Did TaylorMade miss an opportunity with the retro "BRNR" driver?

[RetiredBoomer]

They should have marketed it [the compact driver] with cosmetically matching fairways similar to the Callaway UW.

Maybe an 18° and a 22°, both at 42" long, with the wide loft gap creating the distance gap.

They could have also used the BRNR brand to fill the void for a wide gapped iron set.....

25º 5-iron to 50º PW in 5° increments.  It would be marketed heavily to seniors, juniors, and women, 

but if it were cosmetically attractive enough, it would have some general appeal as well.

A wide gapped iron set is ideal for people who like a lot of utility clubs in the bag--driving irons, chippers, specialty sand clubs, etc.
It lets you bag an extra one while staying within the 14-club limit.

 

[NM01]

Nope. The mini driver is a niche market and they have been doing more retro homage in the mini driver market.

They already have their iron lines pretty well set and the GI/SGI line are tied to their main driver, wood and hybrid releases.

Their players irons are well set in the market and if doesn’t make sense to fit another line into the mix, it usually causes more confusion than it does to help. 
 

Also more SKUs aren’t always good for business

[RetiredBoomer]

To me, many manufacturers have TOO many redundant models and too few interesting new concepts.

Low handicap players will always be skeptical of radical new ideas, and that's perfectly understandable.

However, most players are not low handicap players.

I would think that the "UW-type" fairway wood is an ideal match for the mini-driver,

not to those who see the mini-driver as an extra utility club or 3-wood replacement, but to those who see it as an easier to hit driver.  Low handicap players won't relate to that, but others might.

[NM01]

15 minutes ago, RetiredBoomer said:

To me, many manufacturers have TOO many redundant models and too few interesting new concepts.

Point me to an overall model within any oem.

16 minutes ago, RetiredBoomer said:

Low handicap players will always be skeptical of radical new ideas, and that's perfectly understandable.

Based on my experience it’s actually mid to high handicaps that are skeptical of new ideas. It’s why many are surprised to what they are fit to when they go to a good fitter.

I know several blow handicaps that are playing full hybrid sets like Cleveland offers, gi clubs, players distance several that have sgi clubs in their long irons with gi in the rest of their bag.

I know 2 that are 115+ swing speed that because of their swing use a 12° driver.

19 minutes ago, RetiredBoomer said:

not to those who see the mini-driver as an extra utility club or 3-wood replacement, but to those who see it as an easier to hit driver.  Low handicap players won't relate to that, but others might.

You have a bad misperception about low handicaps. Low handicaps are going to find clubs that will help them play the game easier. It’s why the ap2 was the #1 iron on tour and why t100s are now the number one. Low handicaps will find the best club for them. Low handicaps have bags that are setup with clubs that serve a purpose. 

Its the golfers of all levels who are more concerned about looks that will steer away from certain types of clibs
 

[cnosil]

36 minutes ago, RetiredBoomer said:

They should have marketed it [the compact driver] with cosmetically matching fairways similar to the Callaway UW.

Maybe an 18° and a 22°, both at 42" long, with the wide loft gap creating the distance gap.

25º 5-iron to 50º PW in 5° increments.  It would be marketed heavily to seniors, juniors, and women, 

 

19 minutes ago, RetiredBoomer said:

To me, many manufacturers have TOO many redundant models and too few interesting new concepts.

Low handicap players will always be skeptical of radical new ideas, and that's perfectly understandable.

However, most players are not low handicap players.

I would think that the "UW-type" fairway wood is an ideal match for the mini-driver,

not to those who see the mini-driver as an extra utility club or 3-wood replacement, but to those who see it as an easier to hit driver.  Low handicap players won't relate to that, but others might.

You have lots of personal opinions on how clubs should be designed; which according to your past posts seems to be based on the old ways clubs were packaged….complete sets, matching wood sets, lofts for specific iron numbers,  etc.  

you have said in previous posts you miss the club maker that customizes the lofts and grinds for a set specifically for the player   That was necessary due to production processes that couldn’t produce the different varieties of clubs that are designed to fit a wide variety of golfers without significant modifications.   

you want clubs with 5* of loft for some reason that I honestly don’t understand. What performance benefit does that produce and how does it benefit a senior golfer…I’m approaching senior golfer age so what is it going to do for me?  In my testing of golf clubs I find clubs with the same lofts perform differently.    TM; for example, has numerous clubs that start with a 25ish* 5 iron and progress at 4* and the 5* increments.  Why isn’t that acceptable?  

