We all know how important shaft length is for an iron.  It determines impact position on the face, interaction with the turf, and posture at address.  Drivers nowadays are being made longer and longer.  Cobra is actually releasing a 48” driver called the Long Tom for 2012.  The average length of a driver 5 years ago was approximately 45” long.  In 2011, the average driver length of the brands that we stock is 45.73”, and that number is only going to go up in 2012.  In concept, going to a longer shaft is a great idea since in most cases the longer the shaft the faster the head will travel.

So if a longer driver will increase swing speed, why write about it?  While fitting in the Miles of Golf Cluboratory™, we see a different picture play out that goes much deeper than raw club head speed.  The key for hitting the ball far is to translate the club head speed into ball speed.  If swing speed is increased, but the ball speed remains unchanged, then the extra club head speed is useless.  The true number to pay attention to is ball speed and its relationship with club head speed.  This relationship is called Smash Factor, and we use this number to give us an efficiency rating.  The maximum speed a ball can come off the face of a golf club is one and a half times greater than the speed of the club head.  This is the limit that is set by the USGA.

I personally fit more customers into 43” drivers than 46” or longer drivers.  The reason I fit for a 43” driver is simple: it performs better.  One example is from a guy I fit not too long ago.  The player was a strong guy, about a 15 handicap with some consistency issues.  Anything longer than 43” resulted in erratic impact all over the face, with erratic ball flight to match.  As soon as he had a 43” heavy, stiff driver in his hands, the contact on the face became much more consistent so did his ball flight.  His launch conditions (speed, launch angle, spin rate, spin axis, etc…) improved dramatically as well.  His club head speed (which is the reason that a person would go to a longer driver) was exactly the same as a 45.5” driver.  Despite losing 2.5” of length, the speed was identical.  This is a common occurrence during fittings on the TrackMan machine.

So the big question is: why do we fit drivers of different lengths when all of the new drivers coming to market are approaching the 46” mark?  Due to the volume of questions that we get on this topic, as well as personal curiosity, I decided to do a little testing and get actual numbers to help support a conclusion.

1. The Testing

We had 10 players from around the shop ranging in swing speed from 78.4 mph to 116.1 mph and handicaps ranging from scratch to 10 participate in this study.  For the testing, everybody hit the Titleist 910 driver in the head (D2 or D3) with the loft, face setting, and shaft of their choice.  The Titleist driver was chosen for the testing because we have the ability to match swing weight by adjusting the weight in the back, and we have multiple shafts that are exactly the same but are available in different lengths (example: Aldila RIP Alpha 60 stiff flex in 44.5” and 45.5”).  Every club in this test, swing weighted to a D4 or D5.  Each individual hit 10 balls with each driver length in no particular order.

Driver performance is based on three main variables: (1) Distance, (2) Accuracy/ Dispersion from the intended target, and (3) Face Impact.  The goal of a driver is to consistently hit the ball as far as possible and at the intended target.  This is how we determined the effectiveness of the two different length drivers.

2. Distance

2.2 Club Head Speed

The data that we came up with was very interesting.  On average, the entire test group’s swing speed increased with the longer driver, increasing from 102.8mph to 103.8mph.

Club Head Speed

Measured in Miles Per Hour

However, we did not see a consistent 1mph increase in speed with each individual tester.  The highest swing speed improvement came from our owner Chris Mile, whose club head speed increased from 79.5mph to 81.4mph, for an increase of 1.9 mph.

Club Head Speed

MPH

On the other end of the spectrum we had Ken Johns who actually recorded a decrease in club head speed with the longer driver, dropping from 106mph to 105.4mph for a .6mph reduction.

Club Head Speed

MPH

These two examples were the extremes of the test.  Four other testers recorded an increase of less than a half-mile an hour (.4mph or less) during our testing with the longer driver.

So why would someone swing a longer club slower than a shorter club?  When I showed Ken the results and asked him why he thinks he swung the shorter club faster, he simply said that he had more confidence in the shorter club.  He felt like he could be a little more aggressive while maintaining control of the club.  Ken felt that the longer driver lengthened his swing and decreased his efficiency, also decreasing his confidence.  The numbers of the test supported Ken’s personal feelings.

2.3 Ball Speed

As stated in the introduction of this article, club head speed means nothing if it isn’t translated into ball speed.  One of the data points that we focus on closely is called Smash Factor.  To go a little further into detail, this is an efficiency rating that divides ball speed by club head speed.  The ball cannot leave the face faster than 1.5 times the speed that the club head is traveling.  Therefore a perfect Smash Factor rating is 1.50.  The closer this number is to 1.50, the more efficient the ball is rebounding off of the face.  The Smash Factor helps us determine how closely the ball is hit to the sweet spot, and how efficient a player’s swing is.  For reference, the PGA tour averages between a 1.48 and 1.49 Smash Factor reading.  So how did the longer driver with an average club head speed increase of 1mph translate to ball speed?  For the entire group of testers, we only saw an increase of .9mph ball speed.

Ball Speed

MPH

Assuming a perfect Smash Factor rating with the longer club, we should have seen in increase of 1.5mph ball speed with the 1mph increase in club head speed.  Only seeing an increase of .9mph indicates that the longer driver is slightly less efficient on average for the entire group.  Even more so than the club head speed, we saw a couple of extremes in the ball speed category.  The two testers who saw the greatest difference in club head speed, also saw the greatest difference in ball speed.  Once again, Chris Mile, saw a substantial increase of 3.9mph of ball speed.

