TaylorMade R9

[darnoldil]

Here is a review on the R9 for anyone that is interested. I would also take some time to read the replies at the bottom, well worth the time.

http://thehackersparadise.com/home/?p=1831

 

Here is another, albeit short, review:

http://www.putterzone.com/2009/03/taylormade-r9-review.html

[golfer64]

Iam have a +1 USGA HDCP. I have set the r9 in four different positions. 1 open, N Nu and 1 closed. I find the cobra longer and and consistant.

[darnoldil]

Golfer64- There was no question about your ability, or anyone else. I was simply curious what you found the driver was doing for you to see if there might be a pattern with others who were not getting along with it as well vs. those who are doing well with it. Based upon your settings it sounds like you normally hit a draw/hook and you were trying to straighten it out but your last setting seems to suggest that it started going right too much and you tried to bring it back again. Is this correct? If not what where you noticing with your ball flight through your settings?

Thanks.

[Pepperturbo]

Does anyone know where I can find the swing speed ratings for the stiff and X-stiff stock Fujikura Motore 65 shaft that comes in the R9? I have looked on Taylor Made's Website and Fujikura's as well and cannot find it.

 

I am not aware that TM or Fuji have ever provided SS ratings for shaft flex profiles. From my experience I've played "X" and "S" in Blueboard 73's. TM's TP F1 65 "S" is stout with a very stiff tip section compared to other "S" profiles. I am considering switching to Fubuki aftermarket 73 "S" version and tipping 1"; passing on TM's Fubuki version because of the big difference in torque ratings.

[golfer64]

Darnoldi, I hit a straight ball flight to a fade. It seems like I lost distance, and pushing the ball to the right some and other times to much of a draw. I have other friends that are excellent golfers that have this club and they also don't care for it.

[darnoldil]

Thanks golfer64, please understand that I am just trying to pick your brain to see if there is an adjustment that can be made to help. The reason why I thought you were fighting a draw/hook was the one degree open setting that you tried. Where the weights neutral?

 

I am also wondering if the Nu would have gotten you going left but maybe too much? Do you think 1 degree closed with the weights in a fade setup would have gotten your desired slight fade flight?

 

Of course the 1 degree closed would have really gotten you going left depending upon where the weights were. If you wanted a slight draw I wonder if a 1 degree open with a draw setting on the weights would have given you that ever so slight draw (although it would have lowered flight and possibly negatively affected distance)?

 

Again, I am not criticizing you or anyone else in any way and it doesn't shock me that you have other friends that aren't getting along with the R9. Your experiences have me thinking about possible combination's that may help others who are not getting along with the R9 and your thoughts on these possible settings would be very helpful for all of us I would think. Another thought is if an inappropriate setting for one's swing type could put excess side spin on the ball which would not only affect accuracy but distance as well?

 

Do you think that a reshaft and or different weights moved around would help like some have experienced or that the R9/Motore combo fit a certain type of golfer? Thanks.

[golfer64]

I have tried to move the weights around and even tried heave and lighter weights. I have not given up yet though.

[darnoldil]

Lots of editing as some thoughts, questions and grammar needed to be cleaned up. LOL!

[darnoldil]

Cool. I really hope that you can find a combination that works for you (even if the Cobra still works better) so that your purchase wasn't a waste. I am really starting to suspect the shaft, not because it isn't a quality shaft but because its characteristics may not work as needed for some. There have been several reshafts on this thread with positive results. What do you, or anyone else, think?

[golfer64]

That was my next step to change shafts. Now to what shaft to go to.

[darnoldil]

Reshafted this head woke up......I have tried a Fuji 553 and now a Ozik Xcon 6.......both were an upgrade over the stock Motore 65 shaft. Spin was the main difference as it was lower over the stock shaft. It's solid, looks good and doesn't look closed like most TP's still do in the R position.

 

To those who hit it at a demo day with out a TP shaft......shame on you to rate this driver so poorly over a few range balls.

