Upcoming Most Wanted Driver Testing

[russtopherb]

On 2/22/2022 at 12:18 PM, cnosil said:

Wilson said it was okay to leave the picture up.

They dropped teasers online yesterday and 2nd Swing already has a video up reviewing the full line. So guess the embargo isn't all that strict.

[Siamese Moose]

3 hours ago, tony@CIC said:

Remotely related to the topic, some time ago I saw a chart that listed all shafts and their torque #'s. I can't seem to find that chart either here (mgs search) or google. Can anyone point me to that chart? 

https://www.golfworks.com/choosing-the-best-shaft-for-your-game/a/1650/

Look at the pdf at the bottom of the page.

[RickyBobby_PR]

50 minutes ago, tony@CIC said:

It was more about curiosity rather then using it for shaft selection. Note - my fitter uses it as one component of his shaft selection process for fitting clubs. 

Very interesting because it’s not measured the same way across the industry or with the same machine. I don’t know any fitter who has ever used it for fitting. It’s predominantly for feel per the experts and the ei profile will be more impotent. Fitters are going to consider what the golfer feels along with ball flight to see if the need softer or stiffer tip or maybe the butt end doesn’t fit.

[49er_fan]

Mizumo

 

[fixyurdivot]

1 hour ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

Very interesting because it’s not measured the same way across the industry or with the same machine. I don’t know any fitter who has ever used it for fitting. It’s predominantly for feel per the experts and the ei profile will be more impotent. Fitters are going to consider what the golfer feels along with ball flight to see if the need softer or stiffer tip or maybe the butt end doesn’t fit.

Yup.  That's what my TrueSpec fitter said. Shaft torque and flex spec's are not very useful in the absence of an industry standard. They rely more on comparing notes about clients and which shafts tend to fit which swing profiles and club heads the best.

 

[SoonerBoomer1189]

The biggest problem I foresee with “driver testing” with a large group of people are a few factors:

1. if the same shaft is used (their ideal shaft in their “gamer”) it will react differently per head. And with that create different numbers than with the best shaft for the head and user.

2. Saying “fastest” ball speeds does not mean accurate or furthest.

3. Back to the shaft, it will produce different ball strike locations. Also certain heads have an “ideal” strike zone on the face, some center some high center, others out towards the toe center. 
 

I would love to know how all aspects of the testing were done and if they done similar to a club fitting rather than putting each driver in the same shaft. Love y’all’s information and content!

Edited February 23, 2022 by SoonerBoomer1189

[MikeCR]

I had my driver fitting this week. I hit the new Cobra, Stealth and Calloway Rogue. Didn't like the feeling of the Stealth or dispersion. The Cobra's ball speed and distance was equal to the Rogue ST Max. Went with the Rogue ST Max, Mitsubishi 55G stiff shaft. Gain 20 yards over current Epic Flash driver, also dispersion was the best by far of all three for me. The feeling was so good like the old persimmon drivers. It is so important to get fit for these new drivers especially in view on their cost.

Current handicap USGA 8.9.

[funkyjudge]

On 2/21/2022 at 5:21 PM, ChitownM2 said:

Kind of.  Everyone in this thread already knows about PXG and tbh, that's not who the most wanted guides are really geared toward.  All the casual golfers who aren't on a forum and don't know much or anything at all about PXG aren't going to go back to last years test to see how a brand they didn't know existed did.

That said, the variation in the testers between last year and this year apparently caused some pretty dramatic changes in the rankings.  If there is one thing I feel confident in saying, it is that results from last year don't necessarily translate to results from this year.  

I think that by now a vast majority (I would even say more than 95%) of all golfers know about PXG and most of the 5% who don't know a lot about PXG are at least aware that the brand exists.

[bobsarobot]

Alright, who listed XXIO as the fastest in the poll?  Come on.

[ClarkWGriswoldIII]

46 minutes ago, bobsarobot said:

Alright, who listed XXIO as the fastest in the poll?  Come on.

 

It wouldn't let me select MacGregor or Ram.

[fixyurdivot]

1 hour ago, MikeCR said:

I had my driver fitting this week. I hit the new Cobra, Stealth and Calloway Rogue. Didn't like the feeling of the Stealth or dispersion. The Cobra's ball speed and distance was equal to the Rogue ST Max. Went with the Rogue ST Max, Mitsubishi 55G stiff shaft. Gain 20 yards over current Epic Flash driver, also dispersion was the best by far of all three for me. The feeling was so good like the old persimmon drivers. It is so important to get fit for these new drivers especially in view on their cost.

Current handicap USGA 8.9.

Dayuum... 20+ extra yards w/o giving up accuracy definitely sounds like a worthwhile upgrade.  I think seeing that much gain between a new release and a 2-3 year product cycle gamer is not typical - so that's great!

