JB

Follow @THPGolf on Social Media
Albatross 2024 Club
Staff member
Joined
Oct 8, 2008
Messages
283,235
Reaction score
432,654
Location
THP Experiences
Sent via email
Jennifer Gardner is the author


While their caddies likely would not get confused, the past two major winners share remarkable similarities within their respective bags. Lucas Glover at the U.S. Open and Stewart Cink at Sunday's Open Championship, are Nike Golf staff players and carry square SQ Sumo2 drivers, Nike CCi Forged blades and Nike prototype putters.

"I'm one of the longer players, but not a bomber, not the longest," said Cink said after winning at Turnberry. "I don't hit many fairways. I just play golf. And I play it how I find it."

Cink is not a man known for tinkering with his clubs. He played a Never Compromise belly putter for nearly six years before switching to the Nike flatstick earlier this season. And the Sumo2 driver has been in his bag since the Bob Hope Classic in early 2008.

"Stewart has such a smooth and fluid swing - he's so tall and he gets so much leverage out of it - he's able to play that club and it's very consistent in terms of its ball flight for him," said Tom Stites, Nike's director of product creation. "It doesn't move much left and right as some of our standard geometries. But he's obviously adjusted to that well and made a lot of money, and now has a major championship to his credit, with that driver."

The modern square driver has been around for about three years, but hasn't been widely adopted by PGA Tour players. Besides being more difficult to work from side to side - a reason Tiger Woods has cited for not playing Nike's square driver - the club makes a particular sound at contact that is noticeably different from traditional-shaped clubs. But some pros are finding that the accuracy and consistency such drivers provide make up for not being able to work the ball.

"It's very forgiving, very high moment of inertia, very consistent crown to sole, which means trajectories come off more similar depending on whether you hit it thin or fat," Stites said. "These guys don't necessarily do that much, but they can hit it higher if they want to or lower if they want to and they don't get inconsistency because of impact location."

Accuracy and a consistent trajectory may be especially important in today's majors, as course setups are often penal for errant shots. Plus, being able to dial in a trajectory in the windy conditions at the Open may have helped Cink.

"Whatever attack angle or wherever they position the ball as they tee it off, that's the trajectory that the club will yield," Stites said. "Let's say they want to hit it higher and so they're hitting it on the upswing to reduce spin. Let's say they hit it a little bit thin, a little lower on the face. A normal golf club, it will come off lower than the desired trajectory they're trying to get. On this club, with its higher moment of inertia and more consistent ball performance, that slightly thin shot will still come off flying pretty high.

"The opposite of that is true, if they're trying to hit it low and they were coming in at a different angle and position in the swing, and they hit it a little bit fat, it won't balloon up on them."

Both Glover and Cink, Stites said, want equipment that is very consistent.

"I don't have the kind of golf game where I have to be dead-on mechanically to play well," Cink said. "I play a lot of feel-type shots, a lot of just, you know, it's kind of gut-instinct type golf I play."

Cink may not change equipment frequently, but Stites said Cink often provides valuable feedback for Nike's development team.

"He really helps us a lot from a research and development standpoint," Stites said. "He spends a lot of time hitting prototypes, he understands the technology. We have great staff guys across the board but Stewart really stands out for the information that he gives us, feedback-wise, that allows us to not only make his clubs better but other people's clubs better too."
 
makes perfect sense to give them a whirl but aesthetically I don't feel comfy looking at a square headed driver or fairway wood yet.
 
I have the original Sumo2 driver with an Aldila NV65 stiff flex aftermarket shaft. It hits a nice little consistent draw, but the sound is awful. My buddies said I was going to have to furnish them earplugs if I kept playing it. I changed to the TM R7 because I could move it around left to right, but recently won the TM 2009 Burner in a tournament and am trying it out.

I still have the Sumo and if I played a really tight course, I would probably use it because of its accuracy.
 
Great article...thanks for sharing...:thumb:

I am currently thinking about changing drivers and possibly going to the FT-iQ for some of the same reasons as mentioned in the article. I currently play the FT-9 because I got a very good deal on this club but I am not real intertested in working the ball with my driver...heck I would be extremely happy just hitting it straight each time. See I am 6'4 (like Stewart Cink) and I create a lot of leverage in my swing but have issues with accuracy...especially with the longer clubs. I got the chance to hit an FT-iQ (8.5 Tour, X-Stiff) at a demo day early this year and I could not hit it sideways unless I made a really bad move on the ball. Hmmm...this post has got me really thinking about this again but $525 is a lot for a club...but then again if I could hit more then 50% of the fairways I would pay $1,000...:clapp:
 
Interesting that he's using the Sumo2 and not the Dymo2. Wonder why.

This is a very timely post as I'm going to be demoing an FT-IQ this week and hopefully a Dymo2, also.

Has anyone here hit both these clubs? Impressions?
 
