Jump to content
TESTERS WANTED! ×

Why the RBZ fairway is long


GolfSpy WD

Recommended Posts

It's definitely interesting that even though you didn't like the feel of the club, you saw distance gains. I wonder how much better you would hit a club that felt right to you.

 

I am convinced at this point that I should factor in the type of metal a club face is made from when picking out clubs, especially fairways and hybrids (since COR is a wash on all drivers at this point). It's honestly something I hadn't thought much about other than forged vs cast. I'll need to try out the Diablo irons sometime since they have a carpenter steel face.

 

yeh mate, i really hated how the ball felt off the face when i knew it was off centre n i pulled it 20yards left. but it was really amazing that it went the same distance as what i was hitting my g15 with. the problem is jst i am not able to replicate a flush strike on the RBZ.

i myself am curious if i have a week or so to spend wth the rbz wld i be able to hit it as far as my driver. some ppl gain up to 47 yards with it. if it does it basically means i have another club to hit from 270 yards out, i wld definitely be able to hit long par 5s in 2. but it gets to the stage i wld need another hybrid to fill in the 220 gap and throw my trusty 50 degree wedge out of the bag . so it begs the question is it really necessary to hit a 3 wood as long as ur driver, if ur game requires u to hit over 250 frm the fairway all the time , go ahead and bag the Rbz.

 

On the otherhand, i think i might also give the Adams Fastline 12 or whats it name next as its basically got the same technology except on the crown. Kenny perry hits it 300 yards. pretty impressive for an old Pro off the deck

Taylormade RBZ2 TP 9.5 Fuel 60

Ping i20 3 wood Aldila Nv

Adams Dhy 18*

Mizuno Mp59 4-p KBS Tour S

Vokey 50* 55* 60*

Scotty Cameron Select Newport 1.5

Ball - Z star XV

Oakley Stand Bag

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The rule is the COR or coefficient of restitution or measurement of the springlike effect of the ball off of the club face. It includes all club faces, drivers, woods, hybrids, irons, wedges, putters. Of course the driver was the one that ran afoul of the rule. Specifically the Callaway ERC II and Taylormade made the R500 shortly after, thinking the USGA would raise the limit. The technology availible at the time could only make drivers that way but to keep these manufactures from finding a loop hole they simply said club face and did not limit it to drivers.

 

I am not even sure if they had hybrids then as we know them. You certainly did not have a couple in your bag in 2001 or 2002. You may have had a driving iron or an Adams Tight Lies fairway wood.

 

I had the Adams. You did not want to hit that out of a fluffy lie. I damned near lost my right ear one time when the Adams went under it. I never hit that club again. It broke took the ear piece off my glasses, knocked my cap off, acually took some hair off the side of my head, and I never saw it. It scared the crap out of me.

 

what actually happend to the adams? how did shrapnel fly all over the place?

Taylormade RBZ2 TP 9.5 Fuel 60

Ping i20 3 wood Aldila Nv

Adams Dhy 18*

Mizuno Mp59 4-p KBS Tour S

Vokey 50* 55* 60*

Scotty Cameron Select Newport 1.5

Ball - Z star XV

Oakley Stand Bag

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yeh mate, i really hated how the ball felt off the face when i knew it was off centre n i pulled it 20yards left. but it was really amazing that it went the same distance as what i was hitting my g15 with. the problem is jst i am not able to replicate a flush strike on the RBZ.

i myself am curious if i have a week or so to spend wth the rbz wld i be able to hit it as far as my driver. some ppl gain up to 47 yards with it. if it does it basically means i have another club to hit from 270 yards out, i wld definitely be able to hit long par 5s in 2. but it gets to the stage i wld need another hybrid to fill in the 220 gap and throw my trusty 50 degree wedge out of the bag . so it begs the question is it really necessary to hit a 3 wood as long as ur driver, if ur game requires u to hit over 250 frm the fairway all the time , go ahead and bag the Rbz.

