California Golf Technologies

What's new on the West Coast

Golf Equipment Chronicles 2007 (Part 6)

What Are You Reading? Finding the "Best" Clubs for Your Game

By Leith Anderson

There was a real high point this month. The Stanford Golf Team won the NCAA Tournament. On June 13th, the University held a reception for the team to receive the congratulations of the university community and all old Stanford golfers who didn’t do as well in their time. It was an inspirational event – winning a National Championship is so difficult and so rare. I sat in the back with tears on my cheeks, proud to be part of the family, however distant, still welcome at the celebration.

Stanford has turned into a sports powerhouse. In the old days, no one expected Stanford to win anything, although lightening struck from time to time. If you like to root for a winner, put Stanford Golf on your list. They’ve got some top performers coming back and Coach Conrad Ray has picked four of the best players from across the country for next year’s freshman class. This year they were a dark horse, next year they will be among the favorites. Seniors Zack Miller and Matt Savage are headed for the Tour. Senior Matt Shin is moving to New York City to become an investment banker.

Freshman Joe Bramlett missed beating Tiger Woods’ freshman stroke average by a whisker. Rob Grube, a top 20 on the Sagarin college player ranking will be back as a senior and Dodge Kemmer, one of the longest hitters we’ve seen at the Golf Lab will be a junior. Golf tournaments are free at the NCAA level so if you live in the Bay Area, a good way to get on to Stanford’s golf course is to come out to see the team play.

What Do You Read?

I’m in to a mood to complain. In the golf industry, there is very little access to information that is not controlled by the advertising dollars of the major manufacturers. The National golf magazines are driven by the need to keep their advertisers happy – and terrified to imagine the consequences of real criticism – cancelled contracts. That’s why a lot of readers don’t trust Golf Digest and Golf Magazine. They look forward to equipment testing results but after they read the story, they don’t have the answers they’re looking for. How can every golf club be great?

All advertisers or prospective advertisers always get good recommendations. Oops!! That’s everybody.

Sometimes, the big magazines conduct their own testing. Sometimes they pay Rankmark or Golftest USA to do the work. There are two categories that make sense to me: "performance" and "price".

But the results are always the same. If they’re judging drivers, irons, utilities or putters all of the popular products will be 8.2’s or 8.3’s. For those of us who studied statistics in college, the tiny difference of a tenth of a point on a ten point scale is statistically irrelevant. The magazines give you ten pages of pictures and charts and at the end you’re no farther ahead than before you started. Or, you might dig down into the individual scores and find that what means the most to you (performance and price?) gets buried by "appearance" and "industry buzz".

I’d like to see a new recommendation just one time: "Don’t buy this."

"Living After Midnight"

My hope is that the big National golf magazines are in for a fall. The reason? They’re hardly about golf any more. They’ve managed to convince all sorts of rich but stupid companies from other industries to advertise to the "golfer demographic".

Open any National golf magazine and you’ve got to flip a lot of pages before you see anything advertised that is remotely connected to golf. By the time you get through the ads for Buick, American Express, Rolex and a plethora of "luxury" products you might run into a page or two from Taylor Made, Callaway, Titleist or MacGregor.

Worse, struggling, innovative little golf companies that have great products that they would like to advertise are priced out of the National magazines by rate cards that cater to Cadillac. Feature stories only cover advertisers. Pretty soon, Golf Magazine will have twenty pages of Tiger’s swing tips and the rest will be all about cars, watches and vacations. I may sound a little like curmudgeon Andy Rooney, but as far as I’m concerned, I’d rather read a golf magazine that was about golf – and that includes the advertising.

The Role of Regional Golf Publications

The golf industry is unique in that it supports dozens of regional golf publications – Golf Today being a prime example. No other sport is covered with that degree of regional focus. It stands to reason. Each part of the country is unique, with its own seasons, courses and playing styles. It doesn’t make sense to advertise a golf course in a National magazine – regionals are much better for that as they are for local retailers, professionals and golf services.