My understanding was that mini drivers were first introduced for low handicap players to be able to work a driver type club in the opposite direction from their normal driver ball flight.   

clubs are simply tools that help a golfer complete a task.   Tools are developed to make a job easier.  I can put on a roof with a framing hammer but I would be more efficient with a roofing hammer or better yet a pneumatic roofing nail gun.   
 

you say low handicappers are skeptical of new ideas, but you seem just as skeptical of how OEMs are advancing club design and how players should assemble a bag. 

[Headhammer]

35 minutes ago, cnosil said:

My understanding was that mini drivers were first introduced for low handicap players to be able to work a driver type club in the opposite direction from their normal driver ball flight.   

 

I thought they were designed for yahoos like me that can't hit a driver? The 300 from TM seemed to be a pretty good seller, and still commands a high second hand price. I've not seen that the BRNR had the same success, but maybe I just don't run in the same circles as people playing them.

[Donn lost in San Diego]

Between the 7 or 8 biggest club makers, I doubt there are missed opportunities.  Bettinardi now offering two irons?  I think Callaway  has 7 drivers or is it 9 now?  How many readers here have bot an Argolf or Glass Putter putter? 

[NM01]

19 minutes ago, Donn lost in San Diego said:

Between the 7 or 8 biggest club makers, I doubt there are missed opportunities.  Bettinardi now offering two irons?  I think Callaway  has 7 drivers or is it 9 now?  How many readers here have bot an Argolf or Glass Putter putter? 

So Callaway has two year release cycles on their clubs. It used to be an adjustable driver one year and a molded one the next. They got away from that with the mavrik iirc.

They still have different designs between their releases. The ai smoke wasn’t a direct replacement for the paradym. The paradym will have its replacement next year and the ai smoke the year after.

It can be a bit confusing to some when they look and go man look at these drivers which one to buy. It’s one of the main issues I have with Callaway equipment. But they have multiple head types in a release. So yes they may have a large number and yes in some cases it could be overlap but it’s their business model for two year release cycles. 

[cnosil]

26 minutes ago, Headhammer said:

 

I thought they were designed for yahoos like me that can't hit a driver? The 300 from TM seemed to be a pretty good seller, and still commands a high second hand price. I've not seen that the BRNR had the same success, but maybe I just don't run in the same circles as people playing them.

That may be how people are using them.  I view it as the club that Michelson kind of brought into popularity in 2013 when he was looking for a driver with more workability 

[RetiredBoomer]

21 hours ago, cnosil said:

 

You have lots of personal opinions on how clubs should be designed; which according to your past posts seems to be based on the old ways clubs were packaged….complete sets, matching wood sets, lofts for specific iron numbers,  etc.  

you have said in previous posts you miss the club maker that customizes the lofts and grinds for a set specifically for the player   That was necessary due to production processes that couldn’t produce the different varieties of clubs that are designed to fit a wide variety of golfers without significant modifications.   

you want clubs with 5* of loft for some reason that I honestly don’t understand. What performance benefit does that produce and how does it benefit a senior golfer…I’m approaching senior golfer age so what is it going to do for me?  In my testing of golf clubs I find clubs with the same lofts perform differently.    TM; for example, has numerous clubs that start with a 25ish* 5 iron and progress at 4* and the 5* increments.  Why isn’t that acceptable?  

My understanding was that mini drivers were first introduced for low handicap players to be able to work a driver type club in the opposite direction from their normal driver ball flight.   

clubs are simply tools that help a golfer complete a task.   Tools are developed to make a job easier.  I can put on a roof with a framing hammer but I would be more efficient with a roofing hammer or better yet a pneumatic roofing nail gun.   
 

you say low handicappers are skeptical of new ideas, but you seem just as skeptical of how OEMs are advancing club design and how players should assemble a bag. 

