Callaway epic flash? is this legit? (New Pics added Pg 1)

[lanejsl]

So Phil uses the Flash last week and and completely sucked. Back to the Rouge this week and...?

 

So Phil uses the Flash last week and and completely sucked. Back to the Rouge this week and...?

[BMC]

I've played two rounds with my Flash. I'm not a long hitter, but I've missed one fairway in two rounds and I hit it on every par 4 and par 5. This driver has a very tight dispersion. Not longer than original Epic or Rogue for me, but damn does it wanna go straight.

It sounds good to me, not loud at all.

[nsxguy]

So Phil uses the Flash last week and and completely sucked. Back to the Rouge this week and...?

 

So Phil uses the Flash last week and and completely sucked. Back to the Rouge this week and...?

 

Why do you say everything twice ?

 

Why do you say everything twice ?

[UnderPar18]

So Phil uses the Flash last week and and completely sucked. Back to the Rouge this week and...?

 

So Phil uses the Flash last week and and completely sucked. Back to the Rouge this week and...?

 

Phil driving accuracy using the Rogue:

R1 - 100%

R2: - 43%

 

What’s your point. Are you implying the Rogue is better than the Epic Flash using Phil Mickelson as your example? If so that’s REALLY dumb.

[ShowMe]

So if Callaway used a supercomputer with AI that did 40,000 or whatever iterations and determined this was the best possible club head design, does that mean they’ll never be able to produce a better driver?

[nsxguy]

So if Callaway used a supercomputer with AI that did 40,000 or whatever iterations and determined this was the best possible club head design, does that mean they'll never be able to produce a better driver?

 

Of course not.

 

Computers get "smarter" every year as well. :)

[ThinkingPlus]

So if Callaway used a supercomputer with AI that did 40,000 or whatever iterations and determined this was the best possible club head design, does that mean they'll never be able to produce a better driver?

The machine learning technique was only used for the face design as far as I know. If they improve other aspects of the driver design (mass location, aerodynamics, etc...) then they could generate a better overall design. It is also possible, as mentioned above, that the computer used gets faster allowing more iterations or the algorithm gets better doing the optimization.

[ragingllama4]

Thank you. Definitely didn’t get the heavier weight as requested.

 

If they are handling swingweight requests like that have for the past few generations, you will usually have to order and install the extra weight yourself. I have never had Callaway actually do a swingweight adjustment for a customer on the assembly side. We (the customer or I) have always had to make that adjustment after ordering the weight separately, even when requesting in during order. I had to do the same on my staff Epic and Rogue drivers. Most companies will not touch swingweight anymore.

 

Not a big deal, but in an email and over the phone they said they would do the swingweight adjust. I haven’t called back since it was delivered, but my initials calls told me they wouldn’t sell the weights to the consumer directly, but could be ordered with the initial build. Sadly, didn’t happen. I didn’t have this problem with Titleist in the fall, they got my TS3 order perfect.

[Krt22]

So if Callaway used a supercomputer with AI that did 40,000 or whatever iterations and determined this was the best possible club head design, does that mean they'll never be able to produce a better driver?

The machine learning technique was only used for the face design as far as I know. If they improve other aspects of the driver design (mass location, aerodynamics, etc...) then they could generate a better overall design. It is also possible, as mentioned above, that the computer used gets faster allowing more iterations or the algorithm gets better doing the optimization.

 

Bingo. Not to mention these are 15,000 virtual design iterations. They can test/characterize the actual production faces and plug that data back into the model to further fine tune it's predictive abilities.

 

And like you said, this was just the face. Not only can they look at other aspects of the club , but they can build a similar model to optimize the rest of the design since they can have more confidence to hold the face design constant.

 

Shaft companies keep releasing similar shafts bit with updated fiber content (ie stronger and stronger). We might start seeing that type of enhancement of carbon bodied heads

[ShowMe]

So if Callaway used a supercomputer with AI that did 40,000 or whatever iterations and determined this was the best possible club head design, does that mean they'll never be able to produce a better driver?

The machine learning technique was only used for the face design as far as I know. If they improve other aspects of the driver design (mass location, aerodynamics, etc...) then they could generate a better overall design. It is also possible, as mentioned above, that the computer used gets faster allowing more iterations or the algorithm gets better doing the optimization.

