Nike joins square-headed driver club

This one sounds like a gimick, despite what the magazines predictably say about it. I think the manufacturers have run out of ideas to fleece yet more money out of us. But golfers being what they are (me included) will swallow this spoon-fed rubbish about how great square-headed drivers are, until the triangle-headed driver comes out!
Posted: 12/10/2006 12:33

The physics behind the clubs seem sensible; greater moment of inertia, more weight away from the face etc.

However, I'll reserve judgement until I've hit one- which will probably be Spring next year.
Posted: 12/10/2006 12:37

I would question the square shape on the grounds of airodinamics. Is the rounded, convetional shape more airodinamic, thus resulting in less drag, like a car.
Posted: 12/10/2006 13:19

Boomer, er not really more aerodynamic, as both have a fairly flat face so it's not going to cut through the air that well (probably a little worse but not noticably) unless you swing the club backwards of course ;OD

Maybe you've found something the manufacturers haven't done yet, a more aerodynamic club, rough the edges up, put some holes in it, we might all gain 5mph! EXMAX - wanna knock up a prototype?

I think the physics behind them sounds good, but it depends what you want to acheive, if you make a club more forgiving and straighter you always take away feel and workability.
Posted: 12/10/2006 13:47

Surely if you can't hit a 460cc driver on the sweet spot, which is massive compared to an iron, then maybe a driver is not for you. I think I will stick with the r7 400 or 425 for manouverabiliy.
Posted: 12/10/2006 13:54

If the swing isn't there the golf ball won't care.

Aerodynamic's are hardly going to play a part on a faulty swing.

I for one think that this is going to be a really cool addition to club head design.

I bet my clapped out SAAB that the stats will show more FIR's with this new design, even if there is a yardage penalty.

Can't wait to try one myself.
Posted: 12/10/2006 13:55

I can see how they could be more forgiving, with a bit more stabilitiy, but how come it took 100 years for the deisgn to appear, if it's such a great idea. I'm very suspicious of golfing magazines who say every new design is great, as this month's Today's Golfer has, just because the manufacturers are paying them large amounts to feature their gear. I guess the only real way to find out is to try one out.
Posted: 12/10/2006 14:38

I don't read too many golfing magazines! There tends to be too much contradiction and as you say the dreaded advertising.

However I do like to keep up with the technology when appropriate.

The reason I like this idea is that I agree with the logic. They make iron mallets with square heads for a reason. Ever hit your thumb nail with a round headed hammer? Ouch!!

With this new club concept I think we will invent new terminology. We won't have to strike the "sweet spot "any more. It wil be more along the lines of hitting the "power square".

I prefer to let my irons do the talking once I am in the fairway. But wouldn't it be nice to be playing the second stroke more often from off the short stuff in the fairway ? You bet ya!!

I personally think that this is going to help good iron players shave more off their handicaps than any other invention this year.

So "Swing low sweet power square"



Posted: 12/10/2006 14:52

Cars used to be square and now they are rounded for areodynamics so are planes.
Just another marketing ploy, stick to what you know.
I am :)
Posted: 12/10/2006 19:24

Marketing, marketing, marketing.

Call me a cynic, but I believe most golf companies have stocks of designs, which they take into production from time to time and bring out in their new models.

I don't believe there's that much yet to be "discovered" about golf clubs. Given the level of research technology available today, it's not that difficult to know all there is to know about golf clubs. Any new idea or design can be tested in computer simulation to a fairly high degree of accuracy, so it's not as if prototypes of new designs need to be produced.

Golf companies, as with most industries, need to sell their product to stay in business. Trotting out a model with all the new technologies incorporated, basically means sales of that model only.

What have we had so far ? Oversize, titanium, carbon crowns, variable weighting, dual face, composite materials, to name but a few. If all these make for a better driver, why not make one model incorporating all the above, rather than a model for each new idea ?

Ok, personal choice will play a big role in choosing a new driver, so not everybody will like carbon crowns for example.

