We should be able to know the actual lofts of our drivers and fairway woods!!

[DeCuchi]

10 minutes ago, Jc0 said:

The other golf website did some decent research into this in 2013 (rhymes with golf fly, not allowed to link). It seems like the tolerance are more -1/+2 on the actual loft based on their findings. Basically OEM prefer to miss high because the average player needs more, not less loft. I thought there was another study more recently that showed drivers had gotten a little better but couldn't find it.

 

47 minutes ago, Pepperturbo said:

The presumption tied the above questions are MOST people buying golf equipment don't know enough to care about exact, and they are NOT skilled enough to bother with exact specs. 

 

When someone develops the skill and accuracy that's when they should want to know exact measurements.  There was a time when OEM's published bounce, offset, lie, loft, camber and a few other subtle specs including head weight.  But no longer, their excuse is someone is going to steel design secrets... That line of thinking is a joke, but because most people don't know enough to care, you get what you get.

 

PS, I've had each of my clubs taken apart, measured all aspects then reconfigured.

 

1 hour ago, NRJyzr said:

 

 

 

 

 

 

Back in the day, loft tolerance was always stated to be ±1*.  Tom Wishon has been on record stating that going to ±½* would actually be cost prohibitive, though it seems reasonable on the surface.

 

Thanks to Callaway, for a fair amount of time, the effective loft tolerance seemed to be -0/+3*, or even +4*, when everyone was making drivers much higher lofted because of the purchase habits of the average golfer male in the USA.  Which was less fun for those of us who actually needed 8.5* clubheads to be 8.5*.

 

In a personal, and cynical, comment...  I don't believe the equipment manufacturers have any interest in giving us truth/facts about the specs of our clubs.  The obfuscation of real specifications helps fuel equipment purchases in golf.  They would only be hurting their own bottom lines.

 

I was going to mention similar comments to all of these, but didn't have the energy to.  Thanks gents.  Call me a skeptic, but I don't have faith in manufacturers being able to produce .5* tolerances, or even if they could, actually doing it.  One being the extra costs involved, and two I'm scarred by the previous years of them purposefully adding loft to protect people's egos. I've had multiple drivers that were 1-3 degrees off.  I just got a new set of irons and had them shipped with the grips uninstalled. The first thing I did was put the grips on myself to make sure the extra wraps were done right, then got the loft/lie checked by a builder I trust.  Yea, I guess you could say I have trust issues. 🤣

[Mookieb10]

4 hours ago, ChipNRun said:

Part of the problem with plotting exact measurement is due to face roll: the measured loft will vary depending if you take a measure it low or high on the face.

 

This link explains how the process plays out when you hit the ball: Bulge and Roll

 

 

This is an exaggeration, barring a manufacturing malfunction. Besides loft, clubhead design characteristics such as CoG location can also influence launch angle.

 

But, I'm not worried that WRXers will find that  "...my 3w only dribbles out there only 3 yards longer than my 5w." After all, everyone know that WRXers always get fit before purchasing golf clubs. 😃 The launch monitor (and naked eye when outdoor demo day return) would reveal this.

 

but this is exactly the problem. I can get fit perfectly to the 3 wood and 5 wood in the store and then have it come to those specs.  Or, if you think it’s an exaggeration, you can at least accept 1 degree of difference. A 15 can be a 16 and an 18 can be a 17. Thats still suboptimal at very least. 

[Mookieb10]

6 hours ago, Abh159 said:

I've never purchased Tour Issue and I've never had any of my clubs (driver, woods, irons, etc.) be more than 0.5 * off when I had them checked. I believe the +/- 2* is a bit exaggerated.

 

That being said... I'd love to know the exact specs, but how exactly do you propose these companies do that? Are they supposed to literally take every single club head off the line, measure it, correct it, and then assemble it? 

 

If that is what you are wanting then expect to see a price increase of 50% or more due to all of the added time and labor.

This is what they do with iron heads. Measure, weigh, build then bend. With woods I would propose, at very least, that the 5% or les of golfers who want to know the exact head spec should be able to know. At least that’s a start. I would be that even the least discerning golfer would not be happy if their 3w and 5w were a degree apart. 

