how easy it would be to document the impact position of each shot? Incredibly easy. To me, this would be a step in the right direction.

 

The output numbers from the shot do not tell me much unless I know the input (where the strike occurred).

[xjohnx]

All of these responses are exactly why I'd like to see these online review guys post some expanded results. Of course they aren't machines. So how long would it take to record 5-10 shots missed half a ball towards the toe, or "just a bit heely" as I often here Rick say? If they hit 50 balls I'm sure they could pull out 10 or more slight misses, edit that down, and analyze the data. It's not absolutely conclusive data, but neither is what they are putting up now. Doesn't need to be their main content, just something to add to the mix. I'd be interested in seeing those results.

 

I don't disagree with you but I'd argue that, similar to all of the points we've discussed above, the majority of the viewers don't care like some of us and all it would do is create longer videos with the risk of less views ($) for Rick.

 

If there was a way to provide that data with relative consistency, I agree it would be valuable to some. But I also think there comes a point of diminishing returns on what all of us techy geeks would like to see. Like I mentioned earlier in the post, I think it's a slap in the face to the R&D teams the oems to test these drivers without actually making adjustments to utilize much of the technology that gets tweaked or improved year to year. To see the best gains, you need to have the right settings and though neutral setting might be almost ideal in one driver, they can be further from ideal on the next. But then, all we did was watch Rick fit himself for a driver, right? What does that tell the rest of us? Nothing if you think about it. Fitting is too personal and results and gains depend on too many variables. So then I come full circle to realize that, since most idiot just buy off the rack and never change a thing, the way he did it is probably the most reasonable way to do it after all.

[DeCuchi]

All of these responses are exactly why I'd like to see these online review guys post some expanded results. Of course they aren't machines. So how long would it take to record 5-10 shots missed half a ball towards the toe, or "just a bit heely" as I often here Rick say? If they hit 50 balls I'm sure they could pull out 10 or more slight misses, edit that down, and analyze the data. It's not absolutely conclusive data, but neither is what they are putting up now. Doesn't need to be their main content, just something to add to the mix. I'd be interested in seeing those results.

 

I don't disagree with you but I'd argue that, similar to all of the points we've discussed above, the majority of the viewers don't care like some of us and all it would do is create longer videos with the risk of less views ($) for Rick.

 

If there was a way to provide that data with relative consistency, I agree it would be valuable to some. But I also think there comes a point of diminishing returns on what all of us techy geeks would like to see. Like I mentioned earlier in the post, I think it's a slap in the face to the R&D teams the oems to test these drivers without actually making adjustments to utilize much of the technology that gets tweaked or improved year to year. To see the best gains, you need to have the right settings and though neutral setting might be almost ideal in one driver, they can be further from ideal on the next. But then, all we did was watch Rick fit himself for a driver, right? What does that tell the rest of us? Nothing if you think about it. Fitting is too personal and results and gains depend on too many variables. So then I come full circle to realize that, since most idiot just buy off the rack and never change a thing, the way he did it is probably the most reasonable way to do it after all.

 

I hear you, but I don’t think it’d be much longer than now. Have you seen the other stuff these guys post almost daily? Like I said, doesn’t need to happen every review, but something to add to the mix along with the other stuff.

[Exactice808]

All of these responses are exactly why I'd like to see these online review guys post some expanded results. Of course they aren't machines. So how long would it take to record 5-10 shots missed half a ball towards the toe, or "just a bit heely" as I often here Rick say? If they hit 50 balls I'm sure they could pull out 10 or more slight misses, edit that down, and analyze the data. It's not absolutely conclusive data, but neither is what they are putting up now. Doesn't need to be their main content, just something to add to the mix. I'd be interested in seeing those results.

 

I don't disagree with you but I'd argue that, similar to all of the points we've discussed above, the majority of the viewers don't care like some of us and all it would do is create longer videos with the risk of less views ($) for Rick.

