Technology Advancements in equipment

BoardsMember

Anyone care to offer their thoughts on the pace of advancement of technology in golf equipment vis a vis when you should really be upgrading your equipment based on how old it is.

The context of the request is my driver. I got fitted for an R7 when they were the new Taylor Made. I still really like the club. Fantastic shaft that really suits me. But I wonder should I consider changing the head now? Or would shaft and head technology have progressed equally, i.e. could I benefit from a new shaft too?

I have irons that are about 10 years old. Having tested some clubs recently, and been fitted, they found that the steel stiff shafts in my current clubs are still the best match for me, but the newer heads are definitely more forgiving. Interestingly, a well hit shot with my old irons gave very similar stats to the optimal fitting suggestion, so it seems that with irons the head technology is what has advanced.

Someone suggested to me recently that the rule of thumb for golf equipment is that you should be looking at changing irons every 5 years, woods every two years, if you want to continue to take advantage of technology advancements. It didnt escape my notice that this person was in the business of selling golf equipment, but maybe there is something in it.

Villain

Just a quick comment, I got an R7 last year and moved to it from my Titleist 907D2 and I liked it but I really liked it after I added some heavy weights and set it up for a draw. I was getting more distance and reduce my big fades from about 1 in 9 to about 1 in 18

However I have never really got the consistency that I wanted from it so I bid on an RBZ regular and it arrived this week, I haven't got a chance to use it a lot yet but first impressions weren't great, although I need to spend some time with it to really get used to it and see if it's any better. I found I wasn't getting the sweet spot as often though and I was hitting above the swet spot a lot for some reason?

I do know someone that got fitted at fore golf and tried all new drivers but none gave him an advantage over the R7 but I know that can be mental as much as anything, I always find that when I start with a new driver I always swing too fast trying to force extra distance which obviously doesn't work. But it's not more distance I want it's more fairways so moving I'm hoping moving from a 5 year old club to the latest will help but not sure?

BoardsMember

Interesting. My R7 fitting was in ForeGolf. It was the first time I got fitted for a driver, or for anything, and is the only time I have ever bought a product based on a fitting. The huge advantage as I see it is that with the driver you really need to believe its the club for you. You see lads buying new drivers every year, convincing themselves the next best thing is the one for them. If you have get fitted for a driver you have nobody to blame but yourself. It's cheaper in the long run. I went through various cast off drivers for years, and only when I was 35 did I get my first new driver. I had myself convinced I was a poor driver of the ball, I've spent the last few years trying to convince myself otherwise

foxyboxer

I believe we will begin to see a limit on how equipment can be improved upon. It's like watchmaking. Everything that can be invented, has been invented. I think we will see a progression from the authorities towards limiting it which will lead to a direct conflict with manufacturers.

Once you have a repeating and consistent swing, a custom fitting would be ideal.
If you were to maintain your swing after that, then changing equipment every few years becomes unnecessary. However, someone just starting out might pick up a set off the shelf and when they've gotten better the would consider changing every few years.

Technology advancement has been a double edged sword from a professional and amateur perspective. It has been great for amateurs as it makes the game a great deal easier and therefore more enjoyable but from the professional side it has made it (arguably) too easy, less of a challenge, an erosion of actual talent and genuine skill and rendering obselete some of the world's finest courses.

It's hard to distinguish between what is a gimmick and what is a genuine innovation. The equipment manufacturers are businesses after all so we will always get equipment which is repackaged year on year but will provide no immediate returns on actual performance.

For me the genuine innovations during my time playing have been the odyssey 2-ball putter, Pro V1 balls, 460cc titanium heads, a modicum of graphite shafts and affordable custom fitting. The gimmicks in my opinion have been the adjustable technology, speedslots etc the kind of thing Taylormade excel at.

Introducing the 2013 Taylormade RocketBallz 2: An extra 15 yards off the tee and an extra 2 inches on your knob.

We are now seeing the absurd move into adjustable putters from Ping ffs.

I remember reading a small article a few weeks ago about a top amateur who simply went back to using blades, persimmon woods and balata balls after bowing out of competitive golf. He wanted the rekindle the purity of skill involved and also the tradition of that equipment. It's the total antithesis of 'modern' technology and one that interests me for some reason.

Think I should just get a set of blades and hone my swing with them!

BoardsMember

Interesting post foxybear.

