I noticed that in 2021, they tested the 2020 most wanted ( ping 410) alongside the 2021 group and it scored 7th. Very curious as to where 2021’s most wanted (callaway epic max ls) would have scored vs 2022.

Thanks to your great work testing the above clubs I went and bought a ping g425 max driver and woods . They are great clubs for me. I also got the ping g425 irons and they work well for me. Thanks again

I love reading club stats but one stat I’d love to see. Balls hit in the middle of the drivers sweet spot. With COR limits at the max which driver goes the farthest .

Great in depth article! I currently use a Cobra Long Tom. It has a 48 inch shaft. Looking into upgrading to a Ping G425 max!

Just returned a Callaway Max LS- No discernable difference when compared to my Maverick LS. I am convinced that year to year promised gains from “new technology” is a myth. Think about it, if every year the manufacturers gained 3-5 yards via R and D and materials we would all be hitting it 50 yards further in 10 years. Nonsense when you also consider COR is rules limited so where are the gains achieved? Answer they are NOT. I suggest the focus shift to shafts and shaft/head combinations that actually do have discernable gains that can be significant and are subject to little or no rules restrictions. You will never get much from the “head for the year” but you may gain significantly via fitting combined with optimal club/shaft combinations. OEM shafts offer significant gains when fit properly and combined with heads that have correct weight/geometry to maximize
speed/launch etc. Back to the Mav for 2022. Maybe I will dump the dollars on a autoflex shaft to see if that pushes the numbers a bit.

I data on the Cobra Air-X is correct..It is a very poor performing Driver.

I made the mistake of buying one online before demoing this new release from Cobra

Do you have dates for when the Mid speed (100MPH) ranking will be made available?

Any chance is this week? Going to buy a new driver next week and will really love this information to narrow my options a little bit.

First, my thanks to MGS for the time and effort that goes into gathering, compiling and presenting the data on these drivers. Coupling the knowledge gained from your testing with a club fitting by a qualified fitter is the best way to find the right driver in my opinion. I know getting fit is something MGS has promoted for years.
For myself, finding the right shaft has the biggest impact on driver performance. That said, the section “Buying Considerations-Shaft Selection” caught my eye. In that section a number of statements are made regarding what’s available as “stock”, “no charge upgrades”, after market and quality or lack thereof. The word “shady” is even used. I would like to suggest, as a great service to your readers that you consider a more in-depth article on the subject of shafts available as stock, no charge upgrade or aftermarket as well as the quality and “shady” practices you mention.

Ping’s G425 Max and Callaway’s Rogue ST Max LS and Triple Diamond LS stood out as top performers. But we really really need more clarity on the length of the shafts the bulk of the testers used. It looks like all of Callaway’s stock shafts were 45.75 inches in length. Meanwhile, all of the stock shafts Ping offers are 45.25 inches in length with the lone exception of the 45.75 inch Alta CB 55. So did the vast majority of testers hitting the G425 Max use a 45.25-inch shaft?

If so, that fact alone might explain why the G425 Max generally had substantially more forgiveness (and straight shots?) than the Callaways. And that fact alone might also explain why the Callaways generally had substantially higher total distance and ball speed numbers than the G425 Max.

Conclusion: we really really need more clarity on the length of the shaft the bulk of the testers used, particularly for the G425 Max, Rogue ST Max LS, and Triple Diamond LS drivers.

Thanks!

Let me preface this by saying I really appreciate all the work that I’m sure goes into this testing each year; I know it’s tough to pull off so thanks to MGS for the informative content.

That said, as a long time reader from back before Most Wanted testing was a thing, it seems that some of the same issues continue to plague this testing, notably: (1) Confusion on scoring methodology due in large part to continually changing the metrics year-over-year, (2) not enough clarity on how tester pool impacts a club’s performance, year-over-year, and (3) an unsatisfactory explanation as to why robot testing isn’t included as PART of the data set used to rank clubs.

Until these issues are sorted out, it’s very difficult to trust these rankings year in year out b/c you don’t know if the club you got this year based on the testing, will underperform the following year under the revised metrics. (see G425 this year as example of the opposite situation).

TAYLORMADE STEALTH+ was Among the leaders for Strokes Gained yet Poor Forgiveness score .. Is it me but that doesn’t make sense ..If you hit it perfect you’ll score lower ( which applies to every club ) but it’s not as forgiving which would lead to higher scores . .Maybe the term strokes gain might be right but not the way you mean it..

