Drivers

BEST OF THE BEST – DRIVER CHALLENGE

BY MyGolfSpy
Dec 18th 2020
Read all comments

Support our Mission. We independently test each product we recommend. When you buy through our links, we may earn a commission.

The Most Requested Test in MyGolfSpy History

Is newer really better? Every release cycle, golf companies claim that new equipment will outperform the metrics on past models. “Distance any way you swing it!” “Speed with no limits!” “The longest, straightest, best looking and best sounding drivers we’ve ever made!” You’ve heard it all. Those golf companies want you to think that if you want to improve your game you should be investing in their new technology.

But is technology developing as fast as the marketing slogans say it is? Our job is to find out. We convened a special and unprecedented test.

Every Most Wanted driver winner from 2016-2020, pitted head to head to crown the ultimate champion.

The MyGolfSpy Way

35 testers were tabbed to take 2500 combined shots with each of our previous titleholders using our Foresight GCQuad Launch Monitors .

This is the most requested test in MyGolfSpy history and the results are worth all of your inquiries and each of the 2500 swings. We calculated strokes gained values, distance, and forgiveness to determine the best performing driver of the Most Wanted Era.

5 drivers, one Best of the Best. Data doesn’t lie.

Before we reveal the results, let’s refresh our memories and take a look at the 5 past winners competing to win the Best of the Best Challenge beginning with the most senior and finishing with the freshman. And without giving it all away just yet, take note of a few performance metrics and tester remarks collected from this test.

THE CONTENDERS

TAYLORMADE M1 460 (2016 Winner)

In the 2016 test, the TaylorMade M1 posted the highest carry and total distance numbers in the field. 75% of our testers posted strokes gained values above their averages with the other drivers in the test.

Best of the Best Challenge Performance Notes

The consensus from testers, “This club performs!”
Testers also liked the feel of the TaylorMade M1 460, but as was the case in 2016, opinions on the crown design were mixed.

SRIXON Z565 (2017 Winner)

2017 Most Wanted Recap

In our 2017 test, the Srixon Z565 outperformed Callaway’s famed Big Bertha Epic and in doing so became the only driver from a brand outside the big 5 to win a Most Wanted Test since our test pool expanded.

Test of the Best Challenge Performance Notes

Though testers felt the Srixon Z565 was a solid performance, many said it looked closed at address.
Not a favorite for sound and feel.
One of two drivers in the test without movable weights.

PING G400 LST (2018 Winner)

2018 Most Wanted Recap

The PING G400 LST outperformed a strong field to win the 2018 Most Wanted title while also finishing 3rd in distance.

Best of the Best Challenge Performance Notes

Testers were pleased with the setup and design of the PING G400 LST. Most testers enjoyed the feel
Offers low, but still playable spin and was an absolute fairway finder.

CALLAWAY EPIC FLASH SUB ZERO (2019 Winner)

2019 Most Wanted Recap

The Epic Flash Sub Zero beat out the Taylormade M6 and PXG 0811XF to win the 2019 Most Wanted title while finishing 2nd in Carry yards.

Best of the Best Challenge Performance Notes

A tester favorite with many believing the Epic Flash Sub Zero will be the winner.
Ball Speed is a strength of Callaway drivers, so it’s not surprising that the Epic Flash Sub Zero generated the highest ball speeds in the test.

PING G410 LST (2020 Winner)

2020 Most Wanted Recap

The G410 LST beat both the Callaway Mavrik Sub Zero and Cobra KING Speedzone Xtreme to win the 2020 Most Wanted test. It finished the test #1 in strokes gained and #3 in driving distance.

Best of the Best Challenge Performance Notes

One of the best feeling drivers, if not the best, based on tester feedback.
Over the years, PING has continually made an effort to create an identifiable, acoustic sound. The PING G410 LST continues that dedication.
Testers found fairways at a high rate than with other drivers. Long enough and as straight as they come.

THE RESULTS

This is what you came for, smash the play button and find out if newer really is better.

You could leave now, but we’re just getting started. Let’s dig in to the results.

A LOOK AT THE PODIUM

THE DATA

IN-DEPTH WITH THE CHAMP

While newer isn’t always better, this time around it was. Two generations of the LST family made it into our pool of 5 winners. The G400 LST was a top performer and it took significant effort at PING to improve upon the award-winning design. Frankly, we were skeptical that it was possible to improve upon G400 LST.

With the G410 LST (and the 410 Plus), PING added a moveable weight, which expanded its fitting capabilities. The flat setting at the hosel made it much more appealing to players looking to take the left side out of play or fade the ball just a bit.

The Best of the Best Winner is a result of PING’s approach to create a well-rounded driver that suits a variety of players. It’s rarely the absolute longest driver for any tester, but its seldom far off. Besides, the forgiveness, consistency, and propensity for finding fairways more than make up for an extremely small distance sacrifice.

KEY TAKEAWAYS

Newer Is Not Necessarily Better

Yes, the newest driver won, but a five-year-old driver finished second overall in this test. In fact, the top 3 drivers in this test were separated by less than a yard and the top 4 were less than 2 yards apart.

The reality is that the USGA has manufacturers more or less on lockdown. Real advancement typically takes 3-5 years to materialize and even then breakthrough technology stories are largely cover for tighter tolerances made possible by new materials and improved manufacturing processes.

Year to year most of the rest comes by way of paint, subtle refinements to center of gravity positions, and of course, one hell of a good story.

Sometimes newer will work better for you. Very often newer will be the same and sometimes it will be worse.

Callaway Drivers are Fast

Best Distance - Callaway Epic Flash Sub Zero

What do you expect from a product with the word "flash" in it? Distance, fueled by ball speed is the name of the game for Callaway Epic Flash Sub Zero. It took the coveted crown for distance in the Head to Head Test.

It’s not the least bit surprising to see the Epic Flash Sub Zero on the top of the table for both distance and ball speed.

