Odyssey White Hot OG Putters

What difference is there (if any) between white hot and white hot pro?
I use a white hot pro Havok model from about 2014 or so. Wondering if this is the same insert or not.
 
this insert was popular and for that reason I see the reason to bring it back.... but I do wonder why Odyssey didn't opt for an advertising attack based on the usual NEW AND IMPROVED given that the returned insert material used is supposedly from golf balls of that era and there has been a lot of R&D to improve it since then. Maybe the newer ball materials weren't as suitable for a putter insert - or maybe Odyssey just wanted to keep it simple because if it wasn't broke .... why fix it.
 
this insert was popular and for that reason I see the reason to bring it back.... but I do wonder why Odyssey didn't opt for an advertising attack based on the usual NEW AND IMPROVED given that the returned insert material used is supposedly from golf balls of that era and there has been a lot of R&D to improve it since then. Maybe the newer ball materials weren't as suitable for a putter insert - or maybe Odyssey just wanted to keep it simple because if it wasn't broke .... why fix it.


This isn’t being offered as a new and improved insert. It’s the same formulation and insert of old.
If you want new and improved, that’s where the microhinge star insert comes in.
 
this insert was popular and for that reason I see the reason to bring it back.... but I do wonder why Odyssey didn't opt for an advertising attack based on the usual NEW AND IMPROVED given that the returned insert material used is supposedly from golf balls of that era and there has been a lot of R&D to improve it since then. Maybe the newer ball materials weren't as suitable for a putter insert - or maybe Odyssey just wanted to keep it simple because if it wasn't broke .... why fix it.
They have improved the insert over time which is why it had different iterations. But none of those had the same feel or sound that drew soooo many people in to the original White Hot in the first place. When you still have the amount of players still using an old White Hot insert putter as well as a large amount of tour players still using that exact insert, that's the advertising in itself. I've never used a putter that had an original WH in it but I know exactly what it is. This release wasn't about changing or improving as much as it was fulfilling the call from a loud majority of people wanting the insert itself in newer putters.
 
I'm eyeing the 7 and the 1w. I definitely dig the milling, but never gamed the original WH insert so the nostalgia isn't present for me like it is for others.
 
The Rossie and #7 are my favourites. Too bad the V line isn’t in here.
 
this insert was popular and for that reason I see the reason to bring it back.... but I do wonder why Odyssey didn't opt for an advertising attack based on the usual NEW AND IMPROVED given that the returned insert material used is supposedly from golf balls of that era and there has been a lot of R&D to improve it since then. Maybe the newer ball materials weren't as suitable for a putter insert - or maybe Odyssey just wanted to keep it simple because if it wasn't broke .... why fix it.
I thought @Jman explained all that pretty well in the article.
 
I thought @Jman explained all that pretty well in the article.
He explained everything wonderfully - but many folks are wondering why the enhanced urethane covers now being used on premium golf balls did not make it into the insert for this new release. I'm not losing any sleep over it because I too enjoyed the original WH feel and will be a buyer of the latest release.
 
He explained everything wonderfully - but many folks are wondering why the enhanced urethane covers now being used on premium golf balls did not make it into the insert for this new release. I'm not losing any sleep over it because I too enjoyed the original WH feel and will be a buyer of the latest release.
Because it’s not the same. It’s not all urethane that works, it was the specific two part urethane used in the Rule 35 golf ball.
 
Because it’s not the same. It’s not all urethane that works, it was the specific two part urethane used in the Rule 35 golf ball.
I mean, you had a whole paragraph explaining how they had tried a bunch of different "new and improved" inserts for years, and none of them were as good as the original WH.
 
I mean, you had a whole paragraph explaining how they had tried a bunch of different "new and improved" inserts for years, and none of them were as good as the original WH.
 
Been a white hot fan since the beginning. Favorite is 2 ball blade then the #7EC3D37E5-AA41-4803-85D1-3630C99E60C5.jpeg5606EC72-AE4D-4A17-B3FE-00E35499AC4C.jpeg
 
"The new SL has a shorter stepless steel section, is 7 grams lighter, and is a stiffer overall profile which has led to Odyssey’s testing to show 6% more consistent time to impact, 9% more consistent impact location, and a 6% more consistent swing arc."

With the advancement of technology in graphite shafts and all shafts in general, it is crazy that it can help you with all the things above! I wonder if that is from the previous SL Shaft or all shafts.
 
Because it’s not the same. It’s not all urethane that works, it was the specific two part urethane used in the Rule 35 golf ball.
Yes we understand that and the answer is obvious - this is the best WH-type insert. It is just interesting to some of us that after all the years of R&D they never came up with an insert that improves on the great original.
 
this insert was popular and for that reason I see the reason to bring it back.... but I do wonder why Odyssey didn't opt for an advertising attack based on the usual NEW AND IMPROVED given that the returned insert material used is supposedly from golf balls of that era and there has been a lot of R&D to improve it since then. Maybe the newer ball materials weren't as suitable for a putter insert - or maybe Odyssey just wanted to keep it simple because if it wasn't broke .... why fix it.
Because if it was new and improved it wouldn’t be the OG
 
"The new SL has a shorter stepless steel section, is 7 grams lighter, and is a stiffer overall profile which has led to Odyssey’s testing to show 6% more consistent time to impact, 9% more consistent impact location, and a 6% more consistent swing arc."

With the advancement of technology in graphite shafts and all shafts in general, it is crazy that it can help you with all the things above! I wonder if that is from the previous SL Shaft or all shafts.
From the previous Stroke Lab
 
"The new SL has a shorter stepless steel section, is 7 grams lighter, and is a stiffer overall profile which has led to Odyssey’s testing to show 6% more consistent time to impact, 9% more consistent impact location, and a 6% more consistent swing arc."

With the advancement of technology in graphite shafts and all shafts in general, it is crazy that it can help you with all the things above! I wonder if that is from the previous SL Shaft or all shafts.

#shaftmatters
 
Yes we understand that and the answer is obvious - this is the best WH-type insert. It is just interesting to some of us that after all the years of R&D they never came up with an insert that improves on the great original.
They did though. They improved it greatly. Forward roll tech, more face balance in speed.

Yet comfort and feel are a part too and people have been requesting this for a while.
 
Yes we understand that and the answer is obvious - this is the best WH-type insert. It is just interesting to some of us that after all the years of R&D they never came up with an insert that improves on the great original.
Yup, which was why I enjoyed writing about it, when I heard these were coming, I wondered what the story would be in regards to the fact that the MH Star has been called their highest performance insert ever, and now they’re coming back with “old tech”. But, they did it right, took it head on, let the story be known as to why, and owned that it’s still their most popular insert on Tour and beloved worldwide.
 
Back
Top