Opinion & Analysis
Gear Trials Feedback: A letter from the editor
First of all, thank you so much to all of you who took the time to read 2015 Gear Trials: Best Drivers and comment on the story. In the 24+ hours since it’s been published, we’ve set records in views and comments. I’m grateful that Gear Trials has gained the traction it has across the golf world, because I know it will support many golfers’ desire to buy the best driver for them, and play the best golf they can.
A few questions continue to pop up about Gear Trials, however, and I want to take the opportunity to address them. Those who read this will better understand why we did what we did with Gear Trials, and why we’re going to continue to do it.
The two questions I am addressing are:
- Why don’t we rank clubs in terms of launch, spin and ball speed?
- Why don’t we name a “best” club?
The short answer? It’s a disservice, and a practice that I believe is more harmful than it is helpful.
With our Gear Trials lists, we hope to empower more golfers to make decisions based on what clubs are best for them. Don’t buy a club because it’s good for a group of testers, or voted “best” by an organization. The only reason golfers should make the purchase of a new club is if it brings them the joy of better performance, more confidence, or both.
Golfers should be excited by the process of discovering what clubs performs best for them! Test different heads, preferably with a top-rated professional fitter, and see which one gives you the ball flight you need. Spend some time looking at different models at address to learn what shape inspires confidence in you, and what sound and feel makes your next shot more exciting. That’s how it’s done on the PGA Tour, and that’s how we hope our readers will learn to buy new clubs.
We understand that our readers want to make the most informed decision they possibly can, and we have great respect for the passion they have to play better golf. That’s why we went to the most reputable club fitters we know and asked them to offer our readers the safety of their expertise. With their votes, you can buy any of the seven drivers (or their low-spin equivalents) on our 2015 Gear Trials: Best Drivers List and you cannot make a bad choice!
Differences do exist between the seven models on the list, of course, and we did our best to highlight them fairly in Gear Trials and our individual reviews. But some of you have requested more, so here’s a few anecdotes of what we would face if we were to name “bests.”
- TaylorMade’s R15 (460) is the lowest-spinning driver we’ve tested when it’s used by a golfer who consistently hits tee shots on the center of the face. When properly fit to that kind of player, it creates the highest-launching, lowest-spinning drives that tend to go farther than just about everything else. But if a golfer is more inconsistent, the R15 could actually be the highest-spinning driver on our list with the slowest ball speeds and it could fly the shortest — especially if it’s fit improperly.
- Ping’s G30 is the highest-spinning driver on this list when it’s hit on the screws. Give it to a high-spin golfer, and it could be the shortest driver on this list. But if it’s used by a golfer who misses the center of the face consistently, or a low-spin golfer, it will probably be the longest driver on this list.
How do we know which driver will work best for you? We don’t, and I’m not ashamed to say so. But you can find out.
We’ve given you the best starting point we know how, and how it goes from here is up to you. Are you up to the challenge? Everything I know about GolfWRX readers tells me that you are.
- LIKE87
- LEGIT18
- WOW3
- LOL3
- IDHT2
- FLOP3
- OB3
- SHANK35
Of all the clubs in our bags, wedges are almost always the simplest in construction and, therefore, the easiest to analyze what might make one work differently from another if you know what to look for.
Wedges are a lot less mysterious than drivers, of course, as the major brands are working with a lot of “pixie dust” inside these modern marvels. That’s carrying over more to irons now, with so many new models featuring internal multi-material technologies, and almost all of them having a “badge” or insert in the back to allow more complex graphics while hiding the actual distribution of mass.
But when it comes to wedges, most on the market today are still single pieces of molded steel, either cast or forged into that shape. So, if you look closely at where the mass is distributed, it’s pretty clear how that wedge is going to perform.
To start, because of their wider soles, the majority of the mass of almost any wedge is along the bottom third of the clubhead. So, the best wedge shots are always those hit between the 2nd and 5th grooves so that more mass is directly behind that impact. Elite tour professionals practice incessantly to learn to do that consistently, wearing out a spot about the size of a penny right there. If impact moves higher than that, the face is dramatically thinner, so smash factor is compromised significantly, which reduces the overall distance the ball will fly.
Every one of us, tour players included, knows that maddening shot that we feel a bit high on the face and it doesn’t go anywhere, it’s not your fault.
If your wedges show a wear pattern the size of a silver dollar, and centered above the 3rd or 4th groove, you are not getting anywhere near the same performance from shot to shot. Robot testing proves impact even two to three grooves higher in the face can cause distance loss of up to 35 to 55 feet with modern ‘tour design’ wedges.
