We've launched the new forums! Read more here

TaylorMade SLDR Driver - Review Thread

SuperStroke
BIGBALL said:
I get what you guys are saying - maybe I wasn't explaining it right. When I tee the ball lower, even with my current driver, I have very good contact - but that isn't optimum for the G25 imo. Lets just put it this way - if one was hitting both a G25 and SLDR with a level to even a slight downward aoa, but pretty much in the sweet spot - which club would be a better fit for that swing?
Click to expand...

I couldn't tell you which would be better. How much is a slight downward AOA? Honestly I don't know how much actual difference you would see in that scenario. The only thing I could tell you is to get out and hit it.
 
BIGBALL said:
I get what you guys are saying - maybe I wasn't explaining it right. When I tee the ball lower, even with my current driver, I have very good contact - but that isn't optimum for the G25 imo. Lets just put it this way - if one was hitting both a G25 and SLDR with a level to even a slight downward aoa, but pretty much in the sweet spot - which club would be a better fit for that swing?
Click to expand...

With a slight downward AoA either club could actually work. But the shaft would be the difference maker. I have used both the G25 and SLDR and found that when paired with the right shaft both worked well. I was able to shape the G25 moreso than the SLDR which is where the spin killer came into play. I tee the ball very low when using both clubs. My set up is different in that I can't set up for a draw with my SLDR like I could with my G25. If I was to attempt that setup I would end up hitting a baby draw whereas when I setup for a draw when tees low with the G25 it will not only add distance but it soars. The SLDR is also a power fade machine as well. I mean POWER FADE. Not sure if that's kind of what you were talking about but I have found that both perform very differently. But both when setup with a slightly downward AoA will perform magnificently. If you are looking to shape G25, good trajectory but mostly straight SLDR.
 
Gohead214 said:
With a slight downward AoA either club could actually work. But the shaft would be the difference maker. I have used both the G25 and SLDR and found that when paired with the right shaft both worked well. I was able to shape the G25 moreso than the SLDR which is where the spin killer came into play. I tee the ball very low when using both clubs. My set up is different in that I can't set up for a draw with my SLDR like I could with my G25. If I was to attempt that setup I would end up hitting a baby draw whereas when I setup for a draw when tees low with the G25 it will not only add distance but it soars. The SLDR is also a power fade machine as well. I mean POWER FADE. Not sure if that's kind of what you were talking about but I have found that both perform very differently. But both when setup with a slightly downward AoA will perform magnificently. If you are looking to shape G25, good trajectory but mostly straight SLDR.
Click to expand...

I'm still really confused how a back spin killing driver can produce such a low amount of side to side movement. The assumption would be, that with that little of back spin, the ball would be carving all over the place.
 
blugold said:
I'm still really confused how a back spin killing driver can produce such a low amount of side to side movement. The assumption would be, that with that little of back spin, the ball would be carving all over the place.
Click to expand...

RIGHT! I mean I have tried hard to get the nice draw that Freddie K help me nearly perfect with all my other drivers woods and irons but I Just Can't Get It.
 
blugold said:
I'm still really confused how a back spin killing driver can produce such a low amount of side to side movement. The assumption would be, that with that little of back spin, the ball would be carving all over the place.
Click to expand...

It's because the ball only spins one direction and it's always backspin (except for maybe a really low on the face/topped shot hit with a positive AoA). "Side spin" is just backspin with its spin axis tilted.

I thought the same thing you did, and approached it from the assumption that the backspin would reduce side spin. But after reading the research from the Trackman creator I learned that it does not. So angle to path and gear effect add spin to any shot regardless of head design, but spin added to a low spin shot is still lower than spin added to an average or high spin shot.

That being said, the SLDR is more than capable of producing 4000-5000 rpms easily with the right (wrong) swing. I've done it plenty of times.
 
blugold said:
I'm still really confused how a back spin killing driver can produce such a low amount of side to side movement. The assumption would be, that with that little of back spin, the ball would be carving all over the place.
Click to expand...

While it may not explain the why, play around with http://flightscope.com/products/trajectory-optimizer/. Put the spin axis at 45º and see how much more the ball moves at 5000rpm than it does 1000rpm.

