Just tried a Nike Sumo2

[WhiplashSmile]

OK, that was short lived LOL. A guy I work with wanted my SUMO2. He had the driver I really wanted, I know I'm a flake and fickle.....

Anyway, I traded my coworker for his FTi.

I wonder how long I'll be happy with this one LOL...

[SNIP3R]

OK, that was short lived LOL. A guy I work with wanted my SUMO2. He had the driver I really wanted, I know I'm a flake and fickle.....

I think it was a good trade for you. Never been a big fan of the Sumo. Report back with results of your newly acquired toy.

[P3R3]

lol a FTi for a SUMO2? Someone got ripped off, and it wasn't you my friend.

[WhiplashSmile]

He is looking for distance. I just want to hit the fairway. I did have to throw in my old Odyssey putter but I figure it was only worth about $60 or $75 so I'm happy.....very happy.

I guess I just killed this thread LOL.

[winders]

The burner has a better MOI rating than the SQ and is longer.

P3R3,

No, the Burner does not have a higher MOI rating. The Burner is at 5000 while the Sumo2 is at 5300. Don't equate TaylorMade's eMOI to MOI. That eMOI thing is marketing crap someone at TaylorMade thought up to make their clubs sound better than they really are. They were hoping people would confuse eMOI with MOI and you are proof that it has happened. Scott

[P3R3]

P3R3,

There is very little difference between 5000 and 5300. Being an engineer I've had to calculate MOI before.

[winders]

There is very little difference between 5000 and 5300. Being an engineer I've had to calculate MOI before.

P3R3,

Oh my, the Engineer card.... The difference is that the Sumo2 has a 6 percent higher MOI. As an Engineer, I assume you realize that 6 percent is a significant difference. Also, you said that the Burner had a higher MOI which was completely inaccurate. As an Engineer, you should appreciate accuracy. Scott

[iacas]

P3R3,

6% is significant in some places and rather insigninficant in others, particularly when all the numbers may be somewhat inflated.

With MOI, even 20% can be seen as insignificant. It depends on the player and other factors. For example, I tend to hit the center of the clubface, so. 6% is definitely insignificant to me.

[winders]

iacas,

If 6 percent is insiginificant in regards to driver head MOI, why would both Callaway and Nike, who have near 5000 MOI conventional drivers, come out with square drivers? Also, both the Sumo2 and FT-i are noticeably better on off center hits compared to their more conventional drivers. So, for what MOI is important for, 6 percent is not insignificant.

If you hit the center of the face everytime all the time, then your better than most PGA Tour players....

Scott

[iacas]

If 6 percent is insiginificant in regards to driver head MOI, why would both Callaway and Nike, who have near 5000 MOI conventional drivers, come out with square drivers?

Because, for some people, 6% is significant. Did you not bother to read what I wrote?

Also, both the Sumo2 and FT-i are noticeably better on off center hits compared to their more conventional drivers.

They're also shorter, louder, and more awkward to look at.

So, for what MOI is important for, 6 percent is not insignificant.

Apparently you did NOT read what I wrote.

If you hit the center of the face everytime all the time, then your better than most PGA Tour players....

Uhhhh, no. No I'm not better, and no your statement is not true.

But let me try again so you can understand: I rarely mis-hit my driver so badly that 6% will matter much, and in fact it might hinder me when I try to shape the ball a little as I like to do. Read my Titleist 907 driver review.

[tartanjack]

Winder/Scott:

It is insignificant. Here's what Frank Thomas, former USGA Technical Director, has to say:

"Originally, the USGA proposed a standard on MOI of 4,800 gm. cm ² (see http://www.franklygolf.com/Speak/moi.asp for a simple explanation of MOI), but soon modified this after the manufacturers suggested that it was inappropriate. The USGA explained its quick change of mind by saying that it was based on input from the manufacturers, and that going from 4,800 gm. cm ² to 6,000 gm. cm ² “doesn’t mean anything in real terms.” Studies have shown that the USGA’s statement is correct, that this change doesn’t mean much in real terms. The obvious question, then, is, If this change doesn’t mean anything, would a violation of the new limit mean anything? And if not, then why set the limit?

"When drivers increased in size into the 400-460 cc range, they went from MOIs of about 2,000 gm cm² to 4,000 gm cm². This was a real change that improved forgiveness and led to a significant improvement in performance on mis-hits. But there is a phenomenon known as the law of diminishing returns; every incremental increase does not lead to an equivalent increase in performance. Most of the 400cc to 460 cc drivers perform very well, and are only slightly less forgiving than the newest and latest Square Drivers with MOIs approaching the 5,500 gm cm² range. The difference in performance is simply not significant; this is a text book example of diminishing returns."

Then again, you probably won't believe him either because he's an "engineer." Give it up.

[P3R3]

P3R3,

I dont read the numbers, I just reep the results

ANYWHO here is the equation for moment of inertia. In order to increase the MOI by .06 the MASS must be increased by .06 or the distance to axis of rotation must be increased by .02 Since increasing the club head weight results in slower swing speed and increasing the clubhead volume is not allowed by USGA rules the clubhead must be "stretched" usually resulting in a smaller area of inpact. Sorry for all the math.

[iacas]

ANYWHO here is the equation for moment of inertia.

Go ahead and square 0.02 and you won't get 0.06%, that's for sure. More like 0.0004. You mean to say about 0.25 (~0.245).

A small number, any way you look at it. Frank Thomas knows his stuff.

[P3R3]

Go ahead and square 0.02 and you won't get 0.06%, that's for sure. More like 0.0004. You mean to say about 0.25 (~0.245).

Well yea i guess I did'nt hit the '5' key hard enough, thanks for the catch. lol

[Erlend]

I`m sorry for shaking alive a old thread, but I really get nervous while reading here. People think the Sumo2 is bad? I`ve just ordered it from Canada, this being my first driver.
I`m one of those who`s going down the handicap spiral now. With a 7 wood, I hit 220 metres from the FW now. And with 3W from the tee, I shoot about 220-250 metres.

So now I`ve decided to invest in a driver, and the SUMO2 was appealing. Have I made a big mistake?

[gompers]

I, and many others, just don't like the asthetics and sound they make. Most people who hit them seem to hit them long and fairly straight.

My swing is horrible right now, but I golfed with a guy who's swing makes mine look like a pro, and he was hitting the SUMO2. That guy's misses were way better than my misses.

The thing just looks and feels too weird for me. It's got a certain "Jack from Caddyshack II" thing going on that I just can't seem to get over.

[Erlend]

Ok. Thanks for the info. I`m still unsure. I wanted a driver, and I chose this one. I`m afraid I won`t drive as far as I could with other drivers. May that be a problem?

[kurtwainwright]

Ditto Ditto and Ditto!

I love this club! I bought it wholesale and I'm waiting anxiously for its arrival. The sound it makes, although different, didn't seem all that loud to me. Instead of a "tink" sound of titanium meeting Surlyn, it makes more of a Poooowww sound like a hollow empty soda can being stomped on.

I'm hitting my SQ2 3 Wood almost 300 yards. I cannot WAIT to see how far I hit it with this Sumo2.