[cnosil]

2 hours ago, SoonerBoomer1189 said:

The biggest problem I foresee with “driver testing” with a large group of people are a few factors:

1. if the same shaft is used (their ideal shaft in their “gamer”) it will react differently per head. And with that create different numbers than with the best shaft for the head and user.

2. Saying “fastest” ball speeds does not mean accurate or furthest.

3. Back to the shaft, it will produce different ball strike locations. Also certain heads have an “ideal” strike zone on the face, some center some high center, others out towards the toe center. 
 

I would love to know how all aspects of the testing were done and if they done similar to a club fitting rather than putting each driver in the same shaft. Love y’all’s information and content!

In the MGS most wanted driver testing,  it is about the best stock configuration that works for the tester.   Testers do a basic fitting to see what shaft/adapter setting will provide close to optimal results.  Generally there are 3 drivers per session; the testers rotate through the drivers 5 shots at a time until the get 15 total shots.  Sever outliers are removed and we hit shots to get us back to 15.  What else do you want to know?

[SoonerBoomer1189]

4 hours ago, cnosil said:

In the MGS most wanted driver testing,  it is about the best stock configuration that works for the tester.   Testers do a basic fitting to see what shaft/adapter setting will provide close to optimal results.  Generally there are 3 drivers per session; the testers rotate through the drivers 5 shots at a time until the get 15 total shots.  Sever outliers are removed and we hit shots to get us back to 15.  What else do you want to know?

When is it possible for me to do this testing?! Haha

 

Just to clarify some drivers may have different brand shafts? Or same shaft through all drivers? Thank you mate! Great to know there is detail and accuracy in testing.

[cnosil]

9 hours ago, SoonerBoomer1189 said:

When is it possible for me to do this testing?! Haha

 

Just to clarify some drivers may have different brand shafts? Or same shaft through all drivers? Thank you mate! Great to know there is detail and accuracy in testing.

If you live near Yorktown Virginia you can be one of the testers.   
 

yes, they have different brand shafts.  Think of it this way, if you were to order the club from the manufacturer, what shafts are available as a no cost option.  Callaway and Taylormade may offer a completely different set of shaft options.  Also, the same shaft many not work the same across all the heads.   

[tony@CIC]

19 hours ago, Siamese Moose said:

https://www.golfworks.com/choosing-the-best-shaft-for-your-game/a/1650/

Look at the pdf at the bottom of the page.

Thanks - that's what I was looking for. 

[jswjr]

Great test with lots of info.

todaysgolfer.com has just released a driver test and it's kinda interesting to compare the stats on these two tests

[Thin2win]

1 hour ago, jswjr said:

Great test with lots of info.

todaysgolfer.com has just released a driver test and it's kinda interesting to compare the stats on these two tests

Thanks for the recommendation! Much different then the MGS test in that it reads as only one guy is doing all the testing. So from that side, it could just be "Nate's best driver  2022". So really great of you hit the ball like him, and not so much of you don't. 

But what I really do like about it, is how it broke the clubs into 3 categories and named a winner in those. MGS often breaks down into swing speed categories, but low spin, forgiveness and draw biased just make a lot more sense. 

Overall a good read from a site of never been to before, so thanks! 

[fixyurdivot]

2 hours ago, cnosil said:

If you live near Yorktown Virginia you can be one of the testers.

I know a spy, located near Spokane, WA, that could set-up a western regional test center with his state-of-art LM studio... just thinking out of the box .

[dlow206]

20 minutes ago, fixyurdivot said:

I know a spy, located near Spokane, WA, that could set-up a western regional test center with his state-of-art LM studio... just thinking out of the box .

He will provide the studio, i will provide the clubs...

[Thin2win]

2 hours ago, fixyurdivot said:

I know a spy, located near Spokane, WA, that could set-up a western regional test center with his state-of-art LM studio... just thinking out of the box .

 

1 hour ago, dlow206 said:

He will provide the studio, i will provide the clubs...

Also Free popcorn!

[RollingGreens]

Wow. Just saw the Instagram post about last years g425 max. crazy to think it wasn’t the right specs 

[cnosil]

30 minutes ago, RollingGreens said:

Wow. Just saw the Instagram post about last years g425 max. crazy to think it wasn’t the right specs 

I have no idea what it was.  Could be that they provided a shaft that was an upcharge shaft and therefore violated the rules for being included.  Other clubs have been left out from tests for this reason. 

[Jonny_Crash]

The instagram post was very poorly written, but from what I can tell.... last years' Ping G425 Max was out of spec in some way (not clear in what way) and they just found out about it.  They added the following editors note to the 2021 test:

Editor’s Note: The PING G425 MAX and G425 LST drivers were originally included in this test. Subsequently, we learned that the clubs tested did not match the off-the-rack, retail specification. As a result, we have removed them from the test.

It's weird because it was something that made the drivers perform worse than this year...  I'd like some more clarity

[RollingGreens]

10 hours ago, cnosil said:

I have no idea what it was.  Could be that they provided a shaft that was an upcharge shaft and therefore violated the rules for being included.  Other clubs have been left out from tests for this reason. 

