Jump to content
Check out the Spin Axis Podcast! ×
Note: This thread is 5924 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

Recommended Posts

Posted
Agree with Bridgestone and Srixon, and would add Sonartec, which I think may be defunct now.

Wilson Staff and MacGregor are surely mysteries. Once these were major entities in the golf industry, famous for their players' clubs. If you got in a time machine and went back to the fifties or sixties, they and Walter Hagen, Top Flight, and Spalding were common names in the game, right alongside Titleist (or Acushnet.)

RC

 


  • Replies 103
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted
Henry griffits

henry griffits

henry griffits

henry griffits

henry griffits

Driver: Callaway Big Bertha Diablo 9º
2 Hybrid: Callaway Big Bertha Heavenwood
Irons: Nike Slingshot OSS 6-3 iron
          Taylormade Tour Preferred PW-7 iron
Wedges: Cleveland CG14 50º, 54º
              Taylormade RAC 58º
Putter: Ping Darby 32" shaft


 


Posted
Not to challenge you Balto but what clubs do Snake Eyes copy?

A friend of mine has a set and I believe he said they were ping 'i'-series clones.

Your friend is obviously an idiot. Snake eyes is a component manufacturer, not clones.

Driver:  the search continues
Fairway Wood:  Ping G25 3W Tour stiff
Hybrid:  Snake Eyes Q4U 19*, 23*
Irons:  Ping G25 5-UW w/CFS X-flex  (on order)
Wedges:  685BX black 56*      Putter:  Wilson Staff 8882 


Posted
Indeed, Henry Griffits clubs have been a standard for decades. Surely not as well known today as in past times.

RC

 


Posted
Another vote for Wilson Staff. I chose my Pi7s over several other major manufacturers (TM, Nike, and Callaway, in particular). I haven't regretted my recent wedge purchases for a second, either. The price-to-quality ratio can't be matched.

In my bag:
905R 9.5
906F4 15.5
CLK Fli-Hi 20

MP-52 3-PW

Vokey SM 52.08, 58.08

Studio Stainless Newport 2 35"

PRO V1x


Posted
Nickent makes the best hybrids i think.

In My Sun Mountain 3.5 Bag:
Driver- '07 Burner 10.5
3 Wood- Sumo 3 wood
Hybrid- 3+ 18.5 hybrid
Irons- R7 4-AW steelWedges- 56 Putter- Itsy Bitsy SpiderBalls- D2 Feel Prov1 Practice


Posted
I wouldn't call companies like Miura and Scratch underrated personally. Although they're not well known they have reputations as makers of high-end, high-quality clubs. They're boutique manufacturers known for their quality but out of the price range for the average golfer.

Scratch 8620 Cast Wedges are $99 and would rival any wedge out there... I would hardly say that price range is too high.

I would also throw a vote out for Tour Edge Exotics hybrids and fairway woods as some of the best around... but these you will pay a price for.

13 Wedges
1 Putter


Posted
Scratch 8620 Cast Wedges are $99 and would rival any wedge out there... I would hardly say that price range is too high.

$1,200 iron sets

-Rich

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
Not to challenge you Balto but what clubs do Snake Eyes copy?

I have no idea hehe? Maybe Cobra's? lol

This have something to do with Hippo's? I never said anything about snake eyes hehe

Posted

+1 for Wilson Staff

Used to have ws wedges, loved em. I'm sure the irons are awesome. Shame everyone thinks its the junk you get at target.

Curious about the woods though, I noticed good ole Paddy had an R9 which I found interesting as I thought the 'smooth driver' on their website looks cool.


Posted
Your friend is obviously an idiot. Snake eyes is a component manufacturer, not clones.

Component manufacturers, like Snake Eyes, make clones. They take existing ideas and designs and make a club that is very similar in materials and design but do not infringe on trade marks of the original OEM. That is what Snake Eyes are. They clone other manufacturers clubs materials, designs and specifications. This doesn't mean they're bad clubs.