I doubt square drivers are a new idea, and I'm pretty sure next year's drivers will have "new" innovations the companies already have.
Posted: 13/10/2006 08:02

I know where Boomers coming from, it was only recently that club makers were advertising clubs with more aerodynamic shape so it cuts through the air more easily.

its all a load of b0ll$$x really, lets face it, (and this has already been said), its how you swing it, not what it looks like.

If I hit a nail with a hammer with a round head, square head or shoe heel it still goes in the wall! If I make a mistake & catch my thumb with any of them it still hurts - I just get a different shaped bruise.
Posted: 13/10/2006 08:54

I am truly amazed! If some of the views above are to be taken seriously, I have to assume that you are all using sticks and rubber balls!!

I for one use Mizuno driver (MP001) and Mizuno Pro II irons (Which are dated for technology 5+ years old)

They work for me, but I know having tried newer technology clubs that there has been substantial improvements in club head distribution allowing for longer drives, better ball control and flight characteristics.

My point is that the technology is moving forward not backwards. If it were moving backwards, being a pretty intelligent species, we would see through that and ignore all the marketing hype and carry on with our hand made sticks and rubber balls.

I would quite like to know whether there are any amongst the above who are using granddads clubs or whether they are using current technology.

If the latter, why? If the manufacturers are getting it so wrong why is the golf game getting LONGER and THINNER.

The comment from GC just proves my point. If manufacturers had not developed and advanced technology we would still be driving around in square cars with horseshoe brakes and flat spring suspension!

I for one am grateful when I get in my car, turn on the radio, glide away smoothly to 60mph, put on the air conditioning, knowing that I can stop on a "5 pence" with my ventilated anti-lock disk braking system.

There will always be limits to club design, since they all have to fall within the R&A rules.

But I see nothing wrong in moving the technology on. Does anyone think that they will still be using the same irons and drivers 10 years from now?

I for one know that I won't be. Shear volume of golf is going to wear out my clubs before then. So when I next purchase new gear, I intend to get the best technology I can afford.

Square, round, triangular, or whatever that may be.

The difference in the amount of force exerted against the club head of a rounded "aerodynamic" club compared to that against the raw spread power of a square face is incredibly small. If any one thinks that the shape is going to make any difference to a good golfers swing then I know that they are going to be incredibly surprised.

AP suggests that there is not much to be discovered about golf clubs. Well I think that the industry will discover NEW alloy combinations, better shaft construction, better grip materials, better iron head construction, better "woods" development and better ball construction.

That’s just about everything. See you guys in 10 years time with my sonic boom driver, "never miss" irons and "only one putt required" putter. I hope that you have all stuck in the past and guess what I will be the guy with the honours on every hole and the last to play to the green.

Ah, golf. What a game!





Posted: 13/10/2006 09:07

Andrew et al,

>> Oversize, titanium, carbon crowns, variable weighting, dual face, composite materials, to name but a few......why not make one model incorporating all the above ?

Because they would only have one product to sell and not make as much money !!

T
Posted: 13/10/2006 09:10

Sounds logical.... in a dictatorship.

I like the free market. It makes people develop new ideas or improve old ones.

So what if there is a change of silver along the way. I would like to think that there will be a variety of products in the future and they all cost money to make and develop.

TM - you might as well make all golf courses flat and the same length on every hole. variety is the spice of life.

Not everyone likes a BMW....... well actually wrong example everyone does like a BMW. My point is I don't want to land up being forced to walk everywhere in the future because you can only buy one model of car and that one is so expensive only the "select" can afford to buy it.

Free market - great idea! It keeps advances moving forwards and keeps prices DOWN!
Posted: 13/10/2006 09:27

I'm sure that everyone here who claims it's marketing is NOT still using a persimmon wood? If there are benefits from square drivers over the more traditional models then the tour pro's will be using them (as per 460cc) and they will become more mainstream.
Most people now use titanium drivers, with a low COG, graphite shaft, 460cc heads etc.

I'm not saying I'll get one when it comes out but if it benefits my game then I'll probably buy one. I'm not too bothered about whether the club looks traditional or not.
Posted: 13/10/2006 09:34

Hooray for Stuart!

