Justin

So, I game Acer XK brand and shoot in the low-to-mid 80's, with a driver distance average of 270... Switching to top of the line everything would suddenly have me breaking par regularly and being as long off the tee as Dustin Johnson? LMAO... You most likely saw improvement from being properly fitted, not because of name brands. Put it this way: Justin Leonard was gaming Ben Hogan in his prime. BH is now defunct. Payne Stewart was gaming Spauldings for a time, which are also defunct. In there primes, because they are playing what are now considered "junk"- since the only brands that matter are the current "big boys" with the most advertising dollars- they weren't very good golfers, right? Does that make Colin Montgomery a bad golfer, since he's gaming the little-known Yonex? What about the guys on the Champions Tour gaming Rife putters? The hole in your reasoning is that all clubs, be they component, clone, or name brand, are made in the same 10 foundries in China or Taiwan (depending on head style). Forgings are all done in houses in either Japan or China. That "Hyundai v. BMW" argument holds no weight- because ALL golf clubs are mass-produced, with the bottom line and the size of the stockholder's shares being the only important considerations. You could try "Kia v. Chevy", but even then it wouldn't be totally true. If, say, Callaway let you decide on all your specs, then built each of them on the spot at the main office out of raw materials you picked out, THEN you could use the "premier car v. standard car" analogy. But since only the odd boutique putter company does it (and no, it isn't Cameron- he has three companies to make his putters) that would never fly. Don't believe me? Read "The Right Sticks: Equipment Myths That Can Wreck Your Game" by Tom Wishon, or "Just Hit It" by Frank Thomas (former USGA technical director).

No, brand names do not matter. A properly fitted set will make a big difference, but again, that isn't brand-related. Nit-picking between a Taylormade, Callaway, or Titleist is a micro version of a discussion that includes brands like Srixon, Yonex, Dynacraft, KZG, etc., etc... it's irrelevant.

And they're longer in total length than everyone else, too boot (a Taylormade trademark, to sell distance). It sounds like you have pretty good hand-eye coordination, as that extra length and lower loft isn't hurting you like it would the average golfer. But all things being equal, there won't be much difference between any of them, so it comes down to what you like to see at address, hear at impact ("feel" is interrelated to sound, and is different for everyone) and that the new sticks are properly fitted. Brand doesn't matter- that's a personal choice.

I've never gamed GigaGolf, but I have used Pinemeadow. They DO hold up very well... never had an issue. I then went through the "you're not a real golfer unless you're gaming the name brands" phase. I have since went to Hireko. I chose them over the other component brands because they have a much bigger LH selection. I will never, ever buy another "name brand" golf club. A guy on my golf league has a full set of Pinemeadow's that he's had for a number of years now, and other than normal wear, they're holding up just fine- and allowing the old buzzard to shoot in the high 70's. I'll beat him, someday... Besides, they're all made in the same 10 or so foundries in China and Taiwan, by the same people making the same crap wages, with the same machines, to the same quality standards (this doesn't include the counterfeits- just clones, components and name brands). Why spend the extra money for the same playability?

You don't need name brand. Component brands, like Snake Eyes, CER, KE4, Acer, Dynacraft, KZG, etc., all offer the EXACT SAME QUALITY as the guys with the huge advertising budgets. Does playing something other than Callaway make you not a winner (since "winners play Callaway" according to their ads)? I laugh at that. Here's a little covered up truth about golf club manufacturing: they are ALL made in the SAME 10-12 foundries in China and Taiwan by the SAME people, with the SAME machines, to the SAME quality standards. Forged models are made in the same forging houses in China and Japan. So, do you REALLY think you're getting something "better" by buying from the "big boys"? Hardly. There are a plethora of options. I have personal experience with Pinemeadow, and I really liked them. I only switched out because I went through that "If I want to be a 'real' golfer, I gotta play name brands!" phase. Big mistake. I have no personal experience with GigaGolf, but I've heard some good things. Something to consider: the Scotty Cameron Newport, the one almost everyone seems to fawn over, is a knockoff Ping Anser. Simple as that. It's why Cameron and Mizuno parted ways way back when... Mizuno didn't want to make an Anser clone. Cameron did. Another thing: Cleveland Golf started out as a clone company... now look where they are. So, you never know. These "big boys" aren't guaranteed to be around forever. Look at Ram, Top-Flite, Spalding, Ben Hogan... they were all major players on Tour who fell to the wayside. It isn't feasible to think it couldn't happen to a Titleist or Callaway. About the component brands: I have personal experience with Acer. They absolutely are inline with any of the "big boys" (Nike, TMaG, Callaway, Adams, Tour Edge, Cleveland) that I've gamed. I would recommend them in a heartbeat, especially if you were left-handed. Their LH selection is much greater than any other component brand. If you're RH, there's still an awesome selection. If you have your heart set on "name brands" (everyone has the right to buy what they want, afterall), look to Ebay. Rockbottom, Golf Etail and 3ballsgolf are all dependable Ebay sellers. I try to stick with sellers with >98.5 approval rating. Don't sweat the age, either. Driver technology has been maxed out since 2006. Other than the adjustability thing (which isn't a necessity) you'll still have all the bells and whistles. Iron technology is even older. Because the consumer has dictated what constitutes "normal", the blueprint for iron design hasn't changed much. Make toplines and soles too thick, and they don't sell. Make blade length too long, the don't sell. Put too much offset in the hosels, they don't sell. So, designers are kind of hamstrung... which leads to little in the way of innovation. Same with wedges and putters... if you see a great deal on a 2009 club, grab it. You find a set of Ping Eye 2's in good condition at a great price? Snatch it up, they were a great design then, they still are today.

