Best Driver Golf Clubs 2012
We’ve Got Your DataAs promised we’ve published an extensive amount of data collected during this test. We’ve created two interactive charts that will allow you to sort by club and by golfer. In addition to the raw distance and accuracy numbers we’ve published other key performance data including launch angle, spin rate, ball speed and more.Given how frequently it appeared on other top 5 lists, it should surprise no one that Callaway’s $299 XHot proved to be the best overall driver in our test. While it may not be the absolute longest driver we tested, for the guy looking for something that can give him plenty of yardage, while still keeping the ball in the short grass more often than not, the Callaway’s XHot is the best of this sizeable group.
The performance is particularly noteworthy given the length of XHot’s shaft (46″ standard, 45.75″ Pro). Rumor has it that XHot is absolutely killing the market at the $299 price point, and why the hell shouldn’t it. It’s MyGolfSpy’s “Most Wanted Driver” of 2013.Finishing just behind XHot is TaylorMade’s RBZ Stage 2.
For the majority of our testers, the Stage 2 actually proved to be longer, but almost to a man it couldn’t match the accuracy of the Xhot (the longer shaft caused more of an issue for most), and that proved to be the difference maker. Nevertheless, TaylorMade’s RBZ Stage 2 is an outstanding driver in it’s own right, and if for some reason the Xhot doesn’t work for you, TaylorMade’s budget-friendly RBZ Stage 2 should be the next place you look.TaylorMade’s wrench-friendly, all-lofts-in-a-single-head R1 rounds out the Top 3. It a surprising result when you consider that the R1 failed to crack any of the 3 Top 5 lists for accuracy. Admittedly it only narrowly missed cracking the Top 5 for our higher swing speed players, but it was actually its consistently strong distance numbers (#3 overall, #3 high swing speed, #6 overall) that placed it so high on the overall list. For the guy who is willing to sacrifice a little bit of accuracy to pick up a little bit more distance, the R1 is definitely one to consider.Another Total Driving surprise is PING’s Anser driver, which claims the 4th spot on the list. How can a driver that only appeared on 1 Top 5 list (#5 Accuracy – High Swing Speed) break into the top 5 overall?
Online shopping from a great selection at Sports & Outdoors Store. Beginners Golf Club Tommy Armour Silver Spot – Beginners Golf Club. This is a great set for the beginner made by a venerable and well-respected club manufacturer so you can feel comfortable about your clubs no matter who you are playing with. They will never know the clubs cost so little with the Tommy Armour name on them. Mar 28, 2019 Best golf drivers for distance and accuracy in 2019. New and cheap drivers from top brands like Callaway, TaylorMade, and Wilson, to name a few.
In a word: consistency. While distance was average at best across the board, when it comes to accuracy, the PING Anser was never worse than 7th.
In some respects the Anser is the polar opposite of the R1. For the guy looking for consistency and accuracy at the expense of a few yards, the Anser it another outstanding option from PING.
The Tileist 913 finished 5 on our Most Wanted Driver list. You already know that the 913 topped the list as our most accurate driver of 2013, and that, coupled with an outstanding distance score from our slower swing speed group, keeps the Titleist 913 near the top of the overall list. I don’t think any of our testers would argue that the Titleist is one of the longer drivers we tested, but it’s long enough. When you couple that with its propensity for keeping the ball in the short grass This is the first Titleist driver we’ve seen that we comfortably recommend that every golfer consider. Results by Swing SpeedAs a reminder, our higher swing speed guys (100 MPH) all tested with the Pro/Tour model heads stiff or x-stiff shafts.As you may recall, Callaway’s RAZR Fit Xtreme proved to be every bit the bomber it’s advertised to be for our higher swing speed players. While our testers weren’t generally as close to the centerline as they were with some other, our higher swing speed players actually hit comparatively high percentage of fairways. Simply put, while not the most accurate driver, for most in this group it didn’t wander too far offline.
