*Opinion: New Titleist Drivers, Ugly or New thing of Beauty?

[Mike10487]

I can't say that I dislike the appearance. The sole looks blinged up for a Titleist, but overall, it's not off-putting. I like how they kept the classic shape for which they have been known for. I haven't owned or hit a Titleist driver since the 917 was in my bag. I was a Titleist junkie at that time. I really cannot even tell you why I stopped playing them. 

[jaskanski]

2 hours ago, Mike10487 said:

I haven't owned or hit a Titleist driver since the 917 was in my bag. I was a Titleist junkie at that time. I really cannot even tell you why I stopped playing them. 

Ditto.

To be fair, Titleist couldn't really be accused of ever making an ugly driver (from address) but whatever has been before, the GT range is just another evolution of what they have been doing for some time. Not ugly, not under-performing, not totally bad in any way. Just...well, Titleist. Which ain't a bad thing I guess.

I ended up with the Mizuno STZ for the record. Price had a major part in that decision.

[BradM]

To me this is just classic Titleist.  I did use a buddies AI Smoke and man that thing couldn't miss, with a shaft and loft that wasn't correct for me.  I'm demoing the GT in a week so I'll report back.  I game a TSR3 now, helped me lower my handicap at least 6-8 stokes.  Found it much more forgiving with less dispersion than my old PXG 0311.  More importantly, also getting fit for SM10's and throwing the Sugar Daddy's in the trash.

[Fairwayguy2]

I have been looking at drivers. I am on the fence about the GT, or just going with the TSR2 at the reduced price.

[BradM]

I think you can't go wrong with the TSR2.  I can't imagine there is a huge difference between the GT and TSR, but I could be wrong.  What do I know?  I hit my buddies, hit 13 fairways, looked at him and said, "how much you want for it".  Went to my golf store and just asked for the exact same specs he had.  

[chisag]

8 hours ago, xylostarjames said:

Titleist has always been known for their classic designs, so this shift is definitely a departure. However, I've found that sometimes these changes grow on you over time. Remember when TaylorMade introduced the white drivers? Many were skeptical at first, but they became quite popular.
That said, performance is key. If it outperforms the TSR3, you might find yourself warming up to the looks. It'll be interesting to see how it performs in real-world testing.

 

... In pictures the GT looks just like the TSr so I must be missing something about a departure or warming up to the looks? 

[GaDawg]

I have a demo/fitting scheduled for July 9th with the Titleist folks. Get to put my hands on the GT then.

[Josh Parker]

I had a good talk with a fitter at GG who is on their "staff" and has gotten to hit the GT line. He says they are lighter, faster and more forgiving that the TSR but who knows how true that is. 

TSR is a great product and at the discounts are solid options. 

[cnosil]

2 hours ago, Josh Parker said:

I had a good talk with a fitter at GG who is on their "staff" and has gotten to hit the GT line. He says they are lighter, faster and more forgiving that the TSR but who knows how true that is. 

 

I was talking to Phillip at HQ yesterday and they got fit for the new line last week and were impressed.  Phillip didn't see a significant amount of distance gain but maybe a bit more consistency.  One of the other staff members apparently saw a 9 yard gain and he isn't one that is going to be playing equipment that doesn't fit well.   

[Josh Parker]

1 hour ago, cnosil said:

I was talking to Phillip at HQ yesterday and they got fit for the new line last week and were impressed.  Phillip didn't see a significant amount of distance gain but maybe a bit more consistency.  One of the other staff members apparently saw a 9 yard gain and he isn't one that is going to be playing equipment that doesn't fit well.   

Awesome. I don't see huge gains in distance, but I do see consistency. 

[KC Golf]

8 hours ago, Josh Parker said:

Awesome. I don't see huge gains in distance, but I do see consistency. 

The TSR had more distance consistency across the face, over the TSi, so the GT carrying that even further would be a natural evolution.  It looks beautiful to me!  But I love Titleist Drivers!  So I admit I am very biased.  Can’t wait to try it with the AF shaft!

Edited July 4 by KC Golf

[HikingMike]

On 6/6/2024 at 1:18 AM, Tincuptim said:

Love the classic Titlest shape. Looking down is fine but does look too have a fade bias in the picture and a deeper or taller profile. If it provides better dispersion or higher ball speed without giving up something else, it would go in the bag. 

Man I went 5 pages before I saw anyone comment on how deep/tall this thing looks. Is it deep/tall... or is it narrow left-to-right? Something's going on there, seems like a fairly big change from TSR, and a departure from other brands.

