Jump to content
TESTERS WANTED! ×

Head to Head Testing - We Need Your Help


Tony Covey MGS

Recommended Posts

  • SPY VIP

Given the largely positive response to our head to head fairway test, GolfSpy X and I have been plotting the next big head to head adventure.

 

The logical choice this time around would seem to be drivers (it's what you guys have asked for), and that's certainly where we're looking.

 

We've compiled an initial list of companies we're considering for inclusion. We're probably going to whittle it down a bit, but the goal is to be more inclusive and a little more robust in how we test.

 

We've put a tremendous amount of thought into specifications, and how we're going to handle things like Pro/Tour models. While nothing will satisfy every reader, we're comfortable with the choices we've made.

 

The last remaining internal debate we're having internally is how to handle what we're calling the "shaft problem".

 

We don't think it's realistic to do an in-person fitting for each of our testers (not when we anticipate including 12-20 drivers in the test).

 

From our perspective that leaves us with 3 potentially viable options. We're very aware that each scenario has its own caveats (some more than others). Our goal is to create as much of an apples to apples comparison as we possibly can while (hopefully) avoiding a situation where one of our testers is very clearly poorly fit for a given club.

 

We'd be curious to know which of the options below would be the most appealing to each of you, and if you had any additional thoughts on what the best solution to the shaft problem might be.

 

1. Test with stock shafts across the board.

 

2. Do what we did with the fairway wood review; give each OEM an opportunity to do a best guess fitting based on previous collected launch data.

 

3. Choose a shaft that generally works well for a given tester and test all drivers with that shaft (in all likelihood a different shaft for each of our testers).

 

What do you guys think?

MyGolfSpy is only major golf site that refuses advertising from large golf companies. With your support we can keep it that way. Donate Today
 


Subscribe to the MyGolfSpy Newsletter

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 73
  • Created
  • Last Reply

#2 is your best option of those choices IMO. The main reason is you have to stay within what is offered by the OEM to really be applicable to a vast majority of golfers.

 

Would the OEMs be willing to send multiple shafts with one head for some adjustable drivers? Then testers can pick and choose which is best.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Obviously this is a tough dilemma .. I'd be fine with either 1 or 3, 1 providing the best example for off the shelf clubs (which, lets face it, constitutes the majority of golfers), or 3 in which case the shaft could be an upgrade but would be held constant thus emphasizing each driver head.

 

^Just my thoughts...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • SPY VIP

#2 is your best option of those choices IMO. The main reason is you have to stay within what is offered by the OEM to really be applicable to a vast majority of golfers.

 

Would the OEMs be willing to send multiple shafts with one head for some adjustable drivers? Then testers can pick and choose which is best.

 

Thanks for presenting the first good opportunity to discuss one of the caveats.

 

The biggest issue (in my mind anyway) with option 2 is that without imposing limits, it gives a further fitting advantage to the guys with adjustable drivers. They could theoretically send us 1 head and half a dozen shafts to try...even per tester. The glued hosel guys would be looking at 4 or 5 complete drivers per golfer to cover the same range. It's not really feasible. If we capped it at 2, maybe, but even that would stretch the limits of what the smaller companies could handle.

MyGolfSpy is only major golf site that refuses advertising from large golf companies. With your support we can keep it that way. Donate Today
 


Subscribe to the MyGolfSpy Newsletter

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for presenting the first good opportunity to discuss one of the caveats.

 

The biggest issue (in my mind anyway) with option 2 is that without imposing limits, it gives a further fitting advantage to the guys with adjustable drivers. They could theoretically send us 1 head and half a dozen shafts to try...even per tester. The glued hosel guys would be looking at 4 or 5 complete drivers per golfer to cover the same range. It's not really feasible. If we capped it at 2, maybe, but even that would stretch the limits of what the smaller companies could handle.

 

Maybe only test adjustable drivers? :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • SPY VIP

Obviously this is a tough dilemma .. I'd be fine with either 1 or 3, 1 providing the best example for off the shelf clubs (which, lets face it, constitutes the majority of golfers), or 3 in which case the shaft could be an upgrade but would be held constant thus emphasizing each driver head.

 

^Just my thoughts...

 

Yeah... No scenario short of having every company custom fit each of our testers comes close to touching perfect.

 

There are a few OEMs that we've discussed our testing with in the past, and we bounce ideas off some of them from time to time. I've basically sent the contents of my original post here to a few of those companies to see what their preferences will be. Those guys deal with these questions day in and day out, and quite frankly; if somehow we receive a consensus opinion from those guys, that's almost certainly what we'll go with.