Generally good-enough accuracy combined with generally obscene distance is why the RAZR Fit Xtreme is our #1 ranked club for higher swing speed players.While it could easily be mistaken for the game-improvement offering, Callaway’s XHot Pro is also an extremely solid choice for higher swing speed players. As you can see from the charts below it finished just ticks behind the RAZR Fit Extreme. The majority of golfers will likely find XHot the more forgiving of the two, but if you’re a Callaway fan, or just a fan of drivers that perform, forcing yourself two choose between the two won’t be easy, but it’s not a bad problem to have either.Not surprising, TaylorMade’s RBZ Stage 2 is in the mix for higher swing speed players as well. Truthfully it’s numbers were hurt mightily by one of our higher swing speed players who simply couldn’t hit it straight. Take him out of the mix (we did for the overall), and the Stage 2 is right there with the top 2 on this list.
While we’ve become cynical about TaylorMade drivers over the last few years, there’s not much in either the RBZ Stage 2 or the R1 that’s not to like.and speaking of the R1, it’s distance numbers are strong enough to keep it on the Top 5 for total driving among high swing speed players. It was nearly as long as anything, and among this group, more accurate than the RBZ Stage 2.The PING Anser finished #5 overall among faster swingers. Just as with its overall numbers, for distance alone it wasn’t a standout, but it was more accurate that most.
Once again, for those who are looking for a well-balanced driver where the premium is on accuracy, we’ve got your PING.Our lower swing speed golfers (100 MPH) all tested with standard model heads and regular or stiff (non-tour) shafts where applicable.Raise your hand if you saw this coming? With the RAZR Fit Xtreme and both TaylorMade offerings not generally performing as well among slower swing speed players, Callaway’s XHot stands alone at the top (though it must be pointed out that PING’s Anser also appears in all 3 Top 5s). What can we possibly say about the XHot that hasn’t already been said?
Quite frankly I don’t know, so let’s go with this: Callaway’s XHot is the one driver that consistently performed at wide range of swing speeds for golfers of a variety of ability levels. If you’re just going to pull a driver off the rack, it might as well be XHot.FinallyAdams gets a mention. If we gave out a sneaky bastard award it would most certainly go to the Speedline Super S. While never at the top of any list, when I was crunching the numbers it seemed like it was never far from the lead. As an on-the-record fan of the Adams LS series, it’s difficult for me to admit that the Super S is likely the better of the Adams offerings for 2013.PING fans can finally relax. The G25 has cracked a top 5, finishing 3rd overall among slower swing speed players.
Like the Super S, although it hasn’t shown up as frequently as many (us included) thought it would, it too was never far from the mix. We’ll talk about it more when we go inside the numbers next week, but for now know that the G25 produced some of the longest drives in our test, and was one of the most popular with our testers.Almost unbelievably two drivers finished in a dead head for the #4 spot in the low swing speed category. Wilson’s D-100 is another club we’re going to have a lot to say about next week, but what we can say right now (and say with conviction) is that not only is the built-for-speed D-100 among the strongest all-around performers for slower swing speed players, it’s easily the best driver Wilson has produced in recent (and possibly distant) memory.Matching the D-100 point for point is PING’s Anser (which as I mentioned joins XHot as the only other club to appear on all 3 of our overall Top 5s). I hate to repeat myself for a 2nd time, so I’ll just say this: PING Anser – consistent, accurate, and sneaky good.We’re Not Done YetNot that the results are in, be sure to we gathered and used to arrive at these scores. We’ve built 2 pretty cool little charts that contain all of the relevant information from our launch monitors.Also be sure to check back next week when we go Beyond the Numbers to give you the inside scoop on the MyGolfSpy’s 2013 Most Wanted Driver Test.
You’ll hear more from our testers, and get a more complete picture of what they liked, what they didn’t, as well as why we think certain clubs stood out while others fizzled. This is a really funny list. It’s almost flipped from what worked best for me. I recently went to a demo day and was thoroughly disappointed in all the Callaway, Taylormade, Titleist, and Ping drivers. I found the Cobra Amp Cell (both versions) and Nike Covert (both versions) to be the best performing for me and my high school teammate.
I guess maybe because the Kuro Kage Shaft fits me better because I later put that on my current driver the R9 Supertri. Not to mention that I had very low expectations with the Cobra drivers, and they turned out to be my favorite.
I love MyGolfSpy and really appreciate the effort to show readers the actual data of the test they do. It really empowers us to make better decisions when it comes to getting new clubs, without relying on what´s advertised. It would be really neat if you found a way to compare your results with older clubs. As of now we only get the information of the drivers that are being launched this year, but how can we tell if those clubs are actually better than the ones we already own? Should I really believe Callaway just launched the longest driver in golf, and I should change my i20?? Recently I was toying with an old FT-5, comparing it on a launch monitor with my i20, and there is really not much of a differenceThanks for your help!!!