 

If there was a way to provide that data with relative consistency, I agree it would be valuable to some. But I also think there comes a point of diminishing returns on what all of us techy geeks would like to see. Like I mentioned earlier in the post, I think it's a slap in the face to the R&D teams the oems to test these drivers without actually making adjustments to utilize much of the technology that gets tweaked or improved year to year. To see the best gains, you need to have the right settings and though neutral setting might be almost ideal in one driver, they can be further from ideal on the next. But then, all we did was watch Rick fit himself for a driver, right? What does that tell the rest of us? Nothing if you think about it. Fitting is too personal and results and gains depend on too many variables. So then I come full circle to realize that, since most idiot just buy off the rack and never change a thing, the way he did it is probably the most reasonable way to do it after all.

 

I think that is where we are talking Apples and Oranges here for some.

 

Both sides have valid points and concerns, NO one person is right or wrong.

 

 

 

Again.... Couple FACTS.

 

Since 2005 when CT was adopted, 1.5 smash is the absolute (technically speaking) Any driver since 2005 if struck with a 100mph swing, and applying the .830 cor 257 ct unit, should legally obtain a max 150mph ball speed. All launch characteristic being equal ALL CLUBS WILL GO THE SAME DISTANCE. There is NO magic, Epic and their Jail Break, TM and their Speed slots..... PXG and their Foam cannot Surpass the LEGAL limit of 257 ct Units. PERIOD.

 

 

BUT anything out side of that dime size 1.5 smash CAN be brought up to that number. And any other way to manipulate spin and ball flight characteristics are what can help optimize a less then optimal strike.

 

 

I know some are asking that said tester should do that.... but again, I personally feel as mention the data is enormous along with the fact that the data capture would make the video way to damn long to watch, MY A.D.D lets me sit still for 5 minutes before I start getting fidgety LOL

 

 

I mean seriously, if the center strike that provides 1.5 smash is a 1/4" diameter, for someone to test the circumference of 1/2", 3/4" 1" from center, then high on the face, low on the face, heal strike toe strike, then postive AoA, negative AoA, inside to out path, outside to inside path. That video while being extremely helpful to all golfers would probably be 2 hours long in addition to probably a couple days worth of data capture and video editing....

 

and really 10% of golfers are made up of GolfWRX of the 10% possible 30% would actually get it so 3% of all golfers in the world would actually care...... Is it worth it for him to do a video like that that 97% other golfers dont care LOL, nor take the criticism that some are shelling out LOL....man some of you are HHHARRRSSSHHH!!!!

[flog2]

I'll start of by saying I love Rick and what he does. With that said, his tests are to be used as a guide. They are basically good for him only. Its the same with all his club reviews, use them as a guide.

 

But man would I ever love to be paid to test clubs and golf.

 

get a few hundred thousand youtube subscribers and you can.............thats how he did it

[DeCuchi]

All of these responses are exactly why I'd like to see these online review guys post some expanded results. Of course they aren't machines. So how long would it take to record 5-10 shots missed half a ball towards the toe, or "just a bit heely" as I often here Rick say? If they hit 50 balls I'm sure they could pull out 10 or more slight misses, edit that down, and analyze the data. It's not absolutely conclusive data, but neither is what they are putting up now. Doesn't need to be their main content, just something to add to the mix. I'd be interested in seeing those results.

 

I don't disagree with you but I'd argue that, similar to all of the points we've discussed above, the majority of the viewers don't care like some of us and all it would do is create longer videos with the risk of less views ($) for Rick.

 

If there was a way to provide that data with relative consistency, I agree it would be valuable to some. But I also think there comes a point of diminishing returns on what all of us techy geeks would like to see. Like I mentioned earlier in the post, I think it's a slap in the face to the R&D teams the oems to test these drivers without actually making adjustments to utilize much of the technology that gets tweaked or improved year to year. To see the best gains, you need to have the right settings and though neutral setting might be almost ideal in one driver, they can be further from ideal on the next. But then, all we did was watch Rick fit himself for a driver, right? What does that tell the rest of us? Nothing if you think about it. Fitting is too personal and results and gains depend on too many variables. So then I come full circle to realize that, since most idiot just buy off the rack and never change a thing, the way he did it is probably the most reasonable way to do it after all.

 

I think that is where we are talking Apples and Oranges here for some.

 

Both sides have valid points and concerns, NO one person is right or wrong.