I don’t think the Ping 425 Max should have been removed from last year’s tests. Rather it should have an asterisk beside it with an explanation of what happened. If 1″ in shaft length difference is what turns a bottom performing driver into the top one, that should be highlighted, not hidden.

With the exception with a handful of drivers at the bottom, all of these drivers are good. And most of them could be the “Most Wanted” with the right combination of testers.

Interesting study as usual. I would have liked to have seen which shafts were selected for each head. As shaft tech gets better and better, I would have to say that some of these small margins might just be the difference of shaft choice.
Another thing, when I did a deep dive on the data I noticed some of the carry yardages were actually longer than the total yardages, how is that even possible???

First, thank you for doing these tests and publishing results.
Second, I’d like to see a grid to show comparisons in current and previous models. Or even take the top contenders from the last 3-4 models and put those up against the new drivers (both with real golfers and the robot). How do they fair and how do the numbers change or do they?
Maybe that would show the manufacturer that really does marry technology advances with new models and constantly shows real gains vs hype.

So it appears the most wanted drivers, most are draw bias. Meaning even your RH testers of all abilities are not missing right and a straighter drive. Makes sense….. As others are pointing out a break down by swing speed, slow , medium & fast would be ideal. Perhaps that is coming out shortly?

I would like to see a robot test like you did with balls.
Stock shaft, three swing speeds.
Then a comparison of the heads using same shafts, like the 7-8 more used for top speed, and at least 2-3 options for mid and low speeds.
Lot of work, but eliminate human bias and gives you true numbers.

I always think that there are so many technology build onto Driver but they will never escape the tight control of the rules. Meaning that a new driver may not be always the best. Can we at least have the last 2 year top 5 driver included in the test so we as consumer can decide whether to spend extra money on the latest driver. Isn’t this is what MGS’s mission? Independent, unbiased and always put the #ConsumerFirst.

” Good Looks Don’t Equal Good Performance ” Fail … while this may be true for you , I wont buy a ugly driver or a driver with bad feel or sounds like a tin can (ping , cleveland) and since most if not all of these are so close in performance , your splitting hairs here . I always say you cant really go wrong with any of these drivers so looks,, feel , and sound are the driving force in a lot of golfers eyes .

Any chance of posting tester comments / tidbits about each of the brands? Would love to hear the thoughts about the Cleveland XL lineup.. I see the data – how about some footnote comments about the testing.

When did you realize that the Ping G425 Max and LST for the 2021 test was not off-the-rack and retail specs?

Thanks for the review.
Remembering the comment that stated that Stealh made personal bests in speed for “EVERY staff member of MGS”. Maybe was the 46″ shaft?
That statement doesn’t match at all with the data shown. Maybe the red face hype? : /

Just got fitted for the G425 Max last week. Can’t wait until the snow melts!

What is the range and/or average value for Attack Angle in the Negative, Neutral, and Positive buckets?

For example, is neutral -2 to +2 and positive is +2 and above? Or is the average of the neutral group 0, +1 or some other number?

Are the high MOI drivers generally performing better in the forgiveness rank? Does removing outliers hurt the rankings of the high MOI drivers more than it would the lower MOI drivers?

I’m interested to see what the lifespan of an average Taylormade Stealth driver is compared to other woods. I’ve already seen some people notice that demo models have been seen with significant face wear (visible dimple imprints on the face, not just marks). It seems money right off the rack (or fitting), but I’m skeptical about the mileage they’ll have.

Did they shut down the comments? I made a comment, don’t see it., nor any other recent comments….

Anyway – could someone give me a pointer on what the data means or how to read it, or how to use it to look for the driver characteristic for your swing?

Its slightly concerning that testers are picking a high draw driver, Stealth, over others. Some of other choices and data has me questioning this. Even the 3x Diamond. even callaway says its not for 90% of the golfing public. I think they gave a much smaller number but i wanted to err on the side of caution.

My last concern is the shaft, generally speaking the head isnt going to do all that much….. well compared to the shaft. I just dont know what to make of a test where a Draw driver is in the top 5 of any category. Makes me think the testing pool isnt consistent which is proven out with the choices and lack of a shaft.
I say this just returning from a fitting where the shaft made all the difference. The club head was pretty much a personal choice., of course minor differences in forgiveness and distance.

Love the supplemental data. For me, that’s where the story is. For instance, a BIG dispersion in total yardage for low handicap/high swing speed golfers versus little to none difference for mid handicap/mid swing speed golfers.

VERY different results based on how you filter the data for what type of golfer you are.

