Gigagolf is cheap - Page 3

I don't have a problem with clones.  I know a couple of guys at the local muni who game clones.  This one guy is probably the biggest dork I know.  Nice guy, but a dork.  Although he'd still be a dork if he was gaming sticks off a tour van, but that's because it's in his nature to be a dork.  He's all about touting his clones and how they've been custom fit.  He's quite possibly the worst golfer I've ever seen.  Has absolutely nothing to do with his clones.  That's just in his nature too.  In addition to getting his clones from this local golf shop/driving range he's also gotten many lessons from those same folks.  One time we're playing together and this guys schtick, in addition to sucking at golf, is to expound on golf theory and regale whomever he's playing with about how they ought to be playing the game (he likes to share his knowledge, part of what makes him a dork).  So he proceeds to instruct me on how to hit a lob shot.  He's about 15 yards away from me and he sets up over the ball aiming directly at me.  I interrupt his lesson to point out how he's aiming right at me.  No problem he says this is how it's done.  So naturally I set my bag down and hike away from being in his line of fire to a good safe distance away.  He swings, skulls the shot, and bangs his ball off my bag.  Laughing I tell him that technique aside the ball went exactly where he was aimed...

I shouldn't have told that story because it just comes off as me piling on the anti-clone wagon.  

I really don't mind clones.  I play name brand gear and I'm a hack, and I have no doubt I could hack it up just as well gaming clones.  I would be a little suspicious of clones not being made to the same exact standards as name brands, but for most golfers (read: hacks like me) the difference would probably be negligible.  I do believe though that there is a difference between equipment.  Prior to gaming my i10's (which were fitted to me through Ping's process) I gamed a set of off the rack Wilson Staff Di7's.  The Di7's are SGI clubs and much to my surprise when I switched to the i10's I found the Pings to be more forgiving and all around better irons.  Other's experience may vary, but that experience made me think that quality clubs could well be worth the difference in price.  

Quote:

Originally Posted by LBlack14 


Let me get this straight so as to not put words in your mouth....what does this thread have to do with Di7's (which are fantastic clubs btw) compared to i10's? I, personally, would game the Di7's everyday over the i10's, but that's just me. I'd like to know what "clones" your dork friend was gaming?

I mentioned what I perceived as a difference between the Di7's and the i10's to point out where different clubs have different properties.  In this case I found that a supposed "players" iron was more forgiving than a supposed "Super Game Improvement" club.    Perhaps that had more to do with one set being fitted and the other off the rack, or maybe I had progressed beyond the need for a SGI set to a player's?  Whatever it was the difference to me was immediate and dramatic.  What I took from that experience is that there is a difference between clubs.  Maybe that sounds intuitive but I've always been one subscribe to the belief it's more the Indian rather than the arrow.  

As to the clones this guy had I don't know?  I do remember him making a big deal out of them being clones and that his whole set, fitted and built for him was crazy cheap.  I also tend to subscribe to the notion that quality is not cheap.  Sure there are bargains to be found, but quality materials and craftsmanship are going to cost you more up front.  I also agree about name brands carrying a lot in marketing costs that don't expressly add to the quality of said gear, so that is one area where a smaller company can pass those savings on to the consumer, but quality craftsmanship inherently requires an investment of time.  Time spent on QA, time spent in R&D, and time spent in manufacturing.  There really are no short cuts you can make on those requirements of building a quality product.  Even copying design isn't an effective shortcut because without understanding why something in a design is done or a knowledge of the production techniques used the potential exists to not match the overall design objectives.  Couple that with a limited budget and I have a hard time believing the performance of a clone will match that of the name brand item it is attempting to copy.  Since we are talking about a "club" that is used to hit a ball the mechanics for achieving that objective aren't that extreme, but since a hack like me could discern a difference between two name brand items that leads me to believe that discerning a difference between a clone and it's intended copy are also within the realm of reason.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chief Broom 

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by LBlack14 


Let me get this straight so as to not put words in your mouth....what does this thread have to do with Di7's (which are fantastic clubs btw) compared to i10's? I, personally, would game the Di7's everyday over the i10's, but that's just me. I'd like to know what "clones" your dork friend was gaming?

I mentioned what I perceived as a difference between the Di7's and the i10's to point out where different clubs have different properties.  In this case I found that a supposed "players" iron was more forgiving than a supposed "Super Game Improvement" club.    Perhaps that had more to do with one set being fitted and the other off the rack, or maybe I had progressed beyond the need for a SGI set to a player's?  Whatever it was the difference to me was immediate and dramatic.  What I took from that experience is that there is a difference between clubs.  Maybe that sounds intuitive but I've always been one subscribe to the belief it's more the Indian rather than the arrow.  