That's the spirit. Let's start a revolution in favour of the free market.

Oh hang on I'm getting carried away. What was this thread about?

Oh yes square head drivers. Still I am relieved that logic will prevail and at least we are going to try the new technology. How else are we going to judge whether its a marketing ploy or not?

Hey we will probably be the two guys in adjoining driving bays with square head drivers, with a crowd of disbeliveing viewers shaking there heads in disbelief.

Hopefully not at how bad we are hitting the ball nor at how slow we are swinging the club because of "aerodynamics"!

Keep the faith bro. The future is orange..... Now thats a thought. An orange shaped driver with a square head and a...........

I better get back to work! I keep thinking that I would rather be playing golf!!!


Posted: 13/10/2006 09:54

Hal,

Totally agree - variety is the spice so they say and I was only answering Andrew's point - and it would never happen - one product and price may happen in North Korea [if they are allowed to play golf there] but not in a free market economy.

T.
Posted: 13/10/2006 09:56

I'm not against advances in equipment technology and yes I do play better with the modern clubs.

The point is that manufacturers trot out new models at fairly regular intervals, ie start of new season, with new materials, new ideas etc, claiming each new model to be the best thing since sliced bread.

Case in point:
Model 1: Integra Sooo Long
Model 2: Integra Sooo Long Carbon Crown
Model 3: Integra Sooo Long Double Face
Model 4: Interga Sooo Long with moveable weights
Model 5: Integra Super Sooo Long, incorporating all the above

All pretty good drivers. A friend here has 3 or 4 of the above and now has the Super Sooo Long.

If all these innovations make for a better driver, then incorporate them into a single driver and get it over and done with. Don't add one idea to each generation of driver, when the technologies are already there.

Just to illustrate, I worked for many years for a Russian oil company, who already have the technology to produce a light crude from natural gas. Given the natutral gas reserves in Russia, using this would result in a substantial drop in fuel prices, maybe as high as 15-20 pence a gallon at the pumps. Is it being used ? No. When market conditions are right though (ie crude $100+ / barrel), it will be touted as new a innovation.

Believe it or not, an American company has also developed a hydrogen engine which has little difference in performance from a petrol driven engine. The copyright belongs to an oil company. Again, when the market conditions are right, it will be trotted out as a new innovation.

Titanium, double face, carbon crowns etc, are nothing new. They just get marketed as such.
Posted: 13/10/2006 10:43

Andrew I agree that club companies bring out one club then another with small differences, which don't add up to much. AKA TM with the R7 then the R7 TP, 425, 460, 460 draw, R5 etc etc. But as consumers we need to decide when it is best for us to upgrade to the latter model.
They are all trying to outsell each other with their own interpretation within the USGA rules.
But I'm not sure that all the club companies are sitting on plans for a square driver but acting like a cartel and all producing them at a similar date to drag out old designs.

Posted: 13/10/2006 11:19

No arguments with what you are saying Andrew, but doesn't this happen in every bubiness?

For example, in software we had MS Office 95, then Office 97 Standard and Professional, Office 2000 Standard, Professional, Premium, Enterprise etc., etc., - Then Office 2003 with all the above variants and now Office 2007 is on the horizon - again with all the variants depending on what you will pay for it.

This is called the "Corporate Revenue Stream" - to ensure money flow in more than it flows out - and happens in all commercial operations. Don't always like it but we are stuck with it.

T.


Posted: 13/10/2006 11:23

Ok Andrew, I get the picture. Y

ou are not against the technology, but just want whatever is currently developed to be in the market place now, not when the companies in question are going to make the most money by trotting them out piece meal.

The problem is introducing new technologies too early could cripple economies. For instance, if the petrol engine was ditched overnight for one running on water, companies would go bust due to irrecoverable losses on stock production.

Who will suffer the most? You and me. Millions lose jobs, Less people buy new products, companies downsize, R&D budgets zero and finally we get stuck with worn out clubs which eventually become museum pieces.

