Welcome to the ozgolf.net forums.
Donate Now Goal amount for the next month: 1000 AUD, Received: 0 AUD (0%)
**** Please donate to the Toowoomba Hospital Foundation as part of the Leon Treadwell Memorial Charity Day ****

Note: If you would like to avoid Paypal from getting their cut, either make a paypal payment to andyp@ozgolf.net as a "Gift", or PM AndyP for OZgolf's bank account details.

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 12 of 12
  1. #1
    Senior Member Order of Merit winner
    Join Date
    Jul 17, 2006
    Posts
    9,082

    Default Driver Comparison Data

    This maybe of interest to a few of you Ho's!


  2. #2
    Senior Member Major Winner
    Join Date
    May 18, 2008
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    13,246
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Bugger all in it
    Naturally grippy

  3. #3
    Member Club Pro
    Join Date
    Oct 23, 2008
    Location
    Melbourne, VIC
    Posts
    477

    Default

    Too many different variables....they should all be using the same shaft at the very least. Pretty useless test.

  4. #4
    Senior Member Touring Pro (PGA)
    Join Date
    Jul 29, 2008
    Location
    Fremantle, WA
    Posts
    6,345

    Default

    Only real bit of useful info is the mis-hits data imo.
    WITB

    Lowballing since 2009!

  5. #5
    Senior Member Major Winner
    Join Date
    Mar 02, 2008
    Location
    Sydney - Nth Beaches
    Posts
    11,813

    Default

    Not really - friggin useless unless they have exactly the same shaft in each club.

    Totally and utterly useless.

  6. #6
    Senior Member Touring Pro (PGA)
    Join Date
    Jul 29, 2008
    Location
    Fremantle, WA
    Posts
    6,345

    Default

    Sorry, what I meant was, I wouldn't nessecarily pick a driver based on its mis hits data but if I had narrowed it down to 2 dirvers, brand A v's brand B, this info could be useful.....for me anyway, knowing how many times I don't find the middle

    But they're all much of a muchness I think....doesn't it usually come down to feel for each individual over LM data!?!?
    WITB

    Lowballing since 2009!

  7. #7
    Senior Member Order of Merit winner
    Join Date
    Jul 17, 2006
    Posts
    9,082

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by virge666 View Post
    Not really - friggin useless unless they have exactly the same shaft in each club.

    Totally and utterly useless.
    No Pool Table Platform!


  8. #8
    Senior Member Order of Merit winner
    Join Date
    Nov 27, 2008
    Location
    GB
    Posts
    8,741

    Default

    Not only do they need the same shafts in each of the test clubs, but they would also need them at exactly the same cpm (freq), swingweights, lengths etc...not to mention the exact CT characteristics of each head.

    Any test can be made 'bogus' and made manipulable...

    ...factor into that that none of us are robots...

    ...and that robots have no sense of 'feel'...

    ...and we DO...and that it is different from person to person...


    See what I mean???

  9. #9
    Senior Member Major Winner
    Join Date
    Mar 02, 2008
    Location
    Sydney - Nth Beaches
    Posts
    11,813

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ned Kelly View Post
    No Pool Table Platform!
    Touche'

    Quote Originally Posted by TourFit View Post

    Any test can be made 'bogus' and made manipulable...

    ...factor into that that none of us are robots...

    ...and that robots have no sense of 'feel'...

    ...and we DO...and that it is different from person to person...

    See what I mean???

    Right with you bro. They all are meant to have a 830 COR therefore the distance arguement is totally defunct.

    It all comes down the goose swinging the club.

  10. #10
    Senior Member Order of Merit winner
    Join Date
    Nov 27, 2008
    Location
    GB
    Posts
    8,741

    Default

    Hey Virge, the 0.83 COR is THE MAXIMUM reading that it's allowed to have....

    ...but testing these days has changed somewhat to involve the CT (Characteristic Time) of each clubhead's face, which by the nature of manufacture IS VARIABLE (like weight, loft, lie, face angle etc).

    In reality there are so many finite variables, that to do a 'truly' accurate test the amount of variation between the test heads has to be virtually none (and that is next to impossible).

  11. #11
    Senior Member Major Winner
    Join Date
    Mar 02, 2008
    Location
    Sydney - Nth Beaches
    Posts
    11,813

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TourFit View Post
    In reality there are so many finite variables, that to do a 'truly' accurate test the amount of variation between the test heads has to be virtually none (and that is next to impossible).

    Agree completely.

    I am just bored with the idea that one driver is longer than another. It just comes down to the numbers and then it is a tradeoff between distance and accuracy.

  12. #12
    Senior Member Order of Merit winner
    Join Date
    Nov 27, 2008
    Location
    GB
    Posts
    8,741

    Default

    I too have long been bored with that argument...

    ...even with just one driver, my distances vary FAR MORE from swing to swing than from driver to driver !!!


 

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

     

Similar Threads

  1. What length is your driver?
    By Jono in forum Equip Me
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: 30th August 2009, 04:11 PM
  2. Vision golf balls comparison tests.
    By virge666 in forum Equip Me
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: 12th May 2008, 08:31 PM
  3. Replies: 25
    Last Post: 4th April 2005, 12:57 PM
  4. Ashton X-1 driver - Review
    By Jono in forum Equip Me
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 30th August 2004, 06:11 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Back to top