Visible tech

[RickyBobby_PR]

When it comes to visible tech for things like drivers/woods it used to just be moveable weights, adjustable hosel, then we got different materials on the crowns of woods, then turbulators and dragonfly on ping, see thru port on the cobra LTD and rails on the fairway woods. Then being able to see where jailbreak was on epic and now “screws” on the face of TM drivers.

Does the visible tech help tell the marketing/technology story better? Does it add any confusion to the consumer?  Does it affect you or your perception of a product?

[Mizuno_fan]

When it comes to visible tech for things like drivers/woods it used to just be moveable weights, adjustable hosel, then we got different materials on the crowns of woods, then turbulators and dragonfly on ping, see thru port on the cobra LTD and rails on the fairway woods. Then being able to see where jailbreak was on epic and now “screws” on the face of TM drivers.
Does the visible tech help tell the marketing/technology story better? Does it add any confusion to the consumer?  Does it affect you or your perception of a product?

Personally I’m not a fan of all these adjustable clubs and changing it. I personally think it’s much to confusing and give you sporadic numbers instead of consistency. That is however just my personal opinion.


Sent from my iPhone using MyGolfSpy

[cnosil]

Does the visible tech help tell the marketing/technology story better? Does it add any confusion to the consumer?  Does it affect you or your perception of a product?

 

The answers to these questions will vary based on the individual. Watching DvD 2 we saw that there was focus on having tech visible to help sell the product because the visible tech is what helps distinguish the drivers and gets people to pick up the club.

 

Personally I don’t think it tells a story any better because before I put the club in the bag I am going to try it against my current equipment to see if it works. If it doesn’t I am moving on to the next product. For someone that just walks into a store and buys equipment off the shelf the story, color, graphics, and company name play a big part in the selection.

 

My caveat is that for performance testing I have a bigger advantage over most golfers. As an MGS tester I get to test a large percentage of the equipment in the market and see how they compare head to head without having to seek out demos.

[Mizuno_fan]

I’d like to be an MGS tester


Sent from my iPhone using MyGolfSpy

[cnosil]

I’d like to be an MGS tester


Sent from my iPhone using MyGolfSpy

They are always looking for most wanted testers. Only real qualification is that you are near Yorktown,Va.

[Mizuno_fan]

They are always looking for most wanted testers. Only real qualification is that you are near Yorktown,Va.

Only about 8 hrs away


Sent from my iPhone using MyGolfSpy

[Angry Yeti]

I think it definitely helps market clubs to the crowd that will buy off the shelf. 

An example would be my uncle - he buys a new driver roughly every 2 years. Walks into a big brand store and buys whatever he thinks will help him the most. Outside of asking for a "stiff shaft" , he's going to buy whatever strikes him as the coolest or newest looking tech. Seeing that tech makes it more tangible for him and he can show it off when he next hits the course.

Personally, while I certainly have an aesthetic preference, club choice is going to be the best performer within my budget regardless of where the tech is located.

 

PS: I'd like to be a tester too . Would putting up an MGS sign in my office qualify as the Boston branch for testing? 

[GB13]

For me, the only thing that matters is performance.

That being said, IF I bought off the rack, visible tech would play a huge role into my desicion. Some tech would appeal to me like Jailbreak and some wouldn't, like the old TM Whiteout. But that at that point its just personal preference and who marketed their tech better.

As a performance based customer, I want to see the tech actually works. If the tech works, I'll buy it, if not, I won't. 

[PlaidJacket]

5 hours ago, cnosil said:

My caveat is that for performance testing I have a bigger advantage over most golfers. As an MGS tester I get to test a large percentage of the equipment in the market and see how they compare head to head without having to seek out demos

Interesting. I didn't know MGS had permanent testers. I always thought it was a selection process for each review.

[Mizuno_fan]

Interesting. I didn't know MGS had permanent testers. I always thought it was a selection process for each review.

I figured it had to be someone close to their center. I wish they were more active on the podcast though.


Sent from my iPhone using MyGolfSpy

[cnosil]

1 hour ago, PlaidJacket said:

Interesting. I didn't know MGS had permanent testers. I always thought it was a selection process for each review.

I am one of the participants in the most wanted testing and the other lab tests that they do in Yorktown. This is in addition to those done on the forum.   So when you read the most wanted test results on the main MGS page,  I am one of those testers (or Hitsquad as we are now known).  We have the option of picking what tests we want to do.   This year I did blade putters, mallet putters,  drivers, fairway woods, hybrids, driving irons,  players irons, players distance irons,  game improvement irons, and wedges.  Waiting for them to get the stability shaft test started.  Have also done some of the ball tests in the past.   They are always looking for local testers to try and get a better range of golfer abilities; especially the lower swing speed players.  

[tony@CIC]

I am one of the participants in the most wanted testing and the other lab tests that they do in Yorktown. This is in addition to those done on the forum.   So when you read the most wanted test results on the main MGS page,  I am one of those testers (or Hitsquad as we are now known).  We have the option of picking what tests we want to do.   This year I did blade putters, mallet putters,  drivers, fairway woods, hybrids, driving irons,  players irons, players distance irons,  game improvement irons, and wedges.  Waiting for them to get the stability shaft test started.  Have also done some of the ball tests in the past.   They are always looking for local testers to try and get a better range of golfer abilities; especially the lower swing speed players.  

Wish I lived close the HQ and participate in their testing.


Sent from my iPad using MyGolfSpy

[00sportsman]

Wish I lived close the HQ and participate in their testing.