 

 

 

Again.... Couple FACTS.

 

Since 2005 when CT was adopted, 1.5 smash is the absolute (technically speaking) Any driver since 2005 if struck with a 100mph swing, and applying the .830 cor 257 ct unit, should legally obtain a max 150mph ball speed. All launch characteristic being equal ALL CLUBS WILL GO THE SAME DISTANCE. There is NO magic, Epic and their Jail Break, TM and their Speed slots..... PXG and their Foam cannot Surpass the LEGAL limit of 257 ct Units. PERIOD.

 

 

BUT anything out side of that dime size 1.5 smash CAN be brought up to that number. And any other way to manipulate spin and ball flight characteristics are what can help optimize a less then optimal strike.

 

 

I know some are asking that said tester should do that.... but again, I personally feel as mention the data is enormous along with the fact that the data capture would make the video way to damn long to watch, MY A.D.D lets me sit still for 5 minutes before I start getting fidgety LOL

 

 

I mean seriously, if the center strike that provides 1.5 smash is a 1/4" diameter, for someone to test the circumference of 1/2", 3/4" 1" from center, then high on the face, low on the face, heal strike toe strike, then postive AoA, negative AoA, inside to out path, outside to inside path. That video while being extremely helpful to all golfers would probably be 2 hours long in addition to probably a couple days worth of data capture and video editing....

 

and really 10% of golfers are made up of GolfWRX of the 10% possible 30% would actually get it so 3% of all golfers in the world would actually care...... Is it worth it for him to do a video like that nor take the criticism that some are shelling out LOL....man some of you are HHHARRRSSSHHH!!!!

 

I don’t think anyone expects to watch them capture the data. Gawd no! They could show a shot or 2 if they wanted, but they could present the results and analysis in a 2 minute summary like they do now. Not much else would change minus showing a few shots. “Now let’s have a look at raw baw data”. Here are the shot locations, here are the avg’s etc etc. Give an opinion or observation, move on. I dont think anyone is asking for shot by shot commentary, or a deep dive on the analytics of each shot. Just simple averages like they do now. Just a suggestion from a consumer.

 

Edit: and I’m just talking simple heel/ toe. Throw in high/low if you like.

[Exactice808]

I don't think anyone expects to watch them capture the data. Gawd no! They could show a shot or 2 if they wanted, but they could present the results and analysis in a 2 minute summary like they do now. Not much else would change minus showing a few shots. "Now let's have a look at raw baw data". Here are the shot locations, here are the avg's etc etc. Give an opinion or observation, move on. I dont think anyone is asking for shot by shot commentary, or a deep dive on the analytics of each shot. Just simple averages like they do now. Just a suggestion from a consumer.

 

Sorry I knew what you meant...... I think its exhaustive work for the "producer" of the video It must be WONDERFUL to have a 5 minute youtube video for "us" people to watch, but I am sure the logistics to do just that video probably took a couple days....not as easy it a 5 minute video LOL. And I think youtuber' (going off topic) want viewership.... so the faster and more videos they produce the better.

 

 

Anyways...again I totally see where you were you are coming from..... just think logistically that would be a nightmare video to make..... not worth a youtuber's effort.... maybe a COMPANY/Manufacture effort as they have the time, resources and marketing.

 

But ..... again .... lets face it.... does facts sell..... or does Dreams of more yards sell......Jason Day....294 yard 4 iron...WTF Over!!! LOL!

[Lacey Underall]

I agree with the original premise of the thread: most of the new tech is for off center hits. And that’s great for the masses. But I’ve found that some of the newer drivers make me lose a little feel for the swing/head. Kind of like hitting a blade versus a GI iron. Recently went back to my older 440cc driver and it’s like I’ve been reborn. I also think the newer drivers are much better on strikes low on the face. But that’s not really where better players hit a driver. If you have spent 10+ years learning how to hit drivers that respond well on high face strikes.......it can be a weird transition.