Last edited:
I have the original Sumo2 driver with an Aldila NV65 stiff flex aftermarket shaft. It hits a nice little consistent draw, but the sound is awful. My buddies said I was going to have to furnish them earplugs if I kept playing it. I changed to the TM R7 because I could move it around left to right, but recently won the TM 2009 Burner in a tournament and am trying it out.

I still have the Sumo and if I played a really tight course, I would probably use it because of its accuracy.

Do you find you can hit both types of drivers equally as far?
 
Can't see myself using one just yet because they look weird. But I did say the same thing years ago when the jumbo size driver race commenced.
 
...............Lucas Glover at the U.S. Open and Stewart Cink at Sunday's Open Championship, are Nike Golf staff players and carry square SQ Sumo2 drivers, Nike CCi Forged blades and Nike prototype putters.


I am curious as to when this Prototype will become a production item, I know that I am interested in it as I am always in the market for trying new putters!!
 
Great article...thanks for sharing...:thumb:

I am currently thinking about changing drivers and possibly going to the FT-iQ for some of the same reasons as mentioned in the article. I currently play the FT-9 because I got a very good deal on this club but I am not real intertested in working the ball with my driver...heck I would be extremely happy just hitting it straight each time. See I am 6'4 (like Stewart Cink) and I create a lot of leverage in my swing but have issues with accuracy...especially with the longer clubs. I got the chance to hit an FT-iQ (8.5 Tour, X-Stiff) at a demo day early this year and I could not hit it sideways unless I made a really bad move on the ball. Hmmm...this post has got me really thinking about this again but $525 is a lot for a club...but then again if I could hit more then 50% of the fairways I would pay $1,000...:clapp:

ZM, would you consider buying a used FT-iQ? If so you might want to check out the Callaway pre-owned site. You can get one considerably cheaper than $500.

http://callawaygolfpreowned.com/drivers/drivers-ft-i-q.aspx
 
Or just check out our marketplace as there is a real steal on one right now.
 
Do you find you can hit both types of drivers equally as far?

I would say "comparable" distances. Perhaps the Nike is a little longer because of the added roll you get with a draw, but the Burner carries further. The Burner does not roll out as well because it has a tendency to fade. The TM R7 is in the middle for me.
 
Good read.
 
I'll play cast shovels before I ever play a square driver, and that ain't happenin' anytime soon, either.
 
I'll play cast shovels before I ever play a square driver, and that ain't happenin' anytime soon, either.

everyone has to start somewhere....
 
Why is that?

I have what I guess you might term "strong visual preferences" for my golf clubs. For example, I can't stand any club with a draw bias. None. In fact, square drivers look closed to me and I can't even swing them. In my head it just screams "THIS IS GOING LEFT!" With my irons I like very little offset and a thin top line.

When I tell you I can't look at anything else much less hit it, I'm serious. If it doesn't look good to me it's a non-starter.
 
In our wedge shoot out, the players all said the same thing. What we learned is that looks meant NOTHING to performance for almost every player that took part in the event.
 
I have what I guess you might term "strong visual preferences" for my golf clubs. For example, I can't stand any club with a draw bias. None. In fact, square drivers look closed to me and I can't even swing them. In my head it just screams "THIS IS GOING LEFT!" With my irons I like very little offset and a thin top line.

When I tell you I can't look at anything else much less hit it, I'm serious. If it doesn't look good to me it's a non-starter.

Totally understand. Just wanted to understand your reasoning.
 
In our wedge shoot out, the players all said the same thing. What we learned is that looks meant NOTHING to performance for almost every player that took part in the event.

Depends on how you look at it. I would argue that if you give me a driver with a severe draw bias, my lack of confidence in my ability not to snap-hook the ever-living daylights out it will have a very strong impact on my performance with that particular club. :D

There may in fact be other clubs out there which would perform better than the ones I have, but if I don't like lookin' at 'em, I ain't buyin' 'em.
 
What I meant by that was that every person that had what they said "looked the best" finished one way and the ones that they did not like the looks of based solely on performance finished another way. Confidence can bring a lot of things to a shot, however sometimes "different focus" brings better performance.
 
i dont like the look+nike's shafts on their drivers are annoying...i dont like the yellow look it has to it for some reason
 
wait.... who wrote this?

Spoiler
jennifergarner.jpg
 
:eek:fftopic:

She's a bizarre looking woman, I don't know what people find attractive about her.


:eek:fftopic:
I agree, I don't see why anyone would find her attractive. :D

Spoiler
aliastvposter019.jpg
 
Back to the square drivers, I never said anything about a severe draw bias...I said my tendency with it is to hit a very slight draw. That is a very different thing. It is more difficult to hit a cut with it, but it can be done, it just doesn't seem to like that.

I didn't know how I would like the look of it when I bought it either, but I soon overcame the visual difference and was very happily hitting a lot of fairways. The sound thing I never did conquer. I have heard that some strategically placed lead will dampen the noise, but never tried it.
 
Back
Top