All of the major club makers should be sued with a class action law suit or maybe criminal fraud. No driver made (at this time) can adjust for loft more than1/2. It is physically not possible. PING knew this and stayed away from adjustable driver as long as they could. Then came with a very limited adjustable driver(1/2.) which can only be done by opening or closing the face by 5 or 6 degrees and this much adjustment is not possible in their latest driver. SO they have all been lying to us.
DON’T get taken in by their slick false adv. All this great discourse got me thinking, so I’m just gonna throw this out thereI’d love to see a follow-up to this by using the data generated to prove/disprove the level of impact that individual fitting can have. Each tester could take their lowest performing club head, and be “fit” for shaft/weight/length. Then, compare the results of that test against all of their “off the rack” data. Will their worst performer become their best?The vast majority of golfers buy off the rack, for years we’ve heard about the importance of proper fitting here’s an opportunity to be datacratic.
You can carry this out to infinity as to the rights and wrongs of this particular test. Let be honest hereit was a simple human test by a website doing the best they can undershall we say unscientific methods. I see nothing wrong with their testing methodsas they stated, “it was an off the rack” type test and specifically geared toward that consumer audience. When your doing human type testing there is also the X factor within the testers and that would be simple ‘brand snobbery’The minor golf companies don’t get the respect so the testers really don’t expect anywhere near as much (i.e. Performance, etc.) as they do from the Majors.
Since they are testers they, of course, would never admit that as they were told, most probably, not to be brand biased. But, human nature dictates otherwise. It’s as simple as doing a car testif a tester is going to drive a Kia versus a top of the line Mercedes or BMW.the same daythey expect more from the BMW/Mercedes. Again, brand snobbery.Truth isno one had to submit their golf club for this test. Personally, had I been thinking ‘off the rack’ my choice of submission (i.e. Pre-built golf club) would have been different.
Which is why I stated earlier “next time I do my homework better”.Just my opinion.Steve AlmoPresidentGeek GolfWinner of 17 RE/MAX LD titles worldwide since 2005More than any other golf club company! Thanks Steve.
I couldn’t have said it better, as you hit on the major point that I was trying to make; which was that all of the heads aren’t the same. They can be tailored to different segments that have different needs so that real performance differences can be garnered. The smaller companies such as yourself know that you can compete on the “build a better mousetrap” front and I’m glad that we have you guys making products for us. I just gave the long winded version of “We all agree that shafts can make an important difference, but let’s not forget that the driver head can to”. To make that point I thought it would help to show that human testing shouldn’t be thrown out as it does offer some important insight that can/should be looked at. BTW, care to give any insight into what club you would have submitted for the test?
I really enjoyed reading your postyou must be one Hell of a fitter/builder! And if your notyou should be!If I had to do it all over againI would have submitted the Dot Com This Driver with a RIP (red eye) 60 gram at 45″ with the Golf Pride tacky Tour Wrap grip for the better players (i.e. Faster swing) at 8.5. X Flex and 9.5. S Flex.For the Slower Swingers (i.e. Higher handicappers) I would have submitted either the Dot Com This or even the FS3 (as it is so EZ to hitessentially point and shoot) in 11.
for the DCT and 10.5. for the FS3and 12. FS3 in the 2nd club and 12.5 (or 13.) in the DCT! Both in RIP (green eyes) 60 gram also at 45″ with same grip as above.Both would be good choices for ‘off the rack’ type testing. The No Brainer simply MUST be fitted properly to match the players swing. Even though I am a firm believer in a Professional Fitting by a qualified fitter builder for all clubs.the DCT and FS3 would have been a much better choice for this particular testing. Would have finished much higherin all catagories.
But, whatever, mistakes happen. It was my faultnot MGSthey did fine. I applaud them.Good speaking to you D.! Very useful test. It’s not the end all and I doubt that was the intent. Those that want the “perfect club” for their swing will pay for a fitting expert and likely spend a lot more money on an upgraded shaft.
My personal experience led me to the best off the rack club/shaft combo for me. This test came up with the same conclusion.
