TaylorMade R15 Driver Preview

[tpluff]

If it promotes better contact, I'm lost. I think there's better ways of doing so other than having to look for your ball off in tarnation every other drive because we, the average golfer, only hit a ball on the screws 1-2/10 times. If that. Save the money and just get lessons, that'll promote better contact much more efficiently.

 

[JB]

People always clamor for folks to get fit for custom clubs, because they'll "get used to" poorly fit clubs and compensate, which will ultimately engrain bad habits in their game. Why not have a driver that promotes better contact and penalizes you for hitting poorly? I can understand more forgiveness for folks that just play for fun, but seems like these drivers could be good tools for those that want to get better and more consistent.

Now I am not relating the two things at all and not commenting on the driver with this post, but this line of thinking is curious.
Why not play all blades? Why not play a tiny driver head only and never touch a hybrid? If you play 2 iron muscleback through PW of the same shape and design, the thinking above would lead to you being a better golfer, no?

 

[jlukes]

People always clamor for folks to get fit for custom clubs, because they'll "get used to" poorly fit clubs and compensate, which will ultimately engrain bad habits in their game. Why not have a driver that promotes better contact and penalizes you for hitting poorly? I can understand more forgiveness for folks that just play for fun, but seems like these drivers could be good tools for those that want to get better and more consistent.

So a $400 training aid that doesn't show you how to fix your mistakes, it just lets you know when you, in fact, make a mistake?

 

[dciccoritti]

I have to try one of these forward CG drivers, and I think this will be the driver that I give it a shot with. The 14 degree model intrigues me.

 

[blugold]

People always clamor for folks to get fit for custom clubs, because they'll "get used to" poorly fit clubs and compensate, which will ultimately engrain bad habits in their game. Why not have a driver that promotes better contact and penalizes you for hitting poorly? I can understand more forgiveness for folks that just play for fun, but seems like these drivers could be good tools for those that want to get better and more consistent.

IMO. That's failed logic that's used in irons. I cannot even get to a place that justifies that failed logic in a driver.

 

[Canadan]

I have to try one of these forward CG drivers, and I think this will be the driver that I give it a shot with. The 14 degree model intrigues me.

I look forward to your updates. Hugely different from your current Amp cell gamer.

 

[Canadan]

I keep seeing where people act like a mishit on the SLDR goes nowhere or straight left or straight right, or banana balls, etc. It will have an incremental distance loss on off center hits compared to higher MOI clubs that have a hotter face across the entire club face. It's not a 300 yard bomb or a 30 yard dribbler with nothing in between. It just isn't. Yes, it is more penal than a Bio Cell or a G30 or a D2, but not orders of magnitude so.

"Distance for all" is hyperbolic of course, but a pretty big testing site did a large scale test across many drivers and different levels of golfers, and found the SLDR to be the longest on average, across all golfers, by 5 yards. Thus, it seems to me the SLDR would most closely fit a "distance for most" designation, of any other driver. But absolutely would be a bit shorter for some. There probably isn't ever going to be one single model that is longest for everyone. But in 2014, across a range of golfers, at least one pretty thorough test has found it to be the closest thing to it.

I know you're relatively new to the forum, so I assume you haven't had a fair chance to read through the massive SLDR thread, where big time distance losses occurred for a large number of golfers who striking away from the center. It was never an issue for me because I am a high spin player, but for those who need the spin help, it seems missing off center is quite penalizing with SLDR.

Would you buy a driver that cost you 20-30% of your distance every time you missed the center of the face?

 

[Jman]

There are also places which do thorough testing on all released equipment and put out the findings in reviews which will tell the story about the design and what it is supposed to do, does do, and doesn't do, in order to assist people in gaining a knowledge base prior to going in and hitting the clubs and avoiding the stories that can sometimes be told to consumers. Places like THP.

Yet the fact is, whether you do or not, the MASSES do go off of what they read from the companies, and that will never ever change. The G30 is, in fact, a very forgiving driver for the largest section of the bell curve by design traits, the SLDR is not, by design traits. You have to remember, clubs are aimed and marketed at the MASSES, not the finite groups.

 

[Canadan]

No, but I test drivers out, do research, get some data, and make an informed decision so that very thing doesn't happen to me. I don't feel sorry for consumers who don't do any research and swallow marketing speak from a company who exists to sell you products at a profit. There are loads of facilities all across the fair land that let customers hit their demo clubs for FREE!!! to help make a good decision. There are also facilities that charge a bit of money but have trained personnel that can assist one in making the correct club buying decision when buying a $400 golf club. The resources available to consumers to help them find the right driver are incredible in this day and age. So excuses that someone read, "distance for all" and bought an SLDR then didn't hit it well ring a little hollow to me.

