You need to hit the different drivers and see what works best for you, nothing else mattters!!! And hit some balls outdoors, not into a net. Outdoors is where you play, outdoors is where you test a club.

The correct answer is no, it cannot be too big. I suspect any difficulties anyone has with the supersized heads is inherent to switching clubs and would be worked out with time. The larger heads are more foregiving and push the ball out farther especially on mis-hits. Period. Full stop. What the pros do is only partly relevent. For their accuracy of contact 320cc is a gigantic head for them.

The correct answer is no. Well that may not agree with what I just read in one golf magazine. The article states that the bigger the head, the more air resistance it has and the slower your swing speen will be. SO, if you don't need the extra foregiveness of the bigger head, you might be better off with a smaller head that lets you swing the driver faster and hit the ball longer. And in most cases, if you want to work the ball, you can usually do it easier with the smaller size head. Depending on the golfers skill level and what he wants from a driver, foregiveness may not be everything.

I agree with Don on the accuracy of contact is inversely proportional to the size of the driver head a golfer is using.

I am using a ping Si3 with a 340 cc head ( I think) anyway, it is much smaller than the Ping ISI Titanium which I had before and which my friend is using. I had a 3 wood (Taylormade tour preferred) which had a tiny head but was the best club I ever had. The shaft gave up last year and I have not been able to get the right shaft for it again.

I think the same can be said for blades. Blades are great to play if your ball striking is good because there is so much you can do with them. Also, the smaller heads make them easier to "dig" out of the rough.

The better golfer you are, the less you have to depend on giant driver heads, oversized irons, off-set irons etc etc. That is not to say that there is anything wrong with any of us trying bigger heads etc when things are not going our way and all else has failed. That said, I personally believe that you can't buy a better game by getting more and more expesive equipment. You might lower your score a bit but your swing (your real game) is no better for it.

Most of the time, a golfer's money is better spent going to your local pro and paying for a good lesson on the fundamentals and some jolly good amount of time on the range!

Up until this season I used a Titliest 975D which has about a 260cc head I think. I tested a Callaway 454 a couple of weeks ago, but it just looked too big and I was worried about being able to control it. So I have bought a Callaway Great Big Bertha II with a 380cc head. I think I am going to be very satisfied with it.

Am I right in thinking that the Big Bertha II is the driver that Callaway built to the higher COR limit, that was then put back to the current limit of .830? If I'm correct, then the BB II isn't legal for play in tourniment, if that matters to you. You might want to check just for the fun of it. Being as the 460 head weighs the same as the 380 head you got, I don't know if it would be harder to control. It might look too big to your eye, so that might be more of a problem than size itself. Did you have trouble swinging the 454? If you can't get comfortable with a 454 head, you would be better off with one you feel comfortable with, that's for sure. Good luck with your new toy.

Don,
I'm actually contemplating a Callaway 454 right now. They started with the legal R&A limit that is good thru 2008?? I believe and then dialed it back. The USGA has a new way of calculating the COR. It is no longer .830.
"The ultra-thin, ultra-hot face is designed to the USGA's new Characteristic Time (CT) limit of 257 microseconds. This test determines the spring-like effect of the clubhead much more effectively than the previous COR limit, making this driver as hot as legally posssible."
So they are again making driver faces even hotter because its a more accurate test apparently and can measure right up to the limit.

Here's a link to the USGA site for the rule:
http://www.usga.org/equipment/protocols/pendulum%20r1-0-4.pdf

Thanks for the site link to the USGA. I read the new testing method, but it doesn't really tell me if a driver with a COR over .830 would be over the time limit or not. I assume that the two methods would give the same pass/fail result. The USGA had to use some COR value to set the time limit, I would think? My understanding is that the new test is so the test in easier to do and the club can be tested as it is, you don't have to hit the head with a high speed particle or any such nonsense. But I think a driver with a COR of .830 will come out right at the time limit also. Is that your understanding?

Yes, I believe that is the case. I read a good portion of the rule, and I think there is reference to the .830 COR value in there somewhere. There is some more info at the USGA website as well. Seems like there is a good amount of room for variance according to the rule. I suppose tour players use clubs that are to the upper end of that allowable variance. I think the rule says there's like a 15 ms variance above and beyond the standard measurement.

I have to think that the USGA is run by idiots. Anyone with half a brain knows that if you give a maximum upper limit to something, and than add a allowable tolorance to that limit, the smart club builder is going to design the driver to come right up to the higher limit including the tolorance. That's just common sense and smart business planning. You know that at least one company will use that tolorance to get a few more yards, so all the companys are forced to do it to be competitive. The smart thing to do would have been to set a limit, and nothing over that is legal. No tolorance allowed. And you know for a fact that the big names on tour get drivers with heads in them that come right up to the limit including the tolorances. Why would the manufactures do it any other way? You and I get what ever comes off the assembly line and have to live with it.