What I learned was that the stock shaft for some clubs might be sub par and could undermine a decent head. I think if I wanted to spend a couple (few?) more hundred, I might end up with an even better fit. I may even do it some day.But I found the results fairly closely mirrored mine and the additional information is even more useful. I poured through all the data. “Blake” is the tester that has my numbers. I went to the shop yesterday thinking I was going to walk out with a Stage 2, 913d2 or Anser.
I hit all OEM (stiff, 9.5 stock) except the Stage 2 had the TP shaft, the 913d2 and Aser had the whiteboard and the Rzr xtrm had the black tie. The numbers narrowed it down to the 913d2, Super LS and last years F12 LS.
Hit these 3 again and the LS’s were slightly better than the 913d2 (spin, distance, accuracy, and feel) so I went with the F12 LS since it was $200 less than the Super LS. I cannot believe that the driver head is responsible for the variations you observed. They all weigh virtually the same 198-203g, have the same general design–a hollow core surrounded by metal and composite surfaces, and the same swing weights (D0-d2). The USGA limits the tramploine effect of the face, and we can bet that each manufacturer has tweaked their production to be at the limit.The differences are more likely to be attributable to the shafts, which either match or don’t match the swing kinetics of any given golfer. This introduces too many variables into your testing. I know it’s prohibitively expensive to use the same shaft for every club or to fit each golfer to his/her best shaft, but that’s the only way to arrive at a meaningful conclusion. Point well made, Bryan.
Tom Wishon likens the golfer to the engine and the shaft to transmission. It woould seem that the trhee of us agree that we have top consider the whole picture before making a comparison of different clubs.There may be aerodynamic considerstions that have a slight effect on the clubs’ performance. But the results are skewed by variations in the shafts as the the authors acknowledge in commenting that the Kuro Kage may have been a poor match for the testers.
Maybe i’s never going to happen, but if the test were to be repeated it should either match the shafts used for each driver to the individuals hitting them or put the same shaft in each club. Ahh, systems theory and research theory. Soccoro you bring up some very interesting points and it got me to think.
Seems like over the past few years Callaway has had a hard time keeping up with Taylormade and a few other big brands. I could be wrong, but it just seems that way to me.I have been playing with a old Warbird for a very long time that used to belong to my grandfather and always enjoyed that club and people used to tell me that it was the best Callaway ever was. So I am glad to see their driver at the top of the listIt wont get my 910D2 out of my bad as I personally dont like buying tons of clubs. My irons are 8 years old and are showing their agethen I am also in need of some hybrids. Really a great effort by MGS.What I found really intriguing is that at the end of the day, my recent experience with getting fitted for a driver ended up with the same result. I’m a high speed driver and ended up with the Razr Fit Xtreme because it was noticeably longer for me (I didn’t have nearly the success with the X Hot). I thought going in the Titleist would do it for me because I have golfing buddies that have had great success with it and I loved the looks of it.
They are average speed swingers and that was borne out in the tests.Also, not to knock a club, but the Cobra didn’t work for me at all. The fact that the shaft is suspect makes me curious. Really liked the looks, the design and the set up but the thing was a noodle for my swing. 25-30 yards less. I now think a stiffer, lower launching shaft would have done the trick.Anyway, if nothing else, it was validation for my 3 or 4 hours of personal testing. Didn’t get a chance to hit the Cleveland but I’m guessing that would have been in the running if I had.Now lets get some weather and get out there (I can hear the rain pounding on my window for about the 8th day in a row, ugh!). This testing really raises the bar of interest, and from interest, buying.
If I was to predict a new club of interest, it would be the Wilson D100’s. They are significantly different because of the very noticeable light weight. Sometimes “Different” takes some getting used to, but my guess is that several golf companies are now looking at emulating Wilson.I’ve hit them, but you have to search to find a dealer that handles them.The second point of budding interest is the grip that has a 16 gram weight at the top of the shaft.I’d love to have that researched because it is endorsed by Mr. Nicklaus.Full marks to GolfSpy. The weight will go the other way.and the component companies started that trend (lighter heads in modern times) 2/3 years ago. They came in at 175 gram head. Geek did extensive testing from 172 grams to over 220 grams.