[Londoner]

I agree with the original premise of the thread: most of the new tech is for off center hits. And that’s great for the masses. But I’ve found that some of the newer drivers make me lose a little feel for the swing/head. Kind of like hitting a blade versus a GI iron. Recently went back to my older 440cc driver and it’s like I’ve been reborn. I also think the newer drivers are much better on strikes low on the face. But that’s not really where better players hit a driver. If you have spent 10+ years learning how to hit drivers that respond well on high face strikes.......it can be a weird transition.

From the reviews i thought all the latest drivers work better with strikes higher on the face.

What ones require lower?

[Lancj1]

I love these videos.

 

The most important message that I have taken from it, and its worked, is that if you have a reasonably new driver from a reputable company, that you like and hit well, keep it because dropping £250, £350, £450 on a shiny new one won't make the slightest bit of difference to your game. Mark a date in you phone organizer 5 years from the date of purchase and don't think of buying another til then.

 

Then after five years, take the 2k you've saved and buy a PXG club

[BY#99]

Not sure why anyone would take any post online of a club test as a "true test". As stated these should be guides and taken as such. When Crossfield or Rick does a test and tells you their results this info should not be used to assume your results would be the same or similar. These guys are just testing the clubs and giving their data. Not sure why people bash them and their tests. Take their info as a small percentage of info you use to make a purchase and no more. Try before you buy if possible is the best option. Maybe these tests will help you narrow it down.

[xjohnx]

Not sure why anyone would take any post online of a club test as a "true test". As stated these should be guides and taken as such. When Crossfield or Rick does a test and tells you their results this info should not be used to assume your results would be the same or similar. These guys are just testing the clubs and giving their data. Not sure why people bash them and their tests. Take their info as a small percentage of info you use to make a purchase and no more. Try before you buy if possible is the best option. Maybe these tests will help you narrow it down.

 

The general discussion in this thread has been a healthy one and mostly just talk about what we'd like to see added to these videos. There has been little to no bashing at all and we'd like a little more information to add to the decision making process exactly as you've described.

[DeCuchi]

Not sure why anyone would take any post online of a club test as a "true test". As stated these should be guides and taken as such. When Crossfield or Rick does a test and tells you their results this info should not be used to assume your results would be the same or similar. These guys are just testing the clubs and giving their data. Not sure why people bash them and their tests. Take their info as a small percentage of info you use to make a purchase and no more. Try before you buy if possible is the best option. Maybe these tests will help you narrow it down.

 

The general discussion in this thread has been a healthy one and mostly just talk about what we'd like to see added to these videos. There has been little to no bashing at all and we'd like a little more information to add to the decision making process exactly as you've described.

 

I agree, I don’t think anyone is bashing them. It’s hard to imagine anyone buying a new $500 driver based on these tests alone. Might be enough to convince someone to buy that year or two old driver for $125 instead of the $500 one though. ?

[Jack Pearsall]

JP is reminded that the more you think things have changed, essentially, they remain largely the same.

You nibble around the edges of your abilities, but technique slays hardware almost every time. We create this panacea around gear that is unsubstantiated by our observations. At some point, you recognize the folly you are engaged in, hopefully, and focus on where results are improved: Improving your swing and course management and using your gear effectively, not worshipping the new and shinny and marketed. Gear is fun, but it is not the reason you suck at golf.

[BForrester]

I dunno about you guys but I plan to hit the Center of the face, every time(not claiming that I actually accomplish that). I don't care what the ball does off the toe/heel when it comes to reviews. Plus not many people could purposely hit heel/toe consistently enough to do the test he did. I want Center strike comparisons not miss hit comparisons.

 

I don't know...I can hit the heel pretty damned consistently, haha

[RogerinNewZealand]

Love the Videos from Rick, best TM, Ping, Callaway, Titleist.

I don't get to play enough golf to get under an 18hcp.

But i sure hit Driver dead centre when im warmed up quite often, use a marker pen to check.

Yes all my drivers are shorter..... most have Lead added......

I know i maximise what i have at impact. Have had great Smash readings a few years ago.

Trackman taught me a lot about having a + Angle Of Attack.

That was my key fault, plus pull back the Right foot to Guarantee an Inside to Impact Path...

 

Maximise what you have folks !! Thats why WRX is here for us. Thanks KJ for starting this one !!