 

Bingo. Not to mention these are 15,000 virtual design iterations. They can test/characterize the actual production faces and plug that data back into the model to further fine tune it's predictive abilities.

 

And like you said, this was just the face. Not only can they look at other aspects of the club , but they can build a similar model to optimize the rest of the design since they can have more confidence to hold the face design constant.

 

Shaft companies keep releasing similar shafts bit with updated fiber content (ie stronger and stronger). We might start seeing that type of enhancement of carbon bodied heads

 

So the face design will never get better, or if it does it will be a slight evolution not a major revolution. However, the other components of the club head could have a revolutionary improvement. So ball speed will not improve because of the face design, but rather because the club head gets lighter or more aerodynamic and is able to be swung faster. Makes sense, I suppose.

 

A couple of things regarding the speed of the computer. First, the supercomputer they have will not get faster. If a faster one does come to market, they would have to buy it, they couldn't just upgrade the one they have. Supercomputers rely on massively parallel processing threads, and each machine has a preconfigured hardware architecture. They also cost millions of dollars, so it's unlikely Callaway would buy a new one each year.

 

Regarding the machine learning, it's likely that Callaway produced several prototypes of the club head before going to mass production and plugged that data back into the AI for tweaking. As such, the face design is likely optimized as it currently exists.

 

And btw, I didn't stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night. I actually do have a degree in computer science. Lol.

 

I guess the main point of my post was to point out that Callaway may have backed themselves into a corner with their marketing around the face design. In the future, they won't be able to (in good conscience) come out with a marketing campaign that claims a revolutionary new improved face design unless they spend millions more on a faster supercomputer and materially improve their machine learning models. This will be about the best it gets for them from a face design standpoint for the foreseeable future. It will be interesting to see if their competitors go down the same "machine learning supercomputer" path. It sure does sound impressive to the uninitiated.

[double or triple?]

So if Callaway used a supercomputer with AI that did 40,000 or whatever iterations and determined this was the best possible club head design, does that mean they'll never be able to produce a better driver?

The machine learning technique was only used for the face design as far as I know. If they improve other aspects of the driver design (mass location, aerodynamics, etc...) then they could generate a better overall design. It is also possible, as mentioned above, that the computer used gets faster allowing more iterations or the algorithm gets better doing the optimization.

 

Bingo. Not to mention these are 15,000 virtual design iterations. They can test/characterize the actual production faces and plug that data back into the model to further fine tune it's predictive abilities.

 

And like you said, this was just the face. Not only can they look at other aspects of the club , but they can build a similar model to optimize the rest of the design since they can have more confidence to hold the face design constant.

 

Shaft companies keep releasing similar shafts bit with updated fiber content (ie stronger and stronger). We might start seeing that type of enhancement of carbon bodied heads

 

So the face design will never get better, or if it does it will be a slight evolution not a major revolution. However, the other components of the club head could have a revolutionary improvement. So ball speed will not improve because of the face design, but rather because the club head gets lighter or more aerodynamic and is able to be swung faster. Makes sense, I suppose.

 

A couple of things regarding the speed of the computer. First, the supercomputer they have will not get faster. If a faster one does come to market, they would have to buy it, they couldn't just upgrade the one they have. Supercomputers rely on massively parallel processing threads, and each machine has a preconfigured hardware architecture. They also cost millions of dollars, so it's unlikely Callaway would buy a new one each year.

 

Regarding the machine learning, it's likely that Callaway produced several prototypes of the club head before going to mass production and plugged that data back into the AI for tweaking. As such, the face design is likely optimized as it currently exists.

 

And btw, I didn't stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night. I actually do have a degree in computer science. Lol.

 

I guess the main point of my post was to point out that Callaway may have backed themselves into a corner with their marketing around the face design. In the future, they won't be able to (in good conscience) come out with a marketing campaign that claims a revolutionary new improved face design unless they spend millions more on a faster supercomputer and materially improve their machine learning models. This will be about the best it gets for them from a face design standpoint for the foreseeable future. It will be interesting to see if their competitors go down the same "machine learning supercomputer" path. It sure does sound impressive to the uninitiated.