Someone with a better understanding of physics may correct me, but I believe that the more spin it has, the more it will move in the direction of the axis. So with a perfectly straight ball more spin will cause it to move higher. Off axis more spin will cause it to move more in that direction. The more spin it has the faster the air moves along the axis causing the ball to move in that direction. The same spin that causes lift also makes the ball move side to side.
 
Spent some time on the range tonight and got the flight issues from my last round worked out. Really happy with how I am hitting on the range, need more on course testing.

I'd like to get on a launch monitor with this club again to help me decide shafts. I hit a couple dozen at 10.5° with the 7m3 from my R1 and liked what I saw. Still get a lot of height but it was a little more piercing flight. My only hesitation is I don't get to warm up before playing a lot of the time and it is a little more demanding combo than the diamana.

Just for fun I layered a few frames from a video to show the launch I am getting with the 7m3:
Spoiler
sldr7m3launch.png
 
Last edited:
I just spent two hours at a lesson with mine and am starting to get the bugs worked out of my driver swing (finally). I don't have a lot of experience with various makes/models of drivers, but so far I'm finding the SLDR to be no more or less penal on bad shots than anything else I've hit. Especially the Titleist 910D2, my most recent driver before the SLDR. The other driver's I've played are a 10 year old Cleveland (Launcher? I think), the original bonded RBZ with stock regular flex shaft, and the R1 with stock rip phenom stiff and Fujikura Motore F1 X-flex. When I hit a slice with any of these, they were big slices. When I'd try to over compensate by being handsy/flippy I'd get big hooks.

Hits today with the SLDR that were slightly toward the toe or heel (but still relatively centered overall) had very similar flight for my dead center hits, and did not appear to be significantly shorter judging by eyesight alone (no monitor today). I hit plenty out to the 284 yard hill at my range, but I've done that with my Titleist as well. And I can't take that to the course (yet), because I can't seem to find a groove in 18 holes and it takes me the first 30 minutes to an hour to get my driver swing dialed in decently. I usually start slicing, then over correct to hooks, and then finally find a combo of good draws and what would be playable straight pushes. Near the end of 2 hours today though and I was consistently hitting draws to my intended hill. I left with some homework of the feelings and movements that I need to recreate at home and/or on the range, and some partial swing drills to get me moving in the right direction. I kept the settings at 10.5 and neutral/standard on the sole weight for now. I'm curious as to whether I'd see distance gains by adding more loft, and will try different settings tomorrow evening at the range.
 
Sldr still performing well, still not experiencing any issues of penal distance loss .
 
I reallllly, reallllly want to love this driver but she's a fickle *****.
 
fupresti said:
I reallllly, reallllly want to love this driver but she's a fickle *****.
Click to expand...

This is why I really hoped that TM as a whole, would have gone a different direction. Not in SLDR mind you, but in the fact that they have 3 driver models this year in line and all feature the same design. I understand the price point necessary, and with how poorly JetSpeed did relative to their goals, but all 3 models were similar in design with CG in the same spot and drivers being of similar style.

I hear so many times about loving SLDR and not JetSpeed, or my favorite, loving SLDR and not SLDR S. I enjoyed Tech Talk segments that discussed CG as a whole, by the guy that designed this driver.
 
JB said:
This is why I really hoped that TM as a whole, would have gone a different direction. Not in SLDR mind you, but in the fact that they have 3 driver models this year in line and all feature the same design. I understand the price point necessary, and with how poorly JetSpeed did relative to their goals, but all 3 models were similar in design with CG in the same spot and drivers being of similar style.

I hear so many times about loving SLDR and not JetSpeed, or my favorite, loving SLDR and not SLDR S. I enjoyed Tech Talk segments that discussed CG as a whole, by the guy that designed this driver.
Click to expand...
I enjoyed the videos. He dubunked a lot of myths haha
 
JB said:
This is why I really hoped that TM as a whole, would have gone a different direction. Not in SLDR mind you, but in the fact that they have 3 driver models this year in line and all feature the same design. I understand the price point necessary, and with how poorly JetSpeed did relative to their goals, but all 3 models were similar in design with CG in the same spot and drivers being of similar style.

I hear so many times about loving SLDR and not JetSpeed, or my favorite, loving SLDR and not SLDR S. I enjoyed Tech Talk segments that discussed CG as a whole, by the guy that designed this driver.
Click to expand...
The old David would have driven straight to Golfsmith and bought the G30, but I'll be the first to admit swing was off today so before I give up I'm going to work a bit more. But, today my driving dictated my whole round and I need more confidence.
 
fupresti said:
That Sunday is the reason it's still in my bag.
Click to expand...