Ball Speed   Smash Factor

MPH

The reason why Chris saw such an improvement in ball speed is for 2 reasons: his club head speed increased 1.9mph, and his Smash Factor increased from 1.46 to 1.47.  So he was not only swinging faster, but also the ball was also coming off the face more efficiently.  This gives us an indication that going to a longer driver increased Chris’s potential for speed.

Like club head speed, Ken Johns was on the other extreme of the ball speed differential.  Ken saw a decrease of 1.9mph going to the longer driver.  The ball speed decrease can actually be explained by using the same data points that explained an increase in ball speed for Chris Mile.

Ball Speed   Smash Factor

MPH

Ken saw a decrease in ball speed for 2 reasons: he actually swung the longer club .6mph slower than the shorter club, and was less efficient with a Smash Factor reading of 1.47 with the longer club vs. 1.48 with the shorter club.  This data helps support the fact that Ken preferred the shorter club.

I personally was in the middle of the pack when it came to club head speed and ball speed increases.  I saw a .9mph club head speed increase from 114.5mph to 115.4mph, and a 1.1mph ball speed increase from 168.6mph to 169.7mph.  I had an identical 1.47 Smash Factor with both clubs.

Club head Speed   Ball Speed   Smash Factor

MPH

Chris Mile saw a significant increase in speed by going to a longer driver, Ken Johns saw a significant decrease in speed with a longer driver, and I personally saw an increase that closely mirrors that of the group average.  So what does this mean about the actual performance of the longer driver?  Driver performance isn’t just based solely off of speed.  Driver performance is based off of total distance and left and right dispersion.  This is where the data gets interesting.

2.4 Launch Angle & Spin Rate

The other two primary variables of distance when it comes to ball launch conditions are launch angle and spin rate.  Launch angle is the vertical angle relative to flat that the ball comes off of the face.  Spin rate is how many rpm’s of backspin the ball has coming off the face of the club.  Backspin on a golf ball creates a low-pressure zone above and behind the ball as it’s flying through the air, causing lift and drag.  Depending on ball speed, there are optimal windows in which we would like to see the launch angle and spin rate.  Ultimately our goal is to optimize launch angle and spin rate based on a player’s ball speed.  We want just enough spin for the ball to maintain its trajectory without altering it.  Too much spin relative to speed will create lots of lift and drag, causing the ball to climb and lose its down-range momentum.  This leads to a ball that will fall to the ground at a steeper than desired angle killing roll.  A golf ball with too little spin will not have enough lift to maintain trajectory and will fall out of the air, significantly reducing carry distance.

Launch angle plays a primary role in how much spin we need on a golf ball.  Across all swing speeds, the lower a ball is launched, a higher spin rate is needed to help keep the ball in the air.  The higher a ball is launched, a lower spin rate is needed to maintain optimal trajectory.  In a perfect world, we like to see a high launch angle with a spin rate that’s just high enough to maintain that trajectory.

For example, if there is a player who has a ball speed of 150mph and launches the ball low with an 6.5 degree launch angle, then this player will have to spin the ball between 2,800rpm-3,300rpm to achieve optimal trajectory given their low launch angle.  On the other hand, if you take the same player and he launches it at 15 degrees, then the optimal spin rate would be between 1,900rpm-2,300rpm to achieve optimal trajectory.

So how does this tie back in with our length data?  There are many variables that will change how the ball will launch and spin off of the clubface.  Club head delivery and face contact are without question the two most important determining factors of ball launch conditions.  Changing the length of a club will change club head delivery as well as face contact.

On average the 45.5” driver had a 100rpm higher spin rate than the 44.5” driver, and launched .1 degree higher.

Launch Angle   Spin Rate

Measured in Degrees     Measured in RPM

This is actually a very small change that that won’t make much of a difference to the ball flight.  Just like the speed test however, there were a couple of individuals that saw a significant difference in performance.  Every player in the study launched the ball within 1 degree with both driver lengths, which has very little impact on our down range performance, so I’ll focus more on the spin rate.

Once again, Chris saw the greatest increase in spin rate with the longer driver, and one of our custom fitters, Brian Carpenter, saw the greatest decrease in spin with the longer driver.

Ball Speed  Launch Angle Spin Rate

MPH                         Degrees                      RPM

Chris saw an increase of 465rpm of spin, and Brian saw a decrease of 284rpm.  In both of these examples the spin rate change was an improvement with the longer driver.  Based off of the ball speed and launch angle, the added spin with the longer driver for Chris helped keep the ball in the air longer allowing the ball to fly down range longer than the lower spinning ball.  Combine that with Chris’s increase in ball speed by 3.9mph and we see a ball that climbs to an apex 4.2 yds higher and stays in the air for a half-second longer.  This leads to an increase in carry distance of 8.9 yds.  That’s almost a full club length.

Apex (yds)  Flight Time  Carry Distance

Seconds                         Yards

Brian saw a decrease in spin by 284rpm with the longer driver, which was also a positive result, based on his ball speed.  Because Brian’s ball speed was around the 150mph range, and he launched the ball around 12 degrees, the lower spin with the longer club created less drag and allowed the ball to get down range faster.  Due to the reduced drag, and the ball getting down range more efficiently, Brian’s carry distance increased by 11.4 yds.