 

BG

 

 

Maybe one of these two or a Fubuki 63/73? For me probably anything is an upgrade over my current driver/shaft (I get my R9 in a week or so). My current shaft is a Graffalloy ProLaunch Blue which is made more for keeping things straight than it is for combining max distance with keeping it straight. It simply doesn't release nearly as much as other shafts seem to. I still get decent carry but seldom good roll out and it simply spins too much (ave. in the 2900-3100 range).

[socalpaul97]

My first post, so here we go.....

 

They say: "tournament after tournament the best players in the world reach for taylormade drivers more than callaway, cleveland, corba, nike, and ping combined"

 

Maybe, but there drivers are all longer than the R9. :black eye:

[darnoldil]

My first post, so here we go.....

 

They say: "tournament after tournament the best players in the world reach for taylormade drivers more than callaway, cleveland, corba, nike, and ping combined"

 

Maybe, but there drivers are all longer than the R9. :black eye:

 

LOL!!! :clapping:

 

Well in all honesty a number of players have found the opposite, just check out the first two pages on this thread. Of course individual results may vary and usually our longest distances come with a customized shaft fitted. :russian_roulette:

[fishstix70]

I have the r9 with a 65g voodoo stiff. All I can say is that it's very solid, but not the longest driver out there. I was hitting a tour edge proto with an aldila by you 70x. That club was longer but not near as accurate. If you want to find fairways the R9 will get you there once you dial it in.

[darnoldil]

I have the r9 with a 65g voodoo stiff. All I can say is that it's very solid, but not the longest driver out there. I was hitting a tour edge proto with an aldila by you 70x. That club was longer but not near as accurate. If you want to find fairways the R9 will get you there once you dial it in.

 

 

Cool. I do agree that there are drivers out there that are longer than the R9 and I think this is all uncovering some very interesting points. But first I think it should be noted that there are also drivers out there that are shorter than the R9 too and since the R7 series wasn't the longest driver out there I wouldn't expect the R9 to be either.

 

With all of this said I am merely trying to point out that there is no ONE driver that is THE longest for everyone. One thread will sing the praises of "X" driver being the longest and "Y" being significantly shorter and the "Y" thread will sing the exact opposite while the robots will say that a great many drivers are within 5 yards of carry of each other so none of it matters.

 

Ah, but we humans introduce a cornucopia of variables due to our different physiques, mentalities, living altitudes, course conditions, ball types and technique. Add into this our manufacturing tolerances and shaft selections and we simply have too many variables to say what THE longest driver is.

 

Now what this really brings us to is our reason for WHY we buy a driver as this will determine how we rate drivers which is where the rub comes in. If "X" driver is 10 yards longer than "Y" driver does that make "X" driver better? Well it depends upon the individual. If there are 20 people who are longer with "Y" than they are with "X" than it is what it is. Twenty people saying "X" is longer than "Y" won't change the fact that for another group it's not.

 

The real kicker is this: Some are as long or longer with an R9 than anything they have tried and others are not, just as some are longer with a Str8-Fit Nike than an R9 and some are not. What we really need to look at is what we need out of a driver and test and buy on that merit while keeping in mind what others have found out. For the R9 some are longer, others are not. Some can get adjusted and some can't. Those who are enjoying the R9 seem to have already posted and it seems that we are hearing from others who have already tried it and didn't like it which is great info. By the end of the summer we should have info from newer purchases to see how things have gone overall for the R9. For me it's a keeper and is longer than anything I have hit.

[Quantumgolfer]

Interesting reading. I saw the R9 460 in the shops for the first time on the weekend. Has anyone compared the performance of the two? For those that aren't aware, the 460 is 460cc and has the adjustable face angle and lie angle, etc, but no moveable weights, like the standard R9. It also has a stock Aldila/RE-AX shaft.

The R9's were $649AU, the R9 460's were $499AU. The Nike STR8-FIT's were $779AU, in comparison and they also don't have moveable weights. I guess the $280 extra gets you a slightly better shaft and helps pay Tiger's endorsement fees. Lets just say I'm very grateful for eBay, as I need that money a lot more than Tiger!

[darnoldil]

Interesting reading. I saw the R9 460 in the shops for the first time on the weekend. Has anyone compared the performance of the two? For those that aren't aware, the 460 is 460cc and has the adjustable face angle and lie angle, etc, but no moveable weights, like the standard R9. It also has a stock Aldila/RE-AX shaft.