Since 2016 Callaway drivers have produced the fastest speeds in three of our five driver tests. For what it’s worth, while Callaway wasn’t #1 in 2019, its drivers ranked 2nd and 3rd for the metric.

While 2015 was a bit of an off-year for the brand, Callaway drivers also produced the highest average distance in three of four tests since 2017. As with ball speed, TaylorMade finished on top in 2019, with Epic Flash and Epic Flash Sub Zero finishing a close second and third.

It’s a remarkable run that should cement Callaway’s position as the kings of both distance and ball speed.

Consistency is the Name of the Game for PING

Best Forgiveness - PING G400 LST

It shouldn't be a surprise a PING topped the forgiveness chart in this Head to Head Test. The PING G400 LST was a standout in 2018. Its production was on full display in this test as well.

Never the absolute fastest or the absolute longest, PING seems to have figured out balanced performance in a way many of its competitors haven’t. No matter how we crunch it, PING drivers continue to be at or near the top of the table for forgiveness, our testers hit fairways with them, and they do it without struggling for distance.

That last bit is especially true for the LST model which has won Most Wanted tests across consecutive generations. It’s the only model in the history of Most Wanted test to achieve that feat and with the G425 LST slated for the 2021 test, we’re as anxious as anyone to see if the LST can go 3 for 3.

The bottom line is that we’re always going to get professionally fit for every club in your bag, but if, for whatever reason, you choose to roll the dice on an off the rack driver…hey, no judgment, but we’d recommend taking your chances with PING.

THE RESULTS AND YOUR GAME

Death, taxes, and the annual flood of new drivers. These are inevitable. While nothing good comes from the first two, the latter brings with it a fresh new round of promises and optimism for longer drives and lower scores.

Real or otherwise, the advancement of technology will continue and performance will improve…albeit by incrementally smaller margins with each passing year. With that, it’s important to note that while the newest driver in this test was the best driver, there are no guarantees it means better performance for you.

Our advice is to disregard logos, get fit, and find the driver that works best for your game. That’s what Power to the Player is all about.

What do you think of the results? Is your favorite sitting on the throne? Let us know.

For You

Irons

Apr 24, 2024

PXG Irons: Model By Model

Putters

Apr 23, 2024

PING 2024 Putter Line Extension

News

Apr 23, 2024

Nelly Korda Deserves Her Caitlin Clark Moment, So Why Isn’t She Getting It?

MyGolfSpy

Our mission is #ConsumerFirst. We are here to help educate and empower golfers. We want you to get the most out of your money, time and performance. That means providing you with equipment reviews you can trust, as well as honest reporting on the latest issues affecting the game today. #PowerToThePlayer

MyGolfSpy

Tackling the 12th at Augusta – Amateur Edition

Apr 11, 2024 | 0 Comments

What Club Should You Use to Get Up and Down?

Feb 22, 2024 | 14 Comments

Ball Lab Golf Ball Quality Awards

Jan 22, 2024 | 31 Comments

ENTER TO WIN: Rapsodo MLM2Pro Launch Monitor

Dec 23, 2023 | 1 Comment

MyGolfSpy

Driver Ping G30	Hybrids PXG 0317
3/4 IRON PXG 0311XF	5-GW Srixon Z 565
SW PXG 0317	LW PXG 0311
Putter EVNROLL

MyGolfSpy

comments

Join The Discussion

Leroy Wordlaw

3 years ago

Really great analysis MGS! Keep going on testing all things golf! No amount of analysis is going to make a golfer automatically better but expert knowledge helps us in out selection process!
After 33 years in this game what I’ve always known that improvements in this game are not only equipment, but individual performance and ability, and practice! Two hips and a knee replacement later – last year I switched from a Taylormade Slider with a 65 gram stiff shaft to the Epic Flash with a 49 gram shaft. Up to this point I’d never hit any drive except Taylormade. I get reasonably good distance and consistency, and on occasion (depending on how I feel that Saturday) I’m able to win our 24 man club long drive contest! So yea I’m happy. Please note that this is what works for me and everybody is different!
I really love your golf ball analytics. That’s been a great help in selecting the right ball for my abilities. I just wish we didn’t have to wait until December to get club testing results for that year!
I’m now signed up for your newsletter and will continue to read your articles and support your efforts!

Bubbly Pop

3 years ago

I had the G400, loved it’s feel and automatic hitting of fairways. I had the G410, less of a springy feel off the face, nor not quite as forgiving as the G400in my opinion, but a little longer for me. Now I have the G425 and it is the best of both worlds, great feel off the face and longer for me than the G410.. The only major difference, it has a loud crack off the face compared to the other two, not bothersome to me but noticeably louder than it’s two predecessors.

Abraham

3 years ago

I was fitted by Club Champion for a Ping G410 Plus. I was a 15 handicap and am now quickly down to 11. I had never played a Ping club in my life. Here are my objective takeaways:

-Expect to pay about a $300-400 premium for getting fit for a driver (this takes into account the fitting itself). I find this reasonable if you have a 2 hour session with an expert and access to hundreds of heads/shafts. For me, it’s made golf more enjoyable and thus, worth it. At $40-$100 per round, it’s not like golf is cheap to start with. If I didn’t have the money, I’d actually not play real golf for six outings and instead get fit for a driver.
-If you don’t have the money, buy a Ping off the rack.
-The Ping is definitely not the longest club but I gladly exchanged distance for having a ball in play.
-I personally don’t like the sound of the Ping. I have hit a lot of off center shots that end up okay but don’t feel satisfying.
-The adjustable weight is very handy. It definitely gives you a few yards to play with left or right. I think people should experiment with changing the settings more . . . that’s what it’s there for.
-In the year 2021, I think all of the top clubs are fairly similar. I would probably be happy playing any of them. I play with plenty of people with old drivers (> 6 years old) and I think they would enjoy golf a bit more if they got a new club.
-In general, the average golfer may benefit from a shorter and stiffer driver shaft if they want to be more consistent. The stock clubs are made so people at a Dick’s store can hit that one glorious long drive but not made for lowering scores.