 

On the otherhand, i think i might also give the Adams Fastline 12 or whats it name next as its basically got the same technology except on the crown. Kenny perry hits it 300 yards. pretty impressive for an old Pro off the deck

 

If you like Adams, check out the Speedline Super XTD when it's released. It's supposed to be a beast.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

what actually happend to the adams? how did shrapnel fly all over the place?

 

 

Now that I think about it this happened long before the COR debate. Maybe 5 years. It was in 1997. The original Adams Tight Lies was basically an inverted fairway wood, cut in half. To get the center of gravity low they made the thing very thin. It truly was great for hitting off tight lies. But it was not the Adams Normal Lie or Adams Fluffy Lie. You needed the hard ground under the club to keep it from passing under the ball. You had to be very careful of the lie because it would pop up off of the crown. Always before this simply resulted in a pop up that went out 50 or 75 yards and left a mark on the club.

 

However on this occassion, I had hit my drive on a par 5 into the first cut. (This was back at a time when I swung with everything that I had. And rarely had good results. I was at least a 25 handicaper, but I could knock the ball much further than I do now. I had a Wilson Jumbo metal driver, not Titanium, and still used a steel shafted Adams. My 5 wood was still wood. and I had, still have, a set of Ping Eye 2's) So the ball was sitting about an inch above the ground. This club was only about an inch and a half thick. So I passed under the ball and hit the top of the club, the ball still was probably traveling 100 mph when it came straight up past my head, close enough to break sunglasses, remove my cap, leave a scrapemark in my hairline about a 1/2 inch in front of my right ear. And a few seconds later hit the ground 50 yards behind me.

 

I could have easily lost an eye or worse. The woosh was incredibly loud that close to the ear. It was so scary that I never hit that club or one like it again. I put it in the garage and carried a persimmon 3 wood for two more years.

 

 

It was a couple of years later when I saw my first Taylormade Rescue, which I still have.

:ping-small:G430LST 10.5° on     T P T    POWER 18 Hi Driver 

:ping-small:G430MAX 3w  on     T P T    POWER 18 Hi Fairway 

:ping-small:G425 3H on     T P T    POWER 18 Hi Hybrid 

:taylormade-small:P790 Black 4-A 
on :kbs: TGI 80S
 

:mizuno-small: ES21 54-8° & 58-12° on :kbs: Hi Rev

:L.A.B.:DF2.1 on :accra: White

:titelist-small: ProV1  

:918457628_PrecisionPro: Precision Pro  NX7 Pro

All Iron grips are BestGrips Micro-Perforated Mid

Driver, 3w, 3H are JumboMax JMX UltraLite XS 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you like Adams, check out the Speedline Super XTD when it's released. It's supposed to be a beast.

 

I had really high hopes for it, but I was unimpressed when I hit it recently on Trackman. Maybe it was fatigue, maybe it was the shaft, but I just didn't like it and I didn't see huge ball speed. Doesn't mean I won't be trying it again though. B)

Follow me on Twitter: @MattSaternus

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have tried several 3 woods, Cobra, Callaway & Powerbilt.

 

None have given me the distance and accuracy that the Powerbilt AFO has.

 

Last week, I flubbed my drive on the first hole, going about 100 yds and leaving me at the beginning of the fairway but 205 yards from the green. Normally, I would lay up & try for 3 on the green. I took my 3 wood and nailed it to the front of the green, 2 putted for a par.

 

I can't argue with my Powerbilt 3 wood.

Driver: image.png.6ba1c8a254ad57aa05e527b74c2e04ba.png0311 XF 10.5* w/Project X Cypher 40 gram Senior shaft or 0811 XF 12* w/Evenflo Riptide CB Senior shaft

Fairways:  image.png.80321f01fc46450b6f428c7daf7b3471.png0211 5W & 7W w/ Evenflo Riptide CB  regular shaft and Tour Edge E521 9W w/Fubuki HD50 regular shaft

Hybrid: None in bag at the moment

IronsTitleist T300 5-PW w/Fubuki MV Senior graphite shafts w/Golf Pride Tour

Wedges: Edison forged 49*, 53* and 57* wedges with KB PGI Senior shafts(80 grm).