The R9's were $649AU, the R9 460's were $499AU. The Nike STR8-FIT's were $779AU, in comparison and they also don't have moveable weights. I guess the $280 extra gets you a slightly better shaft and helps pay Tiger's endorsement fees. Lets just say I'm very grateful for eBay, as I need that money a lot more than Tiger!

 

 

:clapping:

[darnoldil]

Just in with some interesting data for those that say the R9 isn't long.

 

I compared six drivers today on the Golf Smith Indoor Vector launch monitor:

NOTE: This system is short between 15-20 yards from actual verified distances. Each driver was hit at least 6 times with the best two ball speeds and best distance used. Others' results will surely vary.

 

 

Shaft Loft Best Ball Speed Best Total Distance

 

 

R9 Fuji Motore S-65 9.5 158/155 263

 

 

 

FT9 Fuji T-45 S 9 153/153 257

 

 

S91 DYS HL-55 9.5 150/149 258

 

 

Monster XL Fuji Gold S 9.5 155/154 256

 

 

Str8 Fit SQ Aldila NV 65 X 9.5 154.5/154 257

 

 

909D2 Mitsubishi Diamana S 9.5 149.2/147 254

 

The data shows that there is nothing wrong with the ball speed and distance that the R9 is capable of generating compared to other hot drivers. I personally expected the S91 or Monster XL to come out on top followed by the SQ and 909D2 with the FT9 bringing up the rear on ball speed. I was really surprised that the S91 finished next to last and that the 909D2 finished last in ball speed!

 

What this data tells me when I compare ball speeds to total distance is that drivers achieve their total distance through combinations of launch, spin rate, carry and roll and the shaft's interaction very much contributes to these parameters. This could mean that places with softer fairways would adversely affect drivers that depend more on roll vs drivers that carry better and vice versa.

 

Notice how there was only a total distance gap of.... 9 YARDS!!!! However there were bigger gaps in carry vs. roll and spin, different shafts very easily could have changed the total gap by extra 5-10 yards I estimate. I am quite sure that individual results would vary based upon a host of variables and thus others would see different performance between these clubs with some other club coming out on top. :black eye:

[McWynn]

can you change shafts in the r9 driver?

[birdieputt]

Took the plunge on the R9 TP the other day, set me back a mere £365, w/ Voodoo SNV6 - and i really cant wait to get it on the course. I went into the golf store with and open mind on which driver I'd chose. I tested the R9, S9-1 Pro D, 909D3, FT9 i-Mix, i really wanted to like the Titleist, but to be honest I hated it, it felt firm, the feel was hard and always wanted to go left (shaft was OZIK Xcon6), so the Titleist was out of the running. Next the Cobra, again was excited to test this but again was dissapointed, I couldn't get used to the thud sound it made and it just felt dead, again it was and Xcon6. I had read alot of reviews here about the FT9, raving about the FT9/Fubuki combo, this wasnt too bad, but found the head a little big, and the head came loose on a couple of occasions (was the i-Mix version). Then tried the R9 w/Motore 65, felt good, swing speed was 104-107, ball speed was 153/156, just it was spinning to much (just over 4000rpm). Then, tried the R9/Motore 85, instantly, too heavy, results were down. Last test was R9/Voodoo SNV6 and voila we had hit the money, swing/ball speed was 108/156 and it felt much better, more forgiving, spin rate was down to 3300rpm so therefore i could not get much lower than that. Of course, the TP shaft had to suit me because there was a £65 upcharge. Anyway, after a big gulp after being told the price I put the order in and now I just can't wait to get it.

 

Anyone know how does the TP Voodoo compare to the real one?

[darnoldil]

Yes you can. With the TP version you can simply buy shafts that are ready to have the head put on whereas the non-TP version (like I have) must be expertly pulled from the hostel without damage which TM can do (and probably some expert club fitters). I didn't think it was worth an extra $100 to have the ability to try different shafts so I didn't get the TP version but others swear by the performance that other shafts have given vs. the TP version of the Motore shaft which is a little more stought than the non-TP Motore shaft.