I understand you own a set and are defensive about them for whatever reason, but maybe you should read this: http://www.pinemeadowgolf.com/clubs101_5.html It explains what clones are and why companies like Snake Eyes make clones. They are cheap alternatives to name brand clubs and get similar performance. Clones are not knock offs. Knock offs are of poor quality and illegal.

Posted
Component manufacturers, like Snake Eyes, make clones. They take existing ideas and designs and make a club that is very similar in materials and design but do not infringe on trade marks of the original OEM. That is what Snake Eyes are. They clone other manufacturers clubs materials, designs and specifications. This doesn't mean they're bad clubs.

Not only did the link you posted not prove anything, you are 100% incorrect in your assertion that Snake Eyes uses other designs and copies them. Every Snake Eyes iron head is an original design. I am not sure how old you are but back in the 90's before they were owned by Golfsmith dozens of tour players had Snake Eyes wedges in their bag. These same wedges are still being sold.

"Component manufacturers, like Snake Eyes, make clones.". Are you asserting that all component manufacturers make clones? There is a difference between a component and a clone. I use almost exclusively Maltby products and I can assure you that not one of my clubs is a "clone". Do a little research before posting stuff like this. Here is a list of Snake Eyes Irons. Why don't you tell me which ones they cloned: http://www.golfsmith.com/cm/browse/c...275624&Ntk;=All

Glock 17


Posted
Component manufacturers, like Snake Eyes, make clones. They take existing ideas and designs and make a club that is very similar in materials and design but do not infringe on trade marks of the original OEM.

Based on what you're saying, basically all OEM's make "clones". Square headed drivers, hybrid iron sets, seamless cover golf balls, interchangeable shafted drivers....... etc. This is what I (and many others) consider to be clones. Most people who stay on top of new equipment can look at these iron sets and see which OEM set they are 'cloned' after. I've never played any of them so I will not make an assumption of how they perform. http://goldeneaglegolf.com/golf-irons/index.htm

Driver:  the search continues
Fairway Wood:  Ping G25 3W Tour stiff
Hybrid:  Snake Eyes Q4U 19*, 23*
Irons:  Ping G25 5-UW w/CFS X-flex  (on order)
Wedges:  685BX black 56*      Putter:  Wilson Staff 8882 


Posted
Why is it that people that play off-brand equipment are so defensive about it? Those companies take existing ideas on materials, specifications and designs and do very little R&D; themselves. That is why they are an off-brand, or clone.

I never said it was bad equipment. Just that it was copied from higher end manufacturers.

I don't play Snake eyes and don't care to, to be frank. But my friend who built a set said they're basically like some Ping clones. He didn't get ultra-defensive about his low-end gear.

Posted
Why is it that people that play off-brand equipment are so defensive about it? Those companies take existing ideas on materials, specifications and designs and do very little R&D; themselves. That is why they are an off-brand, or clone.

I don't think anyone is getting defensive. You just made a series of inaccurate statements and were corrected. We have all been wrong from time to time.

Component companies take their own ideas, own materials and design their own equipment to their specs. Clones take other peoples designs and copy them. EDIT-Above you claim "I never said it was bad equipment." and then your last sentence in the post does just that.

Glock 17


Posted
what??? noone mentioned Walter Hagens ???

Dicks Sporting Goods in-house brand (it might be at Golf Galaxy now since Dick's owns them now as well). When I worked for Dicks back in 2006, their Walter Hagen offerings were (IMO) pretty bad. Seemed like they were just copying all the conventions of what Taylor Made was doing and still had the nerve to charge top dollar for them.

Just my opinion, but I didn't think the Walter Hagen brand brought anything to the table that made them worth the money they were asking.