I like the sole just fine. It is fairly simple and clean, so maybe the simplicity is a turn off for some. But their TSR line also has a fairly simple sole design. It could be seen as too much color compared to the TSR... maybe less classy with the text in the middle. Who really cares though, this is nitpicky stuff.

As for the glossy top, I guess I have played both glossy and matte, and I probably prefer matte, but no big deal.

So it looks like the GT3 has a movable weight system that is internal. That's kind of nice. The frosted clear plastic window on the sole could be a turnoff.

On 6/5/2024 at 6:43 PM, GolferXY said:

Meh.

I like the face and crown, dislike the "give us a kiss!" look of the back weight, and the sole is a big yawner.

Hmm, made me think of something.

[chisag]

5 hours ago, HikingMike said:

I like the sole just fine. It is fairly simple and clean, so maybe the simplicity is a turn off for some. But their TSR line also has a fairly simple sole design. It could be seen as too much color compared to the TSR... maybe less classy with the text in the middle. Who really cares though, this is nitpicky stuff.

 

... Some do care and I have really never understood why. 1st you can't see the sole at address and 2nd for most players that want to protect the head and the shaft, the driver is usually under a head cover. Most importantly the ball and the scorecard don't care what the sole looks like. What really amazes me is comments from some saying they would never play a driver because of the color or graphics on the sole. Allen Iverson would be sayin:

We in here talkin' bout the sole, I mean listen we talkin' bout the sole, not performance, not performance we talkin' about the sole', not the clubs performance I go out there and die for, we talkin' bout the SOLE, we talkin' bout the sole, how silly is that man, what are we talkin' bout the sole? The sole? We talkin' bout the sole? We not talkin' bout performance, performance when it matters we talkin' bout the sole.  

... Other than "It's ugly but I would play it if it performs" I would love to hear someone explain why it makes any difference to them. 

Edited July 5 by chisag

[funkyjudge]

43 minutes ago, chisag said:

 

... Some do care and I have really never understood why. 1st you can't see the sole at address and 2nd for most players that want to protect the head and the shaft, the driver is usually under a head cover. Most importantly the ball and the scorecard don't care what the sole looks like. What really amazes me is comments from some saying they would never play a driver because of the color or graphics on the sole. Iverson would be saying

We in here talkin' bout the sole, I mean listen we talkin' bout the sole, not performance, not performance we talkin' about the sole', not the clubs performance I go out there and die for, we talking' bout the SOLE, we talking' bout the sole, how silly is that man, what are we talking' bout the sole? The sole? We talking bout the sole? We not talking' bout performance, performance when it matters we talking' bout the sole.  


... Other than "It's ugly but I would play it if it performs" I would love to hear someone explain why it makes any difference to them. 

Sole design and graphics make absolutely no difference to me, when it comes to the driver. I also don’t care much about how the driver sits when soled, because I tend to hover the sole of my driver above 1/4” off of the ground at address or just before I start my backswing.

[hartrick11]

All this sole talk is funny. I don't really care about that at all and it seems to look the same from address as TSr which is what I do care about...

I didn't see any meaningful gains with TSr vs. my TSi3 that I tested for the forum back in 2020; in fact I haven't even been tempted by another offering for 3+ years until the TD max / Darkspeed and now the GT line...I think this summer/fall is the time for me to finally see some real gains and pull the trigger. I'll try to defer to the fitting results completely, but I am really feeling the itch now, and the GT is already the leader for me based on how awesome the TSi has been.

[cnosil]

1 hour ago, chisag said:

... Other than "It's ugly but I would play it if it performs" I would love to hear someone explain why it makes any difference to them. 

So, I believe the answer lies in non-forum golfers.   The people on golf forums are generally performance centric and buy what works best and in general seem willing to ignore the look...putters, iron offset, face angle at address are all exceptions       Non-Forum golfers typically play what the winner of the last PGA event or whomever is playing well is playing.   Or they walk into a store and pick what looks good to them.   How are drivers displayed in a store?  Sole up with no headcover so the decision to pick that driver up is made based on how the sole looks.   

Just my thoughts on why sole matters

 

[NM01]

On 7/3/2024 at 10:08 PM, cnosil said:

I was talking to Phillip at HQ yesterday and they got fit for the new line last week and were impressed.  Phillip didn't see a significant amount of distance gain but maybe a bit more consistency.  One of the other staff members apparently saw a 9 yard gain and he isn't one that is going to be playing equipment that doesn't fit well.   

Carry or total?

Did it come from launch, spin, ballspeed or a combo of them?

[cnosil]

30 minutes ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

Carry or total?

Did it come from launch, spin, ballspeed or a combo of them?

Carry and it was a 30 second conversation that didn't get into all of that but he did mention ball speed was higher.