MyGolfSpy is only major golf site that refuses advertising from large golf companies. With your support we can keep it that way. Donate Today
 


Subscribe to the MyGolfSpy Newsletter

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Without a doubt, Option #3. Each individual tester really needs to use the same shaft for every head. There is no need to introduce another variable in your testing. Otherwise, you will always be left questioning "was it the shaft......or the head?"

MENTOR, L4 COACH & TRAINER  FIRST TEE GREATER HOUSTON
HDCP: 8.3  (GHIN: 3143312)
In my bag, April 2023
:titelist-small: TS3 Driver & 4 Wood Hzrdous Smoke Shaft (Stiff Flex)
:titelist-small: TS2 Hybrids  Mitsubishi Tensei Shaft (Stiff Flex)
:mizuno-small:  MP-59 5-PW; KBS Tour (Regular Flex)
:titelist-small: SM8 Wedges

EVNROLL ER2  Putter
SRIXON Z-STAR DIAMOND BALL
Sun Mountain Cart Bag
:Clicgear: 4.0 Push Cart (I'm walking 9 outta 10 rounds!!)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • SPY VIP

Maybe only test adjustable drivers? :)

 

Ha...floated that briefly too, but there are too many good ones out there that still rely on glue and glue alone. You guys have told us you want smaller companies involved...going 100% adjustable would eliminate most of them.

MyGolfSpy is only major golf site that refuses advertising from large golf companies. With your support we can keep it that way. Donate Today
 


Subscribe to the MyGolfSpy Newsletter

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Without a doubt, Option #3. Each individual tester really needs to use the same shaft for every head. There is no need to introduce another variable in your testing. Otherwise, you will always be left questioning "was it the shaft......or the head?"

 

 

 

Good Point. #3 is starting to win me over.

 

Would you install the shafts T? or would the OEM's/smaller companies do it... (just wondering about access)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • SPY VIP

Good Point. #3 is starting to win me over.

 

Would you install the shafts T? or would the OEM's/smaller companies do it... (just wondering about access)

 

We'd ask the OEMs to provide the shafts (although we'd probably have a backup plan if we needed one). That's certainly one of the hurdles.

 

One of the caveats with #3 is that when it comes to fitting; changing one variable changes all the others. Basically, while a shaft may have certain characteristics, those characteristics could be amplified in one head, and muted in another.

 

That said...at this point, I think it's my favorite option right now. It gets us closer to a true apples to apples.

MyGolfSpy is only major golf site that refuses advertising from large golf companies. With your support we can keep it that way. Donate Today
 


Subscribe to the MyGolfSpy Newsletter

Link to comment
Share on other sites

WD has a good point about number 2 in that sticking with the OEM options are what most guys will be getting.

 

However, if the testers have current drivers with shafts they know work for them, having each tester set up with the same lofts and shafts they currently use would give them a better comparison. If a tester uses different shafts, how much of the differences between clubs is the head and how much is the shaft? No way to know. No. 3 will give solid results about the drivers by taking the shaft variables out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a tough one as I see merit in each one. But for a true comparison of how a driver head performs I think each tester needs to use the same shaft (that is fit for them) in every head. That said I like option 3 the best.

 

The only question I really have is who provides the shafts then? Will the testers get fit in a specific driver and then use that shaft for all of them? Do they need to bring their own favorite shaft? Aside from TMaG it seems like you would then be swapping that shaft 12-20 times for each tester. Do you really want to reshaft a club that many times, and each tester will only be able to test one club per day then if you have to wait for the glue to dry every time.

 

Maybe I'm missing something, but it seems like if Tester A uses the same shaft in each driver it is going to add A LOT of club work for you guys. Don't get me wrong, I think that is the way to go, but do you want to start down that road?

Driver: :taylormade-small: SLDR w/ Fujikura Ventus Black

3w: :taylormade-small:'16 M2 hl w/ Diamana D+ 82

5w: :cleveland-small: Launcher HB w/ HZRDUS Yellow

Hybrid: :cleveland-small: 22 deg. Launcher HB w/ HZRDUS Black

Irons: :cleveland-small: 5i - gap Launcher CBX w/ Nippon Modus 3 125

Wedges: :cleveland-small: 54 CBX & 58 Zipcore w/ Nippon Modus 3 125

Putter: :odyssey-small: Red 7s

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • SPY VIP

I think we'd want to stear clear of using the exact same shaft. I think same make/model will be close enough.