In addition, as impact moves above the center of mass, the golf club principle of gear effect causes the ball to fly higher with less spin. Think of modern drivers for a minute. The “holy grail” of driving is high launch and low spin, and the driver engineers are pulling out all stops to get the mass as low in the clubhead as possible to optimize this combination.
Where is all the mass in your wedges? Low. So, disregarding the higher lofts, wedges “want” to launch the ball high with low spin – exactly the opposite of what good wedge play requires penetrating ball flight with high spin.
While almost all major brand wedges have begun putting a tiny bit more thickness in the top portion of the clubhead, conventional and modern ‘tour design’ wedges perform pretty much like they always have. Elite players learn to hit those crisp, spinny penetrating wedge shots by spending lots of practice time learning to consistently make contact low in the face.
So, what about grooves and face texture?
Grooves on any club can only do so much, and no one has any material advantage here. The USGA tightly defines what we manufacturers can do with grooves and face texture, and modern manufacturing techniques allow all of us to push those limits ever closer. And we all do. End of story.
Then there’s the topic of bounce and grinds, the most complex and confusing part of the wedge formula. Many top brands offer a complex array of sole configurations, all of them admittedly specialized to a particular kind of lie or turf conditions, and/or a particular divot pattern.
But if you don’t play the same turf all the time, and make the same size divot on every swing, how would you ever figure this out?
The only way is to take any wedge you are considering and play it a few rounds, hitting all the shots you face and observing the results. There’s simply no other way.
So, hopefully this will inspire a lively conversation in our comments section, and I’ll chime in to answer any questions you might have.
And next week, I’ll dive into the rest of the wedge formula. Yes, shafts, grips and specifications are essential, too.
- LIKE8
- LEGIT1
- WOW0
- LOL0
- IDHT1
- FLOP0
- OB0
- SHANK0
Golf's Perfect Imperfections
Golf’s Perfect Imperfections: Amazing Session with Performance Coach Savannah Meyer-Clement
In this week’s episode, we spent some time with performance coach Savannah Meyer-Clement who provides many useful insights that you’ll be able to implement on the golf course.
- LIKE0
- LEGIT0
- WOW0
- LOL0
- IDHT0
- FLOP0
- OB0
- SHANK0
19th Hole
Vincenzi’s 2024 RBC Heritage betting preview: Patrick Cantlay ready to get back inside winner’s circle
Just a two-hour drive from Augusta National, the PGA TOUR heads to Harbour Town Golf Links in Hilton Head Island, S.C. Hilton Head Island is a golfer’s paradise and Harbour Town is one of the most beautiful and scenic courses on the PGA TOUR.
Harbour Town Golf Links is a par-71 that measures 7,121 yards and features Bermuda grass greens. A Pete Dye design, the course is heavily tree lined and features small greens and many dog legs, protecting it from “bomb-and-gauge” type golfers.
The field is loaded this week with 69 golfers with no cut. Last year was quite possibly the best field in RBC Heritage history and the event this week is yet another designated event, meaning there is a $20 million prize pool.
Most of the big names on the PGA Tour will be in attendance this week with the exceptions of Hideki Matsuyama and Viktor Hovland. Additionally, Webb Simpson, Shane Lowry, Gary Woodland and Kevin Kisner have been granted sponsors exemptions.
Past Winners at Harbour Town
- 2023: Matt Fitzpatrick (-17)
- 2022: Jordan Spieth (-13)
- 2021: Stewart Cink (-19)
- 2020: Webb Simpson (-22)
- 2019: CT Pan (-12)
- 2018: Sotoshi Kodaira (-12)
- 2017: Wesley Bryan (-13)
- 2016: Branden Grace (-9)
- 2015: Jim Furyk (-18)
In this article and going forward, I’ll be using the Rabbit Hole by Betsperts Golf data engine to develop my custom model. If you want to build your own model or check out all of the detailed stats, you can sign up using promo code: MATTVIN for 25% off any subscription package (yearly is best value).
Key Stats For Harbour Town
Let’s take a look at key metrics for Harbour Town Golf Links to determine which golfers boast top marks in each category over their past 24 rounds.
Strokes Gained: Approach
Strokes Gained: Approach is exceedingly important this week. The greens at Harbour Town are about half the size of PGA TOUR average and feature the second-smallest greens on the tour. Typical of a Pete Dye design, golfers will pay the price for missed greens.
Total SG: Approach Over Past 24 Rounds
- Scottie Scheffler (+1.27)
- Tom Hoge (+1.27)
- Corey Conners (+1.16)
- Austin Eckroat (+0.95)
- Cameron Young (+0.93)
Good Drive %
The fairways at Harbour Town are tree lined and feature many dog legs. Bombers tend to struggle at the course because it forces layups and doesn’t allow long drivers to overpower it. Accuracy is far more important than power.