At the risk of taking the thread down a diversion, I have always thought it interesting the difference between how baseball and golf dealt with the "threat" that technology posed to their games. Baseball flat out banned "metal" bats, golf had the same opportunity to ban metal woods but declined. I agree with you, it has come home to roost, the distance that new drivers hit the ball is a bit of a farce, not to mention the forgiveness. And its effect on some great courses is lamentable too. Having missed the boat on banning metal woods, the way forward now to control the ever increasing distances equipment will hit the ball is to start to think about devising new guidelines for golf balls. A bit like they have done in tennis.

foxyboxer

I recall reading about Nick Faldo who was moving house and he came across a set of Mizuno blades he used back in the early 90's. He just looked at them and thought "I must have been bloody good to be hitting those!"


I guess a suggestion would be to take a look at Demo Days from the top manufacturers, heading along every year and seeing if you notice any improvement, if at all. If you happen to find yourself at a demo day in a years time and your bombing them past your R7, then an upgrade would be needed post haste! :pac: If the difference is negligible at best then an upgrade would be a personal choice.

mike12

I don't think the techonolgy has moved on very much driver wise from the R7, not sure which model you have but if it is a 460 cc head it will not be much different, i think the R7 limited is still the top driver taylormade have made. I have had a R7 R9 and now the R11 just because i like getting new second hand stuff the R11 has the R9 shaft in it and i still have the R7 limited which is just as long as back up.
The stock shafts have gotten worse in all drivers over the last couple of years due to the increased costs of the raw materials for making the shafts. so unless u are going to pay extra for a good shaft u are going to gain very little by changing.
Not sure irons have become more forgiving but there are a lot more forgiving heads available than there were 10 years ago, if you know what shaft suits then a change there maybe a better idea.
Mike

hades

Read this during the week, pretty interesting. Perhaps the comparisons are a bit bigger than 10 years, but well worth the look.

Mizuno through the decades, technology may have changed a few things...

Chris Wood helped us out with an ongoing Mizuno NFC arguement, How much better is new equipment vs old?

http://mizunoforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=16&t=4761

Seves Three Iron

I was talking recently, through work, to the greenkeeper at Royal Birkdale, Chris Whittle. I was asking him about the changes they made to Birkdale between '98 (Justin Rose's famous breakthrough) and 2008 when it next hosted the Open and Harrington won there. He went through a list about as long as your arm, from lengthening of holes to extra bunkers etc. Almost all of the changes were responses to the increased distance that players were able to hit the ball 10 years on.

He was fairly matter of fact about it all but I have to say I was quite pissed off by the idea which I hadn't given much thought to previously. Who exactly is gaining from all these new R5, R7, R9, R11, R 11s clubs coming out? Obviously the manufacturers. And who has to pick up the tab? Courses like Birkdale etc who have to change the dimensions of their holes to accommodate the whole thing. It's a nonsense.

Even if you argue that the R&A probably pays a few quid towards course changes, it's just wrong, the whole principal of it. Why not just set a limit 10 years ago on club manufacturers and ball manufacturers and leave the 18th tee box at Augusta where it was instead of pulling it back every year. Anyhow, rant over!

P.s. I have a lovely set of old Titleist blades that I pull out every winter to pratice with. Sharpens up your ball striking no end before the season begins.

PhilipMarlowe

I have my R7 superquad 4 years now. Got fitted @ Foregolf then with a prolaunch red shaft.
I was recently @ Foregolf again and tried a few drivers & shafts. The only one that was mildly interesting for me was an R11 with a diamana (Mitsubishi?) kai'li shaft. When I say mildly I mean it was new and shiny and want etc. but it's probably a combination that costs $$$ (5-600 euros?) and the performance wasn't any different to be honest - certainly wasn't worth paying anything basically... With my swing I was getting about the same amount of dispersion, no real difference with distance either.
No magic dust I'm afraid.

matt-dublin

well my logic is that if id have bought every new driver since i bought my tour burner i would be hitting the ball in excess of 400 yards....

saying that im expecting my titliest 910 d2 next week with the stock aldila RIP 63 shaft, i got an extra 15-20 yards outta it i think.

the aldila felt the best for me, the kal'il seemed to baloon every shot, the project x just didn't have a good feel off it and the prolaunce also just went straight up in the air.

i do however thinkg shafts have a shelf life, i think after so many years of hiting them they lose toque and stiffness so they do need to be replaced, i also thinkg clubheads lose shape, especially on the face after a couple of hundred rounds