We've launched the new forums! Read more here

Why TaylorMade Should Not Release A New Driver

SuperStroke
JMN57 said:
I just checked the digital edition (I get it) and I'm not entirely convinced we're talking M2 here. I'll try and post the ad later today but the tag line is "On 2.19.16 the M family is complete". The picture show the driver, fairway and hybrid side-by-side (and from what I can see the fairway looks adjustable) but also laying across in front of them is an iron.

My initial impression is not change to the existing clubs but perhaps an M1 iron line? That would make a lot of sense to maximize on the success of the driver.
Click to expand...


Its an interesting hosel look but I don't believe it is adjustable. The same strange hosel is on the irons too. The bottom of that driver clearly doesn't have adjustable weights on it. The only weight is similar to what was on the Jetspeed driver but moved all the way to the rear of the head while it was more centered on the Jetspeed.
 
Really good article JB. After seeing the Golf Digest ad it looks like they're updating the Aeroburner line and naming it the M2. I like that strategy as well, keeping the names simple and not trying to get too creative. I also think keeping the M1 is the right move which seems to be what TM is doing. All in all, I like what TaylorMade is doing for 2016. Hope the new line performs well.
 
StanTheCaddy said:
Really good article JB. After seeing the Golf Digest ad it looks like they're updating the Aeroburner line and naming it the M2. I like that strategy as well, keeping the names simple and not trying to get too creative. I also think keeping the M1 is the right move which seems to be what TM is doing. All in all, I like what TaylorMade is doing for 2016. Hope the new line performs well.
Click to expand...
I don't get it, though. M2 just SOUNDS like an update/replacement to the M1. If they're replacing the Aeroburner, why not name it something that makes is seem like the Aeroburner's replacement, Aeroburn-ier or Aeroburner-Z?

Taking a club, reducing the amount of technology/adustability, and then trying to sell it as something new, is part of how TaylorMade got itself into this mess in the first place (the SLDR, then the SLDR-S, with a glued hosel). If the M2 is the Aeroburner's replacement, and boasts less tech than the M1, I would almost think TM's marketing department is engaging in the most straightforward self-sabotage in the golf industry.
 
Paladin said:
I don't get it, though. M2 just SOUNDS like an update/replacement to the M1. If they're replacing the Aeroburner, why not name it something that makes is seem like the Aeroburner's replacement, Aeroburn-ier or Aeroburner-Z?

Taking a club, reducing the amount of technology/adustability, and then trying to sell it as something new, is part of how TaylorMade got itself into this mess in the first place (the SLDR, then the SLDR-S, with a glued hosel). If the M2 is the Aeroburner's replacement, and boasts less tech than the M1, I would almost think TM's marketing department is engaging in the most straightforward self-sabotage in the golf industry.
Click to expand...
My thought here is that the M1 will take the "crown" as their premium offering and the M2 will be more affordable option.

Funny you brought up The SLDR and the "SLDR C" when I first heard that the "SLDR C" came out I thought of it as the "SLDR cheaper"

Sent from my LG-H901 using Tapatalk
 
I think it would be foolish to name the lower price point product the 'M2'. Utterly foolish.

But that's just one man's opinion.
 
ShanksaloT said:
My thought here is that the M1 will take the "crown" as their premium offering and the M2 will be more affordable option.

Funny you brought up The SLDR and the "SLDR C" when I first heard that the "SLDR C" came out I thought of it as the "SLDR cheaper"

Sent from my LG-H901 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
I was referring to the SLDR-S, which had the sliding weight of the SLDR, but without the adjustable hosel.

And I can understand a possible intent in your naming convention, and a desire to put all the drivers under one roof, but M2 sounds like the sequel to the M1, not the more affordable alternative to my ears.
 
I figured they would/should release a less expensive Aero upgrade line, it's been out over a year and seems 'old' now compared to what many OEMs are doing. M1 is so hot right now that I also thought they should cosmetically tie the Aero upgrade line to it with a little bit of that carbon fiber look too. But I agree with others, M2 is a poor name choice, unless their marketing team comes out and clearly differentiates the drivers for the common golfer. Proper marketing to differentiate their offerings has been sorely lacking in the recent past. Hopefully they do a better job removing any confusion if they are indeed rolling this as 'M2'. (and even still there are about a zillion other names that seem better IMO).
 