[ChipNRun]

10 minutes ago, Mookieb10 said:

This is what they do with iron heads. Measure, weigh, build then bend. ... .

 

I would be that even the least discerning golfer would not be happy if their 3w and 5w were a degree apart. 

 

A note from all Ping iron spec sheets:

A pro at a better public course in our area does a lot of clubfitting. He has all custom-order irons shipped to the pro shop, where does a loft and lie check. He said even with top OEM at least a couple of irons will need to be tweaked to get them into spec before he gives them to golfer. 

-----------------------------------

 

As for long clubs (drivers, fairways, hybrids), the heads are a little more solid state and shouldn't bend that much. @Mookieb10, work with us on this. Have  you found a 3W and 5W from the same model(same model) that are only a degree apart, although specs sheet said more?

 

Some fairway wood models - especially those with bonded (non-adjustable) heads - have rather close loft gapping between woods within a model.

 

The Tour Edge EXS model had basically three 3W models - strong, regular, and "4W". And, the loftiest 3W and 5W were just a degree apart in loft. But players buying a pair of these  normally skip adjacent heads. Basically, get a 3W/15* and 5W, or a 3W/17* and a 7W/21*.

 

Again, have you experienced a situation when you ended up with a 3W and a 5W only a degree apart in loft, when specs promised a 3- or 4* gap? Does this problem actually exist, or is it something you just worry about?

 

 

 

 

[ChipNRun]

17 hours ago, PEI_Golfer said:

Doesn't Ping offer hand picked heads through wrx?  

 

The Maltby people at The GolfWorks will handpick component heads for you at an added cost. A lie angle that's a degree out of standard spec may be just what a person wants to get a flatter fairway wood.

 

[Mookieb10]

12 minutes ago, ChipNRun said:

 

A note from all Ping iron spec sheets:

A pro at a better public course in our area does a lot of clubfitting. He has all custom-order irons shipped to the pro shop, where does a loft and lie check. He said even with top OEM at least a couple of irons will need to be tweaked to get them into spec before he gives them to golfer. 

-----------------------------------

 

As for long clubs (drivers, fairways, hybrids), the heads are a little more solid state and shouldn't bend that much. @Mookieb10, work with us on this. Have  you found a 3W and 5W from the same model(same model) that are only a degree apart, although specs sheet said more?

 

Some fairway wood models - especially those with bonded (non-adjustable) heads - have rather close loft gapping between woods within a model.

 

The Tour Edge EXS model had basically three 3W models - strong, regular, and "4W". And, the loftiest 3W and 5W were just a degree apart in loft. But players buying a pair of these  normally skip adjacent heads. Basically, get a 3W/15* and 5W, or a 3W/17* and a 7W/21*.

 

Again, have you experienced a situation when you ended up with a 3W and a 5W only a degree apart in loft, when specs promised a 3- or 4* gap? Does this problem actually exist, or is it something you just worry about?

 

 

 

 

Let me start by saying that I appreciate the thoughtful and respectful discourse. Here, in this photo, are the first two heads which pop up on the bay. A 3 wood with a stated loft of 15*, but an actual loft of 16.6* and a 5 wood with a stated loft of 19, but an actual loft of 18.2. The stated gap is 4*, the actual gap is 1.6*. 
 

I don’t know if this has happened to me. Since I’ve paid attention to these things, I’ve been lucky enough to be able to purchase some tour issue gear, but it’s the principle that it can and must happen to people who spend a lot of cash on these things. 

[Mookieb10]

How about this one??

 

[lefthack]

TM says 2* of adjustment, but that's not what I asked for.

 

 

Edited July 9, 2021 by lefthack

[ChipNRun]

@Mookieb10,

 

First of all, let me explain my GWorld View (G= golf). I talk all the time about the GolfWRX Law No. 1: Get fitted!