Putter: 33” Evnroll ER6R or  ER2 or Bellum Winmore Model 707,   or Nike Method Core Drone  w/Evnroll Gravity Grip

Bag: Vice cart bag(Black/Lime). 

Ball: Snell MTB Prime X, Maxfli Tour/S/X CG, Titleist Pro V1x or Titleist TruFeel

Using Shot Scope X5 and Pinned Rangefinder

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have tried several 3 woods, Cobra, Callaway & Powerbilt.

 

None have given me the distance and accuracy that the Powerbilt AFO has.

 

Last week, I flubbed my drive on the first hole, going about 100 yds and leaving me at the beginning of the fairway but 205 yards from the green. Normally, I would lay up & try for 3 on the green. I took my 3 wood and nailed it to the front of the green, 2 putted for a par.

 

I can't argue with my Powerbilt 3 wood.

 

Goes to show there is more than one way to get max COR. It sounds like the purpose of filling the club with nitrogen is to help get to max COR, though I'm guessing the "face flex technology" is a fancy term for carpenter steel. The nitrogen is Powerbilt's equivalent to RBZ's compression slot.

 

Description:

 

PowerBilt has charged the club heads of the new Air Force One Air Foil 2 Fairway Woods with pressurized nitrogen – up to 150 PSI for maximum C.O.R. and Smash Factor. Clubs feature a 17-4 Stainless Steel head with Nitrogen Pressurized FFT - Face Flex Technology.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm guessing the "face flex technology" is a fancy term for carpenter steel. The nitrogen is Powerbilt's equivalent to RBZ's compression slot.

 

Description:

 

PowerBilt has charged the club heads of the new Air Force One Air Foil 2 Fairway Woods with pressurized nitrogen – up to 150 PSI for maximum C.O.R. and Smash Factor. Clubs feature a 17-4 Stainless Steel head with Nitrogen Pressurized FFT - Face Flex Technology.

 

Warning, I design mechanical systems and equipment not golf clubs so I may know as much about this as I do about picking winners in the match play tournament. For the record, I watched it last night, knowing the scores and still got one wrong.

:D

 

 

Carpenter steel is actually a steel manufacturer and maker of a particular alloy of steel originally designed for the aircraft industry. There are many alloys out there that offer the impact resistance that they get from "Carpenter" steel but when one golf club OEM used it the first time, we had to have a bunch of ME2 manufacturers use it. That is not to say that you can only achieve the desired results by using carpenter steel and anything that is not is inferior. There are many ways to do things. Carpenter makes many alloys but the specific steel is C455 Carpenter steel is typically used in some golf club faces. It is very espensive and only used in the face. That means the face has to be welded in. This is a technology all on its own. The Powerbuilt, Ping, previous Taylormades, Cleveland and many others are made from 17-4 stainless steel. While, Titleist, Callaway, Hogan, those I stated earlier used Carpenter Steel, almost all of them use 17-4 stainless bodies but Carpenter steel faces welded in them.

 

 

While some manufacturers have gone to the aircraft industry to find a way to improve clubs, Powerbuilt went to the auto racing industry. Powerbuilt uses nitrogen charged heads, why? Because by replacing the air normally inside they make the head slightly lighter since nitrogen is lighter than air. Just as Ferrari "aired up" their tires with nitrogen so that they were lighter. IF Callaway did this they would say that they use the same nitrogen as Lambrogini. Powerbuilt further add the nitrogen to 150 pounds per sq in. This has the same effect of as tightening the head on a drum. By adding presure inside the thin face they get more rebound off of the ball. I would bet that if they put in 180 psi then they could make an illegal club.