Regional golf magazines accept product advertising but because of their lower circulation, product advertising doesn’t light up the switchboards. So here’s my suggestion for the good of the golf industry. Pick up Golf Today or whatever golf magazine is distributed in your area and page through the magazine noting the advertisers. Then, make a list of the interesting products and note the phone numbers or email addresses of the companies. Then, do something. Make some calls, send some emails, show some interest. If you can spare a few bucks, buy something. That’s the way to help the regional publications grow. They need to deliver sales to their advertisers. They need to get credit for the sales that they deliver. Do your part and help out. If you don’t, in your lifetime your equipment choices will be Titleist, Taylor Made, Ping or Callaway and you’ll be bored to death. Support the little guys.

There’s a good reason that regional golf magazines are more interesting. I finish the Chronicles on the fifteenth of the month. Ten days later, Golf Today is distributed. You actually get information that is pretty close to news. The lead time for the Nationals? Three months. Regionals give you material that’s fresh.

Regional golf publications are working together with better cooperation. The International Network of Golf (ING) is the organization that brings publishers, writers and companies together. I attended the ING "Spring Meeting" in June outside of Syracuse, New York. I had a chance to sit down with some key marketing executives from companies big and small. Future Chronicles will benefit from those relationships.

How Do We Find "Our Best?" – Testing Methodology

I a pretty good player for my age (62, 6’4", 4.5 index, 108 driver SS). After 55 years playing golf, I think I know what I like. I’m also smart enough to know that what I like might be knocked out of my bag by a club that I think I don’t like. The key to success is to continue relentless testing with an open mind – even clubs that don’t look like a good fit. Testing proves performance. I only write about products that I have tested myself, or products that have been tested by my partner, Fuji Bob or some of the ever-growing "Golf Lab Gang" of product testers. The Chronicles are about hands-on experience by players who reflect the diversity of all golfers. Over the years, readers have come to know Iron Byron, Heather and Chuck. The Pilot is coming on strong. Stay tuned and learn how you can join the testing club.

You can waste a lot of time testing golf clubs. If you don’t know what you’re testing (length, swingweight, shaft flex, shaft profile, actual head loft, actual face angle) you’re just hitting shots. Most players grab a few clubs out of a demo bag and take them to the range. They whack a hundred range balls that aren’t called "range rocks" for nothing. How can you evaluate golf clubs on a driving range? You’re hitting balls that don’t perform like the ball you play. You’re hitting to targets that you can’t see. And you probably can’t remember which club produced which shots anyway. Players that buy golf clubs based on a "Demo Day" testing rarely find the best possible fit. A couple of lucky swings and that’s the club that goes home with you.

That’s not so bad. Orphans deserve good homes too.

We don’t believe in that testing method. First, we want to know exactly the specifications of the clubs that we’re testing. Then, we test the player and the club with two launch monitors. The first launch monitor is the Achiever. The Achiever records important information: ball speed, carry distance, trajectory, swing path and face angle. Over a series of several shots, the Achiever also indicates consistency – an important factor in knowing that a certain club really fits. We don’t waste time hitting clubs that don’t test well. A few swings – look at the data. If it doesn’t measure up, the club goes back to the parts bin.

We finish our electronic testing with the Max Out "Launch Max" launch monitor. The Launch Max gives the most accurate spin data of any launch monitor that we’ve owned. We look for the optimal launch angle and spin rate as well as the most consistent performance.

If a player is looking for a magic driver, we winnow the dozens of choices down to two or three that test the best. We might adjust club length, swingweight and club balance during the testing process. Then, we’re ready to let a player take a club to the range. Hitting balls on the range is not totally useless, but your results should not be trusted. Range balls are much harder and spin much less than the ball you will play. It doesn’t hurt to compare drivers hitting range balls, but the ultimate test is to take your test club to the course. That’s where you can compare your distances with distance you know. That’s where you hit the ball you play and can see the true trajectory and shape of your shots.