[HikingMike]

1 hour ago, cnosil said:

So, I believe the answer lies in non-forum golfers.   The people on golf forums are generally performance centric and buy what works best and in general seem willing to ignore the look...putters, iron offset, face angle at address are all exceptions       Non-Forum golfers typically play what the winner of the last PGA event or whomever is playing well is playing.   Or they walk into a store and pick what looks good to them.   How are drivers displayed in a store?  Sole up with no headcover so the decision to pick that driver up is made based on how the sole looks.   

Just my thoughts on why sole matters

Non-forum golfers that maybe try the new thing and change clubs fairly often.

Then there is me, who doesn't change clubs very often, and I had my first ever 3 driver fittings at the beginning of the season where I hit new Callaways, TaylorMades, Ping, Cobra, and I ended up buying a 2017 used, more-beat-up-than-I-would-like driver because I hit it best and it reduced my miss the most.   I'll be honest, I didn't buy it immediately, but I realized I couldn't refuse the results, and after an ebay check I went back and got it.

3 hours ago, chisag said:

... Some do care and I have really never understood why. 1st you can't see the sole at address and 2nd for most players that want to protect the head and the shaft, the driver is usually under a head cover. Most importantly the ball and the scorecard don't care what the sole looks like. What really amazes me is comments from some saying they would never play a driver because of the color or graphics on the sole. Iverson would be saying

We in here talkin' bout the sole, I mean listen we talkin' bout the sole, not performance, not performance we talkin' about the sole', not the clubs performance I go out there and die for, we talking' bout the SOLE, we talking' bout the sole, how silly is that man, what are we talking' bout the sole? The sole? We talking bout the sole? We not talking' bout performance, performance when it matters we talking' bout the sole.  


... Other than "It's ugly but I would play it if it performs" I would love to hear someone explain why it makes any difference to them. 

I understand the sole looks can be a "damn that thing looks fantastic" kind of reaction, or the opposite. And I can relate to that a bit. But when you're really making a decision for your golf game and opening the wallet, it's down the list of priorities.

[chisag]

1 minute ago, HikingMike said:

I understand the sole looks can be a "damn that thing looks fantastic" kind of reaction, or the opposite. And I can relate to that a bit.

 

... I can honestly say I have never done that. It is the other side of the club that can elicit that kind of response from me. I love a clean crown with little to no distractions other than a subtle alignment aid and many of the modern heads like to show the tech at address like the AI Smoke and the king of distracting crowns, any recent Ping driver. The recent Titleist series and the Stealth 2 and especially the Qi10 look so good to my eye setting up to the ball. But even then, if the G430 sounded/felt better and out performed my Qi10 I would at least give it a try and see if I could ignore the Erector Set on the crown.  

[HikingMike]

5 minutes ago, chisag said:

 

... I can honestly say I have never done that. It is the other side of the club that can elicit that kind of response from me. I love a clean crown with little to no distractions other than a subtle alignment aid and many of the modern heads like to show the tech at address like the AI Smoke and the king of distracting crowns, any recent Ping driver. The recent Titleist series and the Stealth 2 and especially the Qi10 look so good to my eye setting up to the ball. But even then, if the G430 sounded/felt better and out performed my Qi10 I would at least give it a try and see if I could ignore the Erector Set on the crown.  

Turbulators, man! I jokingly play them up every chance I get, haha. I mean the word sounds funny in itself even. But they do make a mean club. And I’m sure they wouldn’t be there if there wasn’t a slight benefit. 

[chisag]

39 minutes ago, HikingMike said:

Turbulators, man! I jokingly play them up every chance I get, haha. I mean the word sounds funny in itself even. But they do make a mean club. And I’m sure they wouldn’t be there if there wasn’t a slight benefit. 

 

... I do think if Turbulators made a significant difference, every OEM would be using their version of them. Like the Speed Slot on the RBZ that most every OEM now uses to some degree with their drivers and woods. Turbulators create "Up to 1 mph increase in clubbed speed at 100 MPH" which means exactly what you posited "a slight benefit" but a measurable benefit none the less. The issue is, I think most will trade "up to 1 mph" that may or may not produce 1 or 2 more yards, for a club that doesn't look like it came from the Peter Parker Collection. Otoh it sets Ping apart so their fans or those that lean toward tech may view it as a desirable attribute. That said, I have no doubt Ping has done their due diligence with focus groups and player testing so the brain trust obviously feel like parking lines on their drivers and fairway woods are the way to go:



 

[KC Golf]

7 minutes ago, chisag said:

 

... I do think if Turbulators made a significant difference, every OEM would be using their version of them. Like the Speed Slot on the RBZ that most every OEM now uses to some degree with their drivers and woods. Turbulators create "Up to 1 mph increase in clubbed speed at 100 MPH" which means exactly what you posited "a slight benefit" but a measurable benefit none the less. The issue is, I think most will trade "up to 1 mph" that may or may not produce 1 or 2 more yards, for a club that doesn't look like it came from the Peter Parker Collection. Otoh it sets Ping apart so their fans or those that lean toward tech may view it as a desirable attribute. That said, I have no doubt Ping has done their due diligence with focus groups and player testing so the brain trust obviously feel like parking lines on their drivers and fairway woods are the way to go:



 

I have always wondered if the “Turbolators” create additional wind noise.