 

Now, I confess I fudge on this a bit. If I get a driver fitting or an irons fitting every four years, I sometimes use the info to make an educated guess at what clubs I need to tweak my system in between.

 

What you show is clubs available from an online source. These are Tour Issue - all OEMs have this gig. The implication is that these clubs were prepared for a specific golf pro or at least met pro level quality-control precision.

 

Another thing is the mix in the long clubs. Did the same pro/competition amateur order both of these clubs? Or, were the clubs tweaked as single fairways for an accomplished players? If the player got what he/she wanted, let's assume the 19* and 15* were starting points for building the club the player eventually thought he/she wanted.

 

Again, this goes back to fittings, and the hideous absence of demo days when you can pound balls off real turf and see how they rise and fall with club X.

 

Hitting shots with a club is the best way to see if that club will work for you. If it doesn't, return it before 30-day trial is over.

 

 

 

 

With electronic fittings indoors and outdoors, isn't the key issue this?

11 hours ago, rsballer10 said:

To be honest I haven't seen as much variance in specs as people are claiming. I have a gauge at home and measure all my own clubs. Not to say it doesn't exist but the claim of +/- 2 degrees seems very extreme. I would venture a guess that its +/- 0.5 at the absolute worst.

 

Excuse me for being jumpy. Our golf club is hosting a Callaway fitting tomorrow afternoon, and at 2:30 PM I'm on for irons.

[joostin]

Honestly it doesn't matter if it's digitally measured or analog.  A physical measuring device that uses flat surfaces and stops (cylindrical, round, point, whatever jigs) to measure an object that is curved everywhere is only as accurate as the person setting it up and measuring. 

 

A little bit off on a setup and indicating on the bulge and roll of the face, and one gauge and person will be different from another gauge and person.  Heck, even the shaft could've set a little off-concentric with the hosel, and a vertical jig can be sitting against a shaft taper.

 

Guys, we can't even measure lengths of clubs the same way.  Different rulers, different methods, and the same club can easily be measured 1/4" different from two sources!  I'll trust CAD, casting, forging, CNC accuracies over getting measurements from different sources of unknown methods and calibrations.  A jig-less optical/digital scan would be more trustworthy. 

 

That said, paying extra for accurate specs would be frustrating.  No tolerance for big tolerances 😒

[Mookieb10]

14 hours ago, ChipNRun said:

@Mookieb10,

 

First of all, let me explain my GWorld View (G= golf). I talk all the time about the GolfWRX Law No. 1: Get fitted!

 

Now, I confess I fudge on this a bit. If I get a driver fitting or an irons fitting every four years, I sometimes use the info to make an educated guess at what clubs I need to tweak my system in between.

 

What you show is clubs available from an online source. These are Tour Issue - all OEMs have this gig. The implication is that these clubs were prepared for a specific golf pro or at least met pro level quality-control precision.

 

Another thing is the mix in the long clubs. Did the same pro/competition amateur order both of these clubs? Or, were the clubs tweaked as single fairways for an accomplished players? If the player got what he/she wanted, let's assume the 19* and 15* were starting points for building the club the player eventually thought he/she wanted.

 

Again, this goes back to fittings, and the hideous absence of demo days when you can pound balls off real turf and see how they rise and fall with club X.

 

Hitting shots with a club is the best way to see if that club will work for you. If it doesn't, return it before 30-day trial is over.

 

 

 

 

With electronic fittings indoors and outdoors, isn't the key issue this?

 

Excuse me for being jumpy. Our golf club is hosting a Callaway fitting tomorrow afternoon, and at 2:30 PM I'm on for irons.

It sounds like you’re making two statements. 1) golfers get fitted; and 2) just because I’ve offered evidence of a tour issue head’s actual loft being 2.9* different than its stated loft doesn’t mean this happens at the retail level. Is this reasonable?
 

Your second statement is, in my estimation, the only argument you can make and still logically adhere to your position. I cannot disprove this as retail heads are simply not measured as often as retail heads. I suppose our differing positions come down to how much variation applies and to what percentage of products. I will admit, if 90% of fairway wood heads are within +/- .5* of their stated loft, my point is much ado about nothing. I, however, think the variance is greater. If the variance is greater, say only 30% of heads are > +/- .5*, I need not show that I’ve personally  been aggrieved to note that logically, many people are getting worked over.  
 