Sent from my iPad using MyGolfSpy

You and me both. I drive within a couple hours twice a year, but other than that I'm 1000 miles away.

Sent from my XT1585 using MyGolfSpy mobile app

[GolfSpy_BNG]

8 hours ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

When it comes to visible tech for things like drivers/woods it used to just be moveable weights, adjustable hosel, then we got different materials on the crowns of woods, then turbulators and dragonfly on ping, see thru port on the cobra LTD and rails on the fairway woods. Then being able to see where jailbreak was on epic and now “screws” on the face of TM drivers.

Does the visible tech help tell the marketing/technology story better? Does it add any confusion to the consumer?  Does it affect you or your perception of a product?

I think visible tech is all about shelf appeal and selling product.  For me I personally don't care if I can see the tech as long as I like the look from address and the club performs.

[russtopherb]

I think visible tech is nice because you can talk about COR and MOI until you're blue in the face, but the average golfer who don't live on a forum doesn't know much about that. If they walk into a big box store they'll most likely be more apt to grab a driver where they can see something and say "hey what's this?" and try it out.

Personally it's not a big thing for me one way or the other, especially tech that's visible at address. Within a few balls I never notice it again. 

[newballcoach]

12 hours ago, cnosil said:

I am one of the participants in the most wanted testing and the other lab tests that they do in Yorktown. This is in addition to those done on the forum.   So when you read the most wanted test results on the main MGS page,  I am one of those testers (or Hitsquad as we are now known).  We have the option of picking what tests we want to do.   This year I did blade putters, mallet putters,  drivers, fairway woods, hybrids, driving irons,  players irons, players distance irons,  game improvement irons, and wedges.  Waiting for them to get the stability shaft test started.  Have also done some of the ball tests in the past.   They are always looking for local testers to try and get a better range of golfer abilities; especially the lower swing speed players.  

I think we all appreciate (and don't always think through) the massive amounts of hours our in-person testers do to get our most wanted results. Sure, it seems awesome to think that you could be an MGS tester, but I would imagine you have put in close to what, 100 hours this year on all that testing? More? That's not time I could give up right now to test golf clubs. Thanks again to all that do, it's what makes this place great!

[newballcoach]

2 hours ago, russtopherb said:

I think visible tech is nice because you can talk about COR and MOI until you're blue in the face, but the average golfer who don't live on a forum doesn't know much about that. If they walk into a big box store they'll most likely be more apt to grab a driver where they can see something and say "hey what's this?" and try it out.

Personally it's not a big thing for me one way or the other, especially tech that's visible at address. Within a few balls I never notice it again. 

The thing that the tech does is allows ball flight etc. to be honed in to help your miss at impact. It gives fitters more options. To think of it from the OEM's perspective, last year I tested the Mizuno ST-180. I found it to be very draw-biased. Because there was no adjustability, I likely would not have purchased that club, as it created too many misses for me. If they had moveable weights or technology to help me out (like my M1 does in fade setting) a fitter could have potentially fixed that miss and dialed in that driver to a level where it might have been my best performer. A lack of tech doesn't allow a fitter to do that. And if the customer can see it and understand it, even better. There's also really no way to add invisible tech to a golf driver, because the space and weight savings on the inside are just too valuable to give up (that was also seen on Driver vs Driver).

[cnosil]

I think we all appreciate (and don't always think through) the massive amounts of hours our in-person testers do to get our most wanted results. Sure, it seems awesome to think that you could be an MGS tester, but I would imagine you have put in close to what, 100 hours this year on all that testing? More? That's not time I could give up right now to test golf clubs. Thanks again to all that do, it's what makes this place great!

If I think back, it was probably about 70 hours for the testing throughout the year. I am probably on the higher end since I want to test everything I can. Some testers may only do a few tests so they have less hours. It isn’t too bad, I go right after work and get home for dinner and to spend time with the family.

[RickyBobby_PR]

1 hour ago, newballcoach said:

The thing that the tech does is allows ball flight etc. to be honed in to help your miss at impact. It gives fitters more options. To think of it from the OEM's perspective, last year I tested the Mizuno ST-180. I found it to be very draw-biased. Because there was no adjustability, I likely would not have purchased that club, as it created too many misses for me. If they had moveable weights or technology to help me out (like my M1 does in fade setting) a fitter could have potentially fixed that miss and dialed in that driver to a level where it might have been my best performer. A lack of tech doesn't allow a fitter to do that. And if the customer can see it and understand it, even better. There's also really no way to add invisible tech to a golf driver, because the space and weight savings on the inside are just too valuable to give up (that was also seen on Driver vs Driver).

Tech is so many things. Adjustability is just one aspect and is the most obvious visible tech. Materials used to reduce weight and move CG, moveable weights, weight ports like titleist, speed channels, and even the shape/size of adapter can be as well.

The adjustability and/or moveable weights would be the visible tech that allows for the flight to be dialed in wherec as something like turbulators, the ridges adaptor TM uses, multi material crowns is more design tech to improve performance of the head from jump.

[PlaidJacket]

17 hours ago, cnosil said:

I am one of the participants in the most wanted testing and the other lab tests that they do in Yorktown. This is in addition to those done on the forum.   So when you read the most wanted test results on the main MGS page,  I am one of those testers (or Hitsquad as we are now known). 

Pretty cool. I don't know if all that testing would be something I could handle but if I lived next door Id certainly want to do a couple of them now and then. Sounds fun. Being able to be selective helps.