Spin Rate  Carry Distance

RPM Yards

2.5 Distance Summary

As an average the numbers are pretty easy to decipher.  The 45.5” driver carried 1.1 yds longer, and the 44.5” driver went .6 yds longer total.

Carry Distance  Total Distance

Yards

The longer driver carried 1.1 yds longer for three reasons: 1) ball speed with the 45.5” driver was .9mph faster, 2) the spin rate with the 45.5” driver was 100rpm’s higher creating more lift, and 3) the 45.5” driver launched .1 degree higher.  All of these variables are miniscule, however when combined they equal a driver that carries 1.1 yds longer than a shorter driver.

The 44.5” driver, although slightly slower, still had a longer total distance than the 45.5” driver because of two reasons.  Those two reasons happen to be the same reasons why the 45.5” driver carried longer.  The lower launch and lower spin rate from the 44.5” driver created a more penetrating (flatter) ball flight.  The angle of decent with the 44.5” driver, which is the angle the ball approaches the ground, was 1.3 degrees flatter than the 45.5” driver which means the ball will roll out more once it hits the ground.  During driver fittings we try to maximize carry distance while reducing decent angle.  If we can achieve maximum carry distance combined with the flattest decent angle, then we know we maximized total distance potential.

Decent angle

Degrees

Of course, just like every other topic we have covered, there were outliers who saw both positive and negative results with distance by going to a longer driver.  Brian Carpenter, who also had the greatest improvement in the Ball Launch Conditions, also saw the greatest increase in distance.

Carry Distance  Total Distance

Yards

As shown in the Ball Launch Conditions section, Brian carried the ball 11.4 yds longer with the 45.5” driver than the 44.5” driver.  Total distance increase was 15.5 yds.  That is a significant increase and worth the extra length assuming similar dispersion patterns.  There’s an interesting twist to the long driver performing so well for Brian.  When asked what length driver Brian currently plays, he stated that he prefers a short driver (under 45”) because he feels that it gives him more control.  I’ll discuss this in more detail in the Accuracy portion of this article.

Throughout the entire test group however we saw a different story from Brian’s.  Only 4 of the 10 testers saw any total distance increase at all, and Brian was the only individual who saw a total distance gain of more than 5yds.  The shorter driver had very similar results to the long driver.  6 testers saw a distance gain, only 1 of the 6 saw a distance gain of more than 5 yards.  Just like the Ball Speed category, the person who saw the greatest distance increase with a shorter driver was Ken Johns.  Ken saw an increase of 16yds with the 44.5” driver vs. the 45.5” driver.  The reason Ken saw such an increase in total distance is because of two reasons: 1) Speed.  As covered earlier, Ken’s ball speed was 1.9mph faster with the 44.5” driver over the 45.5” driver, and 2) Spin rate.  The shorter driver spun 492rpm less than the longer driver creating a more penetrating trajectory.  Combine the faster speed with the flatter trajectory and Ken saw a significant total distance gain with the 44.5” driver.

Ball Speed  Spin Rate  Total Distance

MPH                RPM                          Yards

So far we have 2 testers who saw a significant difference in total distance between the 44.5” driver and the 45.5” driver in opposite directions, and the rest of the field who saw a minimal distance gain with either length.  Distance only does so much as long as you can find the ball after you hit it.  15 more yards doesn’t help if it’s 15 more yards out of bounds.  So lets look at dispersion.

3. Accuracy & Dispersion

We didn’t see a significant difference in distance on average between the 44.5” driver and the 45.5” driver so let’s focus on accuracy and dispersion.  How did the length of the golf club impact the accuracy as well as the grouping of the drives?

We measured accuracy by the distance from the intended target.  For example if a player hits one shot 10 yards right, then the next one 10 yards left, then their average distance from our intended target is 10 yards.  Dispersion is the distance between the most left shot and the most right shot.  Sticking with the above example, then the dispersion between the two shots is 20 yards.

3.1 Accuracy

On average our testers hit the 44.5” driver 13.9 yds offline and the 45.5” driver 15.7 yds offline.  8 out of our 10 testers hit the ball straighter with the shorter driver.  Similar to the distance test, only 3 testers saw a difference of more than 4 yards between the two lengths.  Two testers saw an improvement of 6.2 yds and 7.9 yds with the shorter driver, and one tester hit it 8.7yds straighter with the longer driver.  The other tester who hit the longer driver straighter saw an improvement of only .7 yds.

Distance from Target

Yards

Despite the group average, the straightest individual group came from the 45.5” driver at 7.1 yds offline compared to 8.4 yds offline with the 44.5” driver.  The farthest individual group from our centerline did come from the 45.5” driver at 24 yds offline compared to 20.5 yds offline with the 44.5” driver.

Distance from Target

Yards

On average the 44.5” driver was only 1.8 yds straighter in relationship to the target line compared to the 45.5” driver, and 8 out of 10 of our testers did hit it more accurately, even if most of them only hit it slightly straighter.