Driver: 907 D2 10.5 - Diamana Blue 65 Shaft
3-Wood: 906 F4 15.5 - Graphite Design YS-6+ Shaft
5-Wood: 906 F4 18.5 - Diamana Blue 75 Shaft
Irons: Rac TP CB Irons; 5.0 Flighted Rifle Shafts, 1 degree flat.
Wedges: Rac TP Black 52:08; 56:12Putter: Scotty Cameron Studio Select Newport 2 - 35"B...


Note: This thread is 5924 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • TST Partners

    Carl's Place
    PlayBetter
    Golfer's Journal
    ShotScope
    The Stack System
    FitForGolf
    FlightScope Mevo

    Coupon Codes (save 10-20%): "IACAS" for Mevo/Stack/FitForGolf, "IACASPLUS" for Mevo+/Pro Package, and "THESANDTRAP" for ShotScope. 15% off TourStriker (no code).
  • Posts

    • I work with a lot of golfers who want more shaft lean at impact, who currently have AoAs that range from +2° to -2°, and who love to see the handle lower and more "in front of their trail thigh" from face-on at P6. And a lot of these golfers try to solve the issue by working on the downswing. They do something to drag the handle forward. Or they just leave their right thigh farther back so the same handle location "looks" farther forward. Or they move the ball back in their stance. Or they push themselves down into the ground to get the handle lower and increase (decrease?) their AoA (to be more negative). The real fix is often to get wider in the backswing. To do LESS in the backswing. To hinge less, fold the trail arm less, abduct the trail arm less. I had a case of this over the weekend. Before, the player had 110° of trail elbow bend, "lifted" his trail humerus only a few degrees, etc. The club traveled quite a bit around him, and he tended to "pick" the ball from the fairways. In the "after" swings below (which are mild exaggerations — this golfer does not need to end up at < 70° of elbow bend. These were slower backswings with "hit it as hard as you normally would" intent downswings), you can see that he bent his elbow about 70° instead of 110° and lifted his right arm an extra ~15° or more. You can't see how much less this moved his hands across his chest (right arm abduction), but it was also decreased. His hands stayed more "in front of" his right shoulder rather than traveling "beside" them so much. The two swings look like this: The change at P6, without talking about the downswing one little bit (outside of him telling me that he tends to pick the ball), is remarkable: Without 110° of elbow bend to get out (which he gets to 80°, a loss of 30°), the golfer actually loses slightly less elbow bend (70 - 50 = 20), but delivers 30° less elbow bend, lowering the handle and letting the elbow get "in front of" the rib cage… because it never got "behind" or "beside" the rib cage. If you look at this video showing the before/afters of P6, you'll note the handle location (both vertically and horizontally) and the shoulders (the ball is in the same place in these frames). This golfer's path was largely unaffected (still pretty straight into the ball, < 3° path and often < 1.5°), but his AoA jumped to -5° ± 2°. I've always said, and in talking with other instructors they agree and feel similarly, that we spend a lot of time working on the backswing. This is another example of why.
    • We had a member of our senior club who developed a mental block on pulling the trigger. I played with him to see what the membership was talking about. I timed him a few times when he would get over the ball. 45 seconds. He knew he had a mental block and would chide himself, “Just hit it!” Once on the green he was okay and chipping was a bit better. It was painful to watch him struggle. Our “bandaid” was to put him in the last tournament  tee time with two understanding players. We should have suggested to him to take a break from our tournaments. I agree with the idea that when a player realizes they have a problem, the answer is to go fix it and not return until they are able to play at an acceptable pace.
    • Day 56 (4 May 26) - Worked on some ball-then-ground drills - going from P3 thru impact - with a slowed tempo, working to keep all parts in sync.   
    • Wordle 1,780 3/6 🟩⬜🟨🟨🟨 ⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜ 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
    • Wordle 1,780 4/6 🟨⬜⬜⬜🟨 ⬜🟨🟨🟨⬜ 🟩🟨🟩🟨⬜ 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
×
×
  • 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.