It takes some time and a little investment to make sure that you have the right clubs to fit your game. But when you compare doing a little work in advance to wasting dozens of rounds playing the wrong clubs, the investment is worth it.

If you live in the San Francisco Bay Area and would like to join the Golf Lab Gang equipment testing club, call the Golf Lab for details. 650-493-1770.

I’m not trying to start any arguments with readers who have their own opinions. As far as I’m concerned, if you have an experience that’s different from mine and leads you to a different conclusion about what’s the best, I’m happy to hear it. But for now, I’ve got the floor to give you some opinions that are based on constant attention to golf equipment, testing for performance and playing all of the products that we recommend on the course. As they say: "your results may vary".

The Best of 2007 at the Halfway Point

All disclaimers apply. These opinions are personal, based on electronic testing and playing the clubs that we cover. Some manufacturers provide clubs at no charge for testing. If not, we wait a few months until the prices come down on eBay. My experience is usually confirmed by one or more of the Golf Lab Gang. If we miss a certain product that’s really good, I’m sorry. Readers can help by calling their own favorites to our attention. That’s how we "found" Aerotech – one of our customers told us that he loved the shafts. We can’t test everything no matter how much we work and some companies aren’t that easy to work with. We make no claim to cover every product in the market. But if it’s good, we certainly want to know about it.

Drivers: I got started five years ago with the "Search for the Magic Driver" and that’s never ended. Despite the belief that all innovation has been capped by USGA restrictions, the golf equipment manufacturers have continued to bring out new products that were truly better – year after year.

The year kicked off with the hullabaloo around the introduction of the Nike SUMO2. It was the driver that started players thinking about "moment of inertia" (MOI). The SUMO2 was the ultimate "love it or hate it" driver. Early on, the vast majority of players hated it. Then, some of us took it to the golf course and found that we were in the fairway more often than before. We posted lower scores. Then, it dawned on a few of us that the MOI story might actually be true. We reported our experience.

Early on, it was hard to support a radical product like the SUMO2 that was loud and ugly. But, if you played it and hit more fairways and shot lower scores the sound became much more tolerable and you found toasters could be beautiful.

There were lots of naysayer’s. The head of the class was occupied by Taylor Made, a company that mopped up in the driver marketplace for the last few years with their MWT – "Moveable Weight Technology". Taylor Made even went as far as to get their own marketing mathematicians to devise a formula that they termed "eMOI – or effective MOI – postulating that their drivers delivered more of a different kind of MOI which was better. The USGA didn’t think that was too cool but didn’t press an argument. At press time, you can still read about Taylor Made’s home made "eMOI" in their advertising. Don’t confuse Taylor Made’s number with the "MOI" that the rest of the golf industry is talking about.

The jury is in. We’ve sold 30 or 40 SUMO2’s at the Golf Lab. Each one was painstakingly tested by the buyer before final sale, usually including on-course testing so there were no surprises. To a man, they’re all still in the bag. The consensus? The SUMO2 might just be a little shorter than other drivers, but players are willing to give up a tad of distance for straighter drives. That is a low-grade miracle. Players accepting less distance in return for accuracy. The verdict? High MOI drivers hit the ball straighter. No doubt. This season, high MOI drivers have dominated sales at the Golf Lab. The best of the bunch, in our opinion, is the SUMO2.

One thing to think about. The SUMO2 is still loud to most ears and ugly to most eyes. If you put one in your bag, you will have to talk about it two or three times a round with your playing partners. After several rounds, that can get boring. Personally, if I’ve got a casual round to play with friends, I put the Adams BUL in my bag. It looks like a huge Portobello mushroom but that’s way more normal. It sounds like persimmon. No one notices it. Performance? Pretty close to the SUMO2. If you’re a little high-strung, you might want to make a more conservative choice.

Further Confirmation: The companies that missed the boat on MOI are praying for forgiveness and bringing out their own models. Nicklaus has two new high MOI drivers in development. Tour Edge is out with theirs. So is Nickent. In 2008, all drivers will be marketed by their MOI measurements. Mark my words. MOI is here to stay, at least for a year or two.