Heavier heads work much better than Super Lite heads and set ups (the key is to get fitted properly with the proper shaft to support the loading and unloading and not create head lag). The heavy butt grip creates more swing speedbut, ball speed goes down and spin rate goes up. Just the opposite on heavier heads. As I explained in one of the other threads. The industry will go in this directionagain, heavier heads just work better. Your statements are not exactly accurate, I am interpreting them as “lighter swing weight works better for everyone it just takes time to get used to”. This is FAR from the truth, swing weight is completely a players FEEL preference.I am a “big hitter” as you saw from my comments above i run 112-114 SS with a 1.47 or better smash factor on a driver.
I have all custom equipment and play nothing “off the rack” literally. I’ll hit my 6 iron around a 195-200 carry without “stepping on it” I probably can get another 10 yards out of my irons if I wanted to “step on it” / crush it. My hardest hit 7iron few 198yards and had a total of 202yards on a LM before.
I got a lot in the tank, that club is a 180-185 club for me normally.On Monday (4/15/13) I went in to get my loft and lies angles adjusted (what I do regularly) The fitter ended up not only doing the loft and lies but increasing the swing weight of my clubs as well. All my irons were sitting at D0 to D1, which i was tending to get out in front of them a bit because I couldn’t feel them. We increased them to D4 and presto I was perfect positions at impact. Given I load and release so hard to generate my speed FEEL of the head in my swing is important to know when I need to hit the cast point and impact points in my downswing timing. None of my clubs have a lighter swing weight then D4 anymore. Driver is 44.50″ at D5, Fairway at 42.50″ at D5, Hybrid at 40.00″ at D4, irons are all D4, PW / GW D5, SW / Lw D6 I need to have the feel of the weight in the head to timing impact, that’s just my playing style.Jack Might have needed to feel like the swing weight was a bit lighter, back-weighting the clubs from D2 to D0, that just doesn’t work for everyone. JMillerThere was a time in the industry when backweighting (butt) was a big no-noIt was a quick fix to get the SW down.
Nowadays it’s a whole new ballgamewhatever works seems to be the order of the day. Personally, SW on the untility clubs (i.e.
Stand alone clubs), which includes Driver, wedges, F/ws, Hybrids, Putters, etc. Really means nothing IMO. SW on irons is revelant as ‘feel’ from iron to iron should essentially ‘feel’ the same. On the other clubs I mentioned aboveSW is overratedway overrated. Remember, before you go berserk, that is just MO.Peter L. As much as I hate to say this about the greatest golfer that ever livedJack N. Said just the opposite in the early 80’s concerning liteweight golf clubs.
Best Golf Club Driver
And with the new generation of golfers coming up.they will listen to a Tiger or any other number of present day Tour StarsJack, Arnie and others from the heyday of the sporttheir comments just don’t sell product anymore. I hate to say thatbut, that is the harsh reality of getting old and being a faded SuperStar. They can probably sell insurance and other products of that vainbecause the older generation trusts themas they should. But, the younger generation of golfers todaytheir just a memory of what once was.
Case in point, I started and took to this sport as a golfer in 1965 because of Bobby Nichols, Gene Littler and Dave Marrwhen I mention those names to younger golfers.all I get is blank stares! I’m not a real fan of Jack Nicklaus, but totally respect his record in golf. What makes me think a bit more as to the validity of the butt weighting is that it is being developed by Boccieri Golf, and I do respect their innovations.What is really interesting is having a forum to present ideas and have thoughtful replies.An earlier comment that driver heads have gone as far as they can go with the limitations they have, and that the likely difference is in the shaft, that’s really interesting.Thanks to Steve A. For his thoughtful insights. Peter.I worked for Stan Thompson for 5 1/2 years. You may remember the Ginty?
Inanycase, when the Pros were in town for the L.A. Open they all went to Stan to have their clubs tweaked in Culver City. Stan related this story to me about Jack N. Jack came in to have all his irons and woods matched for SW. Stan started laughing and told him, “JackSW is not all that revelant”. Jack went ballistic on Stan.
Stan said is all about static dead weight. Jack said, “You have no idea what your talking about”. Stan said, “Give me 10 minutes Jack”. Stan brought out from the back 2 #6 irons and handed one to Jack at D-2. Jack said.”Yes, so what?”.
