• Announcements

    • iacas

      Visit FlagstickRule.com   03/13/2017

      Visit the site flagstickrule.com to read about and sign a petition for the USGA/R&A regarding the one terrible rule in the proposed "modernized" rules for 2019.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
georgeshot

Anyone playing Tour Exotics XGC# Hybrids or FWW

9 posts in this topic

I read the reviews of both the XGC6 hybrids and fairway woods (I hate when people say "metal" or "fairway metal") in GOLF magazine and the feedback was very positive. I've been looking on eBay and the XCG5s seem to be within my price range. I am specifically looking at the 4-wood (16.5°) and the 4-hybrid (22°). Anyone out there have experience with these clubs or similar? Thanks, George
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sign up (or log in) today! It's free (and you won't see this ad anymore)!

Sign up (or log in) today! It's free (and you won't see this ad anymore)!

I play 1 xcg5 and 2 xcg6.  I love all three, and rotate them depending on the course.  They really do what they say, hit it LONG!  And straight! in the XCG6 I have 15* and 18* and in the xcg5, the club I really love to carry the 11.5* what a club!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tested some Exotics line clubs last week at Demo Day.

I had played Tour Edge Bazooka 3W and 5W from 2002 to 2008. Low-profile pair I really liked, quit using when I dropped stiff shafts.

I had tested Exotics at prior demo days, and they were at the top of my list this time.

As for the mainline Exotics, the XCG6 is a low profile wood with a very hot face. I tried some shots with it, and when I hit is square it really moved out. Stock shafts:

  • Graphite Design AD 40 (42 grams)
  • Matrix Ozik HD 5.1 (53 gram R.flex) and HD 6.1 ( 64 gram S. and 69 gram X)

I was a little wild with the lighter AD 40, and got better pattern with the HDs. If I got to where I was shooting in the 80s regularly, I might upgrade to the XCG6.

The Tour Edge rep encouraged everyone to hit both the 15* 3W and the 16.5* 4W. It just depends on swing characteristics - more on attack angle than swing speed. You just have to see which is best.

As things happened, I bought the Exotics XRail variant (4W and 7W). XRail has a slight v-shaped sole to help get the ball up. It gives me a little less distance but a bigger margin of error than the XCG6.  I worked out the XRails at the range today, very promising - and will do a review once I play a couple of rounds.

TE site: http://www.touredge.com/index.asp

0

Share this post


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

Additional note: I had hit the Callaway XHots at an April Demo Day. The Exotics XCG6 reminded me a lot of the XHots, similar square-face setup and feel. Both have hot faces!

I believe the Exotics have a slightly lower profile, although I didn't do a side-by-side test last weekend.

If I later decide to upgrade to more aggressive FWs, the contest would be between XHots and Exotics.

0

Share this post


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

I have a xcg5 4 wood. 16.5. Man It is a great club, so easy to hit I am thinking about a 13* 3 wood

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Exotics Trilogy fairways and Hybrids are absolutely incredible. Do yourself a favour and try them.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Try the 11.5 just for fun, talk about bombing it... it goes about 20 yards longer than my best driver off the deck shot, and if the course I play has long par 5s I carry this club to attack the green in two! Fun club!!
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a TEE XCG-5 3 hybrid in 19* stiff shaft i'm selling if you're interested

Just swapped this out for a 5 wood.  I'm better off hitting fww than hybrids

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Abraxas,

I appreciate the offer, but I need regular flex shaft for my swing speed.

Thanks,

George

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0



  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • 2017 TST Partners

    PING Golf
    Leupold Golf
    Snell Golf
    Talamore Golf Resort
    Lowest Score Wins
  • Posts