3.2 Dispersion

Dispersion tells us how tight the groupings are.  If a player hits the ball on average 15 yds left of the target line, but does it consistently and repeatedly, then that player will have a smaller dispersion pattern.  The smaller the dispersion pattern, the easier it is to play and correct for tendencies.  So the player who misses the target line 15yds to the left consistently can compensate by aiming 15 yds to the right and still be a very good driver of the golf ball.  We also wanted to see what kind of impact length had on the dispersion pattern.

7 out of 10 of our testers saw a tighter dispersion pattern with the 44.5” driver over the 45.5” driver.  On average the left to right deviation was 7.6 yds tighter with the shorter driver than the longer driver.

Left to Right Dispersion

Yards

However, like every other test we have done today, there were extremes.  One of our testers hit the 45.5” driver 30.3 yds tighter than the 44.5” driver, while the other two testers that hit the longer driver tighter did so by 4.4 yds and 9 yds.  There were 3 testers that put up a tighter dispersion pattern of 25 yds or more with the shorter driver.  As a group the shorter driver did hit the ball tighter than the longer driver.

We only saw a 1.8 yard difference between the two lengths when it came to accuracy, but we did see a 7.6 yard difference in dispersion.  As with every test we have done so far there have been extremes both positive and negative for both lengths.

4. Face Impact

Almost as important as to how the club head is delivered to the ball, is where the ball impacts the face.  Impact position is going to determine spin axis (tilt left or right commonly referred to as side spin), ball speed, launch angle, spin rate, horizontal launch direction, etc…  If the club head is delivered perfectly neutral to the ball but impact position is low and on the heel, then we will see reduced ball speed, a lower launch angle, and an increased spin rate, and typically a right spin axis creating a drive that will be shorter and less accurate.

Each tester hit a series of shots with face tape on the club so we could see exact impact location on the face.  I measured the widest part of each tester’s impact group and added it with the tallest part of the impact group.  The sum of the two numbers will give us a good face dispersion number to compare to the other impact position groupings.  For example, if the dispersion heel to toe is 2” across and the dispersion crown to sole is 1.5”, then that player has a face impact position number of 3.5.  The lower the number, the tighter the impact group on the face and the more consistent the ball will tend to fly (assuming consistent delivery of the club head).

The average face dispersion number with the 44.5” driver was 3.294” and 3.248” with the 45.5” driver.  That’s a difference of only .046” between the two different lengths.  Surprisingly enough, the longer driver was the one that had the slightly tighter face dispersion.

Face Dispersion

5. Summary

In conclusion we saw both drivers perform well for some of our testers, and poorly for others.  The shorter driver did perform more consistent overall, however there were a few of the testers that did see a positive result with the longer driver over the shorter driver.  There are articles out there stating that there is no consistency difference between a longer driver and a shorter driver so you might as well play the longest driver you can to get maximum speed.  There are others stating that anything longer than 44” creates wild inconsistencies and everybody needs to play shorter drivers.

My conclusion after fitting on a TrackMan machine for over 5 years in our Cluboratory, as well as completing this study, is that everybody is unique and needs to be properly fit for a driver.  I personally play a 44” driver and I’m in the process of building a 43” driver.  I had a guy come in not to long ago wanting to go to a 44” driver for control, and we ended up putting him in a 45.5” driver because he hit it more consistently on the face that resulted in more accuracy.  There is no magic length that everybody should play, however everybody does need to be properly fit.

How Information Can Change Your Golf Practice:

1. When I practice, I tend to just hit the ball and not really concentrate on a target. No more will this happen if you are evaluated on each shot for how close it is to the target. You can even make it a competitive game with a friend or friends.
2. I really don’t know how far I hit my 8 iron. You will have a clear understanding how far you hit each club since every shot you hit in a practice session gets measured for distance as well as a whole bunch more.
3. I took a lesson and my instructor gave me some help with my swing path which is from outside to inside. I am not sure if I have corrected this. Feedback on the path and face angle of the club are given with each shot. It shows you graphically how the path and club head are approaching the ball.
4. There are three things I have read about hitting my drives longer. I am not sure if any of these things are helping me. Since each shot is measured for distance, you can perform your own test for each tip and see for yourself the results.
5. When I got my clubs fit, the club fitter said an ideal range of spin for my driver was 2400-2500 rpms with a launch angle of 12-13. How am I doing with my launch angle and spin? Each drive you hit in a practice session includes launch and spin data. You can even review this information on the internet at your computer or on your smart phone.
6. My short iron game is costing me a ton of shots? You can set up short iron practice sessions that grades you by how close you hit each shot to a pin. You can compare practice session to earlier sessions to see how you are doing.
7. When I practice I am always trying to find something that improves my ball stricking. One of the best indicators of ball stricking is ball speed or how fast can you make the ball go. As you practice, keep an eye on your ball speed and if it increases you are on to something.
8. I tend to get bored with practice. The feedback and competitive opportunities this kind of practice generates makes golf practice challenging and more interesting.

How does this technology work? There are special tees in our tee shelters that have TrackMan Radar Monitors. These monitors come from the defense industry and were designed to track missiles. They are also used by every club manufacturer to design their new clubs so they have to be extremely accurate. The TrackMan devices on our range measure each shot you hit for:

1. Ball Speed
2. Distance
3. Spin
4. Trajectory
5. Proximity to Target

This information is recorded for each shot and summarized numerous ways depending upon what information you are looking for. You may review this information over the internet and keep track of the quality of your practice sessions.

