Vokey SM8

[Llortamaisey]

These will actually have a good tech story but Titleist is now scrambling to keep the lid on things. Anybody know where the pictures originated from? Anywho, I do like the offset and heel relief in the pictures.

[Luke7]

Seems like leaked pics of the new vokeys get out early every year lol, not that I'm complaining >:)

[gcp07]

What are the odds they release a high toe? Better question.....why would they not release a HT or a Raw finish. Keep up with market demand Bobby LFG! That 58 in the 3 different colors looks like it has a slighty higher toe, maybe they should call it a Mid Toe. Im coining that.

[Rig14Port]

> @Llortamaisey said:

> These will actually have a good tech story but Titleist is now scrambling to keep the lid on things. Anybody know where the pictures originated from? Anywho, I do like the offset and heel relief in the pictures.

 

The pictures came out of China and are completely speculative. I have no connections with Titleist and didn't get the pics through a Titleist/Acushnet rep. What comes to market could be completely different, but this is what I've seen and figured i'd share it for the sake of discussion.

[MooJersey]

These look way too busy for my taste. Have to stick with my SM7

[jwat142]

No progressive CG on those like the 6's and 7's

[Big Ben]

> @jwat142 said:

> No progressive CG on those like the 6's and 7's

 

I thought the progressive CG really hurt the feel. That’s just me...

[BearQ]

****> @"Big Ben" said:

> > @jwat142 said:

> > No progressive CG on those like the 6's and 7's

>

> I thought the progressive CG really hurt the feel. That’s just me...

 

SM6 felt great imo. Way way way better than SM4/5 at least- those were clicky for sure and Ive played those 3 models extensively with tons of diff shafts

 

Sm6 Gap 50.08 is one of the best at that position ever

 

 

[third-times-a-charm]

> @BearQ said:

> ****> @"Big Ben" said:

> > > @jwat142 said:

> > > No progressive CG on those like the 6's and 7's

> >

> > I thought the progressive CG really hurt the feel. That’s just me...

>

> SM6 felt great imo. Way way way better than SM4/5 at least- those were clicky for sure and Ive played those 3 models extensively with tons of diff shafts

>

> Sm6 Gap 50.08 is one of the best at that position ever

>

>

 

Agreed. Still playing my 52/56 SM6 F grinds

[Ski5280]

Not sure about these. Like others have said they look pretty busy.

[DTown3011]

Not a fan.

[kerila07]

Looking forward to the sm7 discount not a fan of these

[HipCheck]

# MARSHAL NOTE: IMAGES REMOVED

 

**We've received info that indicate these are suspected counterfeit. Please don't add them back to the thread.

 

If we find out that they're indeed legit, we'll allow them again.

 

Thanks all.**

[bunta]

> @HipCheck said:

> # MARSHAL NOTE: IMAGES REMOVED

>

> **We've received info that indicate these are suspected counterfeit. Please don't add them back to the thread.

>

> If we find out that they're indeed legit, we'll allow them again.

>

> Thanks all.**

 

 

 

I think "received info" means Titleist said take that sh*t down or ..lawsuit.

 

How can they counterfeit something thats not even released yet lol?

[Llortamaisey]

> @Rig14Port said:

> > @Llortamaisey said:

> > These will actually have a good tech story but Titleist is now scrambling to keep the lid on things. Anybody know where the pictures originated from? Anywho, I do like the offset and heel relief in the pictures.

>

> The pictures came out of China and are completely speculative. I have no connections with Titleist and didn't get the pics through a Titleist/Acushnet rep. What comes to market could be completely different, but this is what I've seen and figured i'd share it for the sake of discussion.

My bad dude. Wasn’t trying to get you in trouble. All I know is that the white coats moved quick on your pic begging people not to repost them. Hopefully you didn’t get a call from Roland Giroux.

 

[Rig14Port]

> @Llortamaisey said:

> > @Rig14Port said:

> > > @Llortamaisey said:

> > > These will actually have a good tech story but Titleist is now scrambling to keep the lid on things. Anybody know where the pictures originated from? Anywho, I do like the offset and heel relief in the pictures.

> >

> > The pictures came out of China and are completely speculative. I have no connections with Titleist and didn't get the pics through a Titleist/Acushnet rep. What comes to market could be completely different, but this is what I've seen and figured i'd share it for the sake of discussion.

> My bad dude. Wasn’t trying to get you in trouble. All I know is that the white coats moved quick on your pic begging people not to repost them. Hopefully you didn’t get a call from Roland Giroux.

>

No worries here. I didn't take the pictures and don't have any ties to the source... I'm clean. ha. I didn't know if some early pictures might have leaked out of a Chinese factory or what. Can see where these could potentially be counterfeit now that the marshalls have jumped in. Guess we'll have to wait until launch to see...