Conventional Drivers: The bad news for all other driver companies is that the last year’s models are going begging. Nevertheless, there have been some high spots. KZG’s moveable weight driver has turned out to be a super low spin head. For players with a spin problem, pairing up the K4 with a low spin shaft such as the Fujikura Vista Tour or Mitsubishi White Board has been a good fit.

Irons: Miura Rules. Miura has been a force in Japan for many years. Mr. Miura is referred to, reverentially as "God Hand" for his touch with custom grinding. Years ago, Miura established its reputation in Japan. Not so long ago, Miura made its name in the American market by producing the RAC MB’s for Taylor Made and the "T-Stamp" for Titleist. Important players like Tiger Woods developed a taste for Miura irons that he maintains to this day. (Don’t think that Tiger plays the same model that Nike sells on the open market.)

Just three years ago, Mr. Miura decided to bring his product, with his own name, to the American market. The rest is history. The original Tournament Blades are a classic. The second model, the 201, has been redesigned to compliment the Tournament Blades a little more closely. The 301 is the ultimate cavity back. The 101, designed for players who are just good, was replaced by the 201 – a midsize model that anyone with a 15 handicap or less can play. Overall, the Miura line has an iron head for every player and every taste. Whether you’re playing fairways with short grass that get baked out (Tournament Blades) or softer, more resilient surfaces, you can find a Miura model that matches your game. Remember those old Tiger commercials where he said his contract guaranteed that he could play whatever he wanted? It’s Miura, with a very clear Nike stamp.

Miuras are expensive but once you buy a set, you won’t bother to look at irons in golf shops any more. Players report that "nothing feels like a Miura". If you want to find out for yourself, we have several demo sets of Miuras, completed to known specifications that you can play on your own course. If you plan on buying an expensive set of clubs, you might as well know exactly what you’re getting. For more information go to www.miuragolf.com.

Irons: Second Place. Mizuno. It’s impossible not to recommend Mizuno. They have two very good designs. To me, Mizuno is the IBM of the forged iron business. Like we used to say about IBM: "Nobody every got fired for buying Mizuno." The MP-32 and MP-60 are solid performers. The new MP-67 has been slow to catch on but is OK for a player who can handle a small player’s blade.

Alas, the disappointment of the year was the new Mizuno MX-25. Designed to replace the venerable MX-23, it hit the market with high hopes. Unfortunately, there must have been some changes to the manufacturing method because the MX-25 has disappointed me, and most of our testers. Just like the Nike "Tour" Slingshot bombed in 2006, the MX-25 does not appear to surpass the MX-23. If you want to know for yourself, we have a great demo set for on-course trial. For more information go to www.mizunogolf.com.

Irons: Third Place. KZG. KZG is one of those companies that made tough choices by limiting distribution to professional clubfitters. At the Golf Lab, we only care about the quality of the products we sell. KZG is a company with a broad lineup of high quality iron heads, several models forged in Japan. They don’t pay players or advertise so if you haven’t heard of KZG, that shouldn’t be a big surprise. If you’re looking for the right forged iron for your game, KZG is worth a look. For more information go to www.kzgolf.com.

Irons: Fourth Place. Scratch. Scratch is the kind of little company that deserves the support of every golfer who cares about supporting the passion. Headquartered in Eugene, Oregon, Scratch imports raw forgings from the Ishihara Foundry in Japan and custom grinds them to customers’ specifications in their own shop. The only place in the world that a normal USA amateur can buy a set of true custom grinds is Scratch. I’ve got custom Scratch wedges in my bag. For more information go to www.scratchgolfclubs.com.

Shafts: Aerotech Steel Fiber. Aerotech is a little company that happens to have the best graphite iron shafts that we have found but is still relatively unknown. I’ve mentioned the consistency in quality in prior articles. But the most unique thing about Aerotech shafts is that they come in so many weights and weight progressions. You can mix 70, 80, 95, 110 and 125 gram Steel Fiber shafts. You can go for the "Player’s Spec" which is constant weight and you can even go with ascending weights if you want to increase MOI. The 125 gram wedge shaft is gaining recognition from good players – notably the wedge specialists at Scratch who are offering it in their custom line. For more information go to www.aerotechgolfshafts.com.