How can I sign up for one of these practice session? Come to the golf shop and we will help you sign up and familiarize you with how the monitors work. Any new customer gets a 30 minute evaluation at no charge. If you like it, you can either purchase time or purchase an unlimited pass similar to a gym membership. There are also programs that combine TrackMan, the Players Club, and monthly range balls.

Want more information, come to the golf shop or go to:

http://www.milesofgolf.com/practice/trackman/

http://www.mytrackman.com/TrackMan.Online.DrivingRange/Index.aspx

Ping continues its success in the game-improvement iron category with their new G20 irons.  The engineering department at Ping had a huge task in front of them when they were asked to design something to outperform the popular G15 irons.  With improvements in some key areas like feel, distance, and overall performance, the resulting G20 iron is shaping up to be one of the most forgiving and easiest to hit irons for the coming 2012 season.

While the look of the iron might not seem radically different than the G15, the benefits of the G20 lie deeper than just it’s looks.  Materially, the G20 irons are still made of a very high quality 17-4 stainless steel that promotes solid shots and tremendous performance.  The feel of the new G20 irons are much different from previous models because of the refinement of the Custom Tuning Port (CTP).  Ping has used the CTP technology dating all the way back to their I3 irons.  This version is described as “floating” in the back cavity, which allows for a thinner clubface, leading to more ball speed and distance.  The primary CTP device is now partnered with two other multi-material “badges” that provide the softer feel and enhanced the overall sound of the club at impact.

While the G series has always been geared toward game-improvement and helping golfers hit more consistent, better performing shots, the G20 provides enhanced accuracy and better control than previous models.  The change is due in large part to the increased moment of inertia (MOI).  With the thinner face and a deeper cut in the back cavity, the engineers were able to lower the center of gravity and pull weight further back for added stability upon impact.

Specifications

In addition to the changes in the club head, Ping has engineered a new steel shaft to work optimally with the G20 iron.  The new CFS (Control, Feel, Stability) steel shaft was designed to increase the transfer of energy from the swing to the golf ball while providing better feel and trajectories.  Available in soft-regular, regular, stiff, and extra stiff flexes, there is an optimal flex available for every golfer.  Weights range from 94 grams in the soft-regular flex up to 114 grams in the extra stiff flex.  As a graphite shaft option, the new TFC 169i is offered as the stock option.  This shaft was designed with some of the same feel attributes as the CFS steel shaft, but with graphite, the player will experience a more active tip, thus producing higher initial launch.  The TFC 169i is available in ladies, soft regular (senior), regular, and stiff flexes with weights ranging from 40 grams (ladies) to 84 grams (stiff).

Ping continues to do a great job with their G series irons by offering golfers a full array of club options to custom build his/her set.  The G20 irons are available from 3 iron all the way through lob wedge (58*) so that golfers can create a set with fewer gaps in loft and better continuity in feel and performance.  Pitching wedge loft on the G20 iron is 45 degrees, which matches up nicely for a 50 degree gap wedge option.  For fitting purposes, standard length of the G20 7 iron is 36 ¾ ” and the well known color code options for lie angle are available from maroon (4.5 degrees upright) all the way down to gold (3.75 degrees flat).

Testing

A side-by-side test was run comparing a G15 7 iron with its stock AWT steel shaft to the new G20 7iron with its CFS steel shaft.  Data was collected using TrackMan, a doppler radar based launch monitor, over a 10 shot sample size with each club.  Both clubs were standard length and were properly fit for lie angle before the test started.  The tester was fit for a red dot lie angle (0.75 degrees flat) using the Ping AFS Cart, which is available for fittings at Miles of Golf in the Cluboratory.

All the technical data aside, the club still needs to perform, and the G20 delivers.  TrackMan launch monitor data showed that the G20 had an increased ball speed by an average of 1.5 miles per hour.  While initial launch angle and spin numbers were relatively similar, the increased ball speed resulted in an increased carry distance of about 2.4 yards while landing 1.5 yards closer to the target line.  While the small jump in distance is nice, the tighter shot dispersion is much more valuable when it comes to irons.  The tester also preferred the feel of the G20 iron to the G15 because it felt softer and more consistent, shot after shot.

Summary

Ping is continuing the long and successful G line with these irons.  Looks wise they are fairly similar to the G15’s.  Where we see the improvements is in the technology and performance.  The Thinner face combined with the floating CTP port creates faster ball speed, better feel, and increased accuracy.  The new CFS and TFC 169 shafts provide great stability and a great feel.  One of the most important things you can do if you chose to purchase these irons, is make sure you get fit for the proper shaft, lie, loft, length, etc…  And you can do that in the Miles of Golf Cluboratory.

Nike Golf has been fighting an uphill battle with the consumer for years with new product introductions.  Most customers that come into Miles of Golf feel that Nike is a marketing company and technology does not play a major role in the evolution of their equipment.  Through our own, independent product testing, Miles of Golf could not disagree more.  Nike has been making major improvements to the equipment line for the past three seasons and this year’s introductions continue the trend.

This February, Nike will be launching the VR S and the VR S Forged Irons.  We had the opportunity to test both of these models this fall. Though fundamentally different, the Nike VR S will be replacing the MachSpeed Iron and the VR S Forged will be an additional iron to the line.