Good Drive % Over Past 24 Rounds
- Brice Garnett (88.8%)
- Shane Lowry (+87.2%)
- Akshay Bhatia (+86.0%)
- Si Woo Kim (+85.8%)
- Sepp Straka (+85.1%)
Strokes Gained: Total at Pete Dye Designs
Pete Dye specialists tend to play very well at Harbour Town. Si Woo Kim, Matt Kuchar, Jim Furyk and Webb Simpson are all Pete Dye specialists who have had great success here. It is likely we see some more specialists near the top of the leaderboard this week.
SG: TOT Pete Dye per round over past 36 rounds:
- Xander Schauffele (+2.27)
- Scottie Scheffler (+2.24)
- Ludvig Aberg (+2.11)
- Brian Harman (+1.89)
- Sungjae Im (+1.58)
4. Strokes Gained: Short Game (Bermuda)
Strokes Gained: Short Game factors in both around the green and putting. With many green-side bunkers and tricky green complexes, both statistics will be important. Past winners — such as Jim Furyk, Wes Bryan and Webb Simpson — highlight how crucial the short game skill set is around Harbour Town.
SG: SG Over Past 24 Rounds
- Jordan Spieth (+1.11)
- Taylor Moore (+1.02)
- Wyndham Clark (+0.98)
- Mackenzie Hughes (+0.86)
- Andrew Putnam (+0.83)
5. Greens in Regulation %
The recipe for success at Harbour Town Golf Links is hitting fairways and greens. Missing either will prove to be consequential — golfers must be in total control of the ball to win.
Greens in Regulation % over past 24 rounds:
- Brice Garnett (+75.0%)
- Scottie Scheffler (+69.9%)
- Corey Conners (+69.0%)
- Shane Lowry (+68.3%)
- Patrick Rodgers (+67.6%)
6. Course History
Harbour Town is a course where players who have strong past results at the course always tend to pop up.
Course History over past 24 rounds:
- Patrick Cantlay (+2.34)
- Cam Davis (+2.05)
- J.T. Poston (+1.69)
- Justin Rose (+1.68)
- Tommy Fleetwood (+1.59)
The RBC Heritage Model Rankings
Below, I’ve compiled overall model rankings using a combination of the five key statistical categories previously discussed — SG: Approach (24%), Good Drives (20%), SG: SG (14%), SG: Pete Dye (14%), GIR (14%), and Course History (14%)
- Shane Lowry
- Russell Henley
- Scottie Scheffler
- Xander Schauffele
- Corey Conners
- Wyndham Clark
- Christiaan Bezuidenhout
- Matt Fitzpatrick
- Cameron Young
- Ludvig Aberg
2024 RBC Heritage Picks
Patrick Cantlay +2000 (FanDuel)
With the exception of Scottie Scheffler, the PGA Tour has yet to have any of their star players show peak form during the 2024 season. Last week, Patrick Cantlay, who I believe is a top-5 players on the PGA Tour, took one step closer to regaining the form that’s helped him win eight events on Tour since 2017.
Cantlay limped into the Masters in poor form, but figured it out at Augusta National, finishing in a tie for 20th and ranking 17th for the week in Strokes Gained: Ball Striking. The former FedEx Cup champion will now head to one of his favorite golf courses in Harbour Town, where he’s had immaculate results over the years. In his six trips to the course, he’s only finished worse than 7th one time. The other finishes include three third places (2017, 2019, 2023) and one runner-up finish (2022). In his past 36 rounds at Harbour Town, Cantlay ranks 1st in Strokes Gained: Total per round at the course by a wide margin (+2.36).
Cantlay is winless since the 2022 BMW Championship, which is far too long for a player of his caliber. With signs pointing to the 32-year-old returning to form, a “signature event” at Harbour Town is just what he needs to get back on the winning track.
Tommy Fleetwood +3000 (FanDuel)
I truly believe Tommy Fleetwood will figure out a way to win on American soil in 2024. It’s certainly been a bugaboo for him throughout his career, but he is simply too talented to go another season without winning a PGA Tour event.
At last week’s Masters Tournament, Fleetwood made a Sunday charge and ended up finishing T3 in the event, which was his best ever finish at The Masters. For the week, the Englishman ranked 8th in the field in Strokes Gained: Approach, 10th in Strokes Gained: Ball Striking and 16th in Strokes Gained: Putting.
Harbour Town is a perfect layout for Fleetwood, and he’s had relative success at this Pete Dye design in the past. In his four trips to the course, he’s finished inside of the top 25 three times, with his best finish, T10, coming in 2022. The course is pretty short and can’t be overpowered, which gives an advantage to more accurate players such as Fleetwood. Tommy ranks 8th in the field in Good Drive % and should be able to plot his way along this golf course.
