[Tom Zeni]

Yes, this is Off Topic, and I apologize, but when it comes to MWT, am I the only one asking why?

I think for the overwhelming majority of golfers, MWT is a gimmick - sophisticated - but a gimmick none the less. Unless there is some severe flaw that can be corrected by more weight on one end of the club or another, golfers need to remember, anytime you increase the strength of the weights, you narrow the forgiveness of the club.

Now, other than I stated, a severe hook or slice, who wants to have less foregiveness in a clubface rather than more? The pink elephant in the middle of the room that manufacturers want you to ignore is that forgivness IS the entire idea behind the super-sized club faces. Giving average golfers the option to reduce forgiveness is complete lunacy.

Right now, and that may change by the time I'm done typing, the Taylor Made r7 - 425 with the super design of the new Fugikora Re-Ax shaft that had significant Taylor Made input, is arguably the best driver on the planet. But if you touch any of the four Moveable Weights, me thinks you're asking for more problems than cures.

Also, let me add, without the special Fugikora shaft, with computer woven high-grade graphite that resist ovaling when the shaft is stressed during the swing, Taylor Made would be just another club. The game is still in the shaft.

If you have a different opinion on MWT, I sure would like to hear it - because I'm puzzled as to its validity.

[Steve Pozaric]

To an extent, I think MWT is gimmicky for the vast majority of golfers (myselft included) only because most will set the weights and forget.  However, I think the flaw in your position is the recognition that most drivers have a built in weight bias.  The prime example is the Callaway FT-3, which comes in draw, neutral and fade bias, regular (low cg, closed face) and tour (higher cg and square to open face).  The only difference btw the Cally and the R7 is that the Cally weights are fixed.  In both cases, weight can be/have been moved to affect ball flight.

Foregiveness is part, but also modifying ball flights, both direction and height, as well as getting the appropriate launch angle and spin.  All of these can be affected (other than spin - I think, at least) by altering weight.

I do agree that shaft plays a big role.  But, it is fine tuning (that, albeit, can have a huge affect on results).  When I recently went through the opti-fit system, the Cally rep fit me for head first, then shaft.  

[Tom Zeni]

Steve,

Thanks for your insightful reply. I agree with the points you made that MWT can manipulate more than forgiveness. I'm just wondering if the great unwashed masses have the detailed knowledge that you do?

Maybe manufacturer's are just trying to put the "lead tape" guys out of business. lol.

[Tom Dunne]

My friend JeffTodd, also an occasional poster here, has an r7 and he definitely succeeded in using MWT to lower his ball flight. I believe he got the weight kit for the TP version and found the screws that would keep his drives from ballooning. I can say with confidence that that aspect of MWT works.

As far as how MWT works in influencing lateral action, I've heard clubmakers say they think there's something of a placebo effect at work on the average golfer. When you're a double digit handicap like I am, so the thinking goes, your swing just isn't consistent enough to really be impacted by a few grams here and there. I have a TM hybrid, and there's a setting that I prefer, but I'm not good enough to really know how much of that preference is arrow and how much is indian.

[redanman]

HUGE advantage in changing ball flight.  I personally found it hard to believe that they needed an HT model of the original r7 because some guy s couldn't get it airborne.

With the heavy weights in the back I can hit it miles in the air, heavy weights up front I can do what I ant with trajectory - high or low.

Wifer has a 425 r7 with 11?*, unbelieveable height possible.  

Honestly, for all practical purposes it's just exotic, pricey precise lead tape.

A slice needs swing mechanics, you can't get rid of it with weights in the driver head.

I give biomechanical lessons, BTW.

[Matt_Cohn]

I asked our Taylor Made rep for some numbers. He said 85% of people experiment with moving the weights at least once although very few people keep changing them. They find what works at stick with it.

The internal weighting on other clubs, e.g. the Callaway Fusion, works. Also, I've seen differences in numbers on our launch monitor when we change the weights around in R7's. So I agree with people who say that it works.

[Tom Zeni]

A launch monitor. Now there's a valid idea to get it right. I know of one new golf store that has that. That would sure be better than counting clicks of the wrench at a driving range.

85% try changing the weight. That's remarkable. I would have never thought the number that high.

[Dan_Callahan]

With all of this new technology, it still comes down to looks and feel for me. I tried the R7, Hibore, Callaway Fusion, and Titleist 905R.

By the numbers on the launch monitor, I should have bought the Fusion with an extra-stiff Grafalloy shaft.

Instead, I went with the 905R with Proforce stiff shaft.

The pro was kind of pissed at me, but there's something about the set up of the Callaway (it kind of attaches toward the middle of the clubhead rather than at the heel) that I knew I would never be comfortable with.

The 905R, on the other hand, looked ideal to me. Perhaps I wasn't getting optimal launch, but it went plenty long and straight.

I wouldn't buy a club specifically for the moveable weights, but had the R7 fit my eye the way the Titleist did, I would have considered it.

[Tom Zeni]

I totally agree. My first priority, in irons or woods, is to find how the club sets up, then how it feels.  If it doesn't set up well to your eye you can throw all the hype about the club out the window.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()