Three highly anticipated drivers have recently been unveiled. The Ping G5 and Cleveland Launcher Ti460 drivers are already available at some retailers, and the Nike SasQuatch driver is expected in shops before Thanksgiving – and is getting a big push from Nike.
So these drivers are bigger and bolder than their predecessors, right? Oh, wait, all three models are replacing drivers that were already at the 460cc maximum imposed by the USGA and R&A. There goes a big selling point. Can drivers be better without being bigger?
I’ve already noted in a previous Bag Drop that USGA/R&A limitations on technological advances could be plunging golf equipment into a dull age of non-differentiation. And with the blue blazers looking at dialing back the golf ball and the moment of inertia (MOI) in drivers, those limitations could make future equipment options even more, uh, limited.
In the meantime, how are manufacturers working to overcome some of these limitations? Ping and Nike are bringing their second round of 460cc drivers to market, while Cleveland has announced its third 460cc driver. Since golf’s governing bodies won’t let the drivers get any bigger, how are the OEMs trying to make them better? And, most importantly to you, how much better is that new driver than the “old” model that’s now on clearance for $100 less?
Until I’ve had a chance to hit these new clubs, I can’t say for sure how much they improve upon last year’s models. But from the looks of things, you can chalk the changes up to incremental design changes – evolution, not revolution – and some marketing sweet-talk.
Let’s look at Cleveland’s new Launcher Ti460 driver for starters. This new driver replaces both the original Launcher 460 (no “Ti” in the name, though it was an all-titanium driver) and the more recent Launcer 460 Comp driver. In the new Launcher Ti460, Cleveland is getting away from the composite carbon crown that the 460 Comp sported. Instead, the new Launcher Ti460 has what Cleveland calls “Thin Crown Technology.” The company says it has been able to eliminate 15 percent of the weight used in the original Launcher 460, which has been shifted to other parts of the clubhead for a lower center of gravity and higher launch conditions.
That sounds good, but let’s be real. The crown was likely already pretty thin and light. Losing 15 percent of the weight there is a pretty small gain for the rest of the club. Otherwise, the Launcher Ti460 is pretty similar to the original, including the use of a hot SP700 beta titanium alloy in the face. I’m sure that Cleveland’s Thin Crown Technology is a step forward, but how much of an improvement is it over what was already a very good driver? An extra five yards? I wonder, and I’ll look forward to finding out for myself soon. If you’re eager to find out, the Launcher Ti460 and an updated line of Launcher steel fairway woods are scheduled to ship on Oct. 3.
OK, let’s move on to Ping’s new G5 driver. The timing on this new product launch is interesting, because the G2 driver that is being replaced seemed to just be hitting its stride. The G2 was selling very well, and it was accumulating a slow-building buzz as one of the hottest drivers on the market.
But today’s marketing minds demand that new product be force-fed to the retail pipeline every 18-24 months, so the G2 was ready to go. You guessed it, the new G5 is 460cc like the G2 was. So what’s new? According to Ping, the internal weighting was redistributed to create lower spin rates and greater distance. How much weight was shifted from the crown and face? Eight grams. Roughly the same amount of saturated fat you’ll find in a quarter-pounder McDonald’s, Or, to be less oblique, that’s about a quarter of an ounce. I think we’re getting close to nano-technology here.
But, moving even that small amount of weight can make a big difference. Ping made a similar internal weighting change when it moved from the TiSI to the TiSI Tec driver, and it did impact performance and ball flight positively. In the case of the G5, Ping has bumped up all the lofts by a half-degree to keep launch angles on par with the G2 line. The love-it-or-hate-it moon alignment aid has been made smaller, which is good, but the G5 at address otherwise looks a great deal like the G2. How does it perform? I can’t say yet, but the G5 drivers are available now in many golf shops if you want to be among the first to try it out. Let me know what you think.
While both Ping and Cleveland are bringing out new drivers that are cosmetically similar to their previous products, Nike is being a bit more aggressive in the looks and naming departments with the new SQ 460 driver. The SQ stands for “SasQuatch,” the product’s development code name. As Nike tends to do with all its products, the SQ 460 has plenty of named technologies, including “Max Back Center of Gravity” and “Powerbow” technology. These somehow (Nike’s a bit short on the details right now) move the center of gravity way back in the clubhead without using weights. Sounds a bit like what Callaway has done with the very long front-to-back head weighted head design of the Fusion FT-3.
To draw attention to the SQ 460, Nike has painted a U-shaped portion of the sole bright yellow. This is very recognizable in photos and on TV, and is a typically Nike-esque move to make a product stand out. We’ll have to wait until the club ships in November to see if it improves upon Nike’s current Ignite 460 driver – which has a bright red doohickey at the back of the clubhead, in case you have trouble telling the clubs apart.
I guess that’s the thing. I’m having trouble telling the clubs apart, and this is what I do. After several years of new drivers being able to boast significant size increases, 2006 will be the year of leveling out. Once TaylorMade and Titleist finally get around to their 460cc drivers – TM has topped out at 450cc with the r5 Dual and Titleist’s 905 series is in the 400cc range – there will be no more major OEMs that can play the “It’s bigger!” angle.
Golf club designers are a crafty lot, and I’m sure there are some interesting new drivers in the pipeline that improve potential performance without increasing size. But in general, I think we as consumers should start getting used to tiny weight shifts and new paint jobs as “exciting new features” in the age of golf over-governance.