 

You’re assuming they’ll never change the perimeters designated in the program to stay within certain limits. This was the first optimized design for them given the restrictions they kept the super computer confined to. We’re they to change the size or depth of the face the computer could possible kick out a new design.

[nsxguy]

Thank you. Definitely didn't get the heavier weight as requested.

 

If they are handling swingweight requests like that have for the past few generations, you will usually have to order and install the extra weight yourself. I have never had Callaway actually do a swingweight adjustment for a customer on the assembly side. We (the customer or I) have always had to make that adjustment after ordering the weight separately, even when requesting in during order. I had to do the same on my staff Epic and Rogue drivers. Most companies will not touch swingweight anymore.

 

Not a big deal, but in an email and over the phone they said they would do the swingweight adjust. I haven't called back since it was delivered, but my initials calls told me they wouldn't sell the weights to the consumer directly, but could be ordered with the initial build. Sadly, didn't happen. I didn't have this problem with Titleist in the fall, they got my TS3 order perfect.

 

Have you called them SINCE ?

 

My "best guess" is they would send you the proper weight(s),,,,,,,,,,,,,,, for no cost.

[stk123]

A knowledgeable source told me that, due to super computer, Callaway has next year's driver already designed.

[radiman]

So if Callaway used a supercomputer with AI that did 40,000 or whatever iterations and determined this was the best possible club head design, does that mean they'll never be able to produce a better driver?

The machine learning technique was only used for the face design as far as I know. If they improve other aspects of the driver design (mass location, aerodynamics, etc...) then they could generate a better overall design. It is also possible, as mentioned above, that the computer used gets faster allowing more iterations or the algorithm gets better doing the optimization.

 

Bingo. Not to mention these are 15,000 virtual design iterations. They can test/characterize the actual production faces and plug that data back into the model to further fine tune it's predictive abilities.

 

And like you said, this was just the face. Not only can they look at other aspects of the club , but they can build a similar model to optimize the rest of the design since they can have more confidence to hold the face design constant.

 

Shaft companies keep releasing similar shafts bit with updated fiber content (ie stronger and stronger). We might start seeing that type of enhancement of carbon bodied heads

 

So the face design will never get better, or if it does it will be a slight evolution not a major revolution. However, the other components of the club head could have a revolutionary improvement. So ball speed will not improve because of the face design, but rather because the club head gets lighter or more aerodynamic and is able to be swung faster. Makes sense, I suppose.

 

A couple of things regarding the speed of the computer. First, the supercomputer they have will not get faster. If a faster one does come to market, they would have to buy it, they couldn't just upgrade the one they have. Supercomputers rely on massively parallel processing threads, and each machine has a preconfigured hardware architecture. They also cost millions of dollars, so it's unlikely Callaway would buy a new one each year.

 

Regarding the machine learning, it's likely that Callaway produced several prototypes of the club head before going to mass production and plugged that data back into the AI for tweaking. As such, the face design is likely optimized as it currently exists.

 

And btw, I didn't stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night. I actually do have a degree in computer science. Lol.

 

I guess the main point of my post was to point out that Callaway may have backed themselves into a corner with their marketing around the face design. In the future, they won't be able to (in good conscience) come out with a marketing campaign that claims a revolutionary new improved face design unless they spend millions more on a faster supercomputer and materially improve their machine learning models. This will be about the best it gets for them from a face design standpoint for the foreseeable future. It will be interesting to see if their competitors go down the same "machine learning supercomputer" path. It sure does sound impressive to the uninitiated.

 

Pretty sure it's not their computer. If I remember right, they paid to have a computer so the process. So, two things can happen. They can lease time on a faster cluster or utilize improved coding to come up with a better design. Computing is not at it's limits.

[nsxguy]

So if Callaway used a supercomputer with AI that did 40,000 or whatever iterations and determined this was the best possible club head design, does that mean they'll never be able to produce a better driver?

The machine learning technique was only used for the face design as far as I know. If they improve other aspects of the driver design (mass location, aerodynamics, etc...) then they could generate a better overall design. It is also possible, as mentioned above, that the computer used gets faster allowing more iterations or the algorithm gets better doing the optimization.