 

When you consider things like changing tips and hosel bore depths it's impossible to reuse the same shaft in every head, especially if one of our goals is to test all drivers at the same length.

 

A shaft cut to play 45.5" in a Callaway might only play to 44.25" in another driver.

 

At some point practicality dictates we call it close enough.

MyGolfSpy is only major golf site that refuses advertising from large golf companies. With your support we can keep it that way. Donate Today
 


Subscribe to the MyGolfSpy Newsletter

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1, because most golfers don't care about fitting and aren't you trying to appeal to most golfers, or the small small population that does care and has hit all these drivers themselves anyway?

What's In The Bag:

 

Adams 9064LS

Ben Hogan Edge CFT Ti

Ben Hogan Apex Edge 4-PW

TaylorMade ATV 50* 54*

Mizuno Bettinardi BC3 Tour Issue

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It has to be option 2 for consistency from what we as consumers would purchase from an OEM. The reality is that most people purchase a driver with the OEM supplied shaft with flex as the only variable and maybe have the shaft trimmed afterwards to suit there individual requirements.

 

Unless of course you are going to include the new KRANK Element in your test, who give you 3 shafts to choose from and will supply a custom fit for length and flex.

 

I would be very interested (even though I have already ordered mine) to see the KRANK alongside all the others.

 

AJ

 

P.S. Yes I am a fan of KRANK products!!

WITB

Driver: Ping G25

FW: TM RBZ

Irons: Miura 57 Series w/KBS C-Taper

Wedges: Vokey SM4 52-08,56-12,60-04

Putter: Watch This Space

Ball: SRixon Z Star

Other: Tourstriker 7i

 

"Go Hard or Go Home"

 

"Do or Do Not. There is NO "TRY"

 

"Be normal, and the crowd will accept you. Be deranged, and they will make you their leader"

 

"I don't fail. I succeed at finding what doesn't work"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • SPY VIP

#1 is certainly simple, and sadly does represent how most golfers buy clubs.

 

The caveats here are that some of the companies we're considering including don't offer 'stock' shafts.

 

We're also big advocates for custom fitting. To an extent, #1 feels like we'd be turning our back on that.

 

When we've discussed this in the past; when it comes to head to head, most OEMs we've spoken with state a preference for custom.

 

Finally, when it comes to stock, it's less apples to apples and more apples to monkeys. You can find both in trees, but after that there's not much in the way of commonality.

MyGolfSpy is only major golf site that refuses advertising from large golf companies. With your support we can keep it that way. Donate Today
 


Subscribe to the MyGolfSpy Newsletter

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • SPY VIP

It has to be option 2 for consistency from what we as consumers would purchase from an OEM. The reality is that most people purchase a driver with the OEM supplied shaft with flex as the only variable and maybe have the shaft trimmed afterwards to suit there individual requirements.

 

Unless of course you are going to include the new KRANK Element in your test, who give you 3 shafts to choose from and will supply a custom fit for length and flex.

 

I would be very interested (even though I have already ordered mine) to see the KRANK alongside all the others.

 

AJ

 

P.S. Yes I am a fan of KRANK products!!

 

Not a single product request has been sent, but it's highly probable the new Krank Element will be part of the test.

MyGolfSpy is only major golf site that refuses advertising from large golf companies. With your support we can keep it that way. Donate Today
 


Subscribe to the MyGolfSpy Newsletter

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At this point don't you know the testers well enough to fit them with equipment from each OEM T?

 

I'd say have the adjustables tuned to the way you'd fit them and have the clubs sent with the appropriate shafts that you'd fit them for - not perfect but probably a better than average fit and at least a somewhat reasonable apples to apples.

 

Number 1 works if you generalize - that would be very interesting because that's how most people purchase their drivers - Let the guys tell you what they want - S shaft, 45.5 inches and order that for that them in each model.

 

I like either method or perhaps more interestingly both - get two drivers of each brand for each golfer - their choice and your recommendation -

 

That might kill two birds with one stone so to speak.

Taylor Made Stealth 2 10.5 Diamana S plus 60  Aldila  R flex   - 42.25 inches 

SMT 4 wood bassara R flex, four wood head, 3 wood shaft

Ping G410 7, 9 wood  Alta 65 R flex

Srixon ZX5 MK II  5-GW - UST recoil Dart 65 R flex

India 52,56 (60 pending)  UST recoil 75's R flex  

Evon roll ER 5 32 inches

It's our offseason so auditioning candidates - looking for that right mix of low spin long, more spin around the greens - TBD   

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I am anything but an expert, I would think that the answer falls far more towards the question of 'who is the target audience'?

