2015 Most Wanted Driver Test: Q&A

Your Questions Answered

For the most part we’ve remained quiet throughout the publication of the results of our 2015 Most Wanted Driver Test. Rather than respond immediately as we usually do, we wanted to take some time to personally unwind, while allowing all of you to take it in, review the results, and of course, ask questions.

We’ve gone through and pulled some of the most frequent and most interesting questions from our 4 days of content so far. Obviously we can’t answer everything, but hopefully this will address the majority of what you guys have asked.

Instead of beating around the proverbial bush, I’m going to start with the most frequently asked question of them all.

How is the E8 Beta not in the Top? / How is the G30 in the Top 5?

This is the internet, so we expect the most common theories will be conspiracy theories, but when it comes to the case of why Tour Edge’s E8 Beta didn’t make our Top 5 and why PING’s G30 did, the explanation is fairly mundane.

This is textbook case of opposite sides of the same coin.

With respect to the E8 Beta, obviously it did very well for Peak Distance, which I should note, is not the same as our Average Distance calculation. It also fared well for accuracy (the shorter shaft certainly influenced that).

This year we chose not to dedicate a day to forgiveness, but if we had, you would have seen a club that ranked near the bottom from a forgiveness standpoint. It’s a 440cc. There’s an MOI cost that comes with that.

E8 is long (peak shots), it’s straight, but on a relative basis, it’s not very forgiving.

When we looked at the ranges within each performance category, we saw roughly a 12 yard difference in distance (similar in peak distance), 10 yards in our consistency measurement, and less than a 5 yard difference between the best and worst clubs for accuracy.

On a comparative basis, accuracy’s contribution to the overall score was minimal (because the data showed comparably minimal differences between clubs), so as a result of the below average forgiveness rating, the E8 Beta dropped in our overall rankings.

With the G30 what we saw was a club that was near the top for average for distance, not far off for peak distance, and well inside the average range for accuracy. All of that along with the highest forgiveness rating in the test was enough to put the G30 into the top group.

In hindsight, maybe we should have lumped forgiveness in with accuracy, or dedicated a day to it.

A quick word about accuracy vs. forgiveness…

For those that are still struggling with the idea that accuracy and forgiveness are either closely related, or the same thing, they’re not. From a design perspective, accuracy comes from face angle and offset choices. It comes from roll radii, and it comes from internal weighting that further influences the rate at which the face closes during the swing.

Forgiveness is rooted in MOI and face technologies that help further preserve ball speed and other launch parameters on off-center hits. It has very little to do with accuracy.  In very simple terms, accuracy is left to right, forgiveness is front to back.

More of Your Questions

Have you ever thought about…?

Maybe…Probably. Even at the expense of year to year consistency we’re constantly refining the way we collect and analyze data. It’s an ever-evolving process, and some of the changes we make come directly from your feedback. Let’s just say we’re working on some things.

What happened to truAccuracy?

Part of the plan for 2015 was to simplify as much as we could. Quite frankly, some of our readers never quite grasped truAccuracy so we thought it made sense to put accuracy in terms that everyone understands (yards offline). Based on the feedback, I think we’re probably going to bring it back as our standard measurement of accuracy.

Why didn’t you fit your testers for the best Bridgestone ball for their swing? / Why didn’t you use <insert golf ball name here>?

We actually considered fitting guys for the golf ball prior to testing, but in any test like this you want to eliminate as many variables as you possibly can. Having multiple balls in play would introduce more variables and we knew we didn’t want to do that.

We chose the B330-RX because it’s the bestselling ball in Bridgestone’s lineup.

Can you describe the test environment?

As you should know by now, we use Foresight GC2 launch monitors to collect ballflight data, and the Foresight HMT attachment to collect clubhead data. All testers hit Bridgestone B330-RX golf balls. Balls are inspected frequently and replaced if they show any signs of wear/damage.

We test indoors using Foresight’s latest FSX software to project our test environment and provide a realistic presentation of ballflight.

We could test outdoors, but then changing weather conditions as well as how our testers react to those conditions would also become variables.

Something, something, ROBOTS

Every year. We’ve covered it.

Something, something, SHAFTS

Every year.

Not only does that not come remotely close to representing how the average consumer purchases clubs (the average golfer buys a club, not a head and a shaft) it’s not going to tell us much.

Part of the reason why manufacturers use different shafts is that different shafts will achieve different results in different heads. It’s about producing the desired launch characteristics for the target golfer. If we consider this from the extremes…the shaft that would work well for me in a SLDR would likely produce poor results in a G30.

You want the best combo, go see a fitter. We’re all for that, but for an off-the-rack test, not only is putting the same shaft in everything not relevant to the consumer buying experience, it’s going to produce data that’s equally irrelevant.

Why was the Callaway XR not included?

As we discussed when we announced the test, Callaway declined to participate. With the help of our readers we were able to purchase the necessary allotment of Big Bertha Alpha 815, Big Bertha Alpha 815 Double Black Diamond, and Big Bertha V-Series drivers.

At the time we started our test, however, XR was not yet available at retail, and with Callaway unwilling to provide samples, we had no option but to exclude the XR line.