ChrisK

3 years ago

All this crying over how the tests worked, etc. — the biggest surprise to me was how POORLY the Srixon did in distance — it was like 5 yards shorter than everyone else. I know that’s not part of the “strokes gained” topic of the moment, but that’s still significant

Scott S

3 years ago

First; thank you for all the articles and reviews; from some of the comments you are appreciated and under-appreciated; go figure. Merry Christmas to you all.

Second; a review related observation for general consumption; I got fitted in 2018 and have been playing the straight up G400 since then. The sole cracked in 2019 and Ping customer service was OUTSTANDING getting me a replacement. In the shipping interim I used a loaner G410 with the same shaft as my fitted G400 and I almost traded up, but I am still playing the G400 and you would have a hard time convincing me to change.

Lastly; I am going off into left field on a rant meant to be supportive of the team and your work here; while I do “like” to read the comments for perspective, I find some comments to be…white noise, possibly provided by people who must like to hear themselves talk (yeah I know, I am taking up some space here too; pot, this is kettle. over). So, while I appreciate some of the value added comments like, “…this worked for me…” or “…this didn’t seem to work for me…” or “I tried this and it helped in this way…;” I often find myself almost wishing you (MGS) would just shut off the opportunity for people to comment. There are so many instances where my faith in humanity is challenged by the, ummm, stuff that some people ummm, contribute (using the word “contribute” very loosely). It truly befuddles me that some people can be so daft as to not understand that there will always be A standout amongst a group; I guess it could be assumed that some of those folks who want to complain about whether the winner by .0002 points is really THE winner are the same folks who think participation medals are a good idea.
On the contrary, it is just my humble opinion, but:
The data is good to have;
Thanks for providing it;
It is data.
I imagine that if we put you guys up against the other “top 4 of 5” reviewers out there ONE of the five would lead in each category and one would lead in aggregate by some numbed of points; in the end the one who leads in aggregate would be THE winner. Is that REALLY so hard to understand. Of course, some keyboard warrior somewhere, would pop up to argue that, in their world, category A was more important than category D so the results didn’t effectively consider that when “picking” the winner; so, “in their opinion” that would mean the competitor who lead in category D should have “won” because their version of category weighting was “more relevant” to something….UUUUGGGGHGHHH!!!! Sorry, rant over. Please feel free to refuse to post this, delete it, disable me commenting or whatever you feel appropriate; I have obviously been driven from a charitable, Christmas spirit to a Grinch like attitude by the spoiled few among the good many.

Bottom line, some of us appreciate your work and the output. A great leader once told me, “You can please some of the people some of the time, but you can never please all of the people all of the time. So, don’t bother trying.” Merry Christmas folks. I look forward to reading t more reviews, and the intelligent comments, in a hopefully better 2021.

Jack

3 years ago

What Scott said! ^^^

Good work MGS! Very cool test.

Mike

3 years ago

I have the Ping g410 LST. I have grown to like it but had a major snafu this year when I purchased an aftermarket shaft and the golf store put a left-handed Ping tip on it. Played all summer with that, was told later on that it definitely messed with my settings (me being a righty). Talk about being pissed off. But I realize that any increased yardage will only come when I improve my swing.

Tom

3 years ago

Age 73 with essentially one leg post polio. Had 2016 M1 with Hiskei wave R shaft and rarely missed a fairway. Club speed is 78 mph. Tested every driver for years w/o much improvement until the Titleist TSi3. (Ping 410 LST got +8) Now have 9 rounds on TSi3 and have missed one fairway with average distance up nearly 20 yds. I say because no matter how hard I swing or hit all over the head, it is in the fairway. Gave the M1 to wife, who parked her Cally Solaire and picked up 20+ yds as well with longest drive in her life yesterday. Spent 3 days, 238 swings at Club Champion and 5 one hour+ Trackman sessions to get here. If it looks good, feels good, you can swing harder, ergo, more distance. Tom

Steve

3 years ago

This was very good information. The bottom line is you can use whatever head/shaft that you like the looks, sound, feel, etc BUT you must get fitted for the proper shaft/head combination to be able to give yourself the best opportunity to hit fairways with the longest drives your swing can produce..

Mark M

3 years ago

After reading through the plethora of comments from people who don’t understand the Core Concepts of MGS testing, I think this needs to be said:

THANK YOU FOR UNDERTAKING THIS TEST, WHICH WE HAVE BEEN ANTICIPATING FOR A LONG TIME!!

I now feel confident in the knowledge that I don’t have to chase a replacement for my TM M-5 for a while ✌????????????????????

Vincent

3 years ago

If I look at the only metric that really matters, strokes gain, there is really no difference between all these club. Picking a winner is almost dishonest. The difference between the best and the worst is 0.02 strokes. That means you will gain 2 strokes after playing a 100 rounds of golf. Nobody is going to notice that. If you compare first to second, that difference is even tinier 0.006.
I can bet, if you rerun the exact same test, you’ll get a different result in terms of ranking.
My conclusion, all the drivers from reputable brands will perform as well as the others, just get fit for yours, and choose the one that you like the looks of, and fit your price range.

Joe

3 years ago

Vincent, Great point about the repeatability of this test. Just beware if you question their findings or they may change the article and say you have an individual narrative. Only they can be unbiased!