 

Bingo. Not to mention these are 15,000 virtual design iterations. They can test/characterize the actual production faces and plug that data back into the model to further fine tune it's predictive abilities.

 

And like you said, this was just the face. Not only can they look at other aspects of the club , but they can build a similar model to optimize the rest of the design since they can have more confidence to hold the face design constant.

 

Shaft companies keep releasing similar shafts bit with updated fiber content (ie stronger and stronger). We might start seeing that type of enhancement of carbon bodied heads

 

So the face design will never get better, or if it does it will be a slight evolution not a major revolution. However, the other components of the club head could have a revolutionary improvement. So ball speed will not improve because of the face design, but rather because the club head gets lighter or more aerodynamic and is able to be swung faster. Makes sense, I suppose.

 

A couple of things regarding the speed of the computer. First, the supercomputer they have will not get faster. If a faster one does come to market, they would have to buy it, they couldn't just upgrade the one they have. Supercomputers rely on massively parallel processing threads, and each machine has a preconfigured hardware architecture. They also cost millions of dollars, so it's unlikely Callaway would buy a new one each year.

 

Regarding the machine learning, it's likely that Callaway produced several prototypes of the club head before going to mass production and plugged that data back into the AI for tweaking. As such, the face design is likely optimized as it currently exists.

 

And btw, I didn't stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night. I actually do have a degree in computer science. Lol.

 

I guess the main point of my post was to point out that Callaway may have backed themselves into a corner with their marketing around the face design. In the future, they won't be able to (in good conscience) come out with a marketing campaign that claims a revolutionary new improved face design unless they spend millions more on a faster supercomputer and materially improve their machine learning models. This will be about the best it gets for them from a face design standpoint for the foreseeable future. It will be interesting to see if their competitors go down the same "machine learning supercomputer" path. It sure does sound impressive to the uninitiated.

 

Pretty sure it's not their computer. If I remember right, they paid to have a computer so the process. So, two things can happen. They can lease time on a faster cluster or utilize improved coding to come up with a better design. Computing is not at it's limits.

 

Can someone "in the know" explain to me why Callaway (apparently) "cannot afford" their own computer to do the CAD/CAM work ? Or at least link to some references of the machine(s) they had do the work ?

 

Given today's iPhone has more computing power than the mainframes of 40 years ago I find it difficult to believe a corporation such as Callaway "cannot afford" their own machine.

 

TIA :hi:

[GSDriver]

Doing FEA/FEM requires a bit more than CAD/CAM which requires tons of computing power. Companies still but time on Krays, or got to cloud providers for parallel computing power. It's business after all.

[radiman]

 

 

Can someone "in the know" explain to me why Callaway (apparently) "cannot afford" their own computer to do the CAD/CAM work ? Or at least link to some references of the machine(s) they had do the work ?

 

Given today's iPhone has more computing power than the mainframes of 40 years ago I find it difficult to believe a corporation such as Callaway "cannot afford" their own machine.

 

TIA :hi:

 

Not saying they cannot afford it. But, it wouldn't be cost effective to build the system necessary to do this one project. There are universities and private organizations that have invested in the hardware and can run and host the types of projects.

 

The system is likely a series of servers that can share the load of computational power.

 

I'm in the computer industry myself and am generally aware of the process/systems used in these projects. But, I'm in the hardware business and haven't personally seen anything on the scale more than likely used here. If it cost them millions, it's not anything I've personally seen. We've made some small clusters for a local University. But, we're talking $500k in hardware for 4 servers. I don't know what they did for software. I am under the assumption that they were writing their own. But, that's where the money is at.

[ragingllama4]

Thank you. Definitely didn't get the heavier weight as requested.

 

If they are handling swingweight requests like that have for the past few generations, you will usually have to order and install the extra weight yourself. I have never had Callaway actually do a swingweight adjustment for a customer on the assembly side. We (the customer or I) have always had to make that adjustment after ordering the weight separately, even when requesting in during order. I had to do the same on my staff Epic and Rogue drivers. Most companies will not touch swingweight anymore.