There should be no confustion between the SLDR "S" and the SLDR "C" Series Driver.

The original Charcoal Grey, 460cc SLDR and the 460cc Silver "S" are actually the very same clubhead, just different colors. The original had the adjustable hosel, while the "S" is bonded.

The 460cc SLDR "C" is a completely different, (lower profile), clubhead with added forgiveness and a new, (Gloss Black), color. It is both non-adjustable and bonded, hence the term "C" Series, (Classic Series).

On the SLDR C-Series Driver, the Slider was replaced with a "speed pocket" just like on the SLDR Mini Driver which has the very same sole plate design.
 

Attachments

  • sldr c sole.jpg
    sldr c sole.jpg
    44.5 KB · Views: 0
  • SLDR-C clubface.jpg
    SLDR-C clubface.jpg
    11 KB · Views: 0
  • sldrcrown2.jpg
    sldrcrown2.jpg
    9.5 KB · Views: 0
  • sldr-cCrown3.jpg
    sldr-cCrown3.jpg
    89.6 KB · Views: 0
  • sldr-cHeadcover.jpg
    sldr-cHeadcover.jpg
    2.9 KB · Views: 0
Last edited:
I personally think they should release another driver a"cheaper version" I'm fine with that. Every other OEM does it Callaway has released 4, Titleist has 3, Cobra 4, I think they will learn from there previous marketing blunder. M1 is the best selling driver out so far this year "if the commercials are true" didn't look it up. Build on it the M1 is a fantastic club excited for the M2.
 
The weird thing about them going M1 and M2 is that it would make sense (sort of) if they were still using 1 and 2 to delineate the iron lines - though this would be the opposite, with the 1 being the better player and 2 being the "for the masses" model. But now the lines for the irons are Psi and Rsi.
 
mpeterson said:
The weird thing about them going M1 and M2 is that it would make sense (sort of) if they were still using 1 and 2 to delineate the iron lines - though this would be the opposite, with the 1 being the better player and 2 being the "for the masses" model. But now the lines for the irons are Psi and Rsi.
Click to expand...
yup i agree. before psi line it was the rsi 1 for the masses, rsi 2 for the players. no consistency. it's like they are almost trying to confuse the general golfing public.
 
Companies don't always make sense. Mercedes has the C63. Use to have a 6.2L in it and now a twin turbo 5.5, but the 63 name remains.

The problem isn't companies naming products, it's the general publics problem of being scared to ask questions regarding something they are buying.

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk
 
Paladin said:
I was referring to the SLDR-S, which had the sliding weight of the SLDR, but without the adjustable hosel.

And I can understand a possible intent in your naming convention, and a desire to put all the drivers under one roof, but M2 sounds like the sequel to the M1, not the more affordable alternative to my ears.
Click to expand...

I completely understand your point of view. I personally like the thought process of TaylorMade and the simplicity approach they are taking but they are going to have to do a good job of clearly marketing the 2.
 
Its no surprise that TM would follow suit and release a slightly less expensive line just like every other OEM that makes perfect sense to me, I just wish they would keep using the burner name, Aeroburner or anything but M2. Burner is something I always relate to TM and it has been a good line of clubs for them going all the back to the original burner drivers in the 80's.
 
Bstubbs42 said:
Its no surprise that TM would follow suit and release a slightly less expensive line just like every other OEM that makes perfect sense to me, I just wish they would keep using the burner name, Aeroburner or anything but M2. Burner is something I always relate to TM and it has been a good line of clubs for them going all the back to the original burner drivers in the 80's.
Click to expand...

That's 1 thing I wish TM would do is stick with a name. I was glad to see the new, updated golf ball stick with the Tour Preferred name. You can build a name/reputation of a product & not cause any further confusion. I'd love to see them keep using a variation of M1 as their premium line and I agree, keeping "Burner" in the 2nd tier/less pricey product naming.

That's the 1 thing I do like that Titleist does. Products keep the same name, but they just update with numbers. 910, 913, 915, etc...
 
Taylormade had been doing that with the R name when they went back to the R15.

This looks kind of like what I was expecting, same type of multimaterial crown but with fewer adjustments.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top