Brad Smith

3 years ago

Vincent,
Regarding your application of Strokes Gained……is the value they show representing Strokes Gained per shot, or per round. It looks like your message assumes SG value is per round. I think it might be per shot, but don’t remember MGS’s explanation well enough. None the less, even if it is per shot, at 14 drives per round, that would mean that the difference, best to worst of these 5 years best drivers would only be 0.25 shots per round.
Brad

Clay

3 years ago

I always assumed it was per round like every other S/G metric but now that I’m looking at it I’m pretty sure srixons 5 yards less in distance has to be -.0007 per shot. 5 yards per drive on every drive is going to gain you at least what? a stroke every 3 rounds? I know its a lot for me if I’m sitting at my 7 iron or my 6 iron. could be 3 strokes in a hole. i need to go to a GC quad or get some measurements on this thing. or most likely practice zen thinking

Bob Young

3 years ago

I don’t know about you, but I am sick of people who think they know more than people who are not biased and are just trying to be objective and are qualified to speak about a subject they have devoted their lives to. These brilliant folks would have you believe that there is no global warming, wearing a mask is stupid, Trump won the election, etc.,etc. I salute MGS for standing up to the brayers. What good is education if it is not used and our feelings replace our brain?

Mike

3 years ago

Hey sport, did you mean to sign into the MSNBC website and post a comment but somehow you got into MGS by mistake? Can’t you leave all the political BS aside for one freaking moment?

Scott

3 years ago

Second Mike’s comment, and as much as I would like to add a bit, I’ll leave it at that.

NCduffer

3 years ago

Thank you! This past Wednesday I asked my son in law did he know what highly anticipated event was happening on 12/21? He said his birthday and I said well I was thinking about MyGolfSpy’s Best of the Best Driver Test. He text’d me today as soon as it was posted while I was at work. Thanks for what you guys are doing! I’m also a believer in your soft is slow for balls result. You’ve helped my distance off the tee.. I will say though that at my swing speed a slightly softer ball is just as long or a tad longer with my irons.. No comparison though with spin.. Yea, I bought too many (expensive relative to what I played) balls to do my own figuring. So, I spend more on balls now.

MyGolfSpy

3 years ago

????

Jim

3 years ago

Have to agree with your assessment of the Ping products. Currently play the G400 Max and see no reason to change anytime soon. It’s long and as you say it’s very forgiving. Don’t miss the fairways too much unless it’s a very poor swing. Amazingly accurate and forgiving and you don’t really give up any significant distance. Ping has figured out how to make very solid, reliable clubs in all ranges.

strokerace

3 years ago

This is the best sentence in the entire article:
“The bottom line is that we’re always going to get professionally fit for every club in your bag, but if, for whatever reason, you choose to roll the dice on an off the rack driver…hey, no judgment, but we’d recommend taking your chances with PING.”

If you don’t want to/can’t afford/are against fitting it is hard to think of another brand that you can go to your local golf store, pick up and buy and have a good time with. Speaking from experience. :)

JasonA

3 years ago

Playing partner went for fitting at the top local independent fitter after many years playing “off the rack”. Switched his entire bag, except for the off-the-rack G400 Max. While the fitter could find a couple more yards, his advice was it’s a no-brainer to stick with the G400 Max as is.

Greg

3 years ago

IT just goes to show the market is super competitive for your hard earned.
I think the shaft in the ping is what makes that driver but that is another story.
We are all built different so adjustable everything is good for 80% of us .
That is Why we should get fitted ..
Drive for show don’t think so. Putt for dough you betcha.
Ping have good engineers and guess what?
We have adjustable putters coming, that is what we all want.
upright flat more loft more weight shorter longer swingweight deadweight .
I should have started making these yrs ago ,I would be rich.
Ping has started lets see what the others do .Robot stuff is high priced junk

John Burnsworth

3 years ago

Great job. For the technocrats that worry about each detail I think Tony has provided a good foundation of answers. For me it kind of proves what I have found out on my own. I switched to a new driver and lost a yard or two but started hitting more fairways and my handicap came down.
To me that’s the measurement that counts and strokes gained is along that line of thinking.

stueldo

3 years ago

Again we have a problem. RPM versus torque. You can’t have one without the other. I know for a fact that there are at least 10 older drivers that some are 20 years old that with the right shaft will out drive any of the so called high tec new ones.. all but two have adjustable hozel crap.

Andrew

3 years ago

Please, please, please break this down by swing speed. The ” best by swing speed” results have been probably the biggest factor in my considerations since they were implemented. PLEASE!

don

3 years ago

That would be a monstrous task because the speed winners were often different clubs than the overall winners.

James

3 years ago

Man, people want a PHD level dissertation on how the test was conducted. The moral of the story is they are all good drivers and they are all basically the same. Tech is mostly maxed out. Your driver should get you 4-5 years before thinking about an upgrade. Don’t fall for the marketing hype. Keep that yearly $500 in your pocket or go get some lessons. Either way you’ll be in better shape than rushing out for a new driver.

Kansas King

3 years ago

Thank You! This needed to be said.

Mark M

3 years ago

Well said ????????

Steve S

3 years ago

Thanks for MGS for this test. It shows what most of us already knew. The best drivers over the last 5 years are all about the same. No surprise. I’m sure the manufacturers hate this test. For those of us with swing speeds below 90 mph find the one that hits the fairway most often because the distance won’t be a variable worth choosing with.

Garen Eggleston

3 years ago

Played the original Pittsburg Persimmon and still playing a TM, tried Callaway , Titleist and Cobra but have never owned aPing driver , still play the M-1 but might have to try a Ping next go round

don

3 years ago

This confirms 2 things we club fitters already knew. 1 stroke every 4 to 5 full rounds of golf difference between the best and the worst is a poor way to choose your best driver. You might prefer the sound or feel of 1 vs another. 2nd that the m1 and my personal favorite the 2016 m2 was the best Taylormade made. Newer models like the m3 were beaten by others and those clubs just came in behind the m1.

Brian

3 years ago

Sheesh…I’ve been thinking, “Maybe it’s time to replace my 5 year-old M1.” Now I’m not so sure. I wasn’t fit for it, so maybe there’s something to be gained by a proper fitting?

MakeParNotWar

3 years ago

I’d like to thank the MGS team for putting this together! There has been a desire for this test for years.

However, based on the comments I’ve read, I’m starting to understand why you didn’t want to do it. Some people want to find fault in everything.

Great job guys! It definitely reinforced some of my assumptions.