 

Not a big deal, but in an email and over the phone they said they would do the swingweight adjust. I haven't called back since it was delivered, but my initials calls told me they wouldn't sell the weights to the consumer directly, but could be ordered with the initial build. Sadly, didn't happen. I didn't have this problem with Titleist in the fall, they got my TS3 order perfect.

 

Have you called them SINCE ?

 

My "best guess" is they would send you the proper weight(s),,,,,,,,,,,,,,, for no cost.

 

Call before venting?? Of course not. Haha. It came Friday afternoon. I do plan on calling Monday and I’m sure everything will be made right. Just another step in the process, when I had “confirmation” during the order. Big deal? Not really.

[Krt22]

 

Can someone "in the know" explain to me why Callaway (apparently) "cannot afford" their own computer to do the CAD/CAM work ? Or at least link to some references of the machine(s) they had do the work ?

 

Given today's iPhone has more computing power than the mainframes of 40 years ago I find it difficult to believe a corporation such as Callaway "cannot afford" their own machine.

 

TIA :hi:

 

It's not so much CAD/CAM, its CAE (Computer aided engineering). IE running through thousands of potential design iterations through a theoretical model, it's extremely computationally heavy so a lot of times it's easier (and capitally efficient) just to pay for computing power vs purchasing your own out right. Same goes with storage, plenty of companies no longer keep their own server farms when it's cheaper/easier to farm it out to all of the various cloud computing companies in the space.

[BigSky59]

I think the sound is a discussion for the thread. Mainly because you talked about it here and in other threads. While be it your right.....Your opinion/ posts may have created a false narrative for people who take what is said on here for granted and as fact. So your rush to judgement and to offer your opinion so quickly without finding the story of what was happening Is something I don't vibe with...... I hope bringing Taylormade into your shop works out for you. But by not stocking EF you removed a possible revenue stream for yourself. Just my opinion. But what do I know. I'm just here typing things on the internet.....

 

Not sure what I've said that could be taken as "fact"...I've even stated that there is clearly some variation in the sound of the SZ from club to club, and I'm not the only one that has said such. I only have room for one manufacturer to be stocked at a premium level (this is not uncommon at any green grass facility...most partner with only one to carry the full line), and I made the choice based off of direct customer feedback and sales trends the past several years. TM plain and simple outsold Cally for me, and that's without a single TM stick in the building to even hit. So it was a simple business decision this year, and it's looking like it won't be a terrible one. We sold/presold more M6 wood sticks this past launch weekend than I did Rogue total for last year, and that's even before my first TM fitting day, which has been booked solid for a month now.

 

But as far as sound, I think that's also been beat to death. People will either love or hate the sound. And if Cally has in fact tweaked the sound based on early reviewer/staff feedback, that would be a plus for them. Because as has been said, almost every early internet or YouTube influencer reviewer has negatively mentioned the sound of the SZ. Nothing I could say or do could influence more potential customers than those reviews.

 

As a Callaway staffer, I'll throw in my 2 cents,(although it's only worth 1 :taunt: ) regarding the sound of the driver and anyone who might be concerned by this sound, even with positive demo results: give another shaft a shot! Yes I've heard the sound that everyone is commenting on with the Epic Flash, however when it comes to woods, there will be a handful of shafts that will play nearly identically for everyone, and will change the tune of your driver. In my personal experience and through years of extensive tinkering and playing, there are 3 or 4 shafts that are nearly identical for me, performance wise, however each completely change the sound and tune of the driver. To put specifics to the story, the two that I rotate between mostly between those 4 are the Tour AD-BB7-S and Rogue Silver 70-S. I've played both shafts for years in-and-out of different driver models from different manufacturers, and have found that one or the other usually compliments a certain head better than the other, and I usually play one or the other based on sound alone as sound is one of my top 2 personal driver fitting requirements. Bottom line: same situation happened with me and the Epic Flash. Was a little turned off by the sound at first, and after rotating through my shaft selections, was able to fine tune the sound without changing performance characteristics. Find a few shafts with the same physical characteristics that are within 3-4 grams of each other and test them out. Just my one-cent suggestion if anyone is on the fence... hope it works for you.