You smacked the heck out of that club. I don't think I've ever swung so hard trying to catch up.
 
Maybe I haven't used a super forgiving driver before, but my shots with my SLDR are no better or worse than my bad shots with any other driver I have hit (RBZ bonded, Cleveland Launcher, R1, 910D2 and 910D3, and now SLDR 460).

I would like to know if the clubs move at impact around the center of gravity when clamped in to a robot. Doesn't seem like it would move around the grip. So what does that leave, the torque of the shaft allowing the club head to bend from the pressure at impact? That might explain why I do really extra bad with light weight shafts, but I can't get a definitive answer from anyone. The guy with Project X that makes shafts said he didn't think it was a factor, but the fitter with my local Taylormade Performance lab says it does. And now the guy in the CG video basically implies that, unless he's suggesting that people are letting the club move in their hands to have the head rotate around the CG.
 
CG movement (by design) is about forgiveness. By moving it forward, you create something that allows more side to side movement (workable). By moving it back, you create something that will be less penal. Think of it as the muscleback to perimeter weighted design. True blades almost always have the CG directly behind the ball, where as the more forgiving irons, almost always have far more weight and mass around the outside.

What I find interesting (and this is not directed at anybody), is that in irons, nobody on THP disputes the actual forgiveness when comparing the designs, yet with a driver, where the design elements are parallel (generalization), it is definitely done. Nobody would ever dispute someone's findings, but I think there is more to it.

I have loved to sit down and talk to the designer of this club and share his views on CG design with THPers because while some choose to ignore it (for some reason or another), anytime one can gain knowledge about how or why a club reacts the way it does, it is a helpful tool.

As to torque, its my opinion, that in many amateurs' hands, it's an overrated number, similar to spin and a few others. Chasing numbers leads to disaster for far too many.
 
JB said:
CG movement (by design) is about forgiveness. By moving it forward, you create something that allows more side to side movement (workable). By moving it back, you create something that will be less penal. Think of it as the muscleback to perimeter weighted design. True blades almost always have the CG directly behind the ball, where as the more forgiving irons, almost always have far more weight and mass around the outside.

What I find interesting (and this is not directed at anybody), is that in irons, nobody on THP disputes the actual forgiveness when comparing the designs, yet with a driver, where the design elements are parallel (generalization), it is definitely done. Nobody would ever dispute someone's findings, but I think there is more to it.

I have loved to sit down and talk to the designer of this club and share his views on CG design with THPers because while some choose to ignore it (for some reason or another), anytime one can gain knowledge about how or why a club reacts the way it does, it is a helpful tool.

As to torque, its my opinion, that in many amateurs' hands, it's an overrated number, similar to spin and a few others. Chasing numbers leads to disaster for far too many.
Click to expand...

Then there is the Covert. Cavity back driver yet forward CG. Head explode...
 
tgtt said:
Then there is the Covert. Cavity back driver yet forward CG. Head explode...
Click to expand...

Its not really perimeter weighted. Adding a cavity to the back of a club, does not necessarily increase mass of the driver head around the impact area. They can market it any way they would like, and improved upon it slightly in the 2nd generation, but its not perimeter weighted as it pertains to the discussion of MB versus in terms of irons.
 
JB said:
CG movement (by design) is about forgiveness. By moving it forward, you create something that allows more side to side movement (workable). By moving it back, you create something that will be less penal. Think of it as the muscleback to perimeter weighted design. True blades almost always have the CG directly behind the ball, where as the more forgiving irons, almost always have far more weight and mass around the outside.

What I find interesting (and this is not directed at anybody), is that in irons, nobody on THP disputes the actual forgiveness when comparing the designs, yet with a driver, where the design elements are parallel (generalization), it is definitely done. Nobody would ever dispute someone's findings, but I think there is more to it.

I have loved to sit down and talk to the designer of this club and share his views on CG design with THPers because while some choose to ignore it (for some reason or another), anytime one can gain knowledge about how or why a club reacts the way it does, it is a helpful tool.

As to torque, its my opinion, that in many amateurs' hands, it's an overrated number, similar to spin and a few others. Chasing numbers leads to disaster for far too many.
Click to expand...