 

[milesnotsmiles]

lol, funny that titelist is able to squash a product leak like that

[Waytall]

Hopefully those were just a prototype that gets squashed. They really didn’t do it for me in the looks dept.

[golfinguru11]

Nvm

[golfinguru11]

Alright, found the leaked pics. here is my theory. They’ll do something similar to the Vokey forged japan release and move the CG internally with tungsten. This allows for more precise weighting in addition to claiming “new tech”.

 

 

[er1cchandler]

That'd be great if they kept the design aspects of the Vokey forged... love the clean Titleist script

[mrmikeac]

> @golfinguru11 said:

> Alright, found the leaked pics. here is my theory. They’ll do something similar to the Vokey forged japan release and move the CG internally with tungsten. This allows for more precise weighting in addition to claiming “new tech”.

>

>

>

 

I agree.

 

If it could be a mixture of the JDM Vokey Forged and the 64 Degree LTD wedge, that would be perfect

[dciccoritti]

> @golfinguru11 said:

> Alright, found the leaked pics. here is my theory. They’ll do something similar to the Vokey forged japan release and move the CG internally with tungsten. This allows for more precise weighting in addition to claiming “new tech”.

>

>

>

 

I could see that. And I can see the cost going up due to the process of putting those things together.

[Trying4Better]

No L grind? No thank you. When you play off concrete like we have here in Texas, L is King! But, give is a K with 3deg of bounce and you will sell millions here!

[gcp07]

The New TM and Mizuno are looking better by the Min

[swgolf12]

> @"15th Club" said:

> > @storm319 said:

> > > @"15th Club" said:

> > > > @storm319 said:

> > > > > @"15th Club" said:

> > > > > > @storm319 said:

> > > > > > > @"15th Club" said:

> > > > > > > To this day, my all-time favorite Vokeys were the 200 and 400 series.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Too bad the USGA deemed them as non-conforming...

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > Haha. I love this because it is so wrong.

> > > > >

> > > > > The USGA didn't deem them non-conforming. The USGA went out of its way, to make sure that they would not be made "non-conforming" within a normal life span. They are not "non-conforming." And I would normally suggest to you that you look it up and come back to us and tell us what you found but I don't want to wait for that. I want to have as much fun as I can, grinding on you right now, for your wrong-headed suggestion.

> > > > >

> > > > > For the umpteenth time (and for the uninitiated); the groove rule of 2010 did not make old wedges "non-conforming." It prospectively changed the standards for manufacturing grooves on clubs of a certain loft. And the particular ruling bodies of elite golf (first the professional tours, then the state and national amateur championships and NCAA tournament play, etc.) imposed a rule that newly-manufactured wedges would be required per a Condition of Competition.

> > > > >

> > > > > As I write this, there is literally no way that any old pre-2010 wedge is "non-conforming."

> > > > >

> > > > > So now back to you. What else can I say, to run your comment into the ground? Please let me know. Okay thanx bye.

> > > > >

> > > >

> > > > Semantics. Should we say “conditionally conforming” instead? Ultimately the USGA made conformance determinations on most clubs submitted for testing under their 2010 ruling change (the ATR designation is bs) and we are in the midst of temporary 14 year bifurcation which is the difference between conforming and non-conforming for certain models. Either way, 1/1/2024 is approaching and unless you have access to a specific Delorean all Vokeys produced prior to 2010 will be non-conforming for all players under the USGAs rules.

> > > >

> > > > Back on topic, so how bout them SM8s...

> > >

> > >

> > > No. We are not going to “agree to disagree.” You’re wrong. The old Vokeys and other old wedges are not non-conforming. There is no rule — none — that makes them non-conforming. You’re calling this “semantics” but there is nothing semantic about it. If you and I played a match tomorrow, there is no rule whatsoever to prevent my playing with my Vokey 452.08 and 258.08. Right now. 100% legal. Legal; and not “non-conforming.”

> > >

> > > The USGA wisely and carefully said that they may reconsider the old wedge designs in 2024. So until then, there is good reason to wait and see.

> > >

> > > But in the meantime the one thing I know for sure is that you were wrong.

> > >

> >

> > But Justin Thomas would not be able to put those same clubs into play without penalty in this week’s tournament, so non-conforming for him in that playing situation but conforming for you in your proposed situation. As I said, “conditionally conforming”.

> >

> > Also, in what universe do you see the USGA admitting that this rule change failed to meet their goals and revert back to the prior rule across all levels or make the current temporary bifurcation permanent? If that was a possibility and they were really that confident that this would have the intended impact, they would have had no problem publicly outlining success metrics and an automatic rollback date if those success metrics were not met.