I agree with you I hate the look. I played yesterday with someone using the old Ping driver which has a high ping noise on contact which is just brutal too. Not a Ping fan if you haven’t guessed.

I think I need 7-10 extra yards before I even try it out on the range. And that’s saying a lot since I need every yard off the tee I can get!

[HikingMike]

1 hour ago, chisag said:

... I do think if Turbulators made a significant difference, every OEM would be using their version of them. Like the Speed Slot on the RBZ that most every OEM now uses to some degree with their drivers and woods. Turbulators create "Up to 1 mph increase in clubbed speed at 100 MPH" which means exactly what you posited "a slight benefit" but a measurable benefit none the less. The issue is, I think most will trade "up to 1 mph" that may or may not produce 1 or 2 more yards, for a club that doesn't look like it came from the Peter Parker Collection. Otoh it sets Ping apart so their fans or those that lean toward tech may view it as a desirable attribute. That said, I have no doubt Ping has done their due diligence with focus groups and player testing so the brain trust obviously feel like parking lines on their drivers and fairway woods are the way to go:



 

LOL
 

That depends how well the patents protect them I guess, how specific/generalized it is. Ping also bought a patent from Nike for something in the same vein. 

Sorry Titleist fans, this thread is now about turbulators, haha  

1 hour ago, KC Golf said:

I played yesterday with someone using the old Ping driver which has a high ping noise on contact which is just brutal too. Not a Ping fan if you haven’t guessed.

Is that the G425? Never hit it but I have heard it is really a fantastic head, but also the sound is a bit much for people. 

[chisag]

19 minutes ago, HikingMike said:

That depends how well the patents protect them I guess, how specific/generalized it is. Ping also bought a patent from Nike for something in the same vein. 

Sorry Titleist fans, this thread is now about turbulators, haha  

 

... Cobra tried their version of turbulators with the F9 "Speedback" and gave up on the idea very quickly. Titleist keeps it clean.

 

 

[KC Golf]

3 hours ago, HikingMike said:

LOL
 

That depends how well the patents protect them I guess, how specific/generalized it is. Ping also bought a patent from Nike for something in the same vein. 

Sorry Titleist fans, this thread is now about turbulators, haha  

Is that the G425? Never hit it but I have heard it is really a fantastic head, but also the sound is a bit much for people. 

Yes, I think it was a G425, but I didn’t ask… it was not a sound that I liked, but I also didn’t want to be rude and ask that question then have to explain why…

[GolferXY]

3 hours ago, HikingMike said:

Is that the G425?

Sounds ( pardon the expression) like an older model like the Ping 400 which was nearly as loud as a church bell. The PI g G30 was the loudest driver I ever heard, took it to a covered range and got dirty looks with every swing. Actually got rid of it for that reason and started my Titleist period with the TSI, then TSR. Beuatiful clubs, love Titleist's minimalist approach. Not a big fan of the newest iteration looks wise, and now with a Qi10LS I'm definitely in the Taylormade camp.

[Vertical]

I played the TSi3 and it was too fade biased for me. However, I now play the TSR2 and can say it’s the best driver I’ve ever hit. Long and forgiving. Great looks, feel and sound. I also have a Ping G425 Max. Nice driver with good forgiveness, but the TSR2 is much longer. Gonna be hard for the GTs to best the TSRs.

[fixyurdivot]

They look much like so many drivers on the market. I've personally become a fan of matte finish which has less glare and does not show water spots. While I would not let that determine a decision, it would be a tie breaker.

[G-Ram]

Like many others, while the sole "can" draw me towards one driver over another, I'm after the business end of it, at the end of the day. Had a TSR3, and while it felt so balanced and easy to swing, at the end of the day, I spun it like crazy. 
Have a fitting at the Titleist Canada event in a few days, so will be able to speak more intelligently about the looks/feel/performance in a couple days, but looks-wise, I'm sold. 
really liking the move to the front for the weights of the GT3, hoping that brings some spin off the head. 
Hoping like crazy I get one as a door prize.