Stan handed him the other 6 iron and Jacks hands droppedStan had filled the shaft with sand and it also SW at D-2. Stan said to Jack, “Now you tell me what is more important, Swing Weight or Dead weight?”Stan had a way about him that not only made sense to even the Greats of the game but what a mind for equipment he had! Guy was a geniusstill miss The Man, Stan! ” Personally, SW on the utility clubs (i.e. Stand alone clubs), which includes Driver, wedges, F/ws, Hybrids, Putters, etc. Really means nothing IMO.”So what you are saying is that you believe that no one out that will see any difference in control / consistency when the swing weight alone changes on the Driver, Fairway, Hybrid clubs. You said to the other person and implied that you work as a club builder I am curious as to how you came to this conclusion.I might agree with you if I were not a 4 or better handicap that has a repeatable swing and just this week worked with the Driver at D4, D5, D6 on the range to see which one felt the best and gave me the most consistency.
I would be willing to bet that if I got on a LM and changed my clubs from D0, D2, D4, D6 I am going to get different results in terms of accuracy, distance, smash factor, etc for each weight.If I swing 112mph at D6 and get a 1.49 smash factor (167 ball speed) I’ve got a lot more control over the shot then swinging at 118mph with a 1.42 smash factor (167 ball speed). Obviously I would be getting roughly the same amount of distance on both swings, but my control and accuracy is going to be a heck of a lot better at the 1.49 smash factor then the 1.42 smash.To me as a 4 or better handicap swing weight in every club including even the damn putter matters a lot for my feel and tempo into impact. I wouldn’t be shocked to hear a 20 or worse handicap say something like swing weight doesn’t matter on the Driver, Fairway, Hybrid because their swing is not consistent enough to even notice a difference in weight change.
So what you are saying is that you believe that no one out that will see any difference in control / consistency when the swing weight alone changes on the Driver, Fairway, Hybrid clubs.No, JM that is not what I am sayingWhat I am saying is SW in itself does not have to be the same in utility type clubs from club to club as it relates to the irons per se. Quite frankly, JM, it’s all about ‘feel’. The only difference between a 15 or higher handicapper and a low handicapper like yourself is you understand ‘feel’ a higher handicapper is searching for ‘feel’ even though they may not know that. If you remember the TM Bubble shaft Copper Head.although they never hyped this Specthey were in the D 8/9 and some higher SW. That never hurt their sales of this club.I also get more higher handicappers asking about SW than I do low Index players! It’s almost like it’s a requirement for them that all clubs should be in the D 1 or 2 range. Like I said JMIt’s a whole new World in equipment nowwhat use to be industry standards concerning specs and suchhas changed dramatically.
Again, whatever works.BTW, I really don’t build anymore as I utilize a retired Engineer that is a member of several clubfitting organizations. It’s a pleasure to exchange dialog with you JM. Againit’s just my opinionmany may disagree with me on this. It’s just the way I honestly feel. That in itself doesn’t mean I am right.
Not sure if you’ve read through the comments on the other posts, but some of the realities of testing worked against the Wishon.To keep testing as balanced as we could, rather than have guys hit 30 balls at a time with one driver, we spread them out such that they were only hitting a few shots with each driver in a given session. We did this to ensure that no single club would benefit significantly if a tester was having a really good day, or drop significantly because a tester was having a bad day. Multiple clubs, in every session. Every club hit on 3 different days.The unfortunate byproduct of testing like this is that clubs that are different become more difficult to get consistent performance out of. Initially guys hit the 919THI very well (especially when we look at accuracy alone), but as swings accumulated, I believe the 44″ shaft actually worked against the club because of the sizable difference between it and everything else.
It became the unusualit felt different.The same is true of the Geek No Brainer (heavier), and the Wilson D-100 (lighter). Basically, given enough swings, that which is appreciably different becomes more difficult to swing consistently.
You bring up excellent points, @GolfSpyT.Thank you for clarifying.I personally have found a 45″ driver to suit me best, and switching to a different length can definitely throw things off, just as you mentioned. Once a player gets dialed in to what they are used to, something else can screw it up, even if it is a quality offering.I always trim a driver to 45″ and a 3 wood to 43″, then put on my favorite grip (as the grip feel can be important too). My swingweight may now be around D0 or D1, but it works for me.And thanks to MGS for not only taking the time to organize this whole shebang, but also thanks for even thinking it up and having the gumption to print it all out, warts and all, not only with this test but with other product testing as well.I think this test goes to show what a driver in general can do for the masses, but like many folks who posted, I agree that having that right shaft is rather important.