The win is coming for Tommy lad. I believe there’s a chance this treasure of a golf course may be the perfect one for him to finally break through on Tour.
Cameron Young +3300 (FanDuel)
Cameron Young had a solid Masters Tournament last week, which is exactly what I’m looking for in players who I anticipate playing well this week at the RBC Heritage. He finished in a tie for 9th, but never felt the pressure of contending in the event. For the week, Young ranked 6th in Strokes Gained: Off the Tee and 6th in Strokes Gained: Ball Striking.
Despite being one of the longest players off the tee on the PGA Tour, Young has actually played some really good golf on shorter tracks. He finished T3 at Harbour Town in 2023 and ranks 20th in the field in Good Drive% and 16th in Greens in Regulation in his past 24 rounds. He also has strong finishes at other shorter courses that can take driver out of a players hand such as Copperhead and PGA National.
Young is simply one of the best players on the PGA Tour in 2024, and I strongly believe has what it takes to win a PGA Tour event in the very near future.
Corey Conners +5500 (FanDuel)
Corey Conners has had a disappointing year thus far on the PGA Tour, but absolutely loves Harbour Town.
At last week’s Masters Tournament, the Canadian finished T30 but ranked 20th in the field in Strokes Gained: Approach. In his past 24 rounds, Conners ranks 3rd in the field in Strokes Gained: Approach, 3rd in Greens in Regulation % and 24th in Good Drive %.
In Conners’ last four trips to Harbour Town, his worst finish was T31, last season. He finished T4 in 2021, T12 in 2022 and ranks 8th in Strokes Gained: Total at the course over his past 36 rounds.
Conners hasn’t been contending, but his recent finishes have been encouraging as he has finished in the top-25 in each of his past three starts prior to The Masters, including an impressive T13 at The PLAYERS. His recent improvement in ball striking as well as his suitability for Harbour Town makes Conners a high upside bet this week.
Shane Lowry (+7500) (FanDuel)
When these odds were posted after Lowry was announced in the field, I have to admit I was pretty stunned. Despite not offering much win equity on the PGA Tour over the last handful of years, Shane Lowry is still a top caliber player who has the ability to rise to the top of a signature event.
Lowry struggled to score at The Masters last week, but he actually hit the ball really well. The Irishman ranked 1st for Strokes Gained: Approach on the week and 7th in Strokes Gained: Ball Striking. As usual, it was the putter that let him down, as he ranked 60th in the field in Strokes Gained: Putting.
Harbour Town is most definitely one of Lowry’s favorite courses on the PGA Tour. In his six starts there, he’s finished in the top 10 three times, including third twice. Lowry is sensational at Pete Dye designs and ranks 7th in Strokes Gained: Total in his past 36 rounds on Dye tracks.
Lowry is perfect for Harbour Town. In his past 24 rounds, he ranks 5th in Strokes Gained: Approach, 2nd in Good Drive% and 5th in Green in Regulation %. If he figures it out on the greens, Shane could have his first win in America since 2015.
Lucas Glover +12000 (FanDuel)
This is one of my weekly “bet the number” plays as I strongly believe the odds are just too long for a player of Glover’s caliber. The odds have been too long on Glover for a few weeks now, but this is the first event that I can get behind the veteran being able to actually contend at.
Glover is quietly playing good golf and returning to the form he had after the understandable regression after his two massive victories at the end of 2023. He finished T20 at The Masters, which was his best ever finish at Augusta National. For the week, Lucas ranked 18th for Strokes Gained: Approach and 20th in Strokes Gained: Ball Striking.
Over his past 24 rounds, Glover ranks 9th in Strokes Gained: Approach and 13th in Good Drive %. Harbour Town is a short course that the 44-year-old will be able to keep up with the top players on Tour off the tee. He’s played the course more than 20 times, with mixed results. His best finishes at Harbour Town include a T7 in 2008, but recently has a finish of T21 in 2020.
Glover has proven he can contend with the stars of the Tour on any given week, and this number is flat out disrespectful.
- LIKE30
- LEGIT5
- WOW2
- LOL1
- IDHT1
- FLOP2
- OB0
- SHANK2
Dave Portnoy places monstrous outright bet for the 2024 Masters
John Daly stuns fans into silence with brutal opening tee shot on PGA Tour Champions
Things got heated at the Houston Open between Tony Finau and Alejandro Tosti. Here’s why
Tiger Woods arrives at 2024 Masters equipped with a putter that may surprise you
Scottie Scheffler WITB 2024 (March)
Report: Tiger Woods has ‘eliminated sex’ in preparation for the 2024 Masters
Two star names reportedly blanked Jon Rahm all week at the Masters
2-time major champ announces shock retirement from the sport at age of 33
Paulina Gretzky opens up on receiving death threats following DJ’s move to LIV Golf
Neal Shipley presser ends in awkward fashion after reporter claims Tiger handed him note on 8th fairway
Collin Morikawa WITB 2024 (April)
Collin Morikawa what’s in the bag accurate as of the RBC Heritage. More photos from the event here. Driver: TaylorMade...