What lofts/specs were the clubs?

I don’t think we dove into this as deeply as we had in year’s past. This year we asked manufacturers to send a good mix of lofts, flexes, and where applicable stock shafts, so that we could provide the best fit for each tester.

For us, it’s about getting the best possible result with each club. For the most part guys do stay in the same loft and flex, but there are occasions when we need to increase or decrease loft and/or change flex.

Certainly we’ve considered moving to a single loft or a 9.5/10.5 test, but we’re not sure that does much to minimize the variables:

• Some models are 9°, others are 9.5°
• How much loft is really on a given 9.5° driver? How much is on that other one?
• What about adjustability? Do we just set it in the neutral position and ignore the options? Gravity Core? FlipZone?

Manufacturers have provided us with a wealth of options, and during our tests we leverage each of them to fullest extent possible to get the best possible results with the available technology.

How do you go about testing clubs like the Callaway Big Bertha Alpha 815 Double Black Diamond and Cobra Fly-Z+ that have two center of gravity options?

Had we more time, it would have been interesting to treat each of them as two different clubs. Since we couldn’t do that, as with all of the clubs in the test, we tried to get the best fit from whatever options were at our disposal. In the specific case of FLY-Z+ we had roughly a 60/40 split with the majority playing the weight back.

With gravity core, the majority (18/20, I believe) tested with the core down. For those who needed it, flipping the core up increased spin (and some testers needed it) and had only a minimal impact on launch angle.

When the slowest swing speed you’re testing is 91.2 MPH, then you are leaving out a huge segment of average golfers…

We definitely understand what you’re getting at. Worth a mention, the actual lowest swing speed in our test was in the 78 MPH range. We had a couple of others in the low 80s as well, but yet, even our sub-100 swing speed group is likely above average.

We’d certainly like to better represent the slower swingers, but it becomes an issue of fatigue. It’s difficult to find sub-80 swingers who can hold up for the duration of a testing session.

Your Data Doesn’t Make Sense

First of all, the data is the data. It’s what happened. We don’t tweak it, massage it, or otherwise alter it. Other than dropping outliers and calculating averages and standard deviations from what’s left, it is as it came off the launch monitor.

In most cases the presumed oddities are easily explained. One reader mentioned the similarity in the spin numbers between G30 and G30 LS. LS should spin less, right? It’s simply physics, he said.

It’s true. Loft for loft, LS should spin more, but since we do adjust the clubs you have to consider that a segment of testers may have needed more loft with LS. They may have needed a face angle adjustment. They might have had better results with a different shaft. All of these things can and do impact the numbers. We’re willing to tolerate that to get the best results we can on an individual basis.

In other cases, the results aren’t what you anticipate. It happens.

I bounced some data that wasn’t what I expected it to be off an R&D contact who, for my money, is one of the smartest guys in the golf industry. I’m paraphrasing here, but basically what he said is:

I’ve seen that sort of thing enough where I don’t obsess over 200 RPM of spin (that could be as simple as manufacturing tolerances), but when I see things like pronounced changes in Angle of Attack between clubs it’s definitely eye-opening – especially when those changes creep outside one standard deviation.

Angle of Attack, as one reader pointed out, should be dictated entirely by the golfer. In fact, it’s dictated by the golfer and how he responds to a given club.

What we’re quickly learning is that everything impacts everything else.

Cobra had this up on their site fast, did you give them a heads-up?

Yes. As we did with TaylorMade last year, and Callaway the year before, we gave the winner a few days’ notice to do whatever they choose to do with it. It’s also worth mentioning that, unlike the Hot List, companies whose products receive accolades from MyGolfSpy are not required to pay any licensing fees for use of badges, logos, or anything else related to Most Wanted.

Why Didn’t You Include ______ in the data?

Actually, that’s a paraphrased aggregation of several questions related to the presentation of data. Certainly some of the proprietary stuff we like to keep close to the vest, but mostly the goal was to keep it simple enough that the average reader’s eyes wouldn’t gloss over. With that in mind, we limited the data we published to simple averages of the data as it came off the launch monitor. Most everyone can wrap their heads around that.

That said, I was particularly interested in a comment by Johannes N.. Basically the idea would be for us to provide enough data for the reader to assign his own values to Most Wantedness (love that pharse). As Johannes pointed out, to really dig in you’d need to see standard deviations in addition to the raw data.

Quite frankly, it never occurred to us that so much as a handful of you would want to dig in at that level, but I think it’s pretty awesome that you would. That’s data we can definitely include in the future.

From a statistical standpoint, in any given category we had 3 to 6 clubs (with ties considered) that fell outside of one standard deviation. While I won’t say it will never happen, with this many clubs and this many testers, I don’t think we’ll find many that pass the 2 sigma mark.

To Johannes’ larger point about allowing each readers to determine what’s Most Wanted for his individual game…this is exactly what we’re working towards. We’ll have our system, but we will also provide you with the data and the tools to draw the conclusions most relevant to your game.

That’s A Wrap

This more or less closes the book on our 2015 Most Wanted Driver Test. We’ve got some really exciting stuff in the pipeline, so stay tuned as we’ll be making an announcement soon.