The TM marketing propaganda never said the SLDR was forgiving or straight or high MOI or whatever. It said it's high launch and ultra low spin, and it is long. They said "distance for all" which I agree, is hyperbolic. Ping also claims the G30 to be ultra forgiving. For me it spins like mad on mishits and the huge head shape makes it hard for me to visualize and execute "coming from the inside" when I swing one, so I have terrible results with it. Does that mean it isn't forgiving? No, it just isn't forgiving for ME, and I'm not mad about it because I understand that there are a lot of idiosyncrasies out that that can't be measured in MOI, COR, CT, CC, etc.

You're doing a nice job of blurring the lines here. If you spend much time on THP, you'll see that one of the most popular opinions is to get fit, demo for yourself, and make an informed decision on what to buy before executing. No one is contesting that, nor am I saying it's TaylorMade's job to tell consumers to do that. I appreciate the information regarding facilities offering free demos for potential consumers. This may also surprise you, but I am aware of the availability of the golf clubs as well.

My simple point, is the fact that TaylorMade released three particular drivers (SLDR 460/SLDR 430/JetSpeed) last year, and basically none of them were suitable for mid to high handicaps. Let's define 'mid-high' as 8-40+ handicaps if you need a number. I don't have specifics but let's say generously 85% of golfers are outside the skill threshold to adequately make the SLDR work consistently (and Jetspeed was a crash and burn so we'll just throw it away).

So we take the R15 release. Assuming the tech isn't much different from SLDR (based on looks and tech specs alone I'd have a hard time believing the CG was moved more forward), TaylorMade has released a club (R15 460) that MIGHT fit 15% of golfers (generous estimation), another club that might fit an even smaller percentage (R15 430), and one 'speed' driver for the other 85%? Practically speaking, and pardon me if my golf industry/business background is lacking, how is that adequately supporting the industry they serve if their end goal is units sold?

"distance for all" suggests that everyone will achieve solid distance with R15. It's worded well because words like 'consistency' were not thrown into the mix, so I suppose 'big distance every 10 shots or so' is subject to the guy hitting the club. All I know, is that while "loft up" makes perfect sense with the SLDR release, "distance for all" was a huge miss based on unbiased feedback on this forum and probably others.

I can probably bow out at this point. You're telling the consumer to get more educated/fit and that's fine. I'm telling TaylorMade to increase their viable target audience. That is of course, unless R15 is world's better than a release that looks nearly identical in SLDR.

We're in an era of "what fits me the best" and in my opinion, the companies that best serve that mindset, offering clubs for ALL skill types, will move to the top of the pack. This nostalgia effect of the "R" series is only going to help them for so long.

 

[GolfFest]

My simple point, is the fact that TaylorMade released three particular drivers (SLDR 460/SLDR 430/JetSpeed) last year, and basically none of them were suitable for mid to high handicaps. Let's define 'mid-high' as 8-40+ handicaps if you need a number.

As a golfer who fits into this range and who has spent a good amount of time with the SLDR I don't agree with this statement.

I have posted my thoughts extensively in the SLDR thread, and I agree that it is penal distance wise, but when I miss with this club the tendency is to need a longer club for approach instead of taking a penalty stroke. I can work with that.

 

[Canadan]

I'm not telling you there are fitting facilities and demo clubs, I am noting that it is hard for me to get angry at a company or a marketing campaign etc when there are so many resources available to golfers to make a good decision on a golf club. I guess I need to do a better job of not coming across as being combative, I am just trying to have a conversation and express my opinions but everything I say gets picked apart.

I explained in my last post what "Distance for All" meant to me. It was pushed with the SLDR S campaign to inform consumers that they'd released lower cost versions of SLDR with different colors and lofts, so that the technology and cost and appearance would fit far more consumers than the original release.

It's apparent that you feel that the clubs fit far fewer people than what I do, or what TM does, and that's fine. That's what we are all here to talk about. I also think this is why TM has been so very very adamant that people "loft up" as cheesy as it may sound. Higher loft increases forgiveness. I have read countless posts across different forums where people jumped into SLDR at their normal loft and had problems. Some were remedied by going to a higher loft, some were not. I personally think the SLDR clubs, if fit properly for loft and shaft, would fit far more than 15% of golfers. TM probably should have started and pushed their Loft Up campaign harder, sooner, and urged people to get fit for these clubs because of their nature.