 

As to the clones this guy had I don't know?  I do remember him making a big deal out of them being clones and that his whole set, fitted and built for him was crazy cheap.  I also tend to subscribe to the notion that quality is not cheap.  Sure there are bargains to be found, but quality materials and craftsmanship are going to cost you more up front.  I also agree about name brands carrying a lot in marketing costs that don't expressly add to the quality of said gear, so that is one area where a smaller company can pass those savings on to the consumer, but quality craftsmanship inherently requires an investment of time.  Time spent on QA, time spent in R&D, and time spent in manufacturing.  There really are no short cuts you can make on those requirements of building a quality product.  Even copying design isn't an effective shortcut because without understanding why something in a design is done or a knowledge of the production techniques used the potential exists to not match the overall design objectives.  Couple that with a limited budget and I have a hard time believing the performance of a clone will match that of the name brand item it is attempting to copy.  Since we are talking about a "club" that is used to hit a ball the mechanics for achieving that objective aren't that extreme, but since a hack like me could discern a difference between two name brand items that leads me to believe that discerning a difference between a clone and it's intended copy are also within the realm of reason.

When I read that Wilson / PING comparison all I could think was, "here's a guy who's bought into the PING myth hook line and sinker". Unless the first letter in the model name is an S, every PING iron is a game improvement iron when compared to other "players" irons available at the time.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chief Broom 

  In this case I found that a supposed "players" iron was more forgiving than a supposed "Super Game Improvement" club.    

Quotes were used for a reason.

A buddy of my games a set of g5's and having hit them on the range before I was primarily interested in the g10's when I went to get fitted for Ping irons.  This was right after the 15 line came out and they had reduced the price of the 10's accordingly.  The fitter had me hitting a 7i in the g10's and suggested I try the i10's.  On his launch monitor I was hitting the 2 clubs equally well and he suggested I go with the i10's rather than get the g's only to feel held back by them later on.  I went with his suggestion and it was only after I'd gamed the i10's for a few weeks that I came to the conclusion that they were more forgiving that the Di7's which were touted as SGI clubs.  

I can admit to being a bit of a Ping fanboy simply because I'd gamed a Ping Anser since the mid 80's and had long admired their irons from that era.  Still this all led me to the conclusion that just going by manufacturer's classifications and recommendations isn't always what it's cracked up to be.  I don't look down on anyone for the choices they make when it comes to clubs and especially when it comes to golfing on a budget.  I've been beaten before by guys gaming knock off brands and clones, so I try to avoid drinking too much of the name brand kool-aid.  

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chief Broom 

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chief Broom 

  In this case I found that a supposed "players" iron was more forgiving than a supposed "Super Game Improvement" club.    

Quotes were used for a reason.

 

A buddy of my games a set of g5's and having hit them on the range before I was primarily interested in the g10's when I went to get fitted for Ping irons.  This was right after the 15 line came out and they had reduced the price of the 10's accordingly.  The fitter had me hitting a 7i in the g10's and suggested I try the i10's.  On his launch monitor I was hitting the 2 clubs equally well and he suggested I go with the i10's rather than get the g's only to feel held back by them later on.  I went with his suggestion and it was only after I'd gamed the i10's for a few weeks that I came to the conclusion that they were more forgiving that the Di7's which were touted as SGI clubs.  

 

I can admit to being a bit of a Ping fanboy simply because I'd gamed a Ping Anser since the mid 80's and had long admired their irons from that era.  Still this all led me to the conclusion that just going by manufacturer's classifications and recommendations isn't always what it's cracked up to be.  I don't look down on anyone for the choices they make when it comes to clubs and especially when it comes to golfing on a budget.  I've been beaten before by guys gaming knock off brands and clones, so I try to avoid drinking too much of the name brand kool-aid.  

 

I did see the quotation marks and I meant was that's what crossed my mind at first glance. I get that you realize PINGs by definition are the original game improvement gear. It works though - a lot of pros still using older PING gear (like Calc and his i5s). 

I admit I'm a hack. I golf a few times a year and decided on GG Cloud 9 irons. I also have their wedges and a fairway wood and am awaiting a Verve 17 driver. I have played well with them and have never regretted my decision. Would I love some OEM brand? Sure. But in the long run I get custom fitted clubs  for a great price. Just my 2 cents.