I purchased a used Mizuno JPX 800 with Mizuno’s in house brand shaft (Exsar brand), and I really got lucky. I already had three very fine drivers (Cleveland, Cobra, Titleist) that are all 460cc’s and max C.O.R., but when I found the Mizuno one where the shaft felt just right and kicked just right, I got both better distance and better accuracy. Nojo.As a Professional clubfitter/builder you most probably understand the chance both Wishon and Geek took submitting prebuilt clubs. We obviously depend on the fitting aspect of our equipment. Like I said.If I had to do it over again I would have submitted the Dot Com This Driver. It would have been a better choice in my case.
But, such as it isMy telephone has been ringing off the hook and e-mails have been flying toward me from potential customers of which I am directing toward fitters/builders. So, I can’t really bitch.LOL! Thanks for all of your hard work.
It looks like you did a tremendous amount of testing and number crunching to arrive at a rating system that differentiates only slightly from the top driver to the bottom driver, 3.3 points from top to bottom! Do you think this could be attributable to sampling error or variance? I appreciate your heroic effort, but I realize that gross sales are more marketing than workmanship and my decision what to buy will probably be the result of some advertising executive pressing my buttons better than some other ad exec. Here’s the quick story on the Covert (and I’ll have more to say about it next week). Low SS tested the performance model, higher SS guys used the Tour model.Speaking only for myself, the Covert was one of the 5 drivers in this test I enjoyed hitting most. But when you look at the big picture, it was mostly middle of the pack or worse. To a man our lower ss guys all said it was at or near the top of the “Can’t Wait to Try It” list, and to man, each conveyed a sense of disappointment with the club.If we’re speculating hereand in the absence of absolute fact that’s all we can do, if I were to pick out 3 clubs that under-performed expectations they would be:Nike VRS CovertAdams Speedline Super LSCobra AMP Cell (Pro)What these 3 all have in common is some variation of the Kuro Kage shaft.
While I won’t say that it’s a.bad. shaft, but it is the single common thread between the clubs that we’re hit as well as expected.
My suspicion is that it’s generally a poor fit for our testers. But againjust speculation.
Well now that we have the three pieces to the puzzle and the most important thing to me at least THE DATA. I’ll echo what others have said and say great job and it does show the need to be fit.
Driver Golf Club Ebay
I recently got fit for a new driver after bagging the Callaway FT-9 for 4 years. I tested at least 6 drivers on this list and ended up with the Ping Anser. It worked best for me because I’m around 100 mph swing speed with the driver and tend to put a lot of spin on the ball. The Anser is a low spin driver that took a lot of the ballooning arc out of my drives. The part where the fitting comes in is that it wasn’t even a driver I was considering because it’s labeled as being for “better” players. So get fit, you never know what you’ll end up hitting the best! We’ve said from the very first test we did that there can ALWAYS be more golfers hitting more golf balls.
In this case, the number of shots we used, I think, is solid. What we saw is that during the first round (5-10 shots) the numbers were chaotic. What I mean by that is that in most cases they showed very little correlation.As we got to 15+ things started to shake out a bit (at least individually), and guys were repetitively hitting the same clubs well, and some of the others not so well. In some cases they loved what they hit well, while in others cases, they hit it well in spite of how they may have felt about cosmetics, or brand awareness, or any of that subjective stuff.
Fantastic test guys! Really appreciate the hard work put in! This is the most useful and comprehensive data I’ve ever seen. I can filter through the individuals and parameters to figure out the best club for me.
Best Driver Golf Shafts
Looks like I’m going to be getting an X Hot Pro or Razr Fit Xtreme!Tony’s swing numbers seem to be the closest to mine. Do you know which loft and shaft / shaft flex he hit with the X Hot Pro and Razr Fit Xtreme? Aso, what are his swing characteristics with regards to tempo, transition and lag?I notice he got outstanding distance and launch parameters with the Razr Fit Xtreme, but also that his accuracy seemed to suffer alot in comparison to the X Hot Pro? Any particular reason for this given that his spin was only a few hundred RPMs lower with the Razr Fit Xtreme?Cheers! Great review guys. I just loved the data based analysis.What might be really powerful is to put “ideal” numbers up there for guys based on their swing speeds.