 

 

I think that the compression slot is a little different in that they use a face of very thin material and it flexes but close to the edge where the body meets the face it can not flex. But by allowing the body to flex, via a compression slot, on the bottom for TM or on the top for Adams, or around the perimeter of the bottom like Nike compression slot, you get more of a "trampoline effect" by allowing the body to add some pop. This is really quite clever because you add pop but since it is on the face you do not change the COR of the face.

:ping-small:G430LST 10.5° on     T P T    POWER 18 Hi Driver 

:ping-small:G430MAX 3w  on     T P T    POWER 18 Hi Fairway 

:ping-small:G425 3H on     T P T    POWER 18 Hi Hybrid 

:taylormade-small:P790 Black 4-A 
on :kbs: TGI 80S
 

:mizuno-small: ES21 54-8° & 58-12° on :kbs: Hi Rev

:L.A.B.:DF2.1 on :accra: White

:titelist-small: ProV1  

:918457628_PrecisionPro: Precision Pro  NX7 Pro

All Iron grips are BestGrips Micro-Perforated Mid

Driver, 3w, 3H are JumboMax JMX UltraLite XS 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As you said, a 17-4 stainless steel head is not the same thing as a 17-4 stainless steel face. Most companies don't advertise what they do to the face, but code words, such as "maraging steel" essentially means Carpenter alloy. I assumed Powerbilt uses a Carpenter face, but Powerbilt does not publish this information, or at least I couldn't find it.

 

http://www.hirekogolf.com/hireko/webpages/tech_articles/maraging_steel/what_is_maraging_steel.html

 

 

Wishon has a great FAQ about different metals used in clubs:

 

What makes a goof face material for a driver?

 

The goal of most drivers is to create a head that has the maximum amount of face deflection from impact with the ball. The more the face deflects, the less the ball deforms against the face and the less energy the ball will lose. That translates into a higher ball velocity for any given swing speed, and it is ball velocity that chiefly determines the distance of the shot (proper launch angle for the golfer's swing speed and angle of attack is key, but it is second to ball velocity).

 

The best materials for maximizing face deflection are those that have what is called a high STRENGTH-TO-MODULUS RATIO. The strength of a material can be rated in many different types of tests, but the most important strength measurement related to driver faces is the yield strength. Yield strength is a measurement of how much force is required before the material permanently bends or deforms. But what has to come with a high yield strength to make a good driver face material is a low modulus of elasticity along with high toughness.

 

Modulus is the measurement of a material's ability to resist stretching, so the lower the modulus measurement, the more the material can be stretched. In graphite shafts you want higher modulus materials to ensure stiffness, but for a driver face you want to have a low modulus material. If you have high strength and low modulus together in the same material, you have a good candidate for a face design that will deflect inward a lot before it reaches a point of permanent deformation.

 

Toughness is the ability of a metal to rapidly distribute within itself both the stress and strain caused by a suddenly applied load, or more simply expressed, the ability of a material to withstand shock loading. It is the exact opposite of “brittleness” which carries the implication of sudden failure. A brittle material has little resistance to failure once the elastic limit has been reached. There are many materials that have a higher yield strength than titanium, most notably high strength steel alloys like Carpenter AerMet, Carpenter 475, 465, 455 and T275 to name a few. But steel alloys always have a much higher modulus of elasticity than do titanium alloys, often being as much as two times less elastic than titanium alloys.

 

Therefore, a titanium alloy can be as much as 30-40% lower in yield strength than a high strength steel but makes up for that with its modulus being over twice as elastic as the modulus of the high strength steels. However, there are some high strength steels that can make driver faces with as high of a COR as any titanium alloy. This happens because if the strength of the steel is VERY high and the toughness is good, the very high strength allows the face to be made much thinner than ever possible with any titanium alloy, which in turn allows the ball to deflect the face inward the same or even a little more as the titanium alloy. It is the amount of face deflection that makes the COR high and the swing speed to ball speed ratio high as well for more distance.