Ultimately if TM is making drivers that fit a very small percentage of the golfing population, they are going to have some big problems regardless of how much they're winning on tour. But they're smart in making drivers that fit the best players in the world very well and paying them to play them because it insulates them to some extent. If Cobra or Adams or Cleveland etc makes crap drivers that don't fit much of anyone, they're dead sooner than later. TM can get away with it for longer. I'm not saying it's right or wrong, but it's what they've effectively done. The R15 having the split weight will at least have the option of raising the MOI some slight amount, fwiw. Won't make any real world difference. One might ask, why don't they have a way to move it forward or back like other companies do? Or offer a low and back GI version? As I said before, TM fully believes in and is "all in" on low and forward in their flagship drivers. R11S and RBZ Tour were low and forward and they sold like 6 gazillion of them. SLDR turned some folks off. Time will tell how it ultimately impacts their bottom line as users vote with their wallets.

My biggest issue with TM right now, is that their club spectrum fits only a small percentage of the golfing population. Based on the bolded above it seems you're in agreement with that mentality. As far as opinions go, I don't think TaylorMade has made a driver improvement since R11, possibly R9, and that most of their releases since then have regressed on a grand scale (not what suits my game, what suits the majority).

I think if the continue down this path, more and more folks are going to catch on and move elsewhere.

As a golfer who fits into this range and who has spent a good amount of time with the SLDR I don't agree with this statement.

I have posted my thoughts extensively in the SLDR thread, and I agree that it is penal distance wise, but when I miss with this club the tendency is to need a longer club for approach instead of taking a penalty stroke. I can work with that.

I'm going off personal experience talking to people and reading thoughts on this site. You're one of a small percentage who miss well with SLDR, it seems. My comment was a generalization, and I apologize for being vague.

 

[Greg Kulbick]

I don't have time to read all this jibber jabber. Its got an extra weight, sign me up!

 

[Canadan]

I don't have time to read all this jibber jabber. Its got an extra weight, sign me up!

hahahaha #TargetMarket

 

[e1iterate]

Well I am pumped to try this driver out. Although, it will take a lot for me to switch my R1. I've hit some of the best drives I have ever hit with that thing so its going to take a lot of convincing for me to swap drivers again. I am very excited for this one though so we'll see.

 

[e1iterate]

I look forward to your updates. Hugely different from your current Amp cell gamer.

Dan,

I'd like your opinion on how this type of driver would effect my ball flight as we have played together once at the Bridgestone event. If you remember I have a very low ball flight with the driver but at the same time I get great distance as you may remember. How do you think the forward CG in a driver like this will effect my ball flight and distance? I know when we played you hit the ball very high and you and I were in the same range distance wise, maybe mine a touch longer with yours more consistent overall.

Thanks for any feedback you may have.

Mike

 

[Trout Bum]

I can't wait to hit this thing honestly, when we went to Mission Inn for the TM testing I got to hit Tomo's 430 as well as my 460 and during our round we both had several very long drives on the course, is this one going to be for everyone? probably not but how do we know that is not their intention for this club? It could be a players club and there's nothing wrong with that at all. It's pretty simple to me, if you can hit it an like it, fantastic! if you can't, find one you can and fall in love with it! There's something for everyone out there and with all the OEM's there's no reason to dog a stick you can't hit well, praise the one you can.

 

[uman]

Searching through this thread to find the technology nuances story behind the R15 but not much here, maybe there is a new thread for that now.
Yesterday when I saw the photo of this driver here , I commented it looked like the weight is even more forward, now with better photos here that is actually the case.

Just catching up here, clearly the SLDR forgiveness conversation is once again well covered. I really like my SLDR and even though I never thought myself to be a highly skilled ball striker just maybe, "finally at age 69" , I really have become a better ball striker than I ever thought. Have I fought golf and won?? Is it time to move to something more challenging ?? I doubt it but the SLDR is really not any more penal for me.