Which isn't a bad thing necessarily, considering how ridiculously long drivers are already! Yeah, the tolearnce is pretty big, like 10% if I read correctly. The USGA are no dummies. Length is driving club sales and tour interest. They'd be committing suicide if they try to throttle back at this point.

They horse may already have bolted on the length issue. The major problem I have with longer and longer drivers is that the courses are not able to cope with them. What were great par 4's and par 5's are now becoming just a driver and a short iron. That is not how these holes were meant to be played and anybody with half a brain knows that a great score relative to the score card is not that great these days if you are driving well and almost knocking it onto some of the par 4's in one shot.

That said, what do you do about it? To compete these days with other golfers you have to have at least the same firepower in the bag so head to head (if you excuse the pun) is still great competition but as far as bettering your own best round from 10 years ago...forget it. Everybody knows it was harder back then so any scores these days cannot be compared to scores of the old days.

Quite a good way of checking how you are playing though is to do what we sometimes do here just to check what our scores should be... you play from the "tips" which means you find the tee which is the furtherest back, the championship tees and then you tee up right at the back of those! Play the whole course like that and it gives you some idea of how you would be scoring if you did not have the length advantange of today's drivers. Great fun.

It's not just the drivers that are hotter, but the balls as well. This thread reminded me of something a few of you may remember.

About 20 years Jack Nicklaus and MacGregor came up with something called the Cayman ball. The idea was to have a ball that reacted like a conventional golf ball, but only went a little more than half the distance. It was intended for par-3 and executive courses to be played more like their big brothers. This was at a time when course development costs were going through the roof and green fees were climbing as well.

It never caught on, but it really did work. At the time, we had friends who owned an executive course outside Pittsburgh - four par 4s and the rest par 3s. They got some Caymans in when they first came out and they were great fun. The par 4s became par 5s and any par 3 over 180 became a par 4. Just imagine having a 125 yarder over water and having to hit a fairway wood. How many of our long-knocker egos could handle that?

The company, Cayman Golf at http://www.caymangolf.com/About_Us/about_us.html still exists and markets range and specialty balls. The USGA illegal Desperado is one I see pretty regularly in stores.

Don - I think you've mentioned having a favorite par 3 course. You might want to check the Cayman out.

JW

Cayman sounds great. I would love to have a round on a par 3 course with one of those. Not sure if it would putt the same but you could alwasy mark it and then replace it with a conventional ball and putt out with that. I am sure all of us would enjoy using it.

i heard from a salesman saying that technically a bigger head can give more distance as compared to smaller ones.but a smaller head can give us faster swing speed which will in turn drive the ball far too.

can anyone enlight me on this confusion here?

And if i am using a 350cc head and dont have much mis-hits does that mean i shouldnt be shopping for a bigger head? any one can advice over here? thanks

Thanks

Bigger head will not give you more distance. You will have a slightly larger "sweetspot", so you have a slightly better chance to get the most out of the driver, but the maximum distance should be the same. And yes, if the head is bigger, you will get more air resistance when you swing it. That means you need to put more effort into your swing to get the same swing speed, and that might cause you to lose a few yards with the bigger head. I doubt that you will notice it unless you are very consistant off the tee. I hope this helps.

my only question here is whether the advances in technology over the last few years would mean that the new 460 cc drivers would NOT reduce swing speed as compared to an OLDER smaller cc driver.

i can see how it would have more drag and thus give less swing speed compared to a MODERN small cc driver, but i wonder compared to an OLD small cc driver.

also, if distance is LOST, why would tour players be switching to the larger heads?
they sure as heck dont have a problem with mishits.
sure, they miss some fairways, but when was the last time you saw a tour player flub a driver just past the ladies tee?
ive NEVER seen that happen before.

anyway, im confused i guess.
help?

as for hitting the bigger cc drivers for us amateurs, they take some getting used to. maybe alot of getting used to.
i always played small cc drivers until last year.
i got a top flite cannon 400cc driver to see if i liked how it felt.
at first, it felt weird.
then, i got to where i could hit it somewhat consistently, but DID in fact lose some distance.
then, after becoming comfortable with it, i found that i hit it straighter AND longer, or at least as long (hard to guage 100% since my swing speed decreased after the back surgery).

because of that, i went out and got the adams redline 460.
used it for the first time with don a week ago.
it was miserable, BUT (and its a big "but"), i wasnt used to that particular club OR the length in shaft (2 inches).
by the length of my drives even when hit off the heel, im very confident once i get used to it that this club will be as long as i need AND have the forgiveness im looking for.

anyway, anyone have an answer as to why tour players would use these big head clubs if they in fact LOSE some distance?
correct me if im wrong, but im pretty sure tiger AND vijay both switched to the bigger head.