 

What makes a good face material for a fairway wood or an iron?

 

As with driver heads, titanium alloys would be the best candidate. However, most companies do not choose to design fairway woods and irons with a titanium face because of its much higher cost. Golf companies have learned over the years that golfers will pay the higher cost for a titanium driver, but not for fairway woods or irons. The reason is chiefly because with a driver, the golfer is buying ONE higher cost club but with the fairway woods and irons, the golfer knows he has to buy 2 or 3 woods and 7 or 8 irons so the total cost is much higher.

 

As such, when a company wishes to design a high COR fairway wood or iron, they look for high strength steel alloys which all carry a lower cost than titanium alloys. As mentioned in the previous Q&A about titanium driver faces, it is possible to make a clubhead with a high COR using a high strength steel alloy for the face. Steel alloys are available which have a yield strength double that of titanium. Therefore, even though the modulus of elasticity of all steel alloys is not as “stretchable” as for titanium alloys, with the yield strength of some steel alloys being double or more than titanium alloys, it is then possible to make the steel face very thin to allow the face to flex inward to the point of achieving a high COR without fear of the face caving in.

 

However, it is true that in a perfect world in which golfers did not balk at the price of golf clubs, using high strength/low modulus titanium alloys for the faces of fairway woods and irons would definitely push their performance to the maximum level possible

 

http://wishongolf.com/technology/tech-faqs/

 

 

The key is the strength of the alloy, which allows for a thinner face. Here are measurements of strength between 17-4 steel and carpenter 455 and 465 steel:

 

http://www.cartech.com/techarticles.aspx?id=1472

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I tried searching for a fairway wood that has a 17-4 steel face and max cor and couldn't find one, and there are a LOT of max cor fairway woods out there.

 

I did find this interesting description from a Golfsmith fairway:

 

Golfsmith HI-COR Fairway Head: This HI-COR Fairway Head takes the original HI-COR concept and expands on it with its unique shape and rearward crown step design. The large sole keeps the CG (center of gravity) low, yet the sole radius provides good relief from the turf and places well from a variety of lie conditions. The face of the HI-COR is 15-7 stainless steel, giving a firm, strong face that is only 2.2mm. Most steel fairway woods have a 17-4 steel face that is 30% thicker. By crafting the face from 15-7 steel, mass can be placed in the rear portion of the body to provide optimal launch. .350 deg bore provides maximum stability at impact. Download HI-COR Fairway Wood Clubhead Specs (174 KB)

 

http://reviews.golfsmith.com/8567/G3441/hi-cor-fairway-head-reviews/reviews.htm?sort=helpfulness

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I tried searching for a fairway wood that has a 17-4 steel face and max cor and couldn't find one, and there are a LOT of max cor fairway woods out there.

 

I did find this interesting description from a Golfsmith fairway:

 

 

 

http://reviews.golfs...ort=helpfulness

 

 

I have these fairway woods. I have a Driver, 3 and 5 woods. I have not played with them since 2004, when I started plalying with the 980F's I have a 13 and 17 in these. The Golfsmith's were really easy to hit and went a long way, but I left them in favor of the Titleists because of a much lower ball flight. If you play in wind you want a low ball flight with your woods or you spend a lot of time looking for balls. The accuracy is much better with the Titleists but they do have a bit shorter shaft.

:ping-small:G430LST 10.5° on     T P T    POWER 18 Hi Driver 

:ping-small:G430MAX 3w  on     T P T    POWER 18 Hi Fairway 

:ping-small:G425 3H on     T P T    POWER 18 Hi Hybrid 

:taylormade-small:P790 Black 4-A 
on :kbs: TGI 80S
 

:mizuno-small: ES21 54-8° & 58-12° on :kbs: Hi Rev

:L.A.B.:DF2.1 on :accra: White

:titelist-small: ProV1  

:918457628_PrecisionPro: Precision Pro  NX7 Pro

All Iron grips are BestGrips Micro-Perforated Mid

Driver, 3w, 3H are JumboMax JMX UltraLite XS 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have these fairway woods. I have a Driver, 3 and 5 woods. I have not played with them since 2004, when I started plalying with the 980F's I have a 13 and 17 in these. The Golfsmith's were really easy to hit and went a long way, but I left them in favor of the Titleists because of a much lower ball flight. If you play in wind you want a low ball flight with your woods or you spend a lot of time looking for balls. The accuracy is much better with the Titleists but they do have a bit shorter shaft.