My latest " revised" version of the SLDR IS --- I like the SLDR and even though I have not personally found the SLDR to be any more penal than the other drivers I have hit or gamed and recognizing that the Sldr designer states that weight forward can and will impact on the amount of forgiveness, if a given player does not tend to achieve impact upon the area of with a small part of the ball mark still significantly close to the sweet spot, then the SLDR may not be the best choice. ( but even then, if one is possibly interested in the SLDR the best thing to do would be to swing it and evaluate how it performs rather than pre judge the driver without a test drive)

It is an unexplainable mystery to me why myself and others have not found the SLDR be any more penal than the other drivers and others find it to be more penal than others. A significant minority of my impact is 100% dead pure center sweet spot, the rest except for the random stinker are upon the sweet spot with only a small portion of the balls impact mark only slightly to the toe or heel. No one here (in my view) can fully explain this mystery, it still exists.

At this point only someone like the actual designer of the SLDR could add to and hopefully go into greater detail than he already has to provide more clarity for me to this conversation. Not likely that will ocurr.

 

[GolfFest]

A couple of the video reviews I have seen seem to think that in stability mode the club is actually more forgiving. I am ooking forward to reading JB's thoughts on this club when he posts them, specifically if there is any actual improvement in forgiveness over the SLDR.

 

[fupresti]

I actually said IF they are making clubs that only fit a small percentage of the golfing population, because I'm personally not convinced yet that they are. TM obviously thinks these low forward clubs can work for the masses if properly fit and lofted. They're betting their entire driver business on it. You, on the other hand, think that perhaps 15% or fewer of the golfers out there can be effective with one. I probably fall somewhere in the middle. I think it can fit more people than the general consensus here does, but probably not as many people as TM thinks can make it work.

We are all guilty of generalizing and letting our personal biases or perceptions cloud our opinions on certain equipment no matter how fair and subjective we try to be. I have never been a big TM fan, but found success with their R11S, RBZ Tour, and SLDR 430 after not much caring for the R11 or R9 when I tried them. Also, big, high MOI clubs and I have never gotten along well. Therefore I probably am a bit biased towards more compact heads and the low and forward CG stuff because it simply works for me, even when I miss, which I frequently do.

I played golf in HS for a small school, wasn't very good, but loved the game. Went to Juco on a baseball scholarship and didn't play golf for 10 years. I started playing again in 2009--equipment had evolved so much I was overwhelmed. Was told over and over to get the biggest, fattest, most forgiving low and back CG driver because I was a beginner. So I started with a G10 10.5, then a 910D2 9.5 that the club pro told me to get, and hit moon balls that would basically sit where they landed. My misses would be ballooning flares that went nowhere. I just thought that was how it was always going to be for me. By late 2011-early 2012 I was playing to a ~12 and completely stuck in neutral despite putting time in to get better. Started getting on the forums and reading as much as I could about instruction and equipment and club fitting.

I'm a higher launch, higher spin player because I am steeper than I'd like, and haven't been able to get it fixed. So being fit the first time and being introduced to clubs I never would have tried on my own was a very eye opening experience to me. Lower spinning woods and more tip stiff shafts throughout the bag improved my game instantly, even though I'd consciously stayed away from them for several years because I wasn't "good enough" to play them. So I think that is partly why I speak up when I see people blanket labeling certain clubs or equipment for certain handicaps or perceived abilities. People may be writing off the best club for their game simply because of what they're reading or being told.

If properly fit and lofted means that everyone had to have an aftermarket shaft installed to make it work, it's a failure because the majority of the golfing public is buying off the rack. As you references another site, in assuming you mean the GolfWRX trip. You'll notice not a single one ended up in a stock setup. If it takes a 400.00 upcharge to make it work, it's not going to be something for the masses.

 

[ArmyGolf]

Keep in mind that the SLDR Driver also has (2) weights that are separated by its design. One is the familiar 20-gram blue slider weight and the other is the 16-gram weight hidden beneath the toe plate. (More extreme toe weighting with that latter weight placement than is possible with the R15).

TM states that moving the weights further apart on the R15 improves forgiveness while centering the weight maximizes distance. (Same can be said for the SLDR). However moving the weights for distance, forgiveness or to create a draw/fade bias will require (2) wrench adjustments for the R15, while on the SLDR only one wrench adjustment is necessary. Is TM becoming a bit too "wrench happy"?

Perhaps TM had it right the first time with the SLDR's design...

That said, if you want a 2nd sliding weight for your SLDR, you can have that too. Check ebay for multiple listings of these weights from China Sellers. To keep the swingweight the same, you will need (2) 10-gram blue slider weights to replace the single 20-gram blue stock weight on your SLDR. Adding a 2nd slider weight would actually be giving your SLDR (3) weights in total so that you can spread the weight to the extreme in both the heel and toe for forgiveness, and still have the one weight left over that can be centered directly behind the sweetspot to maximize distance. Best of both worlds???