Lou

3 years ago

To make your test as fair as possible and to compare apples to apples I believe you’d need an Iron Byron doing the swinging. That said, all the drivers were comparably close. If you took all the drivers manufactured in the last 5-7 years, my guess is they’d all be similar and within a few yards of each other. That one driver goes 10-20 yards longer is absolutely bogus. The bottom line is get fit into something that looks and sounds good to you. Stick with it and don’t fall for all these driver tests to save 1 stroke out of 100 made.

Tony Covey

3 years ago

Amazing.

I mean it’s amazing that golfers still think robots are the way to test clubs. When it comes to impact, millimeters matter. I don’t think many understand how beyond difficult it is to lock a test’s worth of drivers into a robot’s mechanical arm in a position that guarantees the EXACT same impact location, the EXACT same face angle, the EXACT same…

It borders on impossible.

In fact, I was chatting with a buddy of mine who works in golf club R&D. about robots just last week.

Here’s the most relevant quote: Robots are tricky. While they’re great in theory; they’re a pain in the ass. Need to come up with a better way.

Art

3 years ago

WOW. Tony you sound as if all the major manufacturers begrudgingly employ machines to collect club data. And yet they persist. WHY? Because while robots aren’t EXACT, they are MORE EXACT than people.

Robots spit out consistent and unbiased data all day long. Robots don’t care about color, shape or sound. Robots don’t get tired. When engineers need to quantify club performance data, it’s off to the robot. Just like your ball test!

And it isn’t just the majors anymore. TourEdge picked up a robot not too long ago. Contrary to your industry portrayal, they are pretty excited about the acquisition. Maybe you should hit them up and tell them your sources advise against that thing!

MyGolfSpy

3 years ago

There are things robots can do and things they can’t. For what we do NO expert recommends robots.

Here are what those experts say: http://mygolfspy.com/golf-club-testing-results-you-can-trust/

StrokerAce

3 years ago

Finally we have data – kind of… not that we can dive too deep into it.

35 golfers, 2500 shots – were outliers removed? what are the handicap ranges for the 35 golfers? swing speeds? so many questions that remain unanswered and “behind the curtain”. It’s like the Great Oz. LOL

I’d rather watch a 2ndswing video where there is video evidence of real world comparisons.

The “data” presented shows such minute differences between the clubs that it doesn’t really have a clear runaway “winner”. A few yards here and there…tiny percentage differences…what’s the point?

Finally – this test generates more questions than answers and is thoroughly confusing.

Be better MyGolfSpy; this is not up to your usual standards.

Joe

3 years ago

I agree. This is an embarrassment for their reputation.

David Dulen

3 years ago

I do not think it is embarrassing for their reputation. I have played all 5 of these drivers. I thought the results were so close in my own hands, their data they provided was excellent. I like the test they conducted. The results are what they are, can not argue numbers.

MyGolfSpy

3 years ago

Some golfers understandably so want and assume the numbers should and will say something that fits their individual narrative.

We don’t go in to any test looking for a result. At the end of the day the data is what the data is and we think we can always learn from what that data says whether it is what you want to hear or not.

Tony Covey

3 years ago

We’re trying to simplify things a bit…which in broad terms means less words on the page and less need to explain every detail. At some point I would hope that guys like you who have been with us for a while now would understand that we know what we’re doing, we have a standard, and we don’t cut corners.

So yes…outliers were removed because that’s how we always do things.

We had a range of swing speeds. Mid-80s to just over 120 for this one.

Handicaps topped out around 10. That gives us plenty of insight into forgiveness, without introducing as much randomness into the equation.

At this point in the game, I can’t imagine anyone would reasonably expect to see massive performance differences let alone a runaway winner. And that’s before we point out that these were 5 of the best drivers we’ve ever tested.

Tess

3 years ago

Tony, I’m not understanding some of these comments. Please just keep doing what you’re doing and those of us who have a tolerance for imperfect will keep reading and enjoying the best damn info in golf, anywhere. Period.
A great test that most of us can relate to without an hesitation.

StrokerAce

3 years ago

Fair enough – but why not just call a spade a spade?

why pick a winner?
why not just state that the data shows such minor differences between these 5 clubs that they all deserve first place…
why not have a disclaimer stating that we only tested these 5 drivers because they won most wanted each year and there could be a driver not included in the test that would work best for YOUR game and we encourage you to get fit or try everything you can before making a decision?
why not have a “click here for more details on the testers” option that brings the reader to a page or section that shows swing speed ranges, handicap ranges, percentage of outliers removed. +/- margin of error ?

yes, some of us have been with you for a while but what about that guy who just saw this and is checking it out today for the first time? shouldn’t he get some background on how you do these tests?

this is a test that has been requested every. single. year. when the MW driver is announced and has been anticipated for a long long time.

why not provide as much in-depth information as possible? similar to the big ball test that was done.

why not include the tableau data like you do for MW test results?

there seems to be so much missing here… sad, but true if you read through the comments and that’s why I said you can do better and this isn’t up to your usual standards.

don

3 years ago

I think I can speak for alot of the gear heads here when I say simple is nice but isn’t that what all the manufacturers were already trying to do? We love you because you give us more. More honesty with the data to back it up. I always love it when you make it simple but include links to the more complicated stuff for the rest of us.

Joe

3 years ago

I do believe MGS has brought a good amount of clarity and improvement to the golf community in general. People don’t understand the original comments because the article was changed after it was originally posted. Glad it was a change for the better.

Josephus Nolte

3 years ago

Really? You not seeing what you don’t want to see? You not seeing what you want to see? Of course there is no clear winner, because there is no such a thing. The arrows are very similar, it is the archer that matters more. You dare criticize MGS for such a courageous and herculean effort? Wow..

