16 replies to this topic

[bobcat]

I realize the 310 has a better shaft, but aside from that, are there any advantages to the 310 clubhead itself?  Seems to me the shape of the 290 is so much better, but I would appreciate any feedback from those that prefer the 310 for some reason.

Both clubheads weigh 199 grams according to Cleveland so the difference in weight is soley due to the stock shaft and grip differences.

Assuming both the 290 and the 310 had the exact same shaft and grip, (and hence the exact same weight), which clubhead would you choose and why?

(I personally would put a 77 gram Fujikura 757 Tourspec Speeder shaft and original Tour Wrap grip on both clubheads, so there would be no weight difference at all, just the head shape difference).

Only other difference I know of is the slightly open face on the 310 vs the square face on the 290, but that is not an advantage for me as I actually prefer a face that is dead square..  Don't know any other real differences, (such as COG differences etc), but perhaps someone else out there can educate me further on why they actually prefer the Classic 310.  

Thanks!

Edited by bobcat, 20 November 2012 - 09:38 PM.

[Son_of_Sahm]

I think maybe the 310 sets up a little more open too?

[duffer18]

I have the 310, love it.  I get a boring flight and lots of run-out--has beaten out a bunch of others.  The head is 440, not 460, and not nearly as deep as the 290.  The 290 was simply too deep for me to handle well, didn't do well with it.

[bobcat]

Anyone else prefer the 310 head to the 290?  Please assume the same shaft in both when posting your comments. Only want comments about the clubhead, not about the shaft which I would change anyway.

Thanks!

[kc10]

_{Love my 310 Classic. The one club in the bag that will keep his home for awhile. Long, great roll-out, and I enjoy the 61 Kusala.}

[Jimbud]

 kc10, on 22 November 2012 - 12:08 AM, said:

_{Love my 310 Classic. The one club in the bag that will keep his home for awhile. Long, great roll-out, and I enjoy the 61 Kusala.}

You have great posts but I sure wish you would change your font size setting so I can read your posts.

[kc10]

Sorry, Jimbud and to the community.  I will pay closer attention in future responses.

[Roger H]

310 is one degree open 290 square with (supposedly no draw bias) If you draw(hook) it choose the 310 or take the 290 and put a hot meld towards the toe.Just an old clubmakers thought.

[orangeruffy]

I have 2 clevelands. 7.5° and 9.0°. Both 290's. I like the deep face. I have hit some of my straightest, longest drives with this club. I have the 310 shaft in both. The 310 had too much spin for me and send the ball to heights I was not happy with. Never considered the cleveland again until this fall when I came across the 7.5 with the 72x Kusala blue shaft. OMG! There is nothing I owned last year that came with as much consistency and lenght. I went through them like a good WRX ho.

[KDMullins]

I much prefer the 310 head.  The 290 is too deep for most people (including me), and the 310 just seems like a more refined design.

[Becon]

I went with a 910 D3 instead. But I preferred the 310 on the launch monitor when I was trying out clubs. IIRC it was a little deeper so the clubhead looked smaller at address. And I preferred the sound of the 310. Less tinny.

And the 310 shaft was awesome.

Edited by Becon, 24 November 2012 - 11:34 AM.

[bobcat]

I am still willing to listen to the merits of the Classic 310 clubhead, but.....

As a 290 owner I find it very difficult to love the 310 as much.  Perhaps I am just spoiled now by the head shape of the 290 which has the smaller "footprint"  of these two drivers event though it is actually larger at 460cc .  (The Tour Classic 310 is smaller in volume at 440cc, but actually looks bigger than the 290 at address due the difference in clubhead shape)..

I think for me at least, going with the 290 and then reshafting with a heavier graphite shaft was the best way to go here.  I knew I wouldn't like the ultra lightweight C.Kua 43 stock shaft.  I am sure that I would reshaft the 310 as well, but I feel the 310 would always just look a bit "odd" to me now, even if it did perform just as well as the 290 after the reshaft.

Just can't bring myself to pull the trigger a 310 even though I initially wanted to own both models.  Oh well, now I will have more money to spend on my wife's Christmas gift...

Edited by bobcat, 24 November 2012 - 05:14 PM.

[wolfpack]

When the spy pics came out for this driver,  ROBOPTI sniffed out right away that the 290 and 270 were new heads while the 310 was a repainted version of the previous years launcher 310TL.    So Dan Srixon comes on and posts that yes the 310 was the same driver as the year before with an updated face insert and new paint job.    This is all a loose paraphrasing of what went on, but if you want to read through backlog i am sure you can find the real conversation.    I am under the impression that the 290 is the cat's meow, it's a very nice head.

[tmfool]

 wolfpack, on 24 November 2012 - 06:04 PM, said:

When the spy pics came out for this driver,  ROBOPTI sniffed out right away that the 290 and 270 were new heads while the 310 was a repainted version of the previous years launcher 310TL. So Dan Srixon comes on and posts that yes the 310 was the same driver as the year before with an updated face insert and new paint job. This is all a loose paraphrasing of what went on, but if you want to read through backlog i am sure you can find the real conversation. I am under the impression that the 290 is the cat's meow, it's a very nice head.

if the 310 was paint job on previous design/technology -- why was it introduced @ higher price point?

its a great driver - that performs for wider range of golfers.
have to wonder what would have happened @ $299?

cleveland has not been able to capitalize lately - this may be 1 example

[wolfpack]

 tmfool, on 24 November 2012 - 06:56 PM, said:

 wolfpack, on 24 November 2012 - 06:04 PM, said:

When the spy pics came out for this driver,  ROBOPTI sniffed out right away that the 290 and 270 were new heads while the 310 was a repainted version of the previous years launcher 310TL. So Dan Srixon comes on and posts that yes the 310 was the same driver as the year before with an updated face insert and new paint job. This is all a loose paraphrasing of what went on, but if you want to read through backlog i am sure you can find the real conversation. I am under the impression that the 290 is the cat's meow, it's a very nice head.

if the 310 was paint job on previous design/technology -- why was it introduced @ higher price point?

its a great driver - that performs for wider range of golfers.
have to wonder what would have happened @ $299?

cleveland has not been able to capitalize lately - this may be 1 example

You would have to ask someone who is in the know for the answer to that.. I would suspect the Kasula shaft, but your guess is as good as mine.

[wolfpack]

http://www.golfwrx.c...e-by-side-pics/

It's all in here.. I can't believe i spent 30 mins looking for this, but whatever.

[bobcat]

Dedided to pass on the Classic 310 and buy a 3rd Classic 290 instead.  I am thoroughly convinced it is the superior head design now.   I now own the Classic 290 in 3 of the 4 lofts available, 7.5*, 9* and 10.5*, and not at all interested in the 4th loft option, (12*) . Soon my most recent Classic 290 acquistion will have the same 45" Fujikura 757 Speeder Tourspec shaft, tipped 1/2" as my other (2) Classic 290's.

BTW, the Fuji 757Tourspec shaft and the Classic 290 clubhead seem perfect for each other.   I strongly recommend this particular combo!

Edited by bobcat, 26 November 2012 - 07:07 PM.