Jump to content
Typhoon92

Driver Head with Weight Removed

13 posts / 408 viewsLast Reply

Recommended Posts

If I take the weight and screw out of my Ping G400max driver at home and then go to the course use it with the hole exposed is it legal or do I have to cover it with tape.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

I don’t think covering it with tape makes it legal.

I think it’s non-conforming either way, but definitely with the weight removed and a hole in the club head.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

1 hour ago, Typhoon92 said:

If I take the weight and screw out of my Ping G400max driver at home and then go to the course use it with the hole exposed is it legal or do I have to cover it with tape.

If you don't want to use the weight maybe Ping has a screw in cover.  I had a Callaway driver a few years ago that had two weight slots, but only one weight. So the other slot you covered with a screw-in lid.

Edited by Double Mocha Man

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, iacas said:

I don’t think covering it with tape makes it legal.

I think it’s non-conforming either way, but definitely with the weight removed and a hole in the club head.

Can he put the screw in, but not the weight?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

4 hours ago, iacas said:

I don’t think covering it with tape makes it legal.

I think it’s non-conforming either way, but definitely with the weight removed and a hole in the club head.

For my own education, can you explain why a "vacant" hole in the underside of the club, normally filled by a screw holding in a weight, would make the club non-conforming?  I don't see anything in the Equipment Rules that leads me to the same conclusion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

45 minutes ago, DaveP043 said:

For my own education, can you explain why a "vacant" hole in the underside of the club, normally filled by a screw holding in a weight, would make the club non-conforming?  I don't see anything in the Equipment Rules that leads me to the same conclusion.

I’m not able to check right now. I know that holes in the head are allowed for some cavity-back irons (not THROUGH the head, but like in the cavity back area) and putters, but they really limit the holes in “wood” heads (drivers, fairways, hybrids). I think there’s a pesky “through” word, but the interpretation is often that the club head isn’t “plain in shape” if it has a hole in it (because the internal geometry is no longer “inside”?)

I’m probably simplifying things a bit in the sense of “better safe than sorry” and not wanting to get too close to the line. I found this, for example:

http://www.canterburygolf.co.nz/assets/Rule-PDFs/CGRA-Is-your-Driver-still-conforming.pdf

If a latch covering a hole in a driver is detached, it’s non-conforming, but for some reason a single weight missing on another head is legal so long as the other weight isn’t missing because then you’d have a hole “through” the head.

So again, I may be simplifying to say “holes in driver, danger area, don’t even do it.”

2 minutes ago, dennyjones said:

I was under the impression that if you started the round with the club as such it was fine as long as you didn't make any changes during the round.

You can’t start the round with a non-conforming club. I won’t die on the hill that a club without a weight and thus a hole is non-conforming, but as I just wrote, it’s a danger area for sure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

I found this on the Golfworks website. Scroll down into the Q&A and they say it’s legal.


 

I was reading the same piece that Iacas found this morning from Canterbury golf about one hole vs. two holes.  Looks like it’s fine.  Thanks guys!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

37 minutes ago, Typhoon92 said:

I found this on the Golfworks website. Scroll down into the Q&A and they say it’s legal.


I was reading the same piece that Iacas found this morning from Canterbury golf about one hole vs. two holes.  Looks like it’s fine.  Thanks guys!

Wait, you said there was a hole. What hole is there with that weight missing? There’s no hole with this weight removed, really. Just the little place for the weight to screw in, but two of those are always exposed. And I don’t think they count as holes as I don’t think they go all the way into the club head (or else stuff could get into the two unused ones).

Sorry, though - I know what a G410 head is. I have one, so I should have thought to ask a better question first.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

On my G400max I don’t know if the hole goes into the head.  But the Canterbury link showing the Callaway head said one hole from a missing weight was ok but 2 holes was not because it was an entrance and exit I think.  Maybe I’ll email Ping.  The his is what I hate about the season winding down, I think about stupid things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

I was picturing a "weight port", a hole with a specific bottom extending into the clubhead, but not through it.  I do agree that the Canturbury ruling seems to apply to a hole that extends completely through a clubhead, which isn't allowed.  I suppose I'd say its the difference between a hole and a tunnel.  The hole is acceptable, the tunnel is not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

5 hours ago, DaveP043 said:

I was picturing a "weight port", a hole with a specific bottom extending into the clubhead, but not through it.  I do agree that the Canturbury ruling seems to apply to a hole that extends completely through a clubhead, which isn't allowed.  I suppose I'd say its the difference between a hole and a tunnel.  The hole is acceptable, the tunnel is not.

The equipment rules will use the word "hole" but say "through" the clubhead, and has pictures showing such. But I get what you're saying, too.

I'd be careful about holes in your clubs, though, as they can be "filled" with things (water can get in, etc.). even if it's not rules-related.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

39 minutes ago, iacas said:

I'd be careful about holes in your clubs, though, as they can be "filled" with things (water can get in, etc.). even if it's not rules-related.

Amen, I wouldn't play a driver with any screws missing.  I've been accused of having a screw loose, but its never been in one of my clubs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • Support TST Affiliates

    SuperSpeed
    TourStriker PlaneMate
    Golfer's Journal
    Whoop
    FlightScope Mevo
    Use the code "iacas" for 10% off Mevo
  • Posts

    • My wife is going on day 9 of no taste or smell, her daily headaches have seemingly gone away so that's a positive step and I had a couple days of slight congestion but nothing significant. Our quarantine is set to be over on Thursday, probably will wait until Friday or Saturday before leaving the house. 
    • But it’s not really. A lot can happen from the time one tests negative to boarding the plane. Or the test may have not detected the virus at test time. Testing negative when asymptomatic isn’t that reliable due to  the unknown status of the virus in the body if present. This silly ‘ negative test no more than 72hrs old’ is a joke. Sure it’s better than nothing....but barely.  Sadly, people are flocking to urgent care clinics and testing sites to get their golden ticket to travel. It’s irresponsible. 
    • Came across this video last night. Impressive.  
    • Tough week for my whoop so far ...haha. I ran off and left it yesterday morning when I left for work. And this morning, I ran off and left my charger. We had a Thanksgiving dinner yesterday and some other things happened that had my mind in other places. I should have told my wife to wait a few days. Her whoop should be here today.
  • Today's Birthdays

    1. AlexPodlogar
      AlexPodlogar
      (45 years old)
    2. big6_76
      big6_76
      (44 years old)
    3. gowpowdsp
      gowpowdsp
      (46 years old)
    4. mambo1888
      mambo1888
      (37 years old)
    5. Stanley51
      Stanley51
      (69 years old)

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Welcome to TST! Signing up is free, and you'll see fewer ads and can talk with fellow golf enthusiasts! By using TST, you agree to our Terms of Use, our Privacy Policy, and our Guidelines.

The popup will be closed in 10 seconds...