[SwingBlues]

Had 9 holes on wet fairways. EFSZ is loud and honestly, I didn't see an astronomical distance advantage over my Epic GBB and I did not have my best driving day on the 9 holes...which is good... let me explain... my misses were much improved over the EGbb. I did not have any huge slice or hooks. Did some big draws and fades but it was left or right fairway rough. It's gotta to be the AI face. Those bad swings would be way further sideways with the EGbb.

 

This driver needs to be tuned, playing it in the +1/D setting, flying a tad higher than I like but S/D is flying too low... might need to adjust the front weight / sliding weight combo...

[tigercolt77]

Cobra swing weighted my F9. Unfortunately my Epic Flash is too light SW wise. Any idea how much that 20g weight is?

 

Just looked them up in our ordering portal. Looks like the slide weights would retail around $20 per slider weight. There's a 12, 16, and 20 listed. And a boat load of the front screws in various weights.

How might someone go about getting the heavier sliding weights?

[chris975d]

Cobra swing weighted my F9. Unfortunately my Epic Flash is too light SW wise. Any idea how much that 20g weight is?

 

Just looked them up in our ordering portal. Looks like the slide weights would retail around $20 per slider weight. There's a 12, 16, and 20 listed. And a boat load of the front screws in various weights.

How might someone go about getting the heavier sliding weights?

 

They are shown in our ordering portal, so any callaway account should be able to order them for you.

[stk123]

Had 9 holes on wet fairways. EFSZ is loud and honestly, I didn't see an astronomical distance advantage over my Epic GBB and I did not have my best driving day on the 9 holes...which is good... let me explain... my misses were much improved over the EGbb. I did not have any huge slice or hooks. Did some big draws and fades but it was left or right fairway rough. It's gotta to be the AI face. Those bad swings would be way further sideways with the EGbb.

 

This driver needs to be tuned, playing it in the +1/D setting, flying a tad higher than I like but S/D is flying too low... might need to adjust the front weight / sliding weight combo...

 

Wild misses with OG Epic SZ is reason why I am in the market for a new driver. I played a few holes today and blasted a couple right down the middle and a couple of wild shots. On one, I thought I put a decent swing on the ball and I look up to see a huge banana slice out of nowhere; way deep into the hazard. There was virtually zero wind and if any it would have minimized the slice.

 

I don't slice any other clubs, and don't slice my driver often at all. But every now and then it can kill a great round. I also found mishits are not as fast as I would like. I am hoping this new breed of 2019 drivers will help take care of some forgiveness issues.

[michaelbsimons47]

Insane how much these new drivers are

[xjohnx]

Insane how much these new drivers are

 

Is it, though?

[GolfChannel]

Insane how much these new drivers are

 

Is it, though?

 

Pricing is relative to the consumer.

 

That said, while I can afford the new equipment I would never fathom paying that much unless it included a proper fitting and no upcharge for most custom shafts. With the new pricing, I will probably just do the same I do with my iPhone which is the 1 to 2-year and wait cycle until I can pick one up for a more reasonable price.

[nsxguy]

Insane how much these new drivers are

 

Is it, though?

 

Pricing is relative to the consumer.

 

That may be but this guy's a member for over 4 years and his first post was earlier today about how beautiful the Titleist CONCEPT irons are, the ones that sell for about $15K per set. OK, OK, that's a gross exaggeration, and he didn't say he'd buy them but,,,,,,

 

And here he is now, with his 2nd post, telling us how insane the prices of the new drivers are. :lol:

[ebbowron]

Billy bobs golf has the heavier sliding weights and front weights for sale. $11.99 each I believe

[Rig14Port]

Got a chance to get the Flash SZ on the course yesterday. I’ve never been more impressed with the all around performance of any driver I’ve owned to date. This thing is both long and super straight even on misses. Its is the first forward CG driver I’ve ever played that gives me the draw shape I like to see when I put a good swing on it. Miss hits with past drivers usually faded 10-20yrds offline and flying around 280. This driver seems to be more like a 5-10 yrd fade on misses flying about 295ish. Heel and toe hits both seem to stay around the center line and ball speeds seem to hold across the face. Couldn’t be happier with my investment thus far!! May have to name her “the unicornâ€