Thanks MSG for the information. The comments are almost as interesting to read as the test results.

NOTE: There is a typo where the Wilson driver picture should be. It says EMBRAGO vs EMBARGO. The A and R are inverted.

I have a Cobra Air-X coming in the mail in the next two or three days

needless to say I’m dismayed to to see it at the bottom of the list for distance !?

I really look forward to this test each year but now I am not sure what to think. I appreciate all of the hard work that goes into this kind of test but the disparity of results between last year and this for Ping G425 leaves me questioning how reliable these tests are. Did all of the other manufactures take a step backwards this year or were (are) your procedures flawed? I’ll probably be less excited for the results next year.

It’s there in the detailed stats. You can choose from high, mid, or low handicap. The swing speed changes accordingly.

I’ve gotta say I happily agree with the results. I got fitted for a Ping G425 max several months ago and have been finding a lot more fairways.

Also re: the data tables: what are the defined ranges for low handicap vs. mid handicap vs. high handicap? And what are the defined ranges for positive attack angle, neutral attack angle, and negative attack angle?

I remain mystified as to why XXIO gave you drivers to test. Their shafts and overall weight are so poorly suited for any tester who would game any of the top finishers that they’re doomed from the start..

i can’t get more than 5 clubs on the low-mid speed, mid handicap setting, perhaps only 5 clubs work for my level of bad golf…..
good stuff as always!!

I’m having a harder time following the results from year to year. Last year the PJNG 425 LST finished very low and near the bottom in distance. This year, it’s towards the tiptop.
Also, why no comparison to last year’s winner?
I’ve owned both Callaway Drivers (8.5 ◇◇◇ LS) and the PING 425 LST.

Also, I’m thinking about how differently Ping’s G425 drivers performed overall in last year’s test compared to this year’s. If I recall correctly, most if not all of the G425s you used last year had shorter shafts than the G425s you tested this year.

Based on that fact, is it reasonable to conclude that a significant majority of your testers would not get better driver performance out of, say, a 44.75 inch shaft than a 45.5 or 45.75 inch shaft?

Interesting that the Triple Diamond ended up as the most forgiving Callaway driver in this test when they market it as their least forgiving model.

In your data tables, how much should one focus on Shot Area (Yards)?

When y’all calculate forgiveness and/or accuracy, do you put more weight on Shot Area than Straight Shot %, Playable Shot %, Carry Delta, and Ball Speed Delta? Or do you put equal weights on all five of those categories when calculating forgiveness and/or accuracy?

Interesting that they eliminated the best value category.

But what I’ve really noticed is that I don’t understand the data at all this year. I looked at the table and I have no idea what any of it means. I never could find a strokes saved category. I think this year I’ll have to rely on other sources for what clubs fit my swing characteristics the best.

What does “IMAGE EMBRAGO” mean?

Great article! Thank you for all of the work you do to provide these results to consumers! Ping seems to be a consistently high performer year after year so they are clearly doing something right. I was happy to see Mizuno and Cobra rank highly in a few categories, also nice to see the “smaller” guys compete more.

Absolutely love the data of hitting up vs down. Never realized it could be so driver specific. The same driver that gave you 13 extra yards if you hit down was one of the worst hitting up. Thats crazy cool to know.

I’ll stick to my 13.5 degree/>400cc (Golfsmith or Wishon heads) with the old 3-wood length shaft. At seventy-two and playing the forward tees, I can save my $$$ for beers at the 19th.

Is there any real value in comparing the CALLAWAY ROGUE ST TRIPLE DIAMOND LS with a 45.75″ shaft and the TAYLORMADE STEALTH+ with a 46″ shaft.. Surely the miniscule difference in distance score between the clubs is due the the shaft length rather than anything else. Also its likely that the accuraracy discrepency in favour of the Callaway is due to its shorter shaft.

The bottom line for me from the data is that the only noticable difference between the top 10 or so is in forgiveness. Both the Callaway and the Taylormade leave a bit to be desired in that category

The most glaring omission is the Titleist Tsi 2 driver. It is the most popular driver in the Titleist line and is advertised as having the greatest distance potential for most players. I bought the Tsi 2 last year and found it to be an exceptional driver. I recently tested it against the new Taylormade and Callaway offerings. In my hands the Titleist produced the greatest distance of all on the Trackman.

Had a go on a launch monitor this weekend testing my existing TM M3 vs TM Stealth, Callaway Rogue ST and Cobra Ltd XS.

Around 105pmh swing speed and the new drivers average strikes matched my old M3’s best strikes (about 9 yds carry extra on similar hits at around 245-255 yds carry).