I addressed your second statement first, because it directly impacts you first statement. “Get fitted”. That’s the point!! If I get fitted with a fairway wood head that says “15*” on the bottom but is really 16*, and then I order that “same” club and the actual loft is 14*... well, did I accrue any benefit at all? Seriously. I don’t know how to state this any other way. 
 

You can suggest people to get fitted, but if the club you loved says 15* and is 13.5*, and you have no idea of this, what, exactly, have you been fitted for??

Edited July 9, 2021 by Mookieb10

[DFS PFD]

The tighter the tolerance you ask for the more cost prohibitive it becomes, finer machining and QA is required, which requires more automation or more skilled labor. Every club that doesn't fall within tolerance has to be tossed, which now goes into loss prevention and return on investment. How many golfers actually know what loft they SHOULD be playing?? 1%? Maybe 5%? Is that 5% worth adding significant cost factors so that that tiny segment of your customers will be happy? This really is a non issue when 99% of players aren't even fit properly, and with the adjustable hosels you can get close to where you need to be. Plus if your game is so important that you must be within + or - 1* of static loft, you can just pony up and buy the tour issue stuff to your exact lofts. 

 

Not to mention, if you don't hit the exact same spot on the face every time, what does your static loft matter? Loft will be slight different on every location on the face, so just find a head that suits your dynamic loft needs and go from there. 

Edited July 9, 2021 by DFS PFD

[ChipNRun]

1 hour ago, Mookieb10 said:

It sounds like you’re making two statements. 1) golfers get fitted; and 2) just because I’ve offered evidence of a tour issue head’s actual loft being 2.9* different than its stated loft doesn’t mean this happens at the retail level. Is this reasonable?

 

Reality check: Who cares?

 

if you get fitted / get on a launch monitor, you likely can tell the stated loft and actual loft don't match up. Caveat emptor! (Let the buyer beware...) Perform some due diligence before you buy golf clubs. And, that's hard to do with online purchases, unless you tried the model two years before at demo day.

 

Let's shift to the simple practical results. I have a repeatable golf swing with some wobbles in it. When I get fitted for clubs, fairway woods and drivers included, I use the stated loft as a starting point. Then, I see how the ball flies on the launch monitor and see what the numbers say. How can I (more basically can I) get the ball under control.

 

Or other times, I can tell after 15 minutes the club is just not a go for me. Fitting is also an audition for the club, so I  dump the club. (Due diligence...)

 

Basically, how does the ball fly. For years I have sought a distance FW and a control FW. Earlier 3W + 5W, in later years 4W + 7W. Do I have a 20-yard gap between the clubs, and the control one flies higher? If so, I'm good. Results and gapping are what's important, not whether the lofts are exact.

 

I'll concede, the world's quality control is less than perfect. That's why I test out golf clubs before I buy them.

 

 

[Valtiel]

On 7/8/2021 at 6:42 AM, rsballer10 said:

To be honest I haven't seen as much variance in specs as people are claiming. I have a gauge at home and measure all my own clubs. Not to say it doesn't exist but the claim of +/- 2 degrees seems very extreme. I would venture a guess that its +/- 0.5 at the absolute worst.

 

If someone isn't precise with the measuring tools, the output will not be precise. It's extremely common in irons, where people use their bending machines to measure. With woods, if that face is not dead nuts square when measuring loft, the value measured will not be correct.

 

I could definitely be wrong, as I don't work on clubs for a living however I don't think the variation is as extreme as some claim. 

 

On 7/8/2021 at 8:18 AM, minhjn said:

+/- 2 degrees sounds crazy. That can't be true 

 

On 7/8/2021 at 9:27 AM, mcounci2 said:

There's no way the manufacturing and in-line quality systems on modern golf clubs is +/- 2 degrees bad.  That sounds more like a poor measurement system (humans with gauges) to me.  I have no data to support my inference, but there has got to be better process capability than +/- 2 degrees.