When someone is in a putting funk, looking at something different can "cross-wire" the brain, akin to rebooting a computer. It's similar to people that switch from a standard length to a belly, or to the claw grip from the standard grip. It's safe to assume both putters were fit to him (which is what I hope everyone has done with their own putters), but they do look different, with different feels. But to suggest one being "better" than the other is a waste of time. It doesn't matter how many he's won with one or the other... the effect it has on his mind is the most important feature. Maybe it snaps him out of his putting funk, maybe it doesn't.

Which iteration of the r9? I'm going to go with the original: The r11 comes with a stock Fujikura Blur 60 shaft. The r9, a Fujikura Motore 65. Shafts are overated, and there's only 5g difference between the two, so make of that what you will. The stock lie angle for the r11 is 57*; the r9, 59*. Lie also isn't as important for drivers (because of its length, if the shaft is the proper flex it'll droop at impact in a "just right" lie angle). You could say that the r9 is more slice-corrective, because of the more upright lie angle, but all other specs would have to be the same. They both have the TM 360 grip The r11 is 440cc; the r9 is 430cc. If you can tell a difference by look and playability, you need to be on Tour. They'll both be too long for you, unless you're very tall and/or have incredible hand-eye coordination. Obviously, the r11 has a white crown. If that's a big deal, so be it. The r11 also has that sole bumper. As I said, if you're properly fit for shaft flex, the lie at impact will take care of itself. So again, if this is a big deal for you, so be it. Other than that, there isn't much difference. The r9 was/is a very good club... so why not game it? All you'd be "missing out on" (using that phrase lightly) would be 10cc head size, 2* lie/the sole bumper (see above) and a newer "it" shaft (no big deal)... oh, and a white crown. If that's worth an extra $200, that's your decision to make.

Depends on what you can do. Rifles and PX are the SAME THING... a "flighted" Rifle is the same as a "flighted" PX. THe only difference is the name. When True Temper bought Rifle (formerly Brunswick) all they did was change the name. This is according to Golf magazine (who'd get flogged and have advertising dollars taken from them if it wasn't true), in an article about Phil Mickelson. He went to TT, worried they'd change things after their purchase (he's been a Rifle/PX guy for what seems like forever). They reassured him nothing would change, which is why he stayed with their shafts. Now, there IS a difference between a "flighted" model and a non-"flighted". The bend point (BP; also known as Kick Point) lowers as the shaft gets longer in a "flighted" model. In non-"flighted" models, the BP stays constant. These nominal changes allegedly allow a golfer to hit a higher shot with a 4i, and a lower, more penetrating (and higher-spinning) shot with a PW. All this little change does is lower or raise a club's effective loft at impact. A low-BP shaft, coupled with a 23* head, can make the effective loft at impact 23.1+ degrees at impact (depending on the amount of bend). Obviously, the ball will fly higher. The high-BP/more spin isn't that magical, either: the high-BP will make the effective loft lower: in essence, taking a 47* PW and turning it into something less. It'll obviously fly lower than "normal", thanks to the decrease in loft. It'll still spin a bunch, because there's still a bunch of loft there. If you're that torn, and these are your only two options, get the less expensive set. From there, learn how to play the ball up (increase launch) or back (decrease launch) in you stance, for the same effect.

Golf clubs are androgenous. And they could care less who's swinging them. Besides, most "women-specific" clubs are the same thing as the "men's" clubs, only they have (supposedly... it isn't always the case with "L"-flex shafts) whippier shafts and a pretty-foofoo paint scheme. Do yourself a favor: get fitted. Brand absolutely DOES NOT MATTER- they are all made in the same foundries in China and Taiwan (forged models are done in Japan and China). Getting the correct lofts, club lengths, shaft flex, grip size, swing weight and total weight for your new sticks is what matters most.