On the other side of the coin perhaps you have another more valid point. What you are really saying is that some technologies are just being
s t r e t c h e d out a bit to much from launch to improvement etc. purely for financial gain rather than market edge.

I would have to agree with this point, however I think that this "new" club head design does not fall into this catergory. It is a radical alteration from the norm, a bit like saquatch for Nike.

Anyhow, I guess we will have to find out whether it is a significant move forward when we try it out. My guess is that it will be a significant aid to playing straighter golf of of the tee.

You guys all have a nice day. I have got to get cracking so that I can get in 9 holes this evening.

Hal
Posted: 13/10/2006 11:32

I guess what I would like to see would be a golf company having a full range of clubs, with all the available technologies, from which golfers could choose the best for their game.

It's unfortunately not confined to golf, but I really don't like this "piece meal" attitude.

Mind you, once the bloody things are on the market, I'll probably be checking them out, just in case I'm wrong and this really is a new deal !!!

Have a good game Hal and a good week-end to all.
Posted: 13/10/2006 12:09

I don't think Callaway and Nike would have gone into this phase of driver production without knowing that tour pros and then amateurs will be queuing up for the square heads in the spring. By the time Tiger and Mickelson go head to head at the Masters using the square heads then everyone will want one.
I also think that it will look amazingly normal in next to no time ... I remember when John Daly started using the "Jumbo Whale" driver and we all thought it was the most stupid, big ridiculous looking driver possible - also the original BigBertha ... those first "big headed drivers" look tiny nowadays ...
Posted: 13/10/2006 13:24

I might be the start Mickleson take 2 drivers for all the pros. A square one for the nice long straight drivers and a traditional one to work the ball.

I wonder what they'd ditch
Posted: 13/10/2006 13:34

Surely, more weight in the toe, as per square driver set up, will mean more fades/slices again? What manufacturers have been doing is moving weight out of the toe to encourage us all to hit that elusive draw by getting the toe to move faster back to impact - it would appear they are moving away from that idea and introducing a different slant on driver technology with this MOI stuff.

Bottom line is with more weight on the toe side, the face becomes difficult to square again, hence Callaway and Mizuno, to name but two, removed weight from the toe side (MX500 and new Fusion FT3 'draw') to help square the face up - it would appear that weighting is not an issue here, which leads me to believe we've been led up the garden path before.

I bet Taylor Made will bring out an R7 square driver with Moveable Weight Technology (MWT) to gain market edge when these will obviously become popular when Tigger and Phillip battle at Augusta in April.

Or am I completely off track here? I've been wrong before...once!

Happy golfing, though!

Parky

Posted: 29/10/2006 14:08

Proves nout but...The 'square' Nike Sumo just won on the US tour last night. It had K.J. Choi at the sharp end.

If Tiger tries one expect them to be everywhere by Christmass!
Posted: 30/10/2006 14:17

"tour pros and then amateurs will be queuing up"

Tour pros will be queueing up at the cashier's desk to collect what they get PAID for using whatever new piece of gear they are contractually OBLIGED to play.

Posted: 30/10/2006 15:25

GB - True....

What is MOI vs. Head Shape (Square Headed Drivers) all about:

http://www.wishongolf.com/etechreport/2006/october/index.html#art2


Posted: 30/10/2006 20:25

We aren't made to buy these products, but many do because they go with the view that it will give them that 1 extra yard over their friends at the weekend. If we didn't buy these products, they wouldn't be produced.
As a consumer we always want the best and latest.

I though shall stick with my G2 driver.
Posted: 30/10/2006 20:55

A lot of golf consumers want that extra something without having to improve, or work at, their swings, IMO.

You can't buy a golf game, and the sooner people wise up to that fact, the sooner the manufacturers will be forced into producing GENUINE innovation, quality, and value for money.

Posted: 30/10/2006 23:14

KJ Choi's win and the margin must have surely given the Nike square driver a nice boost in image.
Posted: 31/10/2006 09:37

Aye, the same image boost Wimbledon gave English football when they won the FA Cup ...

Posted: 31/10/2006 09:53