Sounds more like it was specs that affected its results. Why make a follow up post to a donor on social media that talks about how results varied because it was out of spec vs their was a different tester pool which it fit better this year vs last. Obviously just speculation on my part reading into it. 

[GregGarner]

10 hours ago, Jonny_Crash said:

it was something that made the drivers perform worse

Not necessarily. This wasn't an absolute performance test in the strictest sense. This was about which drivers could be best fit for the testing pool. Since the testing pool is different one year to the next (different guys, different swings, etc) it's fair to say that the 2021 test included a driver that was unavailable off-the-rack and therefore was disqualified from the test. I think, to your point, saying it was "out of spec" starts folks wondering if it was some sort of extra hot face or tour-only issue type product. Maybe, but since this was robot testing, it's unfair to say that one driver performed, in an absolute sense, better or worse from one year to the next.

(This is part of the problem when you run "tests" rather unscientifically. It's good blog fodder, but it's by no means a repeatable, reproducible study into the performance of a driver.)

[cnosil]

2 hours ago, RollingGreens said:

Sounds more like it was specs that affected its results. Why make a follow up post to a donor on social media that talks about how results varied because it was out of spec vs their was a different tester pool which it fit better this year vs last. Obviously just speculation on my part reading into it. 

We are all reading into what was posted.  We see as part of the report out, all the clubs are measured and reported on so If it was simply “specs” it should be apparent in the charts.   The SM posts are unfortunately vague but the website alludes to the fact that it wasn’t an off the rack retail offering.  That fact is one of the things required to be in the club testing, the club must be an off the rack configuration that any consume can purchase in a retail store for no upcharge.   My guess is that they answered because a club went from middle of the pack to top of the pack and they got a ton of email. Clubs do move up and down from year to year; I recall Srixon dropping from the top to low between years.  I am guessing that in these situations, there is deeper review of information associated with the clubs.  

[fixyurdivot]

Just noticing on the G425Max that it has a fade/draw/neutral weight but less extreme position in the draw/fade as compared to my G410P.  Anyone know if the higher MOI of the Max designs effectively offset that?  I like the slightly less "turtle on a stick" look of the non-Max models. 

[PBH3]

Why is MGS being so vague about how the club was "out of spec"?  If it was an upcharge shaft or something like that just come out and give us the details.  Ping has a pretty good reputation for quality control so by not sharing the specifics MGS is just creating more questions. 

I'm starting to think someone at MGS dropped the ball last year and they are covering their ass after this year's results.  

[Jonny_Crash]

2 hours ago, greggarner said:

Not necessarily. This wasn't an absolute performance test in the strictest sense. This was about which drivers could be best fit for the testing pool. Since the testing pool is different one year to the next (different guys, different swings, etc) it's fair to say that the 2021 test included a driver that was unavailable off-the-rack and therefore was disqualified from the test. I think, to your point, saying it was "out of spec" starts folks wondering if it was some sort of extra hot face or tour-only issue type product. Maybe, but since this was robot testing, it's unfair to say that one driver performed, in an absolute sense, better or worse from one year to the next.

 

Fair, but but the G425 Max went from middle of the pack in 2021  to driver of the year in 2022.  That doesn't make a lot of sense if it had a aftermarket shaft or an "extra-hot" face.  I suppose those things could diminish the forgiveness of the club, but I'd guess it would have been one of the longer clubs if that were the case.  Anyway, it's strange now that it has been removed from the data-set.  

 

[GolfSpy MPR]

5 minutes ago, Jonny_Crash said:

Fair, but but the G425 Max went from middle of the pack in 2021  to driver of the year in 2022.  That doesn't make a lot of sense if it had a aftermarket shaft or an "extra-hot" face.  I suppose those things could diminish the forgiveness of the club, but I'd guess it would have been one of the longer clubs if that were the case.  Anyway, it's strange now that it has been removed from the data-set.  

For those new here, a standard clarification: I don't have any role at the testing facility. I've never met the guys there, and I'm not part of MW testing of anything. I just sit in my office here in Michigan's UP and help keep the discussions on track on the Forum

That said, one of the things I think is interesting when digging into MW Driver data is just how similar in the aggregate most of the mainstream drivers are. If you take a look at the data page, the longest carry distance in the data set is the Stealth+, at 233.8.

There are 19(!) other drivers within 5 yards of that number. A lot of the drivers outside that range are specialty drivers (super lightweight, or draw biased, etc.).

I might be wrong in my understanding of things, then, but I think among the mainstream drivers, the margins are really, really tight. If (and again, I want to make clear I have absolutely zero knowledge of the spec issue with PING), the G425 was sent last year with a marginal shaft (in other words, something outside the fat part of the bell curve, e.g., super high launch or super low spin), it could definitely send a specific head tumbling down a tightly-bunched board.