 

Is the target of the head to head the majority of golf who is playing a nominally off the shelf option of head with OEM chosen shafts in the player 'fitted' flex, ala the Edwin Watts/ PGS Stupidstore?

 

Is the target of the head to head the more educated golfer that is unlikely to play an OEM shaft for long, if at all?

 

Is the goal to measure the club head, or the club as the OEM is marketing it?

 

At the end of the day, I think the above questions play more into the decision than any other. Personally, I'd prefer to see 'as the OEM intended' as that is the broadest market, and offers the most 'real world' environment. I know that for most of this crowd however, a stock shaft is unlikely to be the chosen shaft for long if at all. So that begs the question, are you targetring existing readers or actively seeking new ones ?

Dru - Owner, President & Janitor, Druware Software Designs

RH 13.1 Handicap in soggy Georgia 

WITB
* 1W 10.5* @ PXG 0211 ( HZRDUS Smoke Black X-Stiff )
* 3W PXG 0211 ( HZRDUS Smoke Black X-Stiff ) 
* 5W 18* Tailor-made AeroBurner ( Stock Stiff )
* 7W  Sub70 949x ( HZRDUS Smoke Black X-Stiff )
* 5i-PW @ PXG 0211 ( Gen 1 )
* 52 @ Hogan Equalizer
* 56 @ Sub70 
* 60 @ Hogan Equalizer
* Carbon Ringo 1/4
* Vice Pro Plus

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would have to say that it would probably be best if you just got the off the rack version. Due to the 90% of golfers that that's all that normal weekend golfers will ever due. Until you get into the nuts like the rest of us everyone else just uses regular clubs...

Whats in the bag:

 

Titleist 910D2 10.5 Graphite Design Y7-S

Adams 1600 proto 14.5 Graphite Design AD DJ

Titleist 910F 17 Ust Tour Black

Titleist 910H 22 Diamana Kali

Adams Idea Pro A12 4-9 KBS C Taper

Titleist Vokey SM4 46 degree w/ DG Spinner

Mizuno MP R12 50-54-58 DG spinner

Ping Redwood ZB

Ball Nike 20XI-X

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On a similar vane as dru, I ask "Why Do Manufacturers Want Their Clubs To Be Apart Of This Test"??

 

1. Do they want the general public to see how an off the shelf club performs against the competition?

 

2. Do they want MGS readers to see how an off the shelf club performs against the competition?

 

3. Do they like the scoring system that MGS use?

 

4. Do they like the opportunity to show how their product performs when fitted to the user and that MGS utilise a variety of testers?

 

Maybe if we knew the reason (or maybe we do not care) why a manufacturer submits a product for testing, then we might have a better idea which option is the preferred!

 

AJ

WITB

Driver: Ping G25

FW: TM RBZ

Irons: Miura 57 Series w/KBS C-Taper

Wedges: Vokey SM4 52-08,56-12,60-04

Putter: Watch This Space

Ball: SRixon Z Star

Other: Tourstriker 7i

 

"Go Hard or Go Home"

 

"Do or Do Not. There is NO "TRY"

 

"Be normal, and the crowd will accept you. Be deranged, and they will make you their leader"

 

"I don't fail. I succeed at finding what doesn't work"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would have to say that it would probably be best if you just got the off the rack version. Due to the 90% of golfers that that's all that normal weekend golfers will ever due. Until you get into the nuts like the rest of us everyone else just uses regular clubs...

 

My issue with that is part of MGS's theme is to get custom fit. People come here and learn not only about clubs, but why they should get custom fit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • SPY VIP

While I am anything but an expert, I would think that the answer falls far more towards the question of 'who is the target audience'?

 

Is the target of the head to head the majority of golf who is playing a nominally off the shelf option of head with OEM chosen shafts in the player 'fitted' flex, ala the Edwin Watts/ PGS Stupidstore?

 

Is the target of the head to head the more educated golfer that is unlikely to play an OEM shaft for long, if at all?

 

Is the goal to measure the club head, or the club as the OEM is marketing it?

 

At the end of the day, I think the above questions play more into the decision than any other. Personally, I'd prefer to see 'as the OEM intended' as that is the broadest market, and offers the most 'real world' environment. I know that for most of this crowd however, a stock shaft is unlikely to be the chosen shaft for long if at all. So that begs the question, are you targetring existing readers or actively seeking new ones ?

