I'm a bit confused about the new ruling. I know very well that a lot of drivers become illegal in 2008 and I've seen the R&A website listing them. But what about other woods in the same model type? For example, if the Fuwotaschorcha Brand X driver in 8. 9 and 10.5 degree lofts is illegal from 1/1/08, what about the Fuwotaschorcha Brand X 3 or 4 woods in higher lofts? Are they still legal, even if they have the same level COR as the banned driver?
|
 |
 It is my belief that only drivers are banned as 3-woods etc do not have hi CORs. This is because the size of the face is not big enough to produce the same trampoline effect which gives it the COR.
|
|
Steve, many thanks. That makes sense.
|
|
 Another question along similar lines...... If the 9 degree Fujimoto XL driver is listed as conforming but no other drivers of the same type but different lofts are mentioned in either the conforming or non-conforming lists are they legal? Thanks
|
|
 Look At web site www.randa.co.uk this will give you full list in pdf format to download and peruse at your leisure, They have photo's of all non-conforming clubs next to conforming versions with any distinguishing marks shown to give you an idea of what to look for.
|
|
Look At web site [i]www.randa.co.uk[/i] Um... have done that (see my first post). My question was whether if a driver was illegal it followed that the other woods in the set were also illegal and it was assumed people knew this (this wouldn't be the first time there has been this sort of tacit assumption). I didn't think they were, but just wanted to double check.
|
|
USGA state for 2008 it applies to all clubs (excluding putters) in all forms of the game (previously just a condition of competition). Although currently mentions on the conforming driver list, the condition only applies to driver heads? I don't think the problem really affects fairway woods. They have smaller heads and thicker steel faces that tend to restrict COR below that of titanium drivers anyway. Saying that, the Tom Wishon 949MC fairway wood supposedly uses a thinner steel alloy that allows it to achieve 0.83 COR.
|
| Edited: 18/11/07 01:49 |
 My understanding was that it was all clubs with a loft of less than 15 degrees or whose primary purpose was use off the tee...
|
|
 I have a ERC 3+ wood which IS hot faced (as were all the second gen ERC models) and I checked when I got it and was told it WOULD be conforming as it was not a driver loft....but its only 12.5 deg.....
|
|
When you say ERC 3+, do you mean a driver or a strong 3 fairway wood? The + sign is often used to identify a hot-face driver model, but could also mean a stronger lofted wood. If a strong 3 wood, possible like many they might of assumed it is a driver limit and other woods are exempt. I have read about that 15 deg or under comment before on the net, but haven't seen any USGA/R&A reference to support it. If a 3 wood, they might be correct in saying it is conforming, even if the ERC driver is not. As said, the smaller and thicker steel faces on woods often mean they have a lower COR than the driver. You can contact the R&A to check on the clubs status. Certainly only driver heads seem to have been tested. Which has given the impression it only concerns drivers. However, from the latest 2008 rules on the USGA website: http://www.usga.org/news/2007/october/2007_79.html Clubhead; Spring Effect and Dynamic Properties — New section added on spring effect. The limit, as detailed in the Pendulum Test Protocol, now applies to all clubs (except putters) and in all forms of the game; previously covered by condition of competition. So possible both fairway woods and drivers need to conform, but for practical reasons only drivers need to be tested as their thin titanium faces are the only ones likely to break the COR limit.
|
| Edited: 20/11/07 11:26 |
When you say ERC 3+, do you mean a driver or a strong 3 fairway wood? Its a strong 3W with low loft of 12.5 deg and it IS hot faced due to its design > 0.83 COR but its not classed as a driver, although there is nothing to stop me teeing off with it.......so it is exempt as I understand it. No plans to sell it, even though I rarely use it except when I play Links golf.
|
|
Out of interest, where does it say the strong 3W is hot-faced?
|
|
It doesnt on the actual club but when they came out it WAS stated in mags and in Callys info that the second gen ERC drivers and FWs were made with hot faces. This being due to their construction and rebound characteristics.
|
|
 I'm going to miss my old Mizuno E-Type S300 - never found anything to replace it for distance, it was ridiculous in my hands, christ knows how far the top pros hit it. As for finding out which ones are and which ones are not legal - the only way is to download that PDF from the R&A and see if yours is listed - then keep a copy just in case someone makes a complaint - and there you have proof - it's going to be a problem and I'm sure some rules pedants will spot a hi-cor driver in use somewhere in a medal/stableford and have the unsuspecting culprit banned for life/castrated/tar and feathered for using it knowingly! What I will say is if in doubt, buy a new one! Your hi-cor one will be a few years old by now, so isn't it time for an upgrade? Just a thought!
|
|
Parky - agree about buying a new one BUT I am concerned about some of the component makers. Would like to be able to buy a second hand Geek to see if I get on with it and then splash out on a brand new model.
|
| Edited: 20/11/07 13:58 |
No tacit assumption given (dont even know what it means?) I think that it only applies to drivers as their C.O.R (trampolin effect) is higher. I dont think that 3/5/7 woods are large enough across their faces to have this problem.
|
|
Any club (theoretically) can have a trampoline effect, or a higher COR than .830 just by making the face thinner, which is why the ruling clearly states that it covers all clubs, except the putter. I believe that the ERC fwy woods are non-conforming, so it's not only the drivers. I was reading a very good book on this subject (Science and Golf III) and it was fascinating to read how much effect it really has at the top level - goo djob they've been banned, i think. I'm all for bringing shotmaking back into play, now we've got rid of the springy drivers - will the governing bodies have the wherewithal to introduce a ball which goes maximum 280yds?
|
|
 Hi Parky. What's selling in your shop currently? Are your members having a problem with finding replacements for non-conforming drivers?
|
|
Nah - I've sold loads of drivers this year, Bob! I've been telling most of my members that the need to change their drivers before the end of the year - there are loads of Hi-Cor drivers here, so it's good for business on the driver front! Top sellers are the Snake Eyes 653D series and the Python's, both rather good value and performance-wise - I've not had any complaints so far.best I've seen this year are the R7TP series drivers - as for the square drivers, I get the same replay everytime - "I hate it" despite them being significantly straigher - they just can't accept square! I've not been on for a while, things have been manic....but nice to see some very good debates going on, especially regarding club building and fittings - some of the guys should come and try doing it for a living in a real proshop - it's bloody hard work. Anyway regards from Denmark - hope all is well Parky
|
|
Ken This is the position about Geek heads. The Geek DCTs (left hand and right hand) are all on the conforming list. All the Geek FS2 heads are on the conforming list. Only the 9 degree original Failsafe was ever tested, it passed, that is on the conforming list. The others were not tested, but are not on the non conforming list.
|
|