 

Unless there were club-specific jigs made to repeatedly hold a specific clubhead in place for measurement, I would think a by-hand measurement of loft would be pretty bad.  I wonder if anybody has ever compiled bias and precision data for manual loft measurement....I would think not.

Going just off of tour issued Callaway and Taylormade clubs, +/-2* is actually very standard, and is sometimes more. I have seen plenty of 15* 3-woods in excess of 17.5* from both companies. 
 

On 7/8/2021 at 9:57 AM, Abh159 said:

 

If that is in fact a Tour Issue head then it was intentionally produced or bent to 16.6 degrees. It didn't come like that by accident. Plenty of pros have fairway woods made to specific lofts they just don't change the default paint/etching on the head to reflect the differences.

 

Tour Issue manufacturing tolerances are something like 0.1 degrees... 

 

I don't believe there are any "Tour issue manufacturing tolerances", they just measure production heads and send off whichever ones meet the spec ranges desired/requested. Tour issued heads are all over the place in terms of spec which you simply would not see if the there was a separate manufacturing process that tight. If there were, we would see the same lofts/lie/CT measurements over and over again, which we don't. We see CT measurements ranging from 210 - 240+ on fairways and lofts and face angles +/- 2* or more. And if your argument is that this range is necessary to accommodate the various wants and needs of the pros, then why spend the time and money to have a separate manufacturing process when your standard retail one produces that range already? You then simply invest in small batches of testing and measuring from the pool of retail heads and you get exactly the same thing. 

Another angle that no one has mentioned is marketing. Just like loft creep in irons hiding beneath a number, ego based marketing factors into woods as well. 16*+ of loft on a 3-wood benefits the average golfer, and anyone with enough speed and skill to warrant being concerned about this things can use adjustable sleeves and/or in depth fitting. 

[mcounci2]

16 minutes ago, Valtiel said:

 

 

Going just off of tour issued Callaway and Taylormade clubs, +/-2* is actually very standard, and is sometimes more. I have seen plenty of 15* 3-woods in excess of 17.5* from both companies. 
 

 

 

 

Not to be "that guy" but do you know

- how this is measured

- the stated uncertainty of the measurement system

- how/if QC checks are preformed on the measurement system

- if SQC charts are kept, what are the standard deviations and control limits?

 

Or do you have any way of getting this info? I'm really curious now lol

[Valtiel]

5 minutes ago, mcounci2 said:

 

Not to be "that guy" but do you know

- how this is measured

- the stated uncertainty of the measurement system

- how/if QC checks are preformed on the measurement system

- if SQC charts are kept, what are the standard deviations and control limits?

 

Or do you have any way of getting this info? I'm really curious now lol

Valid questions, and my assumptions are based on the fact that this stuff needs to be accurate if it is going to tour guys. If all these measurements were just for the general public then I would definitely have all those concerns since how much would it *really* matter in the long run. But with the pros, especially the more discerning ones, I don't think they can risk shoddy QC and inconsistent measurements as could seriously sour the relationship. 
 

With Taylormade stuff, an overwhelming majority of tour issue spec stickers have the same handwriting on them, which tells us that testing and sorting is likely done by a very small group of people with one person clearly signing off on/documenting the results of their measurements. 

[mcounci2]

4 minutes ago, Valtiel said:

Valid questions, and my assumptions are based on the fact that this stuff needs to be accurate if it is going to tour guys. If all these measurements were just for the general public then I would definitely have all those concerns since how much would it *really* matter in the long run. But with the pros, especially the more discerning ones, I don't think they can risk shoddy QC and inconsistent measurements as could seriously sour the relationship. 
 

With Taylormade stuff, an overwhelming majority of tour issue spec stickers have the same handwriting on them, which tells us that testing and sorting is likely done by a very small group of people with one person clearly signing off on/documenting the results of their measurements. 