 

It sounds a lot like Taylormade copied the Titleist design for low ball flight by placing the CG more towards the center of the club with the RBZ in order to lower ball flight. Almost every other fairway or hybrid I saw with high COR was more back weighted to help get the ball in the air. This is probably why it's marketed towards "better players".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well the RBZ looks to be twice the size of a 980F, and from the time I hit it the RBZ is twice as forgiving as the 980F. No but it took a lot of practice to learn to hit a 13 degree 980F off the ground. The RBZ hybrid is closer in size to the 980F. Last summer I was playing with a guy (lower handicap than me), we were standing in the fairway waiting for the green to clear and he said something about hitting a 3 wood. I had mine in my hand and handed it to him. He put it behind his ball and looked at it and said, "I don't think I have the balls to use this club." and handed it back and got his own. He did hit it later and was impressed with the distance but said it was not easy to hit.

:ping-small:G430LST 10.5° on     T P T    POWER 18 Hi Driver 

:ping-small:G430MAX 3w  on     T P T    POWER 18 Hi Fairway 

:ping-small:G425 3H on     T P T    POWER 18 Hi Hybrid 

:taylormade-small:P790 Black 4-A 
on :kbs: TGI 80S
 

:mizuno-small: ES21 54-8° & 58-12° on :kbs: Hi Rev

:L.A.B.:DF2.1 on :accra: White

:titelist-small: ProV1  

:918457628_PrecisionPro: Precision Pro  NX7 Pro

All Iron grips are BestGrips Micro-Perforated Mid

Driver, 3w, 3H are JumboMax JMX UltraLite XS 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I tried out the RBZ this weekend against my Alpha V5 FW 15*. I tried every shaft-flex-loft of the RBZ and could not get better than 7 yards shorter on average from my Alpha off the deck. Longest to longest shot the Alpha was 16 yards longer off the tee and the Alpha averaged 11 yards longer than the best RBZ combo. I fit and built the Alpha to myself so that is in the Alpha's favor, but the RBZ is still in the store and waiting for another buyer. For comparison my driver speed is 103-108 and I play to a 2 hc. I think this means that people should "try" the Alpha if you have a chance and a deep face FW does not bother you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I tried out the RBZ this weekend against my Alpha V5 FW 15*. I tried every shaft-flex-loft of the RBZ and could not get better than 7 yards shorter on average from my Alpha off the deck. Longest to longest shot the Alpha was 16 yards longer off the tee and the Alpha averaged 11 yards longer than the best RBZ combo. I fit and built the Alpha to myself so that is in the Alpha's favor, but the RBZ is still in the store and waiting for another buyer. For comparison my driver speed is 103-108 and I play to a 2 hc. I think this means that people should "try" the Alpha if you have a chance and a deep face FW does not bother you.

 

I just recently found out about Alpha. Their woods are made of beta titanium, so achieving max COR is very easy. I can imagine it's a very forgiving club and really want to try it out. For $200 you can certainly do worse. Thanks for posting your results.