Actually, I'm just sharing alternate ideas, and for some reason, that seems to offend people.

The last thing I mean to do is offend anyone,
so I won't be offended if you choose to simply ignore my posts.

I configure my own bag in a way that lets me have the most fun, but I didn't realize that talking about it would upset people as much as it does.  

[NM01]

20 hours ago, Headhammer said:

 

I thought they were designed for yahoos like me that can't hit a driver? The 300 from TM seemed to be a pretty good seller, and still commands a high second hand price. I've not seen that the BRNR had the same success, but maybe I just don't run in the same circles as people playing them.

It all really varies. They are great options for those who struggle because of shorter length of the club and usually more loft. A lot of golfers won’t by a 12° driver, but a 11.5-13° mini driver attracts some golfers who can’t hit a regular driver 

It’s a great option for holes where driver is too much club and brings trouble into play. I know several who use one for later in the round when fatigue sets in it’s something easier to swing than driver. My old playing partner still has the Callaway one from 2015/16

[RetiredBoomer]

4 minutes ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

It all really varies. They are great options for those who struggle because of shorter length of the club and usually more loft. A lot of golfers won’t by a 12° driver, but a 11.5-13° mini driver attracts some golfers who can’t hit a regular driver 

It’s a great option for holes where driver is too much club and brings trouble into play. I know several who use one for later in the round when fatigue sets in it’s something easier to swing than driver. My old playing partner still has the Callaway one from 2015/16

What I like about high loft drivers is that you can hit them with a regular golf shot instead of grooving a driver swing hitting up on a high teed ball very forward in the stance.  That may not be the reason why they're offered, but it is a reason why some people choose them. 

Also, older seniors have played a lot of golf with 43 or 43½" drivers, because pre-titanium and carbon composite,
that's how long drivers used to be...  even metal ones like the original TMs.

Thirdly, if you're playing golf at 6000 yards, 225 yard drives onto the fairway will keep you golden all day long.

 

[NM01]

38 minutes ago, RetiredBoomer said:

What I like about high loft drivers is that you can hit them with a regular golf shot instead of grooving a driver swing hitting up on a high teed ball very forward in the stance.  That may not be the reason why they're offered, but it is a reason why some people choose them. 

 

Honestly don’t understand this comment at all. A higher lofted driver and a lower lofted driver don’t require a different swing. A 9°, 10° or even a 12° driver with the same length are played from the same ball position in setup  and the same swing.

Even if they have different length shafts. All of them can even be played with a negative aoa.

It’s definitely not why they are offered. They are designed and offered to deal with launch and spin needs of golfers. Theres another forum where a low digit high swing speed member plays 11.5° or more on driver because with his golf swing he needs more launch and more spin.

38 minutes ago, RetiredBoomer said:

Also, older seniors have played a lot of golf with 43 or 43½" drivers, because pre-titanium and carbon composite,
that's how long drivers used to be...  even metal ones like the original TMs.

Not just seniors but anyone that’s played golf pre early 2000s. 
 

 

[cnosil]

1 hour ago, RetiredBoomer said:

Actually, I'm just sharing alternate ideas, and for some reason, that seems to offend people.

The last thing I mean to do is offend anyone,
so I won't be offended if you choose to simply ignore my posts.

I configure my own bag in a way that lets me have the most fun, but I didn't realize that talking about it would upset people as much as it does.  

They don’t offend or upset me; just commenting on your alternate ideas to understand the value.   

we all configure the bag the way we want.   Yet you say things like:

23 hours ago, RetiredBoomer said:

25º 5-iron to 50º PW in 5° increments.  It would be marketed heavily to seniors, juniors, and women, 

A wide gapped iron set is ideal for people who like a lot of utility clubs in the bag--driving irons, chippers, specialty sand clubs, etc.

What is the basis and where is the data that shows these ideas would be better?   How does having matching woods or 5* loft increments equate to fun?   