 

To be honest I think the non-TP version of the shaft is actually better as it seems to load/unload better resulting in greater distance but that could just be me. Coming from the use of a Grafalloy "X" flex Prolaunch Blue shaft EVERYTHING feels like it loads and unloads better.

 

My distance with my R9 has been 5-10yrds better than the the 20 yrds that the 1 camera vector system in Golf Smith predicted due to a much hotter roll out. My old driver uses a generic Distance Master 460cc head and the Grafalloy shaft seems to be built more for control than distance. The Motore shaft in my R9 is so consistent that I was able to go down from an "X" flex to an "S" without loosing more than 5 yards of dispersion to either side while gaining distance.

 

This is by far the best driver I have ever used as most drivers gave very little increase in distance but where better in accuracy. The exception was when I went from my Golf Smith T600 head with a Royal Precision Stiff Graphite shaft to a Callaway GB 415 with a Harrison Stripper J Stiff shaft (137mph ball speed vs. 152mph ball speed). That Callaway combination really gained some distance and was, for a while, straighter than the T600 setup but that is the only time I have really seen that before now.

 

I switched to the Distance Master setup because my swing progressed which started me going left with a bad hook on the Callaway and I couldn't compensate. The Distance Master straightened things out but was down on distance even with its much too flexible stock shaft (for me). The flight was way too high with ballooning ball spin that was costing me distance. This is where the Grafalloy X flex came in as it brought my trajectory down by lowering my ball spin and thus gave me both increased consistency and length. The only problem was that it wasn't enough as my swing speed kept saying that I was down on distance by 20+ yrds with an average of only 250yrds with the occasional 270yrd drive.

 

Initially with the R9 in its' neutral setup (FCT and MWT) I got the same type of a draw/hook flight that I had started getting with my Callaway. After some experimentation (first with MWT then with combinations of MWT and FCT) I found that 2 degrees open FCT (set on R) and Neutral MWT had most of my shots going straight. My few blocks resulted in 10-15yrd pushes/fades and my normal misses resulted in 10-15yrd draws but most were straight right down the middle and everything was looooonnnnngggg (the misses ran longer of course).

 

I've NEVER had a driver give me such a hot roll to compliment such a hot carry. :man_in_love:

[alittleoverpar]

Let me preface this by saying I have never been a fan of Taylormade drivers. I have tried them all through the years and really wanted to like them, but none of them have felt right for me. I am tall (6'5") with a somewhat upright swing. My swing speed with the driver is around 100 - 105 mph. When I am swinging well I tend to load the shaft evenly throughout my swing with a smooth tempo.

 

I decided recently to replace my existing driver with a newer model. I started the process with an open mind and tried several drivers. I quickly narrowed my options to the Cobra S9-1 Pro, the Titleist 909 D3, and the Taylormade R9. After hitting the clubs on the range and launch monitor I narrowed my choice further to the 909 D3 and the R9. I really wanted the 909 D3 to win out (and I hit it very well), but I just hit the R9 better. I hit the R9 consistently 10 - 15 yds. farther than the 909 D3, and more accurately.

 

For me the perfect setting seems to be the NU - Neutral Upright with the weights in the neutral position (although I am interested in experimenting with all of the settings). I was hitting a 9.5 degree head with the stock Motore 65G shaft in stiff flex. My launch angles were in the 11 - 14 degree with spin rates between 2300 - 2600. I have just not been able to generate those numbers with any other driver I have tried.

 

Therefore, I am going to plunk down my $400 and purchase the Taylormade R9 this week. I am by no means implying that the S9-1 Pro or the 909 D3 are bad clubs. They both performed quite well for me. I just happened (to my surprise) to hit the R9 better.

 

Hopefully, all of this analysis will translate into better performance on the course. :yahoo:

[darnoldil]

Glad to hear it. I'm using a 9.5degree also. The longer distance should give us shorter clubs into the green for more GIR's and better chances to get home in 2 on par 5 for more birdies. More GIR's should increase our Par count and take more of the Double and Triple Bogey's out of play on the 2-3 blow up holes.