Brian

3 years ago

Can’t speak to all of your questions, but considering the average carry and overall distances were in the 250 – 265 range, my guess is that the players used in the test averaged out to 100-105mph. It could have been a sampling of low/mid/fast swings, but that seems to be the range it averages out to.

michael agishian

3 years ago

I just played my g425 lst the other day. It is a long fairway finder. It seems to fit me better than the g40max

Robin

3 years ago

I wish the Ping Max would go against the ping lst

Barrett

3 years ago

The data table is missing in the article.

Miranda Nodwell

3 years ago

Updated and includes an explanation of our forgiveness metric.

Jerry

3 years ago

I notice that they took down the data showing each categories and now have just their over all results posted since they have were questioned on how the ratings were completed. I say put them back up so all can see!!!!

MyGolfSpy

3 years ago

We understand how there might have been some confusion if you were to only look at the rankings. We’re transparent at MyGolfSpy. You wanted data, so we’ve added the data points as well as an explanation of our forgiveness metric. This should help answer your questions and add some clarity to our results.

Joe

3 years ago

The G410 LST was +0.011 strokes gained. So every 90.91 swings it will save you 1 stroke. Groundbreaking stuff. Probably most important category. Who cares about distance/spin rate/dispersion area, right? Really who buys a driver based on strokes gained? Shaft not held constant. Throw in your own metric for forgiveness which doesn’t have units. No avg. dispersion area metric. Have you guys ever been to a driver fitting? Shocked MGS considers this valid. What would MGS say if a clubmaker published a comparison like this?

Tony Covey

3 years ago

You’re not going to want to hear this, but I firmly believe that our strokes gained methodology is ahead of the curve and that a good number of fitters simply haven’t caught up.

I say this because Strokes Gained is being discussed with increasing frequency when we have calls with manufacturers. It’s where the industry is heading. It’s becoming a design consideration.

I say this because Arccos and Shotscope are implementing Strokes Gained as THE benchmark for identifying areas of improvement and golfers are starting to catch on.

I say this because reputable fitters like the guys at TXG and Club Champion and others have partnered with Arccos to better understand how the clubs they fit golfers for are performing on the course – and how they can make adjustments to improve that performance.

I say this because many of the instructors I know are implementing a strokes gained mindset into their teaching.

You suggest we need dispersion charts. I’m saying we stopped using the dispersion metric for a reason. As with many golf metrics, it’s ok…it has its place, but it can also be exceptionally misleading.

I can give you a tiny dispersion plot with almost no balls in the fairway and I can give you a massive plot where nearly every ball is in the fairway. In the past, a fitter would gravitate towards the tiny plot, but guess which one yields better strokes gained values (and very likely better scores).

So yeah…fitting should evolve. I hope every golfer will consider Strokes Gained when purchasing a driver because I guarantee you it will have a much more direct correlation with on course scoring than optimizing launch and spin.

Those two, with ball speed are how you optimize distance, but golf isn’t a long drive contest.

Frankly, it boggles my mind that one of the first questions asked in a fitting isn’t “How wide, on average, are the fairways on the course you play most often?”

JasonA

3 years ago

MGS have transparently evolved their ranking system over time and while no system will ever be perfect it’s very logical and defensible to use a “strokes gained” methodology. From a commercial POV. I can fully understand why not sharing every data point.

Gary/Eye4golf

3 years ago

old man who with my new tour edge exs 220 can get more distance than 11-12 players I play with. Everyones swing is their own so try and compare to what your now hitting. Nice article but too high tech.

Peter

3 years ago

The strokes gained difference between “the best” and “the worst” drivers was 0.018. That means you’d gain 1.8 strokes per hundred drives. If you hit your driver 14 times a round, you’d gain 1.8 strokes per 7.14 rounds or roughly one stroke every 4 rounds.

Plus MGS doesn’t indicate whether the data provided here is statistically significant. But let’s be generous and assume it is.

So you gain 1 stroke every 4 rounds. Professional tour golfers could benefit from the gain, but for just about everyone else, this gain would be lost in the noise. The four drivers are essentially the same.

Elias

3 years ago

Not finding a big difference is the finding. Remember these are all previous winners, how many strokes would you gain against possibly buying one of the worst drivers instead of the best.

Yvon

3 years ago

Great test…it would have been interesting to compare prices from today’s market excludes the ping g410 lst…

Peter

3 years ago

The strokes gained difference between the top and bottom drivers was 0.018. This means you gain 1.8 stokes per hundred drives. If you hit a driver 14 times a round, then you’ll gain 1.8 strokes every 7.15 rounds, or roughly one stroke every 4 rounds.

I suggest that for most golfers, this gain will be lost in the noise, and essentially, there’d be no noticeable difference between these drivers. Spending your money on putting or short game lessons would probably help you much more….

Golfinnut

3 years ago

I notice Titleist is never on any of these tests. I guess they don’t stack up against them or people don’t play them as much?
This is why I don’t get rid of my old equipment. Turns out newer isn’t always better, that’s why I’ve gone back to the 975D & 983K driver of old. :)

Msg

3 years ago

This is a head to head test against the top drivers in the last 5 years. If you check the previous test, you’ll see the Titleist drivers. The TS series actually faired well last time.

Dennis Beach

3 years ago

I have a g410 SFT, and I am in the fairway 99% of the time. Ping got it right!! Forgiveness that is unmatched! Used to play Callaway, tried their new clubs, but didn’t like the feel. Be playing thus driver for quite some time, as I am 64 years old.

AWOL

3 years ago

Huh???? You guys must really like Ping. How is the driver that got the worst score in forgiveness still managed to pull first in strokes gained??? I would assume forgiveness is the measurement of making a poor strike and still getting a relatively positive result and in order to have the best strokes gained the ball has to remain playable. Which your number one choice contradicts. So if you removed the “overall” metric. Add up all the scores from the other metrics and divide that by the number of categories. Based on that average the epic is the number one.