The Nike VR S iron will be in the game/super game improvement category and will once again feature the Nike “Power Bow” which allows the design team to reposition each club’s center of gravity to achieve playable launch conditions.  Enhancements made to the head design have allowed the Power Bow’s gram weight to increase throughout the set make up by almost 25 grams.  Nike Golf will also continue with the AM 355 stainless alloy face, as opposed to a lower quality 15-5 or 17-4 stainless steel.  This material allows Nike to continue to push the envelope with spring effect (CT) measurements in iron technology.  Nike Golf has also created thinner faces throughout the set to achieve distance control on off-center hits.

Specifications

The specifications on the Nike VR S 6 iron that we tested were 38 inches, 64* lie angle, 27* loft and True Temper Dynalite 90 Stiff, all standard for this iron.  These “standards” are slightly longer and more upright than most golf clubs on the market today.

Testing

During the test we used two players with handicaps of four and seven.  These players had similar swings speeds ranging from 90-94 mph. Each player hit 10 shots that were measured using the TrackMan Pro swing and ball flight monitor.

This is a ridiculously easy golf club to hit long and straight! Anyone looking for forgiveness and distance in set of clubs for the spring should consider testing these irons.

The Nike VR S Forged iron will be a new game improvement forged iron from Nike, but shouldn’t be forgotten by the better player.  This is a growing market in golf and many of the companies will be introducing clubs in this category.  The profile of the iron is slightly larger than a traditional players cavity back iron.  The top line of the club is slightly larger but still pleasing to the eye.  Nike will continue to use the X3X grooves on the face to ensure maximum flight control and shot-to-shot consistency.  Nike will also be using a new face material, SAE 8655. This material is a triple alloy nickel, chromium and molybdenum blend that allows for a very consistent face thickness, 2.5 mm. This material is considered a “spring like steel”.

Specifications

The specifications on the Nike VR S Forged 6 iron that we tested were 37.5 inches, 61* lie, 29* loft and a Nippon HT Stiff.  These standards are very similar to most irons in the market.

Testing

During the test we used two players with handicaps of four and seven.  These players had similar swings speeds ranging from 90-94 mph. Each player hit 10 shots. The shots were measured using the TrackMan Pro swing and ball flight monitor.  During this test we compared the Nike VR S Forged to our top selling forged iron in this category.  This iron was set up with the same lie angle, 1* stronger loft and a ¼ longer (standard for that club).

Based on the fact that we tested this against one of our best selling clubs in this category, I would say that Nike has come out with a great iron for 2012.  This club is forgiving, pleasing to look at and produces good launch conditions.  For a player looking for forged feel AND forgiveness, keep this in mind.

Tech Specs

TaylorMade has incorporated all of the innovative technology that they have come up with over the past decade into this one iron.  Technologies like an ultra thin face with an inverted cone for faster ball speeds and an expanded sweet spot, a precision weight port to precisely control the center of gravity and swing weight, and a progressive design which maximizes the performance with each iron in the set.  The lofts are progressive and strong.  Combining the strong lofts with the thin faces, this iron should go a long way.  They have two different stock shaft options available; a Fujikura Motore graphite shaft, and a lightweight KBS Tour 90gm steel shaft.  The graphite shaft is painted to match the graphics on the R11 driver and woods.  There are also many aftermarket shaft options ranging from heavy and stiff like the True Temper Dynamic Gold all the way down to a lightweight and soft Nippon NS Pro 950.  With so many different shaft options this iron can fit a wide variety of players.  The R11 is available 3 iron through the sand wedge.  The 3-9 irons are swing weighted to a D2, which is precisely controlled by the weight port in the back of the iron.  The wedges are a little heavier starting at a D2.5 and progressing to a D4.5.  All right, enough with the specs that you can look up online, let’s have some fun and see what they can do to a golf ball!

Performance

The iron I tested in the Miles of Golf Cluboratory™ was the 6 iron with a True Temper Dynamic Gold X100 (extra stiff).

The reason I chose this shaft is because this is the shaft that I currently play, so this would be an easy transition to test the head. The R11 6 iron was standard length, and standard lie angle. Nothing too fancy here, I’m a pretty average guy.  I compared the R11 directly to the TP CB since that is the iron that it is designed to replace in the line up.

The performance data from a TrackMan™ launch monitor in the Miles of Golf Cluboratory™ was as follows:

The results speak for themselves.  The R11 iron outperformed the TP CB iron in every category.  The faster ball speed came from a higher smash factor (efficiency), which is ball speed in relationship to club head speed.  The higher smash factor means that the thinner face of the R11 iron was giving me a little more “spring effect” producing faster ball speeds.  The R11 also launched higher with a lower spin rate creating a high, flat trajectory that is good for hitting the ball a long way.  As you can see, the faster speed coupled with the improved trajectory helped increase my carry distance by 5.7 yards.  As anybody who has played more than one hole of golf can tell you, distance doesn’t do you any good if there isn’t any accuracy to go along with it.  This is where the R11 really shined.  My dispersion left and right of my target went from 11.3 yards to 3.9 yards.  On average that’s 20 feet closer to the pin than the TP CB irons.  That’s going to create a lot more opportunities for birdies.

