My point in the "not well thought out 2 am response" was that since you can not change the shape of the face or front profile of the club without affecting the performance you were left with changing the body and rear of the club. This is what Callaway did with the Razr Fit. This sounds great, and Adams Speedline touts an aerodynamic shape but I do not expect to see any significant difference because of aerodynamics.

I believe that the whole aerodynamic thing is a marketing gimmick. I believe they actually did it, I just do not believe that there were "significant" improvements because of this in the golf club arena

You could measure the effect of aero by using a smaller head (3 or 5 wood) on a driver shaft.

Removing the weights from your driver would also give you a true apples to apples test, taking out the aero and some other variables.

jmiller provided a formula for smash factor that reiterated my main point. Clubhead mass is directly proportional to the smash factor.

So as I stated you will have to increase your speed by 6 mph to make up for 10 grams of clubhead weight. I think the better test would be to add weight to the head. Even if you are swinging a little slower but use a heavier clubhead you get more force with the heavier head. Running the numbers, if you have a 190 gram head than you get the same force into the ball swinging at 123 mph as a 200 g head at 116 and a 210 g head at 111 and a 225g head at 104.

Using this Smash Factor formula and 10 as the spin loft. These same heads get the following smash factor. 190=1.45 200=1.464 210=1.478 and 225=1.495

So this validates my point that by going lighter you have to increase speed a lot in order maintain the same smash factor.

Of course by simply adding weight to the driver head with lead tape or whatever you will alter the center of gravity and therefore the launch angle. Raising the launch angle raises the spin loft which is inversely proportional and lowers the smash factor.