MyGolfSpy

3 years ago

Brandon M

3 years ago

Would love to see the SG data for each category and separation between each driver. Data presented in the chart is confusing. What is the difference between “Overall” and “Strokes Gained”? The chart would imply the EPIC Flash is the best driver, or the G400 for a focus on forgiveness. What aspect of Strokes Gained is not captured in distance/forgiveness to allow the G410 to make up so much ground? If forgiveness is only variation of ball speed across all shots, is that a meaningful criteria? Yards offline could be more relevant to readers looking for a stick to keep them out of the trees…

MyGolfSpy

3 years ago

We’ve added the data for you. We can see where including only the ranking chart could contribute to confusion. So we hope the data helps you understand why the PING G410 LST remains our number 1 driver.

David K

3 years ago

Always love any time I can learn more about equipment to help me improve.
Would like to know more about the shafts used in the drivers for the test.

Rich Mendoker

3 years ago

Me too. & Were the same shafts used by testers for all players, and if any hosel or lie adjustments made on individual clubs

vince

3 years ago

i currently have the G410plus,,,been very good for yr yr and half? great feel great sound very straight decent distance, i have some pro shop credit and have an order for the G425 when it comes out, but all i hear is how great the TS2 titleist is and wonder why its not even on the list ? i ve hit the 2 a couple times and it does seem to jump off the face. i usually hit all drivers straight, but would luv that elusive 10yrds. callaway ?? titleist?? ping?

Paul Vicary

3 years ago

After reviewing the results I see no reason to remove my 2016 TaylorMade M1 10.5 with a Talamonti shaft from the bag. All of your finalists have merit. That said I have confidence my M1 will find the fairway regularly and with the distance I am happy with.

Randy Kitts

3 years ago

I’ve been gaming a Titleist TS1 for a season with an Accra 60 gram regular flex shaft at 68 years old and found it to be the best for me, as the head is lighter weight and I can generate more clubhead speed with that combination, very under rated driver.

Jerry

3 years ago

I agree, when I do the math (no knowing what they did theirs) the Callaway has the lower score over all and should have been #1. I hope they explain how this finish was figured. I don’t get it

MyGolfSpy

3 years ago

dr. bloor

3 years ago

When your “strokes gained” metric is at odds with every other more specific performance metric, it’s not a good metric.

Kansas King

3 years ago

The strokes gained metric has been explained before and is probably a good way of measuring performance. However, MGS could probably do more explaining in the article when the metrics they provide don’t necessarily look consistent with the strokes gained metric.

Barrett

3 years ago

I would argue the exact opposite, my friend. What good does forgiveness or distance give you if it doesn’t give you the best chance to shoot a lower score? Strokes Gained is the only metric that should matter and the rest are just for sifting through the weeds.

Tony Covey

3 years ago

Exactly.

Distance tells you nothing about where the ball landed. Golfers want long drivers (that’s simple enough) and so longest is longest. That metric is easy.

With Strokes Gained in our tests, the strongest correlation is typically found with Fairway Percentage, which is why we added it to the chart. I think what gets lost in the distance chase on tour is that it’s only worth sacrificing fairways if you’re picking up significant distance.

While there are guys on tour that 50 yards longer than others, when choosing between drivers for yourself, you won’t find that kind of disparity.

Even in a large test, it’s rare to see more than 10 on an individual basis, so realistically your best shot at lowering your scores will come through hitting more fairways.

What Strokes Gained has taught us is that there is a benefit to being longer off the tee, but there’s also a hefty price to be paid for missing fairways.

In this test, the top 3 drivers for distance were separated by about 2 and a half feet. That’s not nearly enough to overcome differences in fairway percentage. The PING finished on top because it was negligibly shorter, but hit a higher enough number of fairways to matter.

Forgiveness is always an interesting one. There’s no widely accepted definition – and it definitely means different things to different manufacturers.

We’ve decided to take a practical approach that translates to the golf course in a way that the standard deviation of ball speed (a common forgiveness metric) doesn’t.

What we look at is the difference in Strokes Gained values between the best shots our testers hit with a club and the worst shots they hit with the same club.

If people want to to dig into the weeds on the math behind it, it’s pretty simple. Forgiveness is the difference between the upper quartile and lower quartile Strokes Gained values.

Two things I would mention.

Under our metric, forgiveness differences are excruciatingly small. From a strokes gained standpoint. We need to go 3 decimal places to find a difference between any two clubs in this test.

Forgiveness is a measure of consistency, so if you miss a lot of fairways but group those misses close together, you can still have a narrow forgiveness delta – even if the total performance isn’t great.

James Shepard

3 years ago

If the listing of all results were available then you could see why ping won. It’s always about strokes gained.

TonyG

3 years ago

Forget those dumb questions! When did you guys get a rotating platform?

Tom

3 years ago

Looks like I am still keeping the G400 in the bag. Best in forgiveness is what works for me. I’ll give up a couple yards for that..

Steve S

3 years ago

Show me the data!!! Bottom line is the hint is that the numbers are all very close. 4 of the 5 being less than 2 yards apart means all this is in the “noise” of the data.

MyGolfSpy

3 years ago

The numbers are indeed close. We understand how there might have been some confusion if you were to only look at the rankings. We’re transparent at MyGolfSpy. You wanted data, so we’ve added the data points as well as an explanation of our forgiveness metric. This should help answer your questions and add some clarity to our results.

Kansas King

3 years ago

The test results don’t surprise me and they really shouldn’t surprise anyone. I’m glad MGS is doing these comparisons to show that manufacturers really are maxed out against the USGA restrictions. Manufacturing does improve every year and drivers today are probably better than five years ago, but it’s unlikely because the technology is really that much better. It doesn’t surprise me that the Epic Flash was the longest as I’ve seen people with those hit long drives in various directions but rarely in the fairway. It was interesting to see the G410 performing quite differently than the G400. It seems Ping definitely made some changes in the G410 that made it perform much different. It wouldn’t surprise me if used G400 LSTs are still selling for a premium in the three years relative to everything else. The used TM M1 and M2 drivers are still expensive given their age and this testing probably validates why.