I don't see why there's a big debate. The G15's are built on the same platform as the G10, which was an "upgrade" to the G5, and so on. A couple of milimeters difference in Center of Gravity (CG) location won't make a big difference. The color scheme doesn't make a difference. THe G10's were "top of the line" when they came out... why wouldn't they be now? Just because they're a little older? If you hit them both and liked them both, get the G10's and use that extra $$$ on something else, like Ping shirts, a few lessons (everyone should at least take a few), or a few extra rounds this year.

Thanks for the detail. It helps make for a better answer, that's for sure. As for your concerns: Irons: sounds like this falls into the "if it ain't broke..." philosophy. Fitting IS important, but it sounds like you got lucky that your dad's old sticks fit you well. If you were to get fitted for irons, they'd look at stuff like length and lie angle, for starters. Lie angle is important; a poor-fitting lie angle can make for a push (too flat) or a pull (too upright), even if everything about the swing and contact was perfect. Subsequently, notice that pull? It can also be used to help correct a slice... that's why many drivers are made more upright the last few years (even the adjustable ones, though that can be changed)- it's a built-in slice fixer. What's roughly 70% of all golfer's problem? A slice (just some food for thought)! Anyway, you don't have an issue here, so moving on... Driver: It sounds like your mechanics have improved. That's why the offset driver is hurting your game. Offset allows a person a few miliseconds to square up the face at impact. But if a person can fire their hands through correctly, that offset isn't needed, or can turn it into a hook, which is what I think you were experiencing. The Nicklaus driver creates a fade most likely because it doesn't have the offset. If you don't fire through, it can create a fade. Now, again I think this falls under the "If it ain't broke" mentality. However, if you do feel like something is missing, a fitting may confirm/deny this. If you're hitting a 5i 195y... that's pretty good! So if I were you, I wouldn't bother there (save the $$$ for something else). But the driver, you may want to get that looked into. Do yourself a favor and find an independent fitter- NOT someone associated with an OEM (like Callaway, Nike, etc.). Talk to the fitter about your thoughts, and go from there. Why an independent fitter? No agenda. If s/he doesn't think you need a change, you won't need a change. If s/he thinks you do, they honestly believe it. OEM-associated fitters have their primary function set on "Sell". Avoid those types.

No. Changing to more expensive clubs won't make a difference. Regardless if an iron's made of carbon steel, stainless steel, beryllium copper or zinc, if the head's the same shape, the loft's are the same, the lie angle's the same and the shaft and grip are the same... they'll perform the same. Beryllium copper and zinc can't be bent, that is why they are "inferior" to stainless and carbon steels. Most likely, that set of Maxfli's weren't fitted to your swing. You switch clubs, regardless of brand, to a fitted set and you'll see an improvement. Very cheap drivers are made with aluminum, not titanium. The walls will be thicker, weights may be off, but if you could manage to make an aluminum-headed driver to the same specs of a titanium driver, they'd perform the same. There's an important equation to remember: E=.5(M*V2). As in, the Energy output (distance) equals half of the Mass of the clubhead times Velocity (swing speed) squared. What a club is made out of, or who made it, doesn't factor into the equation. I have an older friend who shoots in the high 70's-low 80's with a full set of Pinemeadow clubs. I shoot in the low to mid 80's with a an almost full set of Acer (from Hireko.com). There's more to golf equipment brands than those with the most advertising dollars telling you what to buy and when. Consider there's Acer, Dynacraft, KZG, Alpha. Geek, Bang, Maltby/GolfWorks (Tricept, CER, Distance Master), Golfsmith (Snake Eyes), Tom Wishon Golf Technologies, Inazone, Diamond Tour Golf, Integra, Swing Science, plus reputable clone brands (who also have their own stuff) like Pinemeadow and GigaGolf... but you won't see them here or in golf magazines since they don't spend the money getting the media to tell people to buy their stuff. I can personally vouch for Acer/Dynacraft, KZG, Inazone and Pinemeadow's gear. Having played the "big boys" stuff as well (Callaway FT-3, 5, 9; X-20 and 22 irons, Forged+ wedge; Nike Sasquatch and SuMo 5000 drivers, SQ 3w, SV wedge; Adams RPM and Speedline driver; Taylormade RAC and RAC TP wedges, Cobra FP II irons) there is NO difference- in quality or performance.

It shows the power of brandwashing, and why "Hot" lists are worthless. W/S was a major player, fell to the wayside, then built themselves back up. It wasn't that they started making inferior products all of a sudden at some point, they just cut way back on advertising. Coincidentally, the biggest advertisers are the ones considered the "best", because apparently, if we don't see their commercials 100 times a day or see ad pages in the golf outlets they just don't compare at ALL.