>

>

> I don't care about Justin Thomas, who is paid millions of dollars to play with clubs that he is fitted with for free.

>

> And I don't expect the USGA to "admit" to any failure with the groove specification change, because I don't think it was a failure on any dimension. And I don't think the USGA believes that either.

>

> As I indicated to you before; okaythankxbye.

 

I can't play the 200 or 400 series vokeys in my state mid-am, they're non conforming. It's hilarious how you think you're right on this. I know golf is supposed to be fun and played for > @milesnotsmiles said:

> lol, funny that titelist is able to squash a product leak like that

 

It's not the BST that's paying the bills around here...

[timbo08]

> @swgolf12 said:

> > @"15th Club" said:

> > > @storm319 said:

> > > > @"15th Club" said:

> > > > > @storm319 said:

> > > > > > @"15th Club" said:

> > > > > > > @storm319 said:

> > > > > > > > @"15th Club" said:

> > > > > > > > To this day, my all-time favorite Vokeys were the 200 and 400 series.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Too bad the USGA deemed them as non-conforming...

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Haha. I love this because it is so wrong.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > The USGA didn't deem them non-conforming. The USGA went out of its way, to make sure that they would not be made "non-conforming" within a normal life span. They are not "non-conforming." And I would normally suggest to you that you look it up and come back to us and tell us what you found but I don't want to wait for that. I want to have as much fun as I can, grinding on you right now, for your wrong-headed suggestion.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > For the umpteenth time (and for the uninitiated); the groove rule of 2010 did not make old wedges "non-conforming." It prospectively changed the standards for manufacturing grooves on clubs of a certain loft. And the particular ruling bodies of elite golf (first the professional tours, then the state and national amateur championships and NCAA tournament play, etc.) imposed a rule that newly-manufactured wedges would be required per a Condition of Competition.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > As I write this, there is literally no way that any old pre-2010 wedge is "non-conforming."

> > > > > >

> > > > > > So now back to you. What else can I say, to run your comment into the ground? Please let me know. Okay thanx bye.

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > Semantics. Should we say “conditionally conforming” instead? Ultimately the USGA made conformance determinations on most clubs submitted for testing under their 2010 ruling change (the ATR designation is bs) and we are in the midst of temporary 14 year bifurcation which is the difference between conforming and non-conforming for certain models. Either way, 1/1/2024 is approaching and unless you have access to a specific Delorean all Vokeys produced prior to 2010 will be non-conforming for all players under the USGAs rules.

> > > > >

> > > > > Back on topic, so how bout them SM8s...

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > No. We are not going to “agree to disagree.” You’re wrong. The old Vokeys and other old wedges are not non-conforming. There is no rule — none — that makes them non-conforming. You’re calling this “semantics” but there is nothing semantic about it. If you and I played a match tomorrow, there is no rule whatsoever to prevent my playing with my Vokey 452.08 and 258.08. Right now. 100% legal. Legal; and not “non-conforming.”

> > > >

> > > > The USGA wisely and carefully said that they may reconsider the old wedge designs in 2024. So until then, there is good reason to wait and see.

> > > >

> > > > But in the meantime the one thing I know for sure is that you were wrong.

> > > >

> > >

> > > But Justin Thomas would not be able to put those same clubs into play without penalty in this week’s tournament, so non-conforming for him in that playing situation but conforming for you in your proposed situation. As I said, “conditionally conforming”.

> > >

> > > Also, in what universe do you see the USGA admitting that this rule change failed to meet their goals and revert back to the prior rule across all levels or make the current temporary bifurcation permanent? If that was a possibility and they were really that confident that this would have the intended impact, they would have had no problem publicly outlining success metrics and an automatic rollback date if those success metrics were not met.

> >

> >

> > I don't care about Justin Thomas, who is paid millions of dollars to play with clubs that he is fitted with for free.

> >

> > And I don't expect the USGA to "admit" to any failure with the groove specification change, because I don't think it was a failure on any dimension. And I don't think the USGA believes that either.

> >

> > As I indicated to you before; okaythankxbye.

>

> I can't play the 200 or 400 series vokeys in my state mid-am, they're non conforming. It's hilarious how you think you're right on this. I know golf is supposed to be fun and played for > @milesnotsmiles said:

> > lol, funny that titelist is able to squash a product leak like that

>

> It's not the BST that's paying the bills around here...

 

Right.....cause we've never had counterfeit anything posted before.....not like there are a million and one threads on this forum asking "Is this club counterfeit"? But in this thread, it's completely justified because the pics are counterfeit, makes complete sense and has nothing to do with who pays the bills.

[Brolegros]

Saw this on Instagram ?

[deep18]

Oh boy....

[soap1984]

Hahaha. Good find...