jake

Jake,
You are right, Vijay and Tiger are using 460cc drivers now. Not so sure it isn't more for marketing than actual performance gain for them. Vijay is a machine with the driver usually, I'm pretty sure he could hit anything. His are different than what the public can get their hands on anyway. Bent open a couple degrees to ensure he doesn't hit a hook left!
As far as mere mortals go, I took my 365cc Titleist 983K with me to my launch monitor fitting for my Ping G2 (460cc.) My swing speed average with the 983K was 107.9 MPH. My swing speed with the larger G2 had dramtically different results- 107.9 MPH!!
The larger head doesn't slow the swing any noticable amount. Keep in mind that was only the second time I had swung a G2, so I don't buy into the whole "adjustment" needed to hit the larger heads. A longer shaft, however, could be murder on a swing! I think you said the Redline has a 46" shaft? Correct me if I am wrong please. That's way too long for accurate results. That's almost Long Drive shaft length! I think 45" should be the limit for most amateurs. I think we talked about seeing how you hit it by choking up on it. If it's easier to control, cut it down! 45" or even 44.5" and regrip it with a grip that you like too. If it feels a little light, a little lead tape can help, but choking down should give the same feel as cutting it down slightly. Don is such a club building guru, I'm sure he can help with all this. Nothing to it if you have the right equipment! Couple bucks for a grip! The problem most people have with the larger drivers is that they come built so long from the factory. 45.5" or even 46", when most drivers just a few years ago were 44." I would venture to say you will find much better results with it shortened.

Here's my 2 cents on why I think the larger heads may not cause the assumed drag and decreased swingspeed. I've been under the impression that the lighter, yet stronger, materials and changes in manufacturing techniques being employed allow the heads to be made larger without any significant increase in weight. As to drag, I've noticed in my own club-monkeying that almost any head will give that dragging feeling if you switch it from a stiff, low torque to a more flexible, high torque shaft.

Here's a sampling of stats for some Golfsmith heads. I think they make my case.

Model CC Gr Material
Python 450 200 6-4 Ti and Beta Ti
Hi-Cor 400 200 6-4 Ti and Beta Ti
Compressor 450 200 6-4 Ti and Beta Ti
FireSteel 385 198 17-4 Stainless and Cobalt

So the much smaller head has only 2 grams less weight than the much larger models. If properly combined with the correct shaft, drag (in my humble opinion) would be negligible.

JW

thanks for the advice divots.

most of the drivers i looked at were still 44" inch shafts, which is what ive always played, though those 44 inchers always FELT a little short to me.
im 6'2 and generally quite comfortable with a driver, so they may have been.

for that reason, i wanted the longer shaft.

really, i think my biggest problem last week was my 10 cent head.
i was THINKING about the shaft length instead of just hitting the little white thing.
my plan the next couple outing is to clear my head and just swing naturally.
i THINK the shaft length will eventually play well, since the adams three wood i hit wednesday (same fujikara with added length) felt perfect, and the results showed it.
why?
well, i forgot about the shaft when i demoed it!!

ill see how it goes the next couple times out (positive thoughts only!!), and if it seems too long maybe that 45" length you mentioned would be a good compromise.

jake

good info jjw!

makes me feel better about my switch to a 460cc.

Hi.

can anyone advice me on these queries

1)why does a thinner club face give more distance? does it have to do with weight or construction material of the whole club?

2)with the same swing speed,does a heavier clubhead gives more distance compared to a lighter one? (looking in a physics point of view eg.a big truck crashing onto a small car the small car gets crashed badly)

3)is there any home D.I.Y. methods to make old grips more grippy?

thanks

[QUOTE]1)why does a thinner club face give more distance? does it have to do with weight or construction material of the whole club?

2)with the same swing speed,does a heavier clubhead gives more distance compared to a lighter one? (looking in a physics point of view eg.a big truck crashing onto a small car the small car gets crashed badly)

3)is there any home D.I.Y. methods to make old grips more grippy?
[/QUOTE]1. The outer portion of the face are thinner and the center thicker, so the outer portion will flex and rebound like a trampoline.
2. Depends on the shaft paired with the head and overall swingweight of the club I would imagine. Clubfiiters/makers?
3. You can sand down the outer surface of the grips lightly with some sandpaper. Doesn't matter too much what grit. Go lightly. Be sure to wash the grips with soap and water and rinse well after sanding.

Help please, large headed drivers are doing my nut in.

I purchased a BB 415 with a nice aldila NV Stiff shaft about four months ago, great at first, but 3 months later i can't hit a draw to save my life! ?

And yet about three weeks ago after much searching trying to find a decent 4 wood i went and bought a 2 iron for the first time in my life with an X100 shaft, (This was not fitted for me i just took a gamble as the fitters i have had keep telling me i need regular !) i play MP37 one degree stronger by the way, and i can hit a three yard draw better than anything i have ever had. ?

so my question is does any one have any experience of graphite shafts going "off" as it were, loosing their torque or should i be using something stiffer.?

Or is it that the head is too big and i cant turn the thing over through the ball, and therefore need a smaller head.?

The loss of distance is getting embarrasing and i am confused, i ask this as i am about to go to the golf expo in london, and i am fed up paying manufacturers and fitters money when they don't seem to know there Butt from there elbow.

Oh buy the way this a great forum, really interesting stuff.