[RetiredBoomer]

1 minute ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

Honestly don’t understand this comment at all. A higher lofted driver and a lower lofted driver don’t require a different swing. A 9°, 10° or even a 12° driver with the same length are played from the same ball position in setup  and the same swing.

Even if they have different length shafts. All of them can even be played with a negative aoa.

It’s definitely not why they are offered. They are designed and offered to deal with launch and spin needs of golfers. Theres another forum where a low digit high swing speed member plays 11.5° or more on driver because with his golf swing he needs more launch and more spin.

 

 

It's really possible to hit down on a 9º driver?  

I didn't know that.  I'm not disagreeing because I'm no expert on the subject,
but it seems counter-intuitive.  

Obviously, higher loft pairs well with lower swing speed.  That's just common sense. A slower swing speed won't
hit a 9° driver to the apex of its intended trajectory. Maybe with a very soft tip shaft, but then there's the torque problem creeping in.

I could be wrong, but to me, loft also helps people like myself who like to hit a little bit down on the driver.
Maybe not in theory, but in practice, it works for me.

 

[RetiredBoomer]

4 minutes ago, cnosil said:

How does having 5* loft increments equate to fun?   

 

First, slower swing speeds gap better with wider increments.

Beyond that, though, it's simple math.

Most people have two shot specific utility clubs--driver and putter 

Suppose, however, that you like to hit lofted woods into greens but prefer a driving iron on tight driving holes.?
That's one extra utility.

Suppose you have trouble with greenside bunkers but are helped by a specialty sand iron which is useless from a tight turf lie? That's two extra utility clubs.

Suppose you like to use a chipper?  That's three extra utility clubs.
With driver and putter, however, that's FIVE utility clubs.

Now you have room for only nine clubs for your entire normal fairway shot range.
See where the wider gaps come into play?

Serious players will scoff at a bag full of utility clubs, but some average recreational twenty handicappers who don't get to practice much actually benefit from them.

I'm thinking of them, but even being a little bit better than that, I like specialty clubs too.

Imagining equipment ideas is almost a separate interest from actually playing,
just as imagining course design is.

 

[NM01]

25 minutes ago, RetiredBoomer said:

It's really possible to hit down on a 9º driver?  

I didn't know that.  I'm not disagreeing because I'm no expert on the subject,
but it seems counter-intuitive.  

Obviously, higher loft pairs well with lower swing speed.  That's just common sense. A slower swing speed won't
hit a 9° driver to the apex of its intended trajectory. Maybe with a very soft tip shaft, but then there's the torque problem creeping in.

I could be wrong, but to me, loft also helps people like myself who like to hit a little bit down on the driver.
Maybe not in theory, but in practice, it works for me.

 

Yes it’s very possible to hit down on a 9° driver. It happens every day on the course and range all over the places a bad over the top swing will do that. It’s also very possible to do it for good golfers/golf swings to control the ball. Many pros hit down with their driver by 1-2°. They do it for control of the ball.

its not obvious that higher lift pairs with slower swings. Thats an old outdated thought process. The persons swing and how it affects launch, spin, etc needs to be taken into account. Slower golfers who add dynamic loft and create a lot of spin that way or the slow golfer who is over the top and a big out to in path that creates a lot of spin may need a lower lores driver to help reduce the spin. This is why when people ask for advice and give swing speed or handicap as part of the data it’s noted they aren’t part of the criteria used when determining a club loft, type or shaft. The swing mechanics are far more important 

Not to mention in my post I talked about a guy who has lots of speed using a 11.5° or higher loft.

torque is mainly a feel thing and for launch and spin a softer tip may or may not help. It’s about how the feel and the balance of the shaft and head work with the golfers swing. Those with later releases usually see the difference in the stiffness profile compared to those with early releases

 

[NM01]

32 minutes ago, RetiredBoomer said:

First, slower swing speeds gap better with wider increments.

Beyond that, though, it's simple math.

Not necessary. There are no hard and fast rules when it comes to what works or not. Two golfers with ten same swing speed yet differently club deliveries are going to have two different results.