    • There are several statements that I disagree with which I feel are important to discuss: All golf balls do not go about the same distance.  A low compression, 2-piece Surlyn covered model will launch higher and with less spin than a 5-piece, high compression urethane covered model which will result in a noticeable difference in distance off the tee.  Dean even stated in another answer "The soft golf ball market has taken off due to the lower spinning balls means players can be longer in distance." Regarding balls for different swing speeds and compression:  3) Bridgestone (and I think Callaway) has come out with tour caliber balls for players who swing under 105mph. Is it possible to design a tour caliber ball for a specific segment of swing speed or is this just mostly a marketing thing?  DEAN: The whole swing speed story to me is one of the most over-rated stories in golf. Companies force or teach golfers to play low compression balls so their low swing speed can compress the ball. The problem with this is that low compression balls have the lowest spin in all shots, so they are pushing players to play a ball with no performance at all… and when you need that spin around the green, it's not there…            I almost don't know where to start on this one.  The concept of designing golf balls based on swing speeds doesn't teach or force players to use a low compression ball...it's about using a ball that has the appropriate compression for your swing speed.  Some players will have better results with a higher compression ball, others will have better results with a lower compression.  Keep in mind, there is a difference between "lower compression" and "low compression".  Most of the urethane tour balls have a compression rating somewhere between the mid 70s to mid 90s.  Tour models like the Chrome Soft, B330-RX and B330-RXS are in the mid 60s, which is lower.  Balls like the Supersoft and e6 are in the upper 30s and 40s, which is considered low.  Dean's statement that "low compression balls have the lowest spin on all shots" is somewhere between a little misleading and flat-out wrong.  It's true that a lower compression ball will spin less (and launch higher) than a firmer ball on full shots.  But on short game shots around the green, the ball is not compressed.  On pitch shots, chip shots, and greenside bunker shots for example,    the only part of the ball that is being activated is the cover. Notice on this chart that the lowest compression ball is very close to the highest spinning, and the lowest spinning ball has almost the same compression rating!  The point is, compression has little to no affect on short game shots...the cover is the main factor.  All 4 of these models have a urethane cover, but the two that provide the most spin have softer covers.  To put this in context, the chart below was a test Golf Digest did in 2015 which shows the performance on a partial wedge shot (I think it was 40 yds) with most of the balls on the market at the time The different colors represented the price point.  These results don't match the first chart I posted exactly which can happen when player testing (this one shows the B330 has higher spin than the RXS). Is there a difference between the lower spinning "red dots" and the highest spinning?  Sure.  There should be though.  Golf balls are designed to have different types of performance for different types of players.  The B330-RX has the lowest spin among the red dot models, but that doesn't mean it's lacking in performance...it spins exactly how the ball designers intended it to, because not everyone wants/needs maximum spin.  Notice the e7...this is a high compression ball very comparable to the B330, but has very different spin characteristics. So again, higher compression doesn't mean higher spin around the green and lower compression doesn't necessarily mean low spin.  About the only thing that I could agree with Dean's comment on would be that all the ultra-low compression balls are Surlyn covered models designed for distance, so it's true that these balls have low spin on all shots and will not offer the same level of performance around the greens, but again, that has more to do with the cover than the compression.  The fact is, there are lower compression balls that perform at the highest level. The B330-RXS is the same type of ball as the Pro V1 in many respects, and performs just as well as, or even better for many players, so I'm surprised by his comments that fitting for swing speed is over-rated and lower compression balls have no performance.  That's like saying getting fit for the correct shaft flex is over-rated, and softer flex shafts don't perform as well as stiffer shafts!  Does anyone consider the Dynamic Gold S-300 to be a lower performing shaft than the Dynamic Gold X-100?  No, of course not. They are designed to do the same thing, but because some players don't swing as fast as others the softer flex will give them better results, just like the B330-RXS is the equal to the B330-S, but will fit players who don't swing as hard better. I'm also not on-board with the opinion that fitting with a driver is a "mistake" and when testing to choose a ball based on 100 yds and in.  I'm not saying that short game performance isn't important, but wow...to claim that testing with a driver is a mistake is ridiculous.  I'll make a simple point on this...anyone can hit good wedge shots with a Pro V1 or B330 or Z-Star.  Fast swingers, slower swingers, high handicappers, low handicappers...it doesn't matter, they can all get good results on wedge shots.  Does that mean that's the ball they should play, and it will work equally as well for the other aspects too?  No.  A wedge can mask any issues in performance because of the loft and backspin, but the driver exaggerates issues.  The same players who hit respectable wedge shots with various tour balls might struggle to keep shots in play or lose potential distance. And before anyone tries to use the old "the driver is used 14 times a round, but half of the shots are inside of 100 yds" argument...save it.  If you play a high spin ball and you're struggling to hit the fairway with your tee shots, that ball will not help you save shots around the green.  Too much spin for players who can't control it is worse than a lower spinning model. Sorry Dean...not trying to blast you or anything, just putting in my two cents.  Ok, maybe more like four cents!
    • So......Is this your point @Jack Watson?
    • https://thesandtrap.com/b/clubs/titleist_716_ap1_review My review for the site is above. I've been using them since writing this review. Excellent clubs. One watch out is with short game shots with the PW and GW. They will go a bit farther than a corresponding chip or pitch with the equivalent wedge. The ball feels like it jumps off the face with good contact. So be careful with that.
    • Thanks for all the comments. I realize change is always hard but single length, lie and weight make so much sense to me. I am going to build a set of Value Golf clubs and see what happens. As improve I may go back to normal but who knows.  I think it will be better for learning the overall game. Which in my opinion and observance needs a lot of help. In my other hobbies that required learned skills it was easy to find groups to help you with the skills and drills to improve them. Businesses that the hobby supported held seminars and workshops covering all aspects. Trying to find help, other than paid lessons, is impossible, at least in my area. 
  • TST Blog Entries

  • Blog Entries

  • Today's Birthdays

    1. Golfgirl10543
      Golfgirl10543
      (43 years old)
    2. jkettman
      jkettman
      (28 years old)
    3. old man1953
      old man1953
      (64 years old)
  • Get Great Gear with Amazon