Summary

The R11 wood line has been incredibly popular, so it is only natural that TaylorMade would come out with an iron to compliment the wood set.  The R11 irons, just like the woods are targeted toward all handicap ranges from scratch, all the way up to a 30 handicap.  A scratch player may find these a little on the thick side, but as long as they won’t let that get in the way of their ego, they are an incredibly stable forgiving iron.  The higher handicap player will appreciate the forgiveness of the R11’s without having to get a super game improvement iron.  The R11’s are the do-it-all irons in the TaylorMade line up, and it lives up to that billing.  As good as these irons are, they will only work if they are properly fit to the person swinging them.  So as always, make sure you get fit in the Miles of Golf Cluboratory.

The ZL Encore driver is the follow-up to the original ZL driver from Cobra Golf.  This is Cobra’s premium driver offering.  This largely composite club head is designed for golfers who are looking for maximum performance with increased distance, control, and feel.  Now a corporate partner with Puma, the apparel company, the design team for Cobra has created an amazing driver that now reflects the company’s bold attitude with an awesome shelf-appeal.  The performance of this driver drastically surpasses the performance of the original ZL driver and proves that there are “Zero Limits” to what this club can do.

Tech Specs

Just like its predecessor, the ZL Encore starts with a composite crown and sole, which is fused to a titanium face and sole plate.  The use and careful positioning of a swing weight screw finalizes the club’s 460cc design and allows the center of gravity to be positioned low and back, promoting high initial launch with low spin.  The clear expression of the carbon fiber sole really hammers home the idea that this driver is light, fast, and strong.

Cobra has also refined the face technology incorporated in to the ZL Encore by combining elements from some of their previous designs.  The first technique is called E9 face technology.  E9 face technology promotes faster, consistent ball speeds and increased accuracy across the entire clubface.  This means that the high toe, as well as the low heel miss-hits won’t be affected as much.  Secondly, the new dual-roll clubface optimizes launch conditions dependent upon the point of contact across the face.  If a shot were struck low on the clubface, the tendency for a typical driver would be to launch low and have dramatically higher spin.  The face geometry of the new ZL Encore, along with the weight port, allow for a higher launching and lowering spinning shot when struck low on the face.  The results are increased distance on miss-hits.

The ZL Encore also comes equipped with Adjustable Flight Technology (AFT).  This adjustable hosel device allows golfers to manipulate ball flight for better accuracy.  There are still three simple settings:  closed, neutral, and open.  The actual club face angles are dependent on the loft of the club head.  The 9.5, 10.5 and 11.5 degree club heads all set up perfectly square when set to the neutral position.  The 8.5 degree club head is actually 1 degree open when set on neutral.  Each adjustment away from neutral affects the face angle by 2 degrees.  Thus, going to the closed setting would make the club 2 degrees closed (9.5, 10.5, and 11.5 degree lofts) or 1 degree closed (8.5 degree loft).  The open setting sets the face angle to 2 degrees open (9.5, 10.5, and 11.5 degree lofts) or 3 degrees open (8.5 degree loft).

Cobra has gone the extra mile when pairing the ZL Encore with a high performance shaft.  In fact, there are two stock shafts to choose from: the Fujikura Motore F1 and Motore F3.  Both shafts are the “real deal” after-market shafts offered by Fujikura.  In the past, Cobra has offered proprietary shafts as stock options, but every aspect of the ZL Encore is accounted for with this high-end shaft offering.  The Motore F1 55 is available in regular, stiff, and extra stiff flexes, and features a mid kick point.  The Motore F3 plays slightly softer with a mid-low kick point, and is offered in lite (senior), regular, and stiff flexes.

Following the success of previous Cobra drivers which had limited edition white club heads, the ZL Encore is offered in both black and white at no additional cost.  Cobra is the first company to come to retail and offer a player the choice of using either the traditional black club head, or the newer, trendy white club head.  The black head is trimmed in a bright yellow and features a black and yellow shaft with a black grip, while the white head has some silver accents and comes with a white shaft and grip.  However, Cobra is offering the option of interchanging any of these stock pieces as the golfer sees fit.  So, if you’d like to have the black club head, but pair it with the white shaft and grip, go right ahead!

Performance

We tested it in the Miles of Golf Cluboratory against the previous model ZL using TrackMan, the industry’s best launch monitor for collecting shot data.  The following results were gathered based on a 10 shot sample with each club.  The results are normalized to account for average playing conditions since the test was performed on a windy day.

The data above is overly convincing that the ZL Encore outperforms the original ZL.  The ZL Encore showed an improvement in all categories.  Our testers saw an improvement of 3.2 mph ball speed increase on a 1.9 mph club head speed increase.  This indicates that the head in more efficient than the older ZL.  Launch angle remained relatively constant.  Spin rate came down for both testers, on average 272 rpm’s.  Due to the added speed as well as the reduced spin, both players saw an increase in distance, on average 6 yards in the air and 9.5 yards total.

Summary

Numerous features have come together to create a driver, which not only performs, but also allows for total customization based on the individual golfer’s needs.  From direction, to accuracy, to consistency, and even to custom colors.  Faster ball speed, lower spin rate, and increased distance has positioned the ZL Encore to be a great driver option for the 2012 season.