WITB Time Machine: Jordan Spieth’s winning WITB, 2022 RBC Heritage
At the 2022 RBC Heritage Jordan Spieth defeated Patrick Cantlay on the first playoff hole after nearly holing his greenside...
Jason Day WITB 2024 (April)
Jason Day what’s in the bag accurate as of the RBC Heritage. Driver: Ping G430 LST (9 degrees @10) Shaft: TPT...
Ludvig Åberg WITB 2024 (April)
Ludvig Åberg what’s in the bag accurate as of the RBC Heritage. Driver: Titleist TSR2 (9 degrees, D4 SureFit setting)...
-
19th Hole1 week agoDave Portnoy places monstrous outright bet for the 2024 Masters
-
19th Hole2 weeks agoThings got heated at the Houston Open between Tony Finau and Alejandro Tosti. Here’s why
-
19th Hole1 week agoTiger Woods arrives at 2024 Masters equipped with a putter that may surprise you
-
19th Hole2 weeks agoReport: Tiger Woods has ‘eliminated sex’ in preparation for the 2024 Masters
-
19th Hole4 days agoTwo star names reportedly blanked Jon Rahm all week at the Masters
-
19th Hole3 days agoNeal Shipley presser ends in awkward fashion after reporter claims Tiger handed him note on 8th fairway
-
19th Hole2 days agoReport: LIV Golf identifies latest star name they hope to sign to breakaway tour
-
19th Hole2 weeks agoAddiction, spinal fusion, and scam artists – Everything Anthony Kim revealed in candid interview with David Feherty
Eugene Marchetti
Mar 29, 2015 at 6:38 pm
I just finished attending a Demo day at my club with all the major brands available. I used the test results to start my search. Knowing that I wanted forgiveness over distance, I had already eliminated some models. I got down to my favorite three based on feel, looks, set up, and ball flight. I then went on the computer and made my choice. The numbers said Nike Speed. It gave me the best smash rate(1.47),spin 2580, and launch 12. I realize the launch was a little low but I was getting great flight and carry. Swing speed was 94 and my overall distance was 232. I went to the Demo Day wanting to buy a mizuno 850 because of its beautiful blue color but my smash factor was inconsistent. Ping G30 was the closest to Nike but the head shape was to elongated and a little light. I appreciate your article and hope you keep up the good work. Bottom line:GET FIT!!!!!’
Lindsay Morrison
Mar 27, 2015 at 10:19 am
“We’ve given you the best starting point we know how, and how it goes from here is up to you. Are you up to the challenge? Everything I know about GolfWRX readers tells me that you are.”
I guess I’ll just go to the store next time without this. If I’m in the market for a new driver this article wouldn’t help. It’s a waste of time puff piece.
That’s a shame, but that’s what it is. There was not much trial in this 2015 gear trial.
Alex
Mar 29, 2015 at 5:09 pm
Ideally it would help you start from a position of knowledge. You’d still need to test, but if you know your trends in terms of hit pattern and spin, then you’d know which driver to start with, and which other ones to look at.
It’s pretty obvious. Of course, if you were just going to test everything anyway to figure out which one is best, then by all means, go for it. But it’s getting old when people expect to find the best driver out. They’re all different. Best is relative. Reviews are relative too. In fact, a review is pointless. But people want to see them anyway.
Lindsay Morrison
Mar 27, 2015 at 9:50 am
“We’ve given you the best starting point we know how, and how it goes from here is up to you. Are you up to the challenge? Everything I know about GolfWRX readers tells me that you are.”
I guess I’ll just go to the store next time without this. If I’m in the market for a new driver this article wouldn’t help. It’s a waste of time puff piece.
That’s a shame, but that’s what it is.
Stickburn
Mar 27, 2015 at 6:29 am
These comments reviews reads like what I have seen as a millennial mindset. 1. I want what I want and I want it now. 2. If the product/info I seek is not what I want then somebody has done something wrong. 3. You have waisted my time by not giving me what I want. 4. My way is the right way and let me tell YOU how to do it right. Bonus characteristics: I am special and will not support you because you have sold out. I will now take my business/time elsewhere.
Cyd
Mar 27, 2015 at 9:33 pm
Well said!