 That all makes sense, it's just really hard to measure things that are curved.  Stuff that's way cheaper and less sophisticated than driver heads has mfg tolerances in the thousandths of inches for metal parts.  I just don't see any way how lofts can truly have a 26% range and pass QA.

[Valtiel]

2 minutes ago, mcounci2 said:

 That all makes sense, it's just really hard to measure things that are curved.  Stuff that's way cheaper and less sophisticated than driver heads has mfg tolerances in the thousandths of inches for metal parts.  I just don't see any way how lofts can truly have a 26% range and pass QA.

Factoring in the curve (roll) you mentioned combined with the inconsistencies in delivered loft and the actual static loft of the middle of the face becomes a lot less important for the average golfer in the grand scheme of things. Plus, the heads that come out on the higher side of the stated loft seem to be far more common than those on the lower side, and the average golfer can almost always benefit from more loft in the longer clubs. 

There has to be a method to all of this, because we do see patterns with TM drivers in that tour issue 10.5* heads tend to be 10-12*, the 9* heads get tighter as they almost never reach 10* (typically around 9.5*), and the 8* heads are the tightest and most often right on spec, rarely exceeding +/- 0.5*. 

[puttingmatt]

Just take your clubs into a club builder and have your lofts measured.

That way you will know what you have,

And adjust accordingly. Or buy adjustable

Hosel woods , like the TM Sim line of woods.

[Mookieb10]

10 hours ago, ChipNRun said:

 

Reality check: Who cares?

 

if you get fitted / get on a launch monitor, you likely can tell the stated loft and actual loft don't match up. Caveat emptor! (Let the buyer beware...) Perform some due diligence before you buy golf clubs. And, that's hard to do with online purchases, unless you tried the model two years before at demo day.

 

Let's shift to the simple practical results. I have a repeatable golf swing with some wobbles in it. When I get fitted for clubs, fairway woods and drivers included, I use the stated loft as a starting point. Then, I see how the ball flies on the launch monitor and see what the numbers say. How can I (more basically can I) get the ball under control.

 

Or other times, I can tell after 15 minutes the club is just not a go for me. Fitting is also an audition for the club, so I  dump the club. (Due diligence...)

 

Basically, how does the ball fly. For years I have sought a distance FW and a control FW. Earlier 3W + 5W, in later years 4W + 7W. Do I have a 20-yard gap between the clubs, and the control one flies higher? If so, I'm good. Results and gapping are what's important, not whether the lofts are exact.

 

I'll concede, the world's quality control is less than perfect. That's why I test out golf clubs before I buy them.

 

 

 

I now understand the issue. You are thinking that I’m discussing “vanity lofts”. Vanity lofting is something akin to Club A states it’s 9* but in reality, it’s 13*. With vanity lofting, Every Club A that is produced says it’s 9* but is really 13*.  But I’m not discussing vanity lofting, I’m discussing manufacturing tolerances. Huge difference there. 
 

That’s not how a +/- tolerance works. Club A can state it’s 15*, you “get fitted” and that fitting head can be 16.5*, you love Club A... order Club A... the one you get is 13*. That’s a tolerance. Fitting doesn’t help with this. You now have a custom club and can’t get a refund. 

 

 

Edited July 10, 2021 by Mookieb10

[lefthack]

Cameron at TaylorMade Golf Customer Support seemed to think a 10.5 driver would be at or damn near 10.5, not +/- 2*. But they are customer support, so take that for what it is.
 
 

[ChipNRun]

35 minutes ago, Mookieb10 said:

You now have a custom club and can’t get a refund. 

Know what you mean. Had a custom fit on Nike irons, shafts came in a half-inch too long despite fitting. Nike was exiting club making at time, wouldn't coooperate, I dumped them on eBay.

[Stuart_G]

Interesting comment from Tom Wishon about factory specs and tolerances and QA - although in this case I think he's might be talking about irons, not woods (although it could be both).

 

 

Edited July 10, 2021 by Stuart_G

[Popeye64]

Maltby right in all of thier specs quote +-1° and I've never seen anything past that. 

I don't know what other manufacturers have for tolerances but +-2° can start to make big differences. 