:bashful:

It's funny you mention this, as the guy I played with a few days ago had two weights on his SLDR and he said it seemed to make a small difference for the better.

 

[Daddio]

When I saw the initial R-15 teaser photos, a few hours before the official release, I was very intrigued. All day I kept thinking back to the excellent T.O. video explaining gear effect/CoG. It's the one where he balances club heads on dowels. (I have not been able to find it using the search tool, just the later one one detailing forgiveness, but I'd love to view it again and read the forum insights). Adding to much my intrigue was pairing T.O.'s take with the enlightening thread on impact tape results KellyBo started several days ago in the "Golf" sub-forum.

From my recollection of T.O.'s discussion, those early pics just oozed of R-15 likely launching the ball higher than SLDR and potentially offering uniquely personal forgiveness tune-ability that no other current driver can. T.O. referenced that club heads twist dependent on where impact is in relation to CoG resulting in gear effect impacts to ball flight. A single heavy moveable weight, ala SLDR or 2014 Alpha has a pretty big impact on just where CoG is located. Obviously, there is only one true "Center" of Gravity no matter how many weights but with 2 movable ones so close to the clubface, R-15 just might offer a mechanism that counteracts much of the penal implications from off center gear effect.

From the photos, it looks like you can move each the weights to ANY location on the track, not just the few configurations on the Japanese stick man chart. Meaning you could separate them by a half inch, three quarters, whatever, and create kind of a wider diffuse 'bar' of influence. The impact in relation to CoG will still influence the flight, BUT the either of the sliding weights should in theory counteract some/much of the penal effect IF they are located outside the ball in the direction the club is rotating. How much depends upon how close to impact the weight/s are in relation to CG also. Take a look at the sole on the new 815 Alpha's. Callaway stated the need for it to be more forgiving that it's predecessor. What stands out most to me is the wide heavy looking center plate and what appears to be two weights centered about 3/4 inch on either side of the gravity core parallel to the club face. My speculation from the first time I saw those pics (and it's only that, I have no inside info) was those two weights would help provide a similar diffuse bar of influence, hence more forgiveness if you don't hit the new Alphas precisely on the CoG.

What's so potentially intriguing about the R-15, is that fitters and/or golfers can personalize this bar. If impact tape shows you tend to hit center or skewed toward heel, set the weights an inch apart to accommodate it and insure the mass of the club head most often brackets your impact. Tighter tolerance, reel em in closer together and enjoy of low/forward on 'your' sweetspot. Your lessons making a difference or you cut down a shaft and you now skew toward the toe, move your bar, go to the range or course, or your fitter and tweak it more if need be. Playing a real tight course with all the worst trouble on one side, open it up while favoring the safe side.

So many possibilities and I look forward to January when my range will have demos so I can test these theories out. I know the pro there will hand me the wrench as he'll want to know if there is validity so he can bring his can of Dr Scholls down and potentially sell another magic R-15.

I personally don't think the R-15 will be anything special with the weights spread all the way out. It's just kind of a watered down cavity back driver, but I could be completely wrong. Also, I don't see where doubling up all the way to either end to influence fade or draw is anything special either. It's just an SLDR clone then. But all OEMs need to sell the latest rendition of titanium magic on a stick to Joey Jumbo Slice to remain viable, so that will be advertised. I see the real magic in the personalized tuneability of your sweetspot and your own forgiveness needs.

We know Low/Forward and be long, but also can be penal. IMO this driver at least has the potential to open another revolutionary door in customization technology and it could prove long and forgiving. I intend to at least keep an open mind until it's given a proper review and opportunity.

 

[deleebar]

Did the sldr really do that poorly in sales? That's all I see on my course.

 

[bobcat]

Did the sldr really do that poorly in sales? That's all I see on my course.

It was huge retail success...the only driver to score a perfect 10 with Golf Magazine, (or was it the Golf Digest Hot list???)..

 

[The Dave]

It was huge retail success...the only driver to score a perfect 10 on the Golf Magazine or was it the Golf Digest Hot list...

I believe it was the Hot List in Golf Digest...I think Golf magazine was all about the Bertha

 

[JB]

Did the sldr really do that poorly in sales? That's all I see on my course.

The driver did well. The metal wood family did not do so well. The Jetspeed (similar tech) did historically bad for a market share leader. Depending on who you speak with, the SLDR did not meet the projections set.