Dave N
Mar 26, 2015 at 9:40 pm
Thank you for what you do. The Gear Trial piece and this response letter were very well done, and I actually like the approach. The message is obvious, and made me want to try out some new drivers. Too many people tend to look to someone else for the answers for 10 more yards and 3-4 more fairways hit. What they get from analyzing a bunch of trackman from someone else is beyond me. Worse yet is a purely data-based analysis of “averages” of many golfers who aren’t me. It may be interesting for about 30 seconds, but mostly useless. The answer is on the course. Pick any or all of the drivers on the list, try it out, ask a fitter for help if you want, and then hit the range.
Gorden
Mar 26, 2015 at 8:08 pm
If your over a 15 handicap and have played golf for more then 10 years your have a greater chance of being a 16 long before you are a 12.. So play what ever clubs you want, a simple fitting is going to work for you and playing what you want to play is really one of the best thrills in golf. If you love Ping , play Ping, if you like how Adams look and feel play Adams….playing what you like as a middle to high handicap can make the game just as fun as if you spent thousands on lessons and fittings and lowerd your handicap 2 points….Sometimes loading your bag on a cart with those shinny new Callaway irons looking at you is the best part of anyones golf day.
Rich
Mar 27, 2015 at 9:05 am
This is so right. I’ve just done that with my irons and while they might not be as forgiving as my last set, they look sick and when I’m swinging well, they are awesome performers as well. Good comment!
Jason
Mar 26, 2015 at 7:35 pm
I can appreciate this response from Golfwrx. While it’s true no head/shaft combo is going to play the same for everyone, it would be beneficial to hit them all with an iron byron – put the exact same shaft with each head and hit the ball off 9 areas on the face – heel/center/toe and high/mid/low on the face. Then just post the trackman numbers. At least then readers would have some data to go by to figure out what they need. All we get from this is a regurgitation of the most popular drivers that everyone already knew about anyway.
CatFoodFace
Mar 26, 2015 at 9:04 pm
Actually, a great idea! I can make my own decision based on numbers.
Rich
Mar 26, 2015 at 6:21 pm
I can appreciate that Golfwrx doesn’t want to say “this is the best driver” period, but I think what people are saying, ithe gear trial doesn’t give you much more info than what you find on the manufacturers websites really. At least last year there was the little sliding table to give an indication of the numbers you might see from certain clubs compared to the others on the list. There’s nothing wrong with that and if anyone got upset with those indications and ended up with the wrong club I dare say, they would be in the minority. It’s just a guess, but I bet one of the manufacturers got a little upset at Golfwrx for publishing that one of their clubs wasn’t as low spinning or forgiving as the next and they had to change their method. But they are hardly going to admit that are they.
Tom
Mar 26, 2015 at 6:18 pm
No good deed goes unpunished.
JillC
Mar 27, 2015 at 11:21 am
It’s easy! Don’t call it a “Trial” unless you actually test the products against each other. For me? I want the best possible driver for my swing. That’s impossible because nobody swings like me. Have the Iron Byron test, hit it in the 9 areas of the club face, vary the shafts (high and low launch), and perhaps do the AOA differently i.e. good golfer have positive AOA while bad once tend to have negative AOA. Then this would be a trial. Agree the intent was great, but if the effort is too compare and test, then do it the right way and it will be better than anyone else! I can foresee: “Go to Golfwrx for the best tests and comparisons!”
M Crossfizzle
Mar 26, 2015 at 4:25 pm
I hope everyone feels ashamed of their self…
You want the truth about the best driver
come to yt and get stuck in
The dude
Mar 26, 2015 at 4:01 pm
Great article Zak……remember, some people will never get it….
Zak Kozuchowski
Mar 26, 2015 at 4:08 pm
Thank you, The dude.
TR1PTIK
Mar 26, 2015 at 5:11 pm
+1
Cyd
Mar 27, 2015 at 9:34 pm
+2
johnnyb
Mar 26, 2015 at 3:21 pm
Wow, you mean to tell me that the PING, Taylormade, Callaway, Titleist, ETC. all make good drivers if properly fit! Wow, this is groundbreaking news that we must push out to the public immediately! Let’s call our study “Gear trials” and it will sound awesome, and everyone will know how cool it is, and then they will know that the big golf companies all make awesome drivers that are all tied for awesomeness if fitted properly! Because all the drivers are so awesome and equally tied for awesomeness it would be a “disservice” to pick one, because all of them are tied for most awesome if fitted for equal players at equal levels of awesomeness!
Adam B.