Quote:

Originally Posted by bobby14HC 

I regularly shoot in lower 80's, not bad for a man over 70. In the thousands of rounds of golf I have played since age of 20, I have not ever, not even once been beaten by anyone using clones. In my younger years I have broken 80 more often than I can count. From my observation people who use clones either do not get to play often or just can't afford better clubs or  just are too cheap. I average 100+ rounds every year, and have played at public and private courses and have observed literally thousands of golfers. And I have owned myself with many clone brands including Giga brand. I have owned every major brand of golf clubs, since I am a sucker for trying "new and improved". The 460cc titanium drivers truly revolutionized my scores. My Callaway FT driver and Cobra L4V drivers are simply amazing.

 

I do not think the majority of golfers spending their hard earned money on name brand are all fools. That said, there is a place for clones. As I said above, people who play few rounds or have limited finances or do not play tournaments should by all means buy the cheaper clones.

 

 

I am not trying to go back and forth any further, but your comments are pretty ignorant and based on the people that you socialize with. I can't imagine that you just play random rounds with people all the time that would allow for more opportunities to play with people with clone clubs. So to throw both of your theories out of the water why don't we go out and play a round of golf. After I beat you, then you can say you have been beaten by someone with clone clubs. Then please attend the Michigan Amateur and look for me out there with my gigagolf clubs and then you can also say that you have seen someone play clones in a tournament.

The bottom line is that all golfers have been saying for years that 90% of the club is in the shaft. Well if I have the option to get my clubs with Dynamic Gold's then 90% of the club is the same as the name brands.

Also one last thing, and this is not something you commented on, just putting it out there for all. I keep hearing everyone say that you can pick up a set of "used" clubs for the same price as the clones. Well that might be true. The only issue with that is that my clubs have to be +1/2 in length and then up 2* along with midsize grips. So with clones I can order those specs at no extra charge and buying used I would have to pay after the fact to do all that.

My advice is play what you like and whatever gives you "your" lowest scores. I will continue to play with the clubs that get me 90% of my rounds in the 70's and almost had a round of 69.

I find the entire discussion of clones vs OEM's to be laughable.   Golf is a game whose results are almost completely dictated by physics.   Golf balls don't differentiate between club manufacturers.  Flight laws don't give a crap about OEMs.  Your Pro V1x or your Pinnacle doesn't go straighter because it's hit with a Ping and not a Pinemeadows iron.   Your wedges don't land three feet from the pin because you hit the ball with a Vokey wedge and not a Gigagolf wedge.   If you can't admit that simple fact then you're not being honest.

That said, there may be difference in feel, the quality of materials used and the R&D that goes into making the heads.   If the tech is being "borrowed" then it comes down to the quality of the materials.   I honestly haven't heard much about Gigagolf but this thread did get me to check their website.    Based on their listings, it appears that they do use some quality components.  True Temper isn't making lower quality S300 shaft for GigaGolf than they do for everyone else!

I don find it interesting that they offer a 30 day guarantee.   There's not a lot of OEM's that do that.

As for the "I've never been beaten by a guy playing clones" comment, that's just idiocy.   When I played on my HS team (playing & practicing every day) I was playing as a 2 handicap and beat a LOT of guys playing OEM stuff with my beloved Chi Chi blades that I got at a garage sale when I was 16. 

I'm not a 2 anymore but I still take money from guys with bags stuffed with $2k worth of gear with my irons that most of them have never heard of.  

OEM's spend billions annually convincing you that their gear is better.  

So much win in this post. Well done sir.
 

Quote:

Originally Posted by GolfBear 

I find the entire discussion of clones vs OEM's to be laughable.   Golf is a game whose results are almost completely dictated by physics.   Golf balls don't differentiate between club manufacturers.  Flight laws don't give a crap about OEMs.  Your Pro V1x or your Pinnacle doesn't go straighter because it's hit with a Ping and not a Pinemeadows iron.   Your wedges don't land three feet from the pin because you hit the ball with a Vokey wedge and not a Gigagolf wedge.   If you can't admit that simple fact then you're not being honest.

 

That said, there may be difference in feel, the quality of materials used and the R&D that goes into making the heads.   If the tech is being "borrowed" then it comes down to the quality of the materials.   I honestly haven't heard much about Gigagolf but this thread did get me to check their website.    Based on their listings, it appears that they do use some quality components.  True Temper isn't making lower quality S300 shaft for GigaGolf than they do for everyone else!

 

I don find it interesting that they offer a 30 day guarantee.   There's not a lot of OEM's that do that.

 

As for the "I've never been beaten by a guy playing clones" comment, that's just idiocy.   When I played on my HS team (playing & practicing every day) I was playing as a 2 handicap and beat a LOT of guys playing OEM stuff with my beloved Chi Chi blades that I got at a garage sale when I was 16. 