[ShortGolfer]

5-wood

23°

RH/LH (Black sets), RH Only (Blue sets)

40.00"

58.5°

C4

 

https://www.callawaygolf.com/clubs/womens/complete-sets/spr5462993.html#product-specs

 

https://www.callawaygolf.com/clubs/womens/fairway-woods/fwoods-2021-epic-max-womens.html#product-specs

5W	18°	RH / LH	41.50"	57.5°	153	C8
Heavenwood	20°	RH Only	41.75"	57.5°	166	C8
7W	21°	RH / LH	41.00"	58.0°	144	C8
9W	23°	RH Only	40.25"	58.5°	136	C8

 

This is vanity lofting.  The 5W in the set has the same loft as their premium single club 9W! 

I bought a 21 degree 7W for my bag and was curious what I would have gotten had I purchased a complete set.

It is the lowest loft after my 14 degree driver.  It replaces a 3W that I cut down to 41 inches (C3.3)

 

A large part of golf is played between the ears.  For some people it makes a big difference whether they are hitting a fairway wood labeled 3 or 7.

Edited July 10, 2021 by ShortGolfer

[Wooderson]

I've always thought if a smaller company wanted to stand out from the pack, they should measure and post the exact specs with each club. If, let's say Tour Edge did this, I would pick up/try theirs first. 

[Valtiel]

43 minutes ago, Wooderson said:

I've always thought if a smaller company wanted to stand out from the pack, they should measure and post the exact specs with each club. If, let's say Tour Edge did this, I would pick up/try theirs first. 

I honestly think every company should have some sort of a "spec service" option. You get loft, lie, face angle, and CT in an "a la carte" format with each spec carrying a price tag, similar to how you can spec out a Vokey through the Wedgeworks service. Selecting all of them nets a similar upcharge that you might pay for tour issue stuff through premium vendors or on eBay (+$200 and up), with exceptional specs like super high CT and loft/lies at the edge of manufacturing tolerance carrying a higher cost. The only cost you would incur would be paying the man hours for the testing since the tech already exists.

I wouldn't be surprised to see this in the future when OEM's completely dry out the well of club head tech within the USGA limits. Pivoting towards offering services to bolster the product is something that resonates with many people, especially the younger generation. 

[liveagua]

On 7/7/2021 at 10:37 PM, Mookieb10 said:

Ya know, I watched a TXG video about a week ago, and Ian stated something to the effect of, “The only difference of tour issue product is know the exact loft, lie and face angle.”

 

It struck me how absurd this aspect of the industry truly is. I can go to Taylormade’s (or any other company) and purchased a SIM2 three wood with a Ventus Black for $650 and a SIM2 Max 5 wood with the same shaft for $550, a total outlay of $1,200. That 3w can be 16.2* of loft and the 5w can be 16.9* and I would have absolutely no idea, except for noticing my 3w only dribbles out there only 3 yards longer than my 5w. What on earth is going on here?

 

Everything has a manufacturing tolerance. I am not stating that tolerance is too large in the industry. I simply don’t know enough to say that. What I am sure of is: 1) you shouldn’t need to spend an extra $200 to know the loft of your “15*” 3w; and 2) you shouldn’t be able to order two separate woods from the same company and have them be a half degree apart in loft. 
 

So really, is it too much to ask for the

manufacturer to include the true specs of each club purchased? It’s a serious question. I realize any extra cost will always get passed on to the end consumer, but this can’t cost too much, right?

You guys complain about how expensive golf clubs are now and you want to add another step of Quality Control?

 

Plus, it's a convex shaped face, where exactly on the face do you want the loft to be measured? 

[MountainKing]

Most stores have a loft/lie machine.   If you want to know just ask them.   I've never been told no. 

[JCAG]

Remember what spec actually mean. Say + or - .5  loft on a on 10* driver. That driver can be 9.5* to 10.5* and still be in spec.

Say + or - 1* loft loft on a on 10* driver. That driver can be 9.0* to 11.0 * and still be in spec.