Mar 26, 2015 at 3:04 pm
I don’t get this at all. I am a scratch golfer, high swing speed, and high spin. I got fitted yesterday and the G30 was 400 rpm less spin for me than the R15 430. How can you say G30 would only be best for inconsistent or low spin players. You just added to the ambiguity of your entire study by giving such odd anecdotes. If you include the data, then you don’t have to try to justify it with confusing statements like this.
TR1PTIK
Mar 26, 2015 at 5:10 pm
Perhaps the reason you got better numbers with the G30 is because it was easier for you to find the center of the face or the fact that it is a far more forgiving club…
other paul
Mar 27, 2015 at 2:01 am
More then likely you hit a tiny bit high on the g30 and a tiny bit low on the r15. Studies have shown a half inch vertically can be 1000rpm different in spin.
Geoff
Mar 26, 2015 at 2:55 pm
Golfwrx has influence on the industry. Its many articles on the benefits of club fitting are one of its stronger attributes. To me, Gear Trials was promoted as an extension of the benefits of club fitting. Yet, I haven’t read anything that convinces me it is any different than a hot list or other generic review piece. As a matter of fact, it reads very similar. Just because club fitters made the decisions means nothing if the insight and opinions of those club fitters, along with their hard data, is generalized or omitted in print. It simply makes it look like Golfwrx does not want to take a chance at rattling the cage of a major manufacturer. It certainly doesn’t help that you encourage golfers not to be influenced by what a group of testers say, to go out and try different clubs, and to seek out a professional fitter, while including direct links to ‘buy now’ from manufacturer’s store fronts and Amazon.com.
Toms1090
Mar 26, 2015 at 2:24 pm
i get what you were trying to accomplish. But I think the gear trials would be better if you included those anecdotes. Knowing a driver is a spin monster when not hit pure is useful. Also, if your prasing getting fit don’t include a link to amizon to buy it.
Robert
Mar 26, 2015 at 2:04 pm
That’s the most ridiculous argument I’ve ever heard of in my life to not report specifics. You can’t be worried about what people do when they mis hit the club. You report on what happens when you hit the club in the center of the face. That’s what the clubs are designed to do. You really wasted a lot of time and money on this because this list does nothing for any one trying to look for a new club. I want the best ball speeds and from your article I have no idea what to look for. So I’m in the same boat I was before I read your article. I just feel bad that you asked for the time of so many fitters when so little came about this. It’s not about you telling us what you think is the best driver for us. It’s about providing all of the information and letting us digest it and letting us decide for ourselves what to do with that information. You can’t just not provide it because some people will not interpret the results correctly. That’s leaving so many people in the dark that could really use this information. The ones that don’t have good fitters in our area’s and have to either go to sites like this to get information or go spends hundreds or thousands of dollars trying out different equipment until we find the right one. You could easily provide the info and make no claims about what you think is the best. What a waste…sad.
KnifeCut
Mar 26, 2015 at 2:11 pm
This reads a little terse, but I agree with the what was was said.
Incredulistic
Mar 26, 2015 at 2:14 pm
Robert you could always start your own golf equipment site and do reviews like you seem to think they should be done.
KnifeCut
Mar 26, 2015 at 2:49 pm
Kind of passive aggressive. Let’s be real… the members of WRX are why this place it is what is now.
Why start your own site? This place is great because most (and often the best) of the content is user-generated.
The majority of the reviews here (both formal and informal) are user reviews. In this instance, they’re infinitely more valuable than the gear trial. We were fed the line that the Gear Trials were going to be the bee’s knees and it’s not exactly the case.
Robert
Mar 26, 2015 at 2:49 pm
Fair enough, but why even spend the time doing all of this if you are just going say, “These 7 drivers were the best!”. Without any type of numbers or data about them? It just seems like a waste of time. When this site does reviews of clubs or balls, they actually have launch number data with them, but when doing a gear trial for all of the drivers in which they tout it as better than any other test because they get club fitters to do the testing…they provide no stats. No numbers. It just seems incredibly odd. And I find the excuse to be pretty ridiculous.
Chris Nickel
Mar 26, 2015 at 2:26 pm
You honestly can’t read through the list and understand that of all the drivers on the market, there are 7 which are generally much better? You can’t read the literature to see that if your #1 criteria is ball speed, then all you have to do is pick a couple heads to hit yourself and see what gives you the best results? I understand people being critical. That’s fine. However, I don’t see why WRX should be responsible for people who are too lazy to do anything constructive with the information they’ve provided. I’ll save you hundreds of dollars. Everything is at .830 COR…I’m sure you already know this. Ball speed will come as a function of which club allows you to make the most consistent center-face contact. That’s impossible for anyone to figure out for you. Why would you want to buy a driver based solely on what works best for someone else?
