Jump to content
Check out the Spin Axis Podcast! ×
Note: This thread is 6773 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
Anyone hit either of these? I wanted to test them out but apparently Golf Galaxy doesn't carry either of them. The Nickent comes with a nice shaft (V2), but I've heard problems with distance and noise. I know there was a small article on the site about the Geomax, but it was more of a preview than a review of the club.

  • Administrator
Posted
Anyone hit either of these? I wanted to test them out but apparently Golf Galaxy doesn't carry either of them. The Nickent comes with a nice shaft (V2), but I've heard problems with distance and noise. I know there was a small article on the site about the Geomax, but it was more of a preview than a review of the club.

We'll have a review of the TourEdge available soon, and perhaps the Nickent one as well.

Erik J. Barzeski —  I knock a ball. It goes in a gopher hole. 🏌🏼‍♂️
Director of Instruction Golf Evolution • Owner, The Sand Trap .com • AuthorLowest Score Wins
Golf Digest "Best Young Teachers in America" 2016-17 & "Best in State" 2017-20 • WNY Section PGA Teacher of the Year 2019 :edel: :true_linkswear:

Check Out: New Topics | TST Blog | Golf Terms | Instructional Content | Analyzr | LSW | Instructional Droplets

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
We'll have a review of the TourEdge available soon, and perhaps the Nickent one as well.

Thanks. I'm looking forward to it.


Posted
How is the Nickent 4DX??

In the bag-
driver: Ping G5
irons: Callaway X-20 4-PW
Woods: none
Hybrid- Ping Rapture /18 and 21wedges: Mizuno -t series 51/56/60 putter: Titlesit SC ball: V1/HX Hot/HX 56


Posted
I've played a round with the GeoMax and the 3DX Square. They are similar in that they're both 460cc and they both have a relatively shallow face for such a big driver. The GeoMax was solid. I didn't like it as much as the Tour Edge Exotics driver, but consider the $200 price difference. It was forgiving and it doesn't look as funky as the square drivers out there.

The 3DX Square was a pleasant surprise. It is less noisy than the Sumo2 and longer than the FT-i. I hit some monster drives with it, and plan to keep it in the bag. Very forgiving, and the design makes it look like you're hitting a ping pong ball. If I had to choose one or the other, I'd probably go with the 3DX Square.

I haven't hit the 4DX yet, but I look forward to trying it soon. I'll hopefully have a review of it and the 3DX Square in the near future.

in the bag today:
Driver: TaylorMade R9 10.5° (Fujikura Motore 65 stiff)
3-wood: Tour Edge Exotics XCG (Aldila DVS Fairway 75 stiff)
hybrid: Sonartec Md 21° (UST Proforce V2 Hybrid 85 stiff)
4-PW: Titleist 755 (Titleist TriSpec Regular)Wedges: Titleist Vokey Design 252.08 bent to 50.5° (Oil...

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
I've played a round with the GeoMax and the 3DX Square. They are similar in that they're both 460cc and they both have a relatively shallow face for such a big driver. The GeoMax was solid. I didn't like it as much as the Tour Edge Exotics driver, but consider the $200 price difference. It was forgiving and it doesn't look as funky as the square drivers out there.

I guess the rumors of the 3DX's short distance were only rumors, that's good to hear. What's the ball flight like btw? Thanks for the information, I really appreciate it.


Posted
Is that review going to be up in the next couple of days, or should I head out and find a nearby shop that has Nickent or Tour Edge clubs?

Posted
hi!

I'm thinking about buying a new driver for this season,..... I'm not sure yet if i should get a titleist 905 r with an aldila NV shaft or the new callaway ft 5 tour with an aldila NV shaft!!! I've tried both, but I'm still not sure which one would fit me best!! Any experiences with either one of the drivers would be a great help and if you've played both then even better!!

thanx
Note: This thread is 6773 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

    PlayBetter
    Golfer's Journal
    ShotScope
    The Stack System
    FitForGolf
    FlightScope Mevo
    Direct: Mevo, Mevo+, and Pro Package.

    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

    • Day 470 - 2026-01-13 Got some work in while some players were using the sim, so I had to stick around. 🙂 Good thing too, since… I hadn't yet practiced today until about 6:45 tonight. 😛 
    • That's not quite the same thing as what some people messaged me today.
    • Day 152 1-12 More reps bowing wrists in downswing. Still pausing at the top. Making sure to get to lead side and getting the ball to go left. Slow progress is better than no progress.  
    • Yea, if I were to make a post arguing against the heat map concept, citing some recent robot testing would be my first point. The heat map concept is what I find interesting, more on that below. The robot testing I have looked at, including the one you linked, do discreet point testing then provide that discrete data in various forms. Which as you said is old as the hills, if you know of any other heat map concept type testing, I would be interested in links to that though! No, and I did say in my first post "if this heat map data is valid and reliable" meaning I have my reservations as well. Heck beyond reservations. I have some fairly strong suspicions there are flaws. But all I have are hunches and guesses, if anyone has data to share, I would be interested to see it.  My background is I quit golfing about 9 years ago and have been toying with the idea of returning. So far that has been limited to a dozen range sessions in late Summer through Fall when the range closed. Then primarily hitting foam balls indoors using a swing speed monitor as feedback. Between the range closing and the snow flying I did buy an R10 and hit a few balls into a backyard net. The heat map concept is a graphical representation of efficiency (smash factor) loss mapped onto the face of the club. As I understand it to make the representation agnostic to swing speed or other golfer specific swing characteristics. It is more a graphical tool not a data tool. The areas are labeled numerically in discrete 1% increments while the raw data is changing at ~0.0017%/mm and these changes are represented as subtle changes in color across those discrete areas. The only data we care about in terms of the heat map is the 1.3 to 1.24 SF loss and where was the strike location on the face - 16mm heal and 5mm low. From the video the SF loss is 4.6% looking up 16mm heal and 5mm low on the heat map it is on the edge of where the map changes from 3% loss to 4%. For that data point in the video, 16mm heal, 5mm low, 71.3 mph swing speed (reference was 71.4 mph), the distance loss was 7.2% or 9 yards, 125 reference distance down to 116. However, distance loss is not part of a heat map discussion. Distance loss will be specific to the golfers swing characteristics not the club. What I was trying to convey was that I do not have enough information to determine good or bad. Are the two systems referencing strike location the same? How accurate are the two systems in measuring even if they are referencing from the same location? What variation might have been introduced by the club delivery on the shot I picked vs the reference set of shots? However, based on the data I do have and making some assumptions and guesses the results seem ok, within reason, a good place to start from and possibly refine. I do not see what is wrong with 70mph 7 iron, although that is one of my other areas of questioning. The title of the video has slow swing speed in all caps, and it seems like the videos I watch define 7i slow, medium, and fast as 70, 80, and 90. The whole question of mid iron swing speed and the implications for a players game and equipment choices is of interest to me as (according to my swing speed meter) over my ~decade break I lost 30mph swing speed on mine.
    • Maxfli, Maltby, Golfworks, all under the Dicks/Golf Galaxy umbrella... it's all a bit confounding. Looking at the pictures, they all look very, very similar in their design. I suspect they're the same club, manufactured in the same factory in China, just with different badging.  The whacky pricing structure has soured me, so I'll just cool my heels a bit. The new Mizuno's will be available to test very soon. I'm in no rush.  
×
×
  • 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.