I thought the CG weighting in GI irons was more for increasing launch angle? Also, isn't harder to work a ball that launches higher (or it moves less)? That's what I see when going from PW to long irons or woods/driver.

And I'm not disagreeing with the guys information, but was asking what is causing the club head to move at impact? Also, the torque wasn't about chasing a number, but more of a statement. A shaft with lower degree of torque bends/flexes less than one of a higher degree of torque. So if the club moves around its CG at impact because the shaft is bending/flexing, then a shaft with lower torque is going to minimize that effect.

And for me, I haven't experienced a difference between drivers so I'm not sure how much it really matters for forgiveness for everyone. Or maybe it's one factor of many in hitting the right shaft/head/loft.
 
-CRW- said:
I thought the CG weighting in GI irons was more for increasing launch angle? Also, isn't harder to work a ball that launches higher (or it moves less)? That's what I see when going from PW to long irons or woods/driver.

And I'm not disagreeing with the guys information, but was asking what is causing the club head to move at impact? Also, the torque wasn't about chasing a number, but more of a statement. A shaft with lower degree of torque bends/flexes less than one of a higher degree of torque. So if the club moves around its CG at impact because the shaft is bending/flexing, then a shaft with lower torque is going to minimize that effect.

And for me, I haven't experienced a difference between drivers so I'm not sure how much it really matters for forgiveness for everyone. Or maybe it's one factor of many in hitting the right shaft/head/loft.
Click to expand...

A lower torque number is for all most a meaningless number unless one is measuring shafts themselves. There is no standard of measurement and every company does it differently. But I am the wrong guy to talk to, because in all my testing, fitting, etc I think the shaft is the most overthought part of the equation and one that is a catch all for far too many golfers in "finding" and "blaming" a club head. I had this same conversation with Matrix, KBS and Project X over the last 5 days ironically.

One of these days, to go along with the R&D interviews, will have to be a fitting one. However I believe it is another element, that in the end, just leads to "Well that is not what I am seeing".

Again, not a knock or mentioned to single anybody out, because its truly not about anybody. Just something I have noticed more and more as we get real information from those that create and how much its disputed in passing comments. The irony is that if I had TO say in a video "Forward CG is the absolute best", the same people disagreeing with him (for some odd reason, since he created the darn thing), would be saying he is a genius.

We certainly dont tell him what to say. We sit in a room and discuss topics for hours. Something comes up that sounds like it might be beneficial for the THPers, we ask him if we can film him. To go along with that, we take topics that are hot or heavily debated on THP, and go to get the correct answers so that everybody has the right or real info. The goal of course is to make sure everybody is armed with the best information possible.

If CG movement forward, does not alter forgivenesss, and certainly cannot make the ball speed faster (COR is maxed), then there would be no reason for it to be moved. I'm truly glad that some are having great success with large amounts of different clubs. The goal would never be to dispute their findings, but make sure they are armed with the right information so they understand their findings both good and bad.
 
JB said:
If CG movement forward, does not alter forgivenesss, and certainly cannot make the ball speed faster (COR is maxed), then there would be no reason for it to be moved. I'm truly glad that some are having great success with large amounts of different clubs. The goal would never be to dispute their findings, but make sure they are armed with the right information so they understand their findings both good and bad.
Click to expand...

Well I'm not arguing the fact that rear CG is more forgiving theoretically. The difference is the spin numbers. Rear CG equals more spin (which does not equal more forgiveness) and low/forward CG equals less spin which according to the creator of trackman and their equations results in less offl-line movement (or less change in total spin).

So the question is, does the lower spin make up for the potential added spin from the club head moving around the CG position. I would say, that with the right shaft, it certainly could make up for any CG related "gear effect".
 
And I for one am not having large success across a range of drivers. I'm having the same success and failures across clubs with difference CG locations. I'm about 50/50 right now with good and bad shots with my driver. But the CG doesn't seem to be the issue for me, it's my swing.
 
-CRW- said:
Also, isn't harder to work a ball that launches higher (or it moves less)? That's what I see when going from PW to long irons or woods/driver.
Click to expand...

-CRW- said:
Rear CG equals more spin (which does not equal more forgiveness) and low/forward CG equals less spin which according to the creator of trackman and their equations results in less offl-line movement (or less change in total spin).
Click to expand...

You see how interesting these two posts are?
Seems to be two rather contrasting points.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top