If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on [email protected] for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact [email protected]

Taylormade XR-03 Driver

  • 29-10-2021 12:37pm
    Registered Users Posts: 5,175 ✭✭✭


    Father in law has a driver thats a good few years old I think. Taylormade XR-03

    Does anyone know if this is a confirming club or is it illegal?

    Google seems to suggest its not (from older articles), but not sure if its still the case in 2021


  • Registered Users Posts: 12,450 ✭✭✭✭prawnsambo

    Non-conforming. The only ones in that range that are conforming are the XR, XR-FCT and XR-HT. There's a list of conforming drivers on the R&A site - the document I found dates from 2017, but that would cover the period concerned.

  • Registered Users Posts: 5,175 ✭✭✭obi604

    thank you

    Do you know what makes it non confirming? is the head too big or too heavy or both?

  • Registered Users Posts: 12,450 ✭✭✭✭prawnsambo

    Quite likely the COR (Coefficient of resolution). Basically the amount of energy lost when the head hits a ball. It can't go below a level set by the golf governing bodies otherwise it's non-conforming.

    Very simple explanation - It hits the ball too far. 😁

  • Registered Users Posts: 307 ✭✭redhill

    I used to have one of those many years ago, think it was the best driver I ever had.. till them gits declared them all illegal, too much of a trampoline effect they said…

  • Registered Users Posts: 5,175 ✭✭✭obi604

    Couple more silly and pedantic questions

    How long was this driver released to the general public before it was deemed illegal? (Are we talking days, weeks, months)

    How did it get released in the first place?

    Was there any refunds issued to buyers?

  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 12,450 ✭✭✭✭prawnsambo

    We're talking years ago. The conforming drivers test and list was first issued in 1999 and the testing method refined in 2004. The Taylormade XR-03 was released in 2001/02. So I have no idea what the situation was way back then, but there may well have been edge cases that the TM club got through on and may have then failed the refined test.

    An important note is that these conformance rules generally only apply to tournaments involving highly skilled players and top amateur events. Committees more generally can apply them, but I've never seen it happen. In any event, the 'grey area' where there were both conforming and non-conforming clubs on the market at the same time has long since past and pretty much every driver made since the mid 2000s are all conforming by and large.

    That driver is twenty years old now and probably even more non-conforming at that age. 😁

  • Registered Users Posts: 5,175 ✭✭✭obi604

    Ah ok. I didn’t realise the driver was nearly 20 years old 😬

    hypothetical question - if I was to use this in a stableford competition on Sunday, would it be be against the rules?

  • Registered Users Posts: 11,243 ✭✭✭✭fullstop

    Yes, it would be against the rules.

    As Prawnsambo said, it was released a couple of years before it was deemed illegal. There was a raft of drivers at that time that became non-conforming - Titleist 975 J.VS, 975 L.FE, some of the Taylor Made 300 and 500 series drivers, Callaway ERC were some of the better known ones. There was a drive to make the faces as thin as possible for maximum trampoline effect and it was getting ridiculous so they rightly reined it in.

  • Registered Users Posts: 2,884 ✭✭✭DuckSlice

    I do sometimes think wouldn't an Unrestricted Long Drive championship be great to watch where the manufacturers compete aswell to get the longest club using the technology that is banned. Could probably get boring after a while though.