 

http://www.alpha-golf-clubs.com/proddetail.php?prod=alphav5fwood

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it took a few rounds to get used to looking at it off the deck, but it is very solid and I don't even notice the size anymore. Off the tee it is very easy to look at, as it looks like my 910 driver's little brother. I have a 19* V5 hybrid too and it is too deep-faced for me to get used to, although off the tee it is a mini-driver. I don't carry it because I need to be able to hit it off the deck but the FW was easy to like as it works very well from both for my swing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

 

u guys shd see this. hes a pga teacher and he has a driver speed of 106, 6 iron speed 86

 

good ball striker but Rbz all hype over burner 2.0

Taylormade RBZ2 TP 9.5 Fuel 60

Ping i20 3 wood Aldila Nv

Adams Dhy 18*

Mizuno Mp59 4-p KBS Tour S

Vokey 50* 55* 60*

Scotty Cameron Select Newport 1.5

Ball - Z star XV

Oakley Stand Bag

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

u guys shd see this. hes a pga teacher and he has a driver speed of 106, 6 iron speed 86

 

good ball striker but Rbz all hype over burner 2.0

 

To a point I agree with this. I tried the RBZ twice. When my swing was off, I was hitting it and my current 3W 200. I know from past rounds I used to hit my 3W 215. When my swing was on though (second time I tried the RBZ), I was hitting it 240.

 

That said, I've been able to bring up my swing speed over the winter, so it may be that I can hit my current 3W farther than 215 now. However, I know the COR for the RBZ is higher than my 3W, so on paper the RBZ should outperform it.

 

Again, as discussed in earlier posts, there are many many 3Ws out there with max COR, and I don't think the RBZ will outperform them off the shelf unless you happen to fit very well with the stock shaft.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To a point I agree with this. I tried the RBZ twice. When my swing was off, I was hitting it and my current 3W 200. I know from past rounds I used to hit my 3W 215. When my swing was on though (second time I tried the RBZ), I was hitting it 240.

 

That said, I've been able to bring up my swing speed over the winter, so it may be that I can hit my current 3W farther than 215 now. However, I know the COR for the RBZ is higher than my 3W, so on paper the RBZ should outperform it.

 

Again, as discussed in earlier posts, there are many many 3Ws out there with max COR, and I don't think the RBZ will outperform them off the shelf unless you happen to fit very well with the stock shaft.

actually the claim on the ad is

"*Better player claim against Burner 11 fairway, robot testing at 150mph ball speed, total distance." i might be wrong but im assuming Burner 11 is the 2011 burner model, correct me if i am mistaken

 

so mark being a better player fits the "better criteria" bill but i not even mark can swing his 3 wood at a 100mph with 1.5 smash factor. Im not saying guys out there cant do that. Im jst saying well done by TM to just post 17yards gained and for a lack of better word "misleading" the public with a fine print (with not quite realistic conditions for the target market) so small that u wont see it from a billboard unless ur 6 inches away from it

Taylormade RBZ2 TP 9.5 Fuel 60

Ping i20 3 wood Aldila Nv

Adams Dhy 18*

Mizuno Mp59 4-p KBS Tour S

Vokey 50* 55* 60*

Scotty Cameron Select Newport 1.5

Ball - Z star XV

Oakley Stand Bag

Link to comment
Share on other sites

WD. I hate to break the news to you but the RocketBallz is not longer than any other fairway wood. At least for me and I found out this afternoon two of my golfing buddies also went and tried the Rocketballz this week and we all came back without them. The rocketballz was 1 yard longer than my 909F. I think that the 910F was 2 yards longer but I know that the Callaway RazrHawk was 3 yards longer than my 909F. That makes the RazrHawk 2 yards longer than the Rocketballz. Of course I was not particularly interested in spending $200 for 2 or 3 yards. Not real sure I would have made the switch for 17 yards on a 3 wood. I liked the feel of the 909F and the Rocketballz better than the other 2 but still..... I wrote more about it on Pass the TM Koolaide, I hit the Rocketballz. I bought a Ben Hogan C455 3 Wood in 2004 made from the 455 Carpenter Steel, so this is not a revolutionary new steel.

 

 

 

HI=i,

 

I have tried the RBZ off mats but did not note a significant change in distance compared to other newer fairway woods. However I have not tried the club on grass yet due to weather conditions.

 

WDA

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...