 

 

I would have to say that it would probably be best if you just got the off the rack version. Due to the 90% of golfers that that's all that normal weekend golfers will ever due. Until you get into the nuts like the rest of us everyone else just uses regular clubs...

 

 

My issue with that is part of MGS's theme is to get custom fit. People come here and learn not only about clubs, but why they should get custom fit.

 

And so now we can talk about some of the caveats of option #1.

 

First and foremost, at least two of the testers we'd use for this test generally are not good candidates for the majority of stock offerings. Is it really fair to knowingly test clubs that fit our golfers poorly? What does that really tell us (other than maybe golfers should get fit).

 

The other issue is that limiting to stock inherently unbalances the playing field.

 

Some OEMs offer only a single "stock" shaft. These include Cobra, Nike, and TaylorMade. Callaway now offers 2, while PING's ANSER driver has 4 stock offerings. While the answer may be "tough crap, it was the OEM's choice to only offer a single "stock" offering, there's a true inequity there.

 

Also, should we choose to include smaller or component companies in the test, how do we account for stock in a situation where stock doesn't actually exist

 

Finally...and I mentioned this to an extent earlier... stock shafts are a necessary evil. Golfers demand the immediate gratification of being able to walk out of the store with a club in their hand. When you talk to the OEM guys...not 100%, but the majority have expressed strong preferences for fitting whenever it's possible.

MyGolfSpy is only major golf site that refuses advertising from large golf companies. With your support we can keep it that way. Donate Today
 


Subscribe to the MyGolfSpy Newsletter

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some OEMs offer only a single "stock" shaft. These include Cobra, Nike, and TaylorMade. Callaway now offers 2, while PING's ANSER driver has 4 stock offerings. While the answer may be "tough crap, it was the OEM's choice to only offer a single "stock" offering, there's a true inequity there.

 

Also, should we choose to include smaller or component companies in the test, how do we account for stock in a situation where stock doesn't actually exist

 

Finally...and I mentioned this to an extent earlier... stock shafts are a necessary evil. Golfers demand the immediate gratification of being able to walk out of the store with a club in their hand. When you talk to the OEM guys...not 100%, but the majority have expressed strong preferences for fitting whenever it's possible.

 

I would agree (and would go further and say that I am sorta surprised that we haven't seen more WYW club assembly services) that custom fit is the best option, but that isn't a real world sampling of how most golfers buy. Because of this, I get the impression that the bigger OEM's are doing optimization testing to get a best 'balance' of performance by mating shaft and head in their 'default' configurations. In the case of the smaller vendors, that option really isn't cost effective, so they either go with a shaft they have partnered with or they depend upon the fitter to find the right fit.

 

I don't think you can find an answer here that really addresses all of your readership and audience. At some point you get the joy of making a choice that may or may not sit well with your most vocal audience members. I don't envy you that choice :-).

 

That said, you might want to blend the test, and split your 'testers' down the middle. Half go with the OEM offerings, half go with the fitted options (assuming you can get the OEMs to give you enough equipment to make that possible). This way, not only do you get a cross section against the OEM shafts, but you get a feel for the impact of the fitted shafts on the performance of the heads.

 

Just a thought.

Dru - Owner, President & Janitor, Druware Software Designs

RH 13.1 Handicap in soggy Georgia 

WITB
* 1W 10.5* @ PXG 0211 ( HZRDUS Smoke Black X-Stiff )
* 3W PXG 0211 ( HZRDUS Smoke Black X-Stiff ) 
* 5W 18* Tailor-made AeroBurner ( Stock Stiff )
* 7W  Sub70 949x ( HZRDUS Smoke Black X-Stiff )
* 5i-PW @ PXG 0211 ( Gen 1 )
* 52 @ Hogan Equalizer
* 56 @ Sub70 
* 60 @ Hogan Equalizer
* Carbon Ringo 1/4
* Vice Pro Plus

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think we'd want to stear clear of using the exact same shaft. I think same make/model will be close enough.

 

When you consider things like changing tips and hosel bore depths it's impossible to reuse the same shaft in every head, especially if one of our goals is to test all drivers at the same length.

 

A shaft cut to play 45.5" in a Callaway might only play to 44.25" in another driver.

 

At some point practicality dictates we call it close enough.

 

I guess that's the question though T. Say you have 15 drivers. I'm guessing 2 will be TMaG (depending on timing either new ones or current models), which means you would need 14 shafts of the same make and model to let a single tester run through all of them. Now say you have 6 testers each with different shafts, now you are talking about 84 shafts, and swapping heads and/or tips 6 times. Is that doable? Or am I missing something again?

