The New Classics

Drivers slyly change old look with new tech

By Mike Stachura

Photos By Jim Herity

October 2008

A recent survey by the golf-industry research firm Golf Datatech suggests that 50 percent of golfers are not interested in buying a "geometric" driver design. Which means, of course, that 50 percent are at least open to the idea. That might explain why many of the new drivers seem to be straddling the line between tradition and technology.

"The whole geometry explosion has helped make so-called traditional looks get much more aggressive," says John Rae, manager of the performance research group at Cleveland Golf.

The company's new Launcher is built on a wider front-to-back frame than the original to improve stability. However, it has a more conservative look than the geometry-driven HiBore XLS.

Still, the challenge of incorporating the benefits of technology-driven shapes in a more pleasing form remains. Can you improve stability on off-center hits (moment of inertia or MOI) without resorting to waffle-iron dimensions?

With its FT-iQ, Callaway is attempting to use a square head to push MOI to the mid-5000s, but the Ferrari-inspired look makes the head seem less boxy. According to Callaway research, the new shape improves the head's aerodynamics, too.

So it has come full circle. Technology drives looks, and looks inspire more technology.

Titleist

The three 909 drivers (D2, $400) use a milled multiple-thickness face (thicker trapezoid shapes in the center).

Tour Edge

The updated GeoMax 2 ($219) has 20 percent more face area than the original, and the center of gravity (CG) is 22 percent lower.

TaylorMade

The r7 Limited ($400) features an elongated front-to-back shape with inverted-cone face technology.

Callaway

The FT-iQ ($500) has a new carbon-composite body design with a weighted back cap to push the CG back and low (50 percent lower than the FT-i). An X-shape pad in the back of the face is designed to improve performance on off-center hits.

Cleveland

The Launcher ($300) has a 21-percent larger face than its predecessor and a sloped, 0.5 millimeter crown to help move the CG down.

Why Bubba Watson shouldn't hit Corey Pavin's driver

Using the robot at Golf Laboratories in San Diego, we were able to mimic the launch conditions of the longest hitter on the PGA Tour (Bubba Watson, 314 yards) and the shortest (Corey Pavin, 261 yards). The robot hit the drivers of each player. Though Corey's 10.5-degree driver optimizes carry yardage for his swing, both drivers are similar in total distance. Bubba's 7.5-degree driver is best for him because the ball lands on a hotter angle, resulting in more distance. But the carry yardages were similar. Still, a robot is just an estimation. "Unlike a robot, the higher Bubba launches the ball, the less spin he gets," says Ping's Matt Rollins. "His shot is a punch cut, so with a higher-lofted driver he'd hook it too easily."

Is the era of the 460cc driver over?

Hardly. Still, the race to build drivers at the USGA-imposed limit of 460 cubic centimeters occasionally has meant compromises in other areas of driver design. Stretching the shape can mean less material to position strategically. Now, some are suggesting they can make better drivers for certain players with a smaller head size.

"Volume is an archaic way of controlling what is happening in the driver," says Dan Stone, vice president of research and development at Titleist, whose line of 909 drivers includes the 440cc 909D3. Other popular drivers on tour, like the TaylorMade Tour Burner (450cc) and new r7 Limited (440cc), are also under the limit.

Center of gravity (CG) and moment of inertia (MOI) have a lot to do with driver performance. Emphasizing one can hurt the other.

"For better players, off-center hits are within a nickel, so the CG location trumps MOI," says Stone, who notes that a smaller head makes it easier to align the CG with the center of the face. If you move the CG farther back, you might get more stability, but the CG can get too high and produce too much spin for players with high swing speeds. "What that means," Stone says, "is that sometimes the volume doesn't need to be 460."

The best way to get fit?

POINT: An online system that asks for static measurements is sufficient to fit most golfers. Just getting the basics right from the start--grip size, shaft length and flex--allows a golfer to continue to make improvements to his or her swing without having to buy a new club each time a change is made. Sometimes an overly specialized fitting, like a closed-face driver to accommodate a big slice, can have the potential to lock that golfer into a bad habit for a long time.

--Mark Marney, CEO, The Golf Warehouse

COUNTERPOINT: Fitting is an art. An experienced fitter watches a golfer hit an entire bucket and notices tendencies. If a golfer has a fitness issue, like a bad back that affects his posture, an online system won't address that. Also, most online systems select shaft flex solely on swing speed, ignoring tempo. Two players might generate the same clubhead speed but require differently tipped shafts based on how fast or smooth their tempo is. A fitter with a good eye can gauge your tempo just right.

-- Bill Totten, Master Clubmaker, Golfsmith