Titleist is getting ready to unveil a new line up of Advanced Performance Irons on November 15th that will include four new models: AP1, AP2, CB and MB.  Miles of Golf is one of five Regional Fitting Centers across the country that has been given early access to fit current Titleist PGA Staff members and top amateurs in the Mid-West.  Having the fitting tools early has given us the opportunity to do some early testing and get player feedback with the new product. We focused our attention on the 2012 AP1 and AP2 irons for this review.

Titleist has been making ongoing enhancements to the AP line over the past 4 years based on feedback from the best players in the world on every major professional tour.  This year’s adjustments are a continuation of the Titleist R&D department searching for the perfect blend of performance and feel.

The 2012 Titleist 712 AP1 has the biggest visual change in the line-up. The goal for the AP1 irons was to retain workability and shot control, improve forgiveness and improve the looks at address.   When you compare this new model to the previous you will notice a slightly smaller profile thanks to a beveled top line and a smoother hosel blend.  They have continued to use progressive blade lengths and stronger lofts than AP2.  By repositioning weight using a tungsten weight block low in the toe, Titleist has increased MOI by 4%.  This iron is available in both right and left hand models.  The stock shaft offering in steel will be the True Temper Dynalite Gold XP and in graphite will be the Graphite Design Tour AD 65i.

The 2012 Titleist 712 AP2 went through a more dramatic internal change to get the performance characteristics Titleist was looking for.  In previous AP2 lines, Titleist used a single tungsten nickel weight that was part of the exterior of the sole of the club.  This year’s version is now a two-piece tungsten (not tungsten/nickel) weight, which accounts for more of the head’s mass (20% on average).  This allows the design team to move the mass more towards the heel and toe of the golf club, which increases the MOI by 7.2%.  The result of this change also improved dispersion by 6% over the previous model.

Visually, Titleist has made minor changes that include a squarer toe profile along with a thinner top line design.  Based on player feedback and grind work done on tour, the AP2’s offer narrower sole profiles in scoring clubs to increase playability and improved turf interaction.  This iron is available in both right and left hand models.  The stock shaft offering in steel will be the True Temper Dynamic Gold.

Testing

During the test we used five different players ranging in handicap from 0 – 7.  Those players swing speeds (6 iron) ranged from 84 to 98 mph.  The test involved comparing AP1 and AP2 to prior generation models.  Each player hit 10 shots with each iron in his current iron specs (lie, length, shaft, flex). The shots were measured using the TrackMan Pro swing and ball flight monitor.

During our testing we did not see any major launch condition changes (launch/spin/swing speed) over the 710’s.  The two consistent changes we saw from the TrackMan data were the horizontal angle/spin axis numbers (curve of the golf ball in the air) and the ball speed numbers.  Talking to the Titleist crew early on we knew that one of the goals was to make the AP line more forgiving, which is accomplished with higher MOI numbers.  They wanted to make ball speeds more consistent across the face, allowing for better distance control.  This showed up on TrackMan through ball speed, smash factor, spin rate, and horizontal launch angle.  The R&D department at Titleist succeeded with the design vision over the previous AP model.  Both the 712 AP1 and 712 AP2 produced a faster ball speed, as well as a reduced spin rate over their predecessors creating a longer carry distance that wound up closer to our center line.

During the off-season we can develop programs that are designed to prepare you for the next playing season.  It will help you make changes and develop concepts that will become the foundation of lasting improvement.  Changes, sometimes simple and sometimes more difficult, can be made effectively because you have the time to make the adjustments and get comfortable with the changes before you have to use it on the course.

This improvement will happen in 3 stages:

1)  Conceptually understanding what needs to be different.

2)  Working with your Instructor to see and feel the difference between the old and the new.

3)  Developing confidence in your ability to know and create the difference between the old and the new.

This process can be repeated multiple times to improve those fundamentals that need improvement.  As you gain experience working with each aspect of your game, you get better at diagnosing problems, treating the errors, then creating and practicing good habits. The confidence that is gained through this process will be necessary for making the transition from the practice range to the golf course.

On 90% of the days in the winter, it is very comfortable taking a lesson in the Kendall Academy studios. The same can be said for practicing during the winter.   If you happen to book your lesson on one of the 10% of days when it is not comfortable, simply reschedule.

If improving your game is important to you and it gives you another reason to stay active during the colder weather months, let us help you to make a difference in your game next spring.  Between now and the New Year, if you purchase 2 pre-paid lessons at the published single lesson price and take 3 lessons before the end of February, the 3^rd lesson is free.  KA Club members will receive an additional $10 off each of the 2 pre-paid lessons. Watch for more special offers in the Miles of Golf Newsletters and e-mail blasts.

Dave Kendall, PGA

Fitting for a belly putter is not too difficult, set up to a ball in your normal athletic setup, too long and it will be pushing in too far and may push you off the ball. Too short will make you bend over too much, you want it touching your belly enough so it anchors. Position of the putter in the belly is a personal preference. We try to size with normal setup and the eyes at the ball or inside a bit.  Body shapes can also affect the sizing process, depending on the physical stature.

The average size seems to be around 43 inches, head weight typically around 375 grams to 400 grams.  Lower lofts on Belly putters seem to be the way to go, tendency is to add a little loft at impact.  I have yet to see someone be able to de-loft a belly putter.

by Ken John’s