These are the targets that they should have been going for in an ideal world. The reason that I say this is that most people don’t actually know the proper spin and launch angle for a particular swing speed (much less their own).There were some surprises, but then some things that didn’t surprise me either. If you need more testers next year, put the feel out in the community. You might find some willing participants.
If you look at the numbers individually, Mark’s launch numbers are solid. In some cases Joe’s could be higher (and we actually talked about higher lofted clubs), but in experimenting we found that he actually lost distance in some cases.
I think he’s a classic case of a guy who could find some real distance if he went through a full fitting.Lou is an interesting case. He hit drivers from 11.5° to 13° degrees. Like many he hits down on the ball, so he struggles to get anything really up in the air. He’s actually just started a series of lessons, and one of his goals is to get the driver closer to level.
Best Drivers 2019: We're reviewed the latest drivers on the market to bring you the best of 2019, comparing ball speed, launch angle, backspin, carry distance and how much you're paying for each driver (per yard)Technology stories – like prices – have rocketed with the new breed of 2019 drivers. They are a bigger investment than ever, making this the most important driver test we’ve ever done.Lots have been written and filmed about these new big sticks, but this is the first time – anywhere – they’ve all been tested head-to-head.
➤➤➤We asked leading brands to send us their 2019 drivers in three testers’ specs. We created an indoor fitting studio to ensure a controlled environment and used a Foresight Sports GC Quad launch monitor – along with TaylorMade TP5/TP5x balls – to capture data for each shot.We rejected major misses, but recorded how shots launched, as well as where shots impacted the clubface, thanks to the GC Quad’s ability to measure impact locations. Then we crunched the numbers and the feedback to come up with these conclusions.
The Drivers/ / / / / / / / / / / / At a glance resultsReview:We say:We’ve tested TaylorMade drivers for years, and regularly over the last decade or so they’ve snuck their noses out in front when it comes to performance. That’s why even though TaylorMade pays huge tour stars mega money to play their drivers, other players (like Tommy Fleetwood and Brooks Koepka) believe they’re best for their game, and play them without being paid. We love TaylorMade’s, which comes on the back of a successful 2018 for Twist Face (DJ, Jon Rahm, Rory McIlroy, Jason Day and Justin Rose all improved their driving accuracy and distance).Speed Injecting means every driver face is at least as hot as a Tour pro’s, which, thanks to manufacturing tolerances, isn’t always the case. Having visited big club-making factories in China, Vietnam and Taiwan, we appreciate how much of an investment testing every single driver produced this year (to make sure it conforms to face flexibility rules) really is.With so much weight at the back of the head the wasn’t the perfect fit for our test pro, but it was well-matched to both amateur testers, as it’s great at protecting ball speed on off-centre hits. Simon was the biggest fan posting an average ball speed a single mph behind his fastest ( and Ping G410, which could be switched on a different day’s testing), and four yards down on his longest carrying Mizuno ST190G.The numbers. Ball Speed: 158.7 MPH / Launch Angle: 10.7° / Backspin: 3200 RPM / Carry Distance: 259 Yards / Cost Per Yard: £1.73 TG Verdict:We’re not here to convince you any particular driver is best – our job is much more about showing you how models compare. We’ve tested the M6 on several occasions and each time our data has supported it being among the top two or three drivers (2-3 yards of carry distance between all three) for across-the-board forgiveness, ball speed and carry distance, without chasing low spin at all costs.
This year, because the leading models are so closely matched, we feel more so than ever that the choice of which driver to buy boils down to personal preferences and particularly how the driver looks at address. If, like us, the M6 inspires confidence, you really won’t go wrong.Review:We say:As a story, the Flash face is every bit as compelling as TaylorMade’s ‘Speed Injecting’, and of course builds on Callaway’s proven (and brilliant) Jailbreak tech.© Bauer Media GroupBauer Media Group consists of: Bauer Consumer Media Ltd, Company number: 01176085, Bauer Radio Ltd, Company Number:1394141 Registered Office: Media House, Peterborough Business Park, Lynch Wood, Peterborough, PE2 6EA H BauerPublishing, Company Number: LP003328 Registered Office: Academic House, 24-28 Oval Road, London, NW1 7DT. Allregistered in England and Wales. VAT no 918 5617 01Bauer Consumer Media Ltd are authorised and regulated by the FCA(Ref No. 710067)Primary Navigation - Mobile.