Shafts: E21 Scandium. The E21 story is either going to be very good or it will blow up in the next few months. E21 is a public company that has been visible in the golf industry for four years. The background story is that E21 is "commercializing" the vast supplies of Russian Scandium (the 21st Element, hence the name of the Company.)

Going back more than two years, I received samples of Scandium shafts and put them into a set of heads that I liked at the time – the "Dirty Birds". I had one day that could only be described as "magic". Irons were much longer than normal, shots arrow straight. I was excited. I moved that set of shafts to other heads and the results did not transfer. In the meantime, the company had supply problems and it looked like it might not matter if I liked Scandium shafts. The product went through several quiet periods. Meantime, there are very few supporters of Scandium in the custom clubmaking community.

E21 seems to be back. The have lined up distribution with the same Canadian company that distributes UST ACCRA shafts. They seem to have solved the supply problems. And, the shafts work. We’ve been working with one of our good players, a player who’s going to Arkansas on a full-ride golf scholarship. We built several test clubs for him, so he could compare Scandium against all of the "usual suspects". He chose Scandium. Fuji Bob sings the praises of Scandium after every round, and those shafts have been in his bag way longer than normal. If you’re looking for something entirely new and different in shafts, stop by the Golf Lab and check out our Scandium demos. Over the next few months we’ll be getting very familiar with E21. For more information go to www.e21golf.com.

Hybrids: Adams. Here’s a good one. If you read between the lines of all of the equipment reviews published this season, the Adams "Pro" hybrid comes out the winner almost everywhere. That’s by an average of a tenth of a point. Combine that with the total customization available from Adams’ partners like the Golf Lab and you’ve got a winner. It’s no surprise that Adams is dominating the senior Tour. One of the things we like best about the Adams heads is the weight screw that gives a player the option to try other weights on his own.

The mistake that most hybrid makers make is to build their clubs to long and use a shaft that’s too light. We like matching hybrids to a player’s other irons. That means that they should be no longer than the iron they replace and be mounted with the same shaft. If you have to go longer, don’t go more than half an inch. Most commercial hybrids are too long and too light. For more information go to www.adamsgolf.com.

Hybrids Second Place: Nickent. From time to time a company comes along that makes its mark in its own way. Who would have thought that Nickent Golf would try to muscle in and own a place at the table for "name brands". But they did their work, focusing on the Nationwide Tour and a niche of golf clubs – hybrids. A few years later, they dominate the Nationwide Tour for hybrids and have a toehold on the PGA Tour with their poster player, Jeff Quinny. For more information go to www.nickentgolf.com.

Accessories: Balance-Certified Counterweights. It’s becoming obvious that changing the balance of golf clubs can yield extraordinary results. Most players get 2-3 MPH of ball speed by counter weighting their driver. The company that’s been at the forefront of innovation in tuning up your clubs is Balance-Certified. The creation of Jeff Lindner and John Cranston, Balance-Certified has awakened the entire golf industry to counterbalancing clubs, first your putter, then your driver, your scoring clubs and finally the rest of your irons. Despite drawing competition from companies that could be politely described as "knock-offs" – Lindner and Cranston are not looking back. They added the "frequency filtered" putter shaft now marketed by UST. Now, they have a new invention in the pipeline that they think will be just as important as their first two.

Balance-Certified counterweighs are reusable and you can install them yourself. That’s a benefit because you need to experiment to know which weight works the best. If you’re trying to find the weight that delivers the highest ball speed, a launch monitor is required. For more information, go to www.balance-certified.com.

Leith Anderson is a Partner in the Golf Lab, Palo Alto, CA.
He will answer any and all questions relating to club fitting and club making. Contact: Leith@calgolftech.com.