 

The greater adjustability should allow us to keep the driver dialed in, especially when you consider that we can customize it more to US instead of us having to adjust to it. I experienced this last weekend when I was able to hit it well several times in each setting but kept looking because I wanted something that was REALLY consistent for ME instead of me adjusting to the driver and then having a bad shot when I missed executing that adjustment.

 

That's why it was so important for me to have the greater adjustability of the R9. I knew that if something changed in either my swing or my real world experiences I could adjust the club to compensate better than anything else out there so you can take that to heart as well.

 

As a result the extra adjustability of the MWT technology over the SQ Dymo Str8-fit was definitely a major selling feature along with the lower cost and the fact that extra MWT weights could be purchased to give an even higher level of fine tuning.

[360_CS]

I have tried it 9.5 S, i hit the ball high and don't get much roll the r9 lowered my ball flight to a bit lower than the perfect trajectory and got a good amount of roll but was still shorter than my all time fav the Superquad. The look of the r9 is good to not so much of a triangle shape like the r7 Ltd.

 

Would the lost of distance be because of it only being 430cc not 460 like the sperquad?

[Quantumgolfer]

Anyone compared the performance/differences between the R9 with the new R9 460?

[darnoldil]

360- In all honesty I am not sure if the extra 30cc's makes a difference in distance or not. Theoretically the increased cc's is about making a larger head for more forgiveness on off center hits but it is possible that a deeper cg could increase carry, I don't know. What you might want to try is hitting just above the center of the face as this has been proven to produce the longest drives with the newer drivers (say past 2 years). It may be that center to center contact is better with some drivers vs. others but my own test seems to indicate that we are playing a game of trade-off's between carry and roll. In your case you may want to try to lighten the 16g weight with a 12 or 10g from T.M. and see if that helps increase your carry a little more since you are getting very good roll-out.

 

Quantum- I forgot to include the 460 R9 in my test (they had one there) so I don't know if there are any differences in performance.

[Carolina Golfer 2]

I have tried it 9.5 S, i hit the ball high and don't get much roll the r9 lowered my ball flight to a bit lower than the perfect trajectory and got a good amount of roll but was still shorter than my all time fav the Superquad. The look of the r9 is good to not so much of a triangle shape like the r7 Ltd.

 

Would the lost of distance be because of it only being 430cc not 460 like the sperquad?

Your experience pretty much mirrors mine, except I have the R Motore shaft. Yesterday was maybe my 5th or 6th round with the driver. But it was by far the best conditions I've played in with it, perfect Temps, no wind to speak of and fairly dry (not firm just dry) fairways as we've had a bit of rain here the past week.

 

My results were mixed. I've got a sky caddie so I'm able to measure my drives with accuracy. I hit what I for me at the time seemed like pretty good "bombs". The distance on them were 258, 264 and of course on No. 18 277. All with a mid ball flight, not quite as high as I would but passable.

 

I got this one on EBAY for a "steal" $295 about a month ago, and had been less than pleased with the consistency of it. For me I'm thinking I probably should have the 460 head for more fogiveness, but I also wish I had a bit of a high launching shaft in it. I may take this one in and see if I can get near $200 trade and if so go with the 460 head. Although I hit a friends G10 the other day and just absoutely loved it and went in the store and demoed it with very good numbers on the LM. So I may take the 460 R9 and G10 head to head.

 

Sorry if I got it a bit off topic, but wanted to give you my similar experience.

[360_CS]

Lol. Can you give us a post on how the 460 differs from the normal r9

cheers

[Carolina Golfer 2]

Lol. Can you give us a post on how the 460 differs from the normal r9

cheers

I haven't hit the R9 460 yet, and it most likely will be Monday of next week before I get a chance to. But I'll definitely let you know the results.

[JMD]

I went to a local shop and hit the entire TM driver line they had in stock (all 9.5 loft). My average SS came out at 108mph and the driver that was the longest consistently was the R9 TP with a Motocore X shaft (298 w carry average). The R7 Limited w Matrix stiff (293) was second followed by the burner tour tp (289) and burner tp (288) with stock stiff shafts. I was really impressed with the consistent distance off the R9, but liked the feel of the R7 limited much better. I think I am going to end up with an R7 Limited TP w whiteboard if I can track one down.