This way of thinking has been proven wrong with actual measured data thanks to launch monitors and 3d 

[RetiredBoomer]

3 minutes ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

Yes it’s very possible to hit down on a 9° driver. It happens every day on the course and range all over the places a bad over the top swing will do that. It’s also very possible to do it for good golfers/golf swings to control the ball. Many pros hit down with their driver by 1-2°. They do it for control of the ball.

its not obvious that higher lift pairs with slower swings. Thats an old outdated thought process. The persons swing and how it affects launch, spin, etc needs to be taken into account. Slower golfers who add dynamic loft and create a lot of spin that way or the slow golfer who is over the top and a big out to in path that creates a lot of spin may need a lower lores driver to help reduce the spin. This is why when people ask for advice and give swing speed or handicap as part of the data it’s noted they aren’t part of the criteria used when determining a club loft, type or shaft. The swing mechanics are far more important 

Not to mention in my post I talked about a guy who has lots of speed using a 11.5° or higher loft.

torque is mainly a feel thing and for launch and spin a softer tip may or may not help. It’s about how the feel and the balance of the shaft and head work with the golfers swing. Those with later releases usually see the difference in the stiffness profile compared to those with early releases

 

You are very familiar with the science, Ricky.   I find the Trackman generation really takes this stuff seriously, and good for you that you do so.  I'm certainly not critical of it.

My guys talk more about the physical attributes of the young lady on the beverage cart,
even if they have older granddaughters.  Launch angles for some.  Enjoying the fresh air for others.
I guess that's how the game works.

My fascination with equipment ideas is almost separate from playing the game for me.
I just imagine things that I think I'd like, but not while I'm playing.
Playing, it's laughs with the guys and the beverage cart girl.

 

[cnosil]

11 minutes ago, RetiredBoomer said:

 

First, slower swing speeds gap better with wider increments.

Beyond that, though, it's simple math.

Most people have two shot specific utility clubs--driver and putter 

Suppose, however, that you like to hit lofted woods into greens but prefer a driving iron on tight driving holes.?
That's one extra utility.

Suppose you have trouble with greenside bunkers but are helped by a specialty sand iron which is useless from a tight turf lie? That's two extra utility clubs.

Suppose you like to use a chipper?  That's three extra utility clubs.
With driver and putter, however, that's FIVE utility clubs.

Now you have room for only nine clubs for your entire normal fairway shot range.
See where the wider gaps come into play?

Serious players will scoff at a bag full of utility clubs, but some average recreational twenty handicappers who don't get to practice much actually benefit from them.

I'm thinking of them, but even being a little bit better than that, I like specialty clubs too.

Imagining equipment ideas is almost a separate interest from actually playing,
just as imagining course design is.

 

Totally agree that slower swing speed players can be successful with fewer clubs in the bag.  I can’t definitively say 5* gaps; maybe it should be more like 8 and they should just skip every other club like the old starter sets.  Everyone is different which is why fitting and gapping sessions are important.  
 

What you discuss with utility clubs also applies to better player and players with faster swing speeds.  We see questions on the forum all the time about filling holes in the bag.  The faster you swing the more short distances your wedges need to cover or bigger gaps occur between other clubs
 

Basically there is no single or simple answer and all players need to make decisions about the makeup of their bags.   The scenarios you describe are being covered by the OEMs since they make a variety of utility clubs; as you described, and other clubs are adjustable to fill gaps in the set.  

[NM01]

5 minutes ago, RetiredBoomer said:

You are very familiar with the science, Ricky.   I find the Trackman generation really takes this stuff seriously, and good for you that you do so.  I'm certainly not critical of it.

My guys talk more about the physical attributes of the young lady on the beverage cart,
even if they have older granddaughters.  Launch angles for some.  Enjoying the fresh air for others.
I guess that's how the game works.

My fascination with equipment ideas is almost separate from playing the game for me.
I just imagine things that I think I'd like, but not while I'm playing.
Playing, it's laughs with the guys and the beverage cart girl.

 

I spent 6 years doing fittings, I’ve been around the equipment side of things and forums for a little over a decade. 
 

Part of my nature but also the jobs I have had and have is based on analyzing things, problem solving various types of issues, and coaching athletes. Knowing the ins and outs goes a long way to success