 

I'm not a 2 anymore but I still take money from guys with bags stuffed with $2k worth of gear with my irons that most of them have never heard of.  

 

OEM's spend billions annually convincing you that their gear is better.  

If you go to http://www.usga.org/ConformingGolfClub/conforming_golf_club.asp you'll see GigaGolf drivers are on the USGA's list, alongside the major manufacturers, as are some of those from Acer, Pinemeadow Golf, etc. Obviously this is no guarantee of quality or equivalency to TM, Ping, etc., but it certainly does indicate their clubs have been tested and found conforming to the Rules of Golf. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by bobby14HC 

Have you ever seen a tour pro, man or woman play Giga Golf clubs? I have not, and I frequent pro tournaments every chance I get. If Giga clubs

were great, why are they shunned by best players? Don't give me that excuse "Giga does not subsidize pro golfers" blah blah...

There are many pro's on tour who play clubs for which they get no subsidy because they like those clubs.

 

Only people I see using "clones" almost always can not break 80. Yet these same people "love" their clones & off brands.

If they love them, why their scores are so mediocre? If price is very important, go with Nickent or Tour Edge brand. Both

make excellent clubs at reasonable prices.

GigaGolf has a Web page (http://www.gigagolf.com/no_pro.jsp) that deals with this very issue - probably worth spending a few minutes reading. FWIW, I have a Callaway Diablo Octane driver (9.5 deg., Project X, stiff), Nike Sumo2 5900 (10.5 deg., UST Proforce V2 Tour Flight, regular) and a GigaGolf GXz driver (9 deg., Grafalloy ProLaunch Red, regular), and the GG driver plays as well (perhaps better) than the others, and the one I currently play.

Quote:

Originally Posted by GolfBear 

I find the entire discussion of clones vs OEM's to be laughable.   Golf is a game whose results are almost completely dictated by physics.   Golf balls don't differentiate between club manufacturers.  Flight laws don't give a crap about OEMs.  Your Pro V1x or your Pinnacle doesn't go straighter because it's hit with a Ping and not a Pinemeadows iron.   Your wedges don't land three feet from the pin because you hit the ball with a Vokey wedge and not a Gigagolf wedge.   If you can't admit that simple fact then you're not being honest.

 

That said, there may be difference in feel, the quality of materials used and the R&D that goes into making the heads.   If the tech is being "borrowed" then it comes down to the quality of the materials.   I honestly haven't heard much about Gigagolf but this thread did get me to check their website.    Based on their listings, it appears that they do use some quality components.  True Temper isn't making lower quality S300 shaft for GigaGolf than they do for everyone else!

 

I don find it interesting that they offer a 30 day guarantee.   There's not a lot of OEM's that do that.

 

As for the "I've never been beaten by a guy playing clones" comment, that's just idiocy.   When I played on my HS team (playing & practicing every day) I was playing as a 2 handicap and beat a LOT of guys playing OEM stuff with my beloved Chi Chi blades that I got at a garage sale when I was 16. 

 

I'm not a 2 anymore but I still take money from guys with bags stuffed with $2k worth of gear with my irons that most of them have never heard of.  

 

OEM's spend billions annually convincing you that their gear is better.  

And because the OEM's spend a lot on brainwashing marketing, people spend money on knock offs that look like expensive gear but maybe don't lead to any better scoring than garage sale clubs do.

What's interesting to me, is that people here are saying that if you can't break 80 with your clone clubs, you aren't a good player? Something like 80% of players never break 100. (think that numbers a little low actually) Give a tour player crap clubs, and give an average player the best clubs on the market. The tour player is still going to mop the floor with him. In every sport there is high end equipment, and lower end equipment, just because you have awesome gear, doesn't make you a great player.

I have played with off the shelf Sports Authority clubs and have won against guys using top end TaylorMade clubs. I was just hitting my crappy clubs better.

I got the sgs wedges in 56 and 60*

Also the trx irons 4-pw, both with firm flex true temper premium shafts.

I got the trx 3 hybrid (not pearl because it was on sale) with the HDX 80 graphite shaft in S-flex.

Also got the pearl trx 3 wood with grafalloy blue shaft in regular flex.

I was surprised with the finish on the 3 wood, I was expecting a cheap glossy white finish and was surprised with a quality matte-white like all you get on a Taylormade.

Hoping to get to the range tomorrow or Monday, I will post my results then.

I got them all +1* lie angle and it makes a huge difference not having to bend my knees so much to an uncomfortable position to hit shots.

The stock grips are fine, nothing extraordinary.  The only downside is that there is a little design right where my bottom thumb goes that feels a little weird but thats not too bad.

By the way, White club head plus blue shaft looks killer