The Cobra was a slightly better than Callaway and both a good bit ahead of the Stealth which was the opposite of which I was expecting! All using same shaft (X Tensei White 65 with my existing shaft being X Tensei White 70).

So while these test are good you should always get fitted as some clubs that work out lower on these ratings may fit your swing better.

Which driver provides the most head feel? This may sound nuts, but i miss the smaller head sizes because they seemed to provide more feel than the new larger heads. That said- is head feel more of a shaft function?

“Best Driver” is a very individual thing–looks, accuracy, sound, price, and most important shaft and FITTING play a role. For example, of the five previous gamers (amongst which several are in your rankings) in my “collection”, a $235 PXG 0211 is the longest straightest driver I have ever owned —-and it doesn’t even show up in your testing. I would take everything you have written here with a big grain of salt !

Apologies everyone, we’re having a caching issue with the data page. You can try accessing it directly with this link:

https://mygolfspy.com/most-wanted-driver-2022-data/

Blows me away that the TSi3 is still amongst the leaders in a lot of these categories. Validates my purchase decision almost 2 years ago

Price is now a factor for me. The last new driver I bought was the Callaway XR-16 Pro, and it was $400. This past November, I bought last year’s Most Wanted, the Epic Max LS, for about $200 less than new retail buy going with “like new” on Callaway Golf Pre-Owned. It’s the way to go now.

Interesting to see that strokes gained is now one of four metrics vs. the one total metric, especially since previous versions of these tests have argued that because it combines distance, accuracy, and dispersion into a single number, it is the only metric needed. Curious to hear a more detailed explanation of this choice.

I do like the scores being broken down by category, as it helps golfers choose clubs that may be better suited to help their weaknesses.

SIM2 vs Stealth please

So, with the G410LST coming in above the G425LST last year, that means the G410LST would still be top 10. That’s quite notable IMO. Seeing this, I have zero desire to make a change. Still want to try the 2021 top driver – the Epic Max LS. Haven’t had a chance to hit it.

Taylormade’s Stealth+ had great distance, poor accuracy, and the longest shaft in the test. That all checks out.

To me, its all about the shaft. I have demo’ed most of the clubs in this test. While most worked for my swing, I found that the shaft had the greatest effect on the overall performance of the club. It was rare that I would find a head that was correctly set up with the right shaft producing less than desirable results. I just purchased a driver 4 months ago after a proper set up with a good club fitter and it produces what I call my “most wanted driver”.

Was it too early to test any of the Cobra Ltdx line?

I love you guys but the G425 Max was not really great last year then this year it came out top. Weird but it is indeed a solid club when I tried it. But that sound really is annoying.

love that TM spends a billion dollars on advertising and hype and loses to a 2 year old ping! nothing could be more stratifying!

I switched to G425 Max from the G400 Plus towards the end of last year. I went with the Ventus Blue 60 (s) and it’s been a killer combo for me. I’m at the point where I care more about performance than appearance & acoustics. The Ping drivers don’t look or sound all that great but damn, they just work.

Why no PXG models in the testing?

Thanks for all the hard work!

Have had a serious stroke yet still playing. Once a low handicapper (7) and now high (25). At sap I would like to see a “rating” covering a swing speed decrease from about 100 to 70………which is the best driver as well on thru the entire set. For eg: is lighter better? is shorter better? is more flex better? is a reduction of 30 in swing speed vs a reduction of swing speed call for different specs?

Every year I look forward to this test, but every time I see a most wanted test, the more I think it is just a statistical reflection of the testers that year. I know this is the most extensive test out there but I’m wondering if there are really enough testers to make this an accurate assessment of the clubs. Last year the G425 Max was a middle of the road driver and now somehow in it’s second year of production it’s the best?

Like the disclaimer MGS alwas puts on their tests, this is just a starting point and each golfer should go and get fitted to see which one is best for them. Obviously, the G425 fit this year’s group of testers better than last year’s group but when you see big swings in rankings it makes you wonder just how dependent the test results are on the specific group of testers.

Cool that youve changed up the criteria and made it a little easier to understand vs strokes gained.

But, now we have a driver, from last year, that finished middle of the pack compared to last year’s offerings; suddenly becomes this year’s winner? Do we have a decrease in performance from the current field, or habe the metrics changed everything?

Any chance of re-crunching last year’s numbers thru this new formula to find out???

I’m curious as to why no PXG drivers in the tests?

No real data this year I see. Not your best work this year…