Driver: :taylormade-small: SLDR w/ Fujikura Ventus Black

3w: :taylormade-small:'16 M2 hl w/ Diamana D+ 82

5w: :cleveland-small: Launcher HB w/ HZRDUS Yellow

Hybrid: :cleveland-small: 22 deg. Launcher HB w/ HZRDUS Black

Irons: :cleveland-small: 5i - gap Launcher CBX w/ Nippon Modus 3 125

Wedges: :cleveland-small: 54 CBX & 58 Zipcore w/ Nippon Modus 3 125

Putter: :odyssey-small: Red 7s

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • SPY VIP

I guess that's the question though T. Say you have 15 drivers. I'm guessing 2 will be TMaG (depending on timing either new ones or current models), which means you would need 14 shafts of the same make and model to let a single tester run through all of them. Now say you have 6 testers each with different shafts, now you are talking about 84 shafts, and swapping heads and/or tips 6 times. Is that doable? Or am I missing something again?

 

IF we ultimately choose option #3...if we're using TaylorMade's R1 as an example, my expectation would be that they'd send us a couple heads, and the appropriate tipped shaft for each tester. We'd mix and match as need be, but wouldn't have to worry about glue. A company like Callaway, for example, would need to send us 4 heads (1 in each loft), and the appropriate tipped shaft for each tester. Again, we'd mix and match appropriately, but with no glue involved.

 

When you get into a traditional glued hosel (Mizuno for example), we'd expect one fully assembled driver per tester.

 

The downside presented by glued designs is that it removes our ability to mix and match. For example, we may find that one tester who generally plays a 10.5 finds he performs better in a Krank at 9.0. With adjustables, we can simply plug the shaft into a different head and go. With adjustables, short of pulling and re-gluing (which we could do), you're basically stuck.

 

Things are further complicated because not everyone offers exactly the same lofts. Some do 9.0/10.0, others do 9.5/10.5 etc..

 

As I think everyone would agree, there are crapload (metric) of variables, which makes any sort of normalization/standardization difficult. That's why we've asked for your feedback, and feedback from our OEM partners. Some time very soon we're going to have to make a decision based on what we think will work best, move forward, and not look back.

MyGolfSpy is only major golf site that refuses advertising from large golf companies. With your support we can keep it that way. Donate Today
 


Subscribe to the MyGolfSpy Newsletter

Link to comment
Share on other sites

# 3 would be my vote.

MY BAG-

Driver- Taylormade SLDR 12* (Speeder 7.2vc tour spec S)

3 Wood- Taylormade R11(bimatrix prototype S)

3 Hybrid- Ping I20(stock S)

Irons-Taylormade Tour Perferred MC ( C Taper S)

Wedges- 50, 54, and 58 SCOR4161( KBS)

Putter-Taylormade Ghost Corza.

 

All Left Handed!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

An interesting dilemma...glad I don't have to make the call :mellow:

 

You may want to consider two categories -- adjustable and fixed - with the ability to do what you can with the adjustable drivers and then making the best decision you can regarding shafts in the fixed models. Split them into two "divisions" and then square off the winner of the adjustable division against the winner of the fixed division. Sort of a driver "Super Bowl."

 

I'm semi-serious here -- it may also be an interesting demonstration on the importance of the right shaft.

 

What's in the bag:
 
Driver:  :titelist-small:TSR3; :wilson_staff_small: DynaPWR Carbon
FW Wood: :wilson_staff_small: DynaPWR 3-wood; :titleist-small: TSR 2+
Hybrids:  PXG Gen4 18-degree
Utility Irons: :srixon-small: ZX MkII 20* 
Irons:;  :Sub70:699/699 Pro V2 Combo; :wilson_staff_small: D9 Forged;  :macgregor-small:MT86 (coming soon!); :macgregor-small: VIP 1025 V-Foil MB/CB; 

Wedges:  :cleveland-small: RTX6 Zipcore
Putter: :cleveland-small: HB Soft Milled 10.5;  :scotty-small: Newport Special Select;  :edel-golf-1:  Willamette,  :bettinardi-small: BB8; :wilson-small: 8802; MATI Monto

Ball: :bridgestone-small: Tour B RXS; :srixon-small: Z-STAR Diamond; :wilson_staff_small: Triad

Stat Tracker/GPS Watch: :ShotScope:


 
Follow @golfspybarbajo

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...