Robert
Mar 26, 2015 at 2:55 pm
But there is no quantifiable measurement in why those 7 drivers are the best and how they are ranked the best. And they don’t have them broken up into the 3 factors in which they tested. They could have at least done that. That couldn’t have been that hard to do. The drivers are all close to each other, that’s why having testing done like this is important. It’s good to see what a large variety of testing shows between a large group of people. Where I live I can’t go anywhere and just get fitted for a driver and grab a couple of heads. I have to go buy a couple of heads and shafts to try it out. So this list does nothing for me in the current state. I knew these 7 drivers were considered the best before this article. That’s nothing new.
Chris Nickel
Mar 26, 2015 at 3:38 pm
There is quantifiable measurement. It’s just doesn’t appear for public consumption. I would think you could easily narrow the list down to a couple heads to try and go from there. If you live that far away from a place to get fit, I get that’s more difficult – but what happens if WRX release a bunch of the data and anecdotes and based on this you select driver xxx. You buy this driver, but b/c you never corroborated their data with your experience, you don’t actually know if that driver is the absolute best for you. You might as well select lower spin or higher spin and then pick the head you like the best…that would be just as reasonable as basing your purchase entirely off someone else’s experiences…Or start a thread in the forum and get more feedback that way…
TR1PTIK
Mar 26, 2015 at 5:05 pm
Do you hit the ball in the center of the club face? If so, which club face? If not, which club face do you most often approach center? Spitting out a bunch of numbers that come from perfect strikes that you will never achieve with significant repetition is pointless. You should be looking for the a club that provides the best numbers for you. The 2015 Gear Trials gives you a good starting point to assess which driver(s) you should be testing to determine which is best for YOU. Why do you want numbers provided by robots that you’ll never be able to achieve?
ca1879
Mar 26, 2015 at 1:54 pm
The article was very well done and did not attempt to prove anything from the data that couldn’t be supported. You showed excellent restraint in your recommendations and the results were presented clearly and with appropriate suggestions for using them. It’s hard to understand what significant fault could be found, but cynicism is a popular substitute for insight these days. The internet is full of those who think that pointing out the obvious about the economics of web publishing makes an argument to support whatever view they take of the content.
Zak Kozuchowski
Mar 26, 2015 at 1:56 pm
Thank you for your very kind words, and we’re glad to have your support.
TR1PTIK
Mar 26, 2015 at 4:58 pm
+1
KnifeCut
Mar 26, 2015 at 1:44 pm
The approach didn’t work because it literally says it’s a starting point… it’s not even finished. Reminds me of a virtual demo day.
I’m sure most would agree it’s far better for people to critique your data and method of collection than be criticized for not including it at all.
There are plenty of people who agree it’s lots of puff with little substance.
Sorry.
Geoff
Mar 26, 2015 at 1:21 pm
This was promoted as having a few tricks up its sleeve but, after all the hype, there isn’t anything in the results that hasn’t already been provided by a manufacturer’s marketing team or a publication’s puff piece. It provides about as much useful information as a list on BuzzFeed. This plays out like an obvious attempt by Golfwrx to do what other golf magazines have done in the past with their so called reviews: get manufacturer’s to link their web sites to that of the reviewer, generating more web traffic and ad revenue for said reviewer. And…it appears they are on their way to achieving exactly that. The second sentence of this letter states: “In the 24+ hours since it’s been published, we’ve set records in views and comments.”
Mission accomplished.
Zak Kozuchowski
Mar 26, 2015 at 1:26 pm
Have you been fit for a driver recently, Geoff?
Geoff
Mar 26, 2015 at 1:42 pm
Yes.
Zak Kozuchowski
Mar 26, 2015 at 1:44 pm
What worked best for you?
Geoff
Mar 26, 2015 at 1:48 pm
How is my decision relevant to my opinion?
Zak Kozuchowski
Mar 26, 2015 at 1:57 pm
I don’t know that it is, but I’m curious to know what driver worked best for you.
Geoff
Mar 26, 2015 at 2:02 pm
It was one of the one’s in your list.
Chris Nickel
Mar 26, 2015 at 1:08 pm
Marginally better? Just b/c some of the results look similar, doesn’t mean the process was at all the same – What I don’t understand is why critics can’t accept that maybe this year had what a lot of us have experienced to be true: There are a lot of great drivers from OEM’s in 2015. The approach did work. Trackman data confirmed what some of the best fitters in the country have seen. Unless I don’t understand how the Hotlist etc. is created, I believe this process was much different. If WRX said the R15 was the driver of the year, not only would it be a disservice (as one driver can’t be the best for everyone) but critics would jump at the opportunity to dissect and pick apart how WRX came to this conclusion and people would be arguing whether or not it was really 1.2 yards longer than driver XXX.