Jump to content
IGNORED

Taylormade burner 2.0


Note: This thread is 3934 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

Is it just me or has TM become the gimmick king of the universe lately? Not that the actual clubs are gimmicks, but the marketing makes me scratch my head a little bit.

Their 4i is the same loft as my 3h...
Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it just me or has TM become the gimmick king of the universe lately? Not that the actual clubs are gimmicks, but the marketing makes me scratch my head a little bit.

Yep, pretty dumb. They are gonna get terrible maltby ratings

Link to post
Share on other sites

Argh! I wish I was there to heckle, not one part of that presentation is new.

Different kick points in each shaft for each club? Really?????? New technology???? Please, how stupid do you think people are?

Thin face? That's fine as long as you get it out of the middle, if you don't, you are worse off.

Technology has been maxed out in every part of the game, in most cases it will be wound back in the net few years, so his whole presentation about moving forward at a rapid rate is crap.

The one thing I wish the USPGA and R&A; could limit is BS marketing like this.
Link to post
Share on other sites

same burner Iron stamped 2.0 with stonger lofts!!!

oh but wait your forgot!!!! The old only appealed to 5-20 hc, nooooowwwww these are for EVERYONE!! haahah
Link to post
Share on other sites

I like how their website used to compare the Burners to many competitors' clubs. If I remember correctly, the TMs were 10 yards longer than my AP2s.
The Titleist website says that a stock AP2 6 iron has a loft of 31* and a shaft length of 37.5 inches
According to TaylorMade, a Burner 6 iron has a loft of 27* and a shaft length of 37.625 inches.
That pretty much explains why the Burners are 10 yards longer. It's like hitting a 5 iron (burner) vs. a 6 iron (AP2) and saying the five iron goes further.
Link to post
Share on other sites

I've gotten to the stage where I don't even understand the point behind their marketing anymore.

"Thin Face. The thinner the face, the more ball speed and distance the iron can produce. Incredibly important in long irons."
One, a thin face is nothing new. Two, why does this company, who claim to have pioneered long-iron replacements (hybrids) even bother with long irons in their set... especially when the target audience for GI equipment is supposed to be crap at hitting long irons?

"Head Shapes. Longer irons have larger heads while scoring iron heads are more compact."
Again, progressive head sizes are nothing new, so why do it now and make a big deal over it?

I can't find the specs on these irons, but I presume the 3-iron is 39.5" and 19* loft, so basically we'll start hearing the tired argument about long-irons being harder to hit (hmm, I wonder why) and that the high-handicapper should dump the 3, 4, 5 and possibly even 6 iron in favour of more expensive hybrids.

I wonder if the quarterly marketing drivel is the reason why mid-to-high handicappers take an interest in blade / muscle-back clubs. I don't know about anyone else, but I'm sick of the same crap that promises to produce miracle results from a crap swing.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Gordon McTavish, according to the TaylorMade website both shaft length and loft are as you mentioned.
http://www.taylormadegolf.com/mainle...html?IsPopUp=0
I'm just as surprised as you that so many people believe in the marketing crap they come up with when it's just a bunch of BS.
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think in the new commercials, you should be able to beat Rory Sabbatini's face in with these rather than listen to whatever banal filth he decides to spew out his wordhole.
Link to post
Share on other sites

I like Taylor Made clubs (especially their woods) and I love the fact that they release clubs every 5 minutes, but I hate the stupid things they do to say their clubs good really long. Adding shaft length, lower lofts. It's just dumb.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

You know, if Taylormade would just ditch this BS and release their tour clubs to the public, they'd be so much better. Their tour issued clubs are great, the consumer R9 and R9TP are cast junk that's delofted to the 9s. The R9TB-B is a carbon steel cavity back, a good club. Their tour issue drivers are low spin, their consumer models are very high spin. They pretty much sell super long, whippy shafted, delofted, cheaply cast junk with fancy badges and a bunch of marketing gimmicks. The old TM Rac MB forged clubs were wonderful, as were the matching wedges. Now they have this "xFT" crap that looks like something from a bad sci-fi golf movie.
Link to post
Share on other sites

If you like long and flashy GI clubs with strong lofts than you should like these clubs ,but for people with taste and a decent swing who could care less about distance and more about feel and workability than you will not like them. If your gonna buy a Tayormade GI CB why not just go for the R9 they have good distance and they are not near as busy in the back.

It looks like they may be coming out with new blades as well. http://www.golfwrx.com/forums/topic/...lade-spy-pics/
Link to post
Share on other sites

You know, if Taylormade would just ditch this BS and release their tour clubs to the public, they'd be so much better. Their tour issued clubs are great, the consumer R9 and R9TP are cast junk that's delofted to the 9s. The R9TB-B is a carbon steel cavity back, a good club. Their tour issue drivers are low spin, their consumer models are very high spin. They pretty much sell super long, whippy shafted, delofted, cheaply cast junk with fancy badges and a bunch of marketing gimmicks. The old TM Rac MB forged clubs were wonderful, as were the matching wedges. Now they have this "xFT" crap that looks like something from a bad sci-fi golf movie.

Whats with the hate on TM? The XFT wedge design is a different way to go about wedge groove maintenance. No other company had that idea out there before them and yet its "crap"? If any other brand made them first I highly doubt you would be ragging on them for it.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Note: This thread is 3934 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!

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

    TourStriker PlaneMate
    Golfer's Journal
    Whoop
    SuperSpeed
    FlightScope Mevo
    Use the code "iacas" for 10% off Mevo and the code "iacasjun21" for 10% off SuperSpeed.
  • Posts

    • I can't wait to hear about them.  I'm probably not getting new hybrids this year, but if I did, these would be near the top of my consideration list.  Please let us know how they are.
    • I read something recently in either Golf Digest or Golf Magazine and it listed I think the top 50 players and what they played for irons.  It was a blades/ combo set/ whatever set type of article.  I showed that they were very few players playing a full set of MB’s.  If I recall correctly, most were gaming some type of combo set.   Clubs like the TM p770 are just so good now, their benefits are more attractive to better players.
    • Thing is TV shows the good shots, the putts being made so we all think they hit everything close and make every putt. Go look up PGA tour proximity to the hole... you’d be surprised it’s not close like you see.
    • I would have to agree, as agile and strong as they are with a game of golf, they probably would look pathetic in a fighting ring. If and when they get their dup together that will be a good show. Although I think the media has hyped it beyond what it really is and would just be a competitive round of golf like most others.
    • I dunno. Watching two meat heads who probably have no idea how to fight isn’t all it’s cracked up to be. I’d rather see them play some serious golf and really give the tour a show.
  • Today's Birthdays

    1. DWB
      DWB
      (68 years old)
    2. Goldy49
      Goldy49
      (72 years old)
    3. joezep23
      joezep23
      (61 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...