I hope MGS continues doing these tests periodically. Drivers are really the only club that is up against the USGA restrictions outside of a few high COR irons and woods. It would be interesting to see the past winners in other categories go head to head. Maybe you this best of the best testing once a year but for a different category each year and go on a rotation.

Joe

3 years ago

Really confused by this test. Is Overall a category or a result? I assume its a result. By your own metrics the subzero flash scores the best score simply adding up the place values you the total scores (assuming 1st is the best in each category a total of 4 points would be the best possible score). The Subzero flash scores a 8 making it the lowest and therefore the best unless categories are evenly weighted. It also makes no sense that 4th ball speed = 2nd distance unless external factors like wind come into play.

Bill

3 years ago

I’m pretty sure each category is weighted. For example, at the end of the day lower scores are the most important factor when considering equipment. Thus, strokes gained is the most important metric when comparing and evaluating equipment.

Joe

3 years ago

How can the most distance be 4th in strokes gained especially when the article says the difference in distance was “less than a yard” and “less than two yards” in the top 4?

Joe

3 years ago

*aren’t evenly weighted

Randy

3 years ago

I agree, this seems off

MyGolfSpy

3 years ago

Randolph Lavery

3 years ago

Im guessing that strokes gained is the most important thing since that’s what matters most, the fewest strokes.

dr. bloor

3 years ago

It’s also completely opaque, and they won’t go into how they arrive at the number, which is the real issue.

MyGolfSpy

3 years ago

We’ve added the data points. Transparency is the name of the game. We hope that answers some of your questions and clears up any confusion. Nothing opaque in our approach.

Tony Covey

3 years ago

We’ve covered this before. It’s not sorcery. It’s not even a secret.

Overall winners are determined using a variation of Mark Broadie’s Strokes Gained methodology. Here’s how it works:

A strokes gained value is determined for each shot (based the remaining distance to a theoretical pin and the resulting lie condition) To keep initial SG values high, we set our flats at 375 yards. Our fairways are 35 yards wide (roughly the average for courses in the USA).

The average strokes gained value for each club is calculated and compared to the average value for each tester.

Overall ranking order is based on the cumulative Strokes Gained value above the average for each driver tested.

Luis Ramírez

3 years ago

I just want to say that I’m crushing the Ping 410LST. Thanks! I knew it would go to the top..

hckymeyer

3 years ago

Love this test and thank you for doing it! However the way the data is presented is broken if we all look at a chart and immediately question the results.. I”m sure mathematically the overall results make sense, but when looking at the chart it’s very counterintuitive

MyGolfSpy

3 years ago

hckymeyer

3 years ago

The updated charts read much better, thank you again for the test and for listening to the readers on the presentation. Keep up the great work!

David Dulen

3 years ago

I agree with your logic.

Ben

3 years ago

It makes sense to me, not sure where the disconnect is. It is my understanding, from reading previous tests MyGolfSpy has done, that Strokes Gained is the primary metric.

Since Callaway had the best ball speed, and we know that Sub Zero kills spin, it’s not a surprise that it had the best distance. Forgiveness, remember, is not about left/right dispersion, but about front/back dispersion. So if a driver has a hot face, and the face is hot all over, the ‘forgiveness’ is good, but it would not necessarily equate to hitting the fairway, or being a good shot.

That is what the Strokes Gained metric pulls together, and why it is the best to use.

WillieT

3 years ago

I am not really surprised as I was thinking the 410 would be on top. It will be interesting in 2021 how all this shakes out with the new kids from the OEM’s coming to town to claim the MGS Most Wanted trophy. Makes me want to head out and find a used M1 (currently swing a SLDR) to replace it.

Malcolm

3 years ago

First, thanks for doing this test. I have compared the different Most Wanteds for years and was psyched for this actual comparison to happen. Not hugely surprised (though I didn’t win the Golf Galaxy gift certificate); can’t really go wrong with any of these, I’d wager.
Happy Holidays!

Scott

3 years ago

Can anyone explain how “Strokes Gained” is calculated? This seemed to be the driving factor in the overall ranking.

StrokerAce

3 years ago

How does Ping go from the most forgiving driver to the least forgiving in the test with one minor upgrade iteration? 400 –> 410
They’re both LST drivers. (Low Spin Tech).
This is bizarre.
Additionally – where’s the testing data? How do we know how small/large the differences are in each category?
This is – at best – interesting, but without data to back it up it’s not very valuable.

MyGolfSpy

3 years ago

Tony Covey

3 years ago

I’ve covered the metrics in a previous comment. I think some people think there’s some sort of A+B=C stuff. It’s not like that at all. They’re entirely different metrics.

Overall is based entirely on Strokes Gained.

Moving forward, you’re probably better off assuming the differences are small because they invariably are across a test pool. Tools like True Golf Fit, which allowyou to specify your swing attributes will show more significant performance differences.

Jamie L

3 years ago

I’m sure I am not going to be the only one who asks this question but how does the Callaway finish first in distance and ball speed and 2nd in forgiveness but finish 4th overall? Assuming forgiveness = accuracy then one would assume hitting longer and straighter than the drivers that finished first and second is a good thing.

Dave

3 years ago

This is what crossed my mind as well, doesn’t seem to make sense for Callaway to finish 4th

Troy

3 years ago

Was thinking the same thing. Adding up all four categories,.minus the overall the Callaway Sub Zero has the best overall score, yet its 4th in total. Are the MyGolfSpy guys using common core math?

Joe

3 years ago

Totally agree. How does furthest distance equal 4th in strokes gained? People must be slicing the Callaway OB while hitting the G410 down the middle.

Tom54

3 years ago

Beat me to it.

Stephen

3 years ago

Same question. How can 1st on distance and 2nd on accuracy = 4th on strokes gained.? Please clarify.

Kansas King

3 years ago

Forgiveness doesn’t necessarily mean accuracy. Forgiveness is performance on off-center hits, not good hits. So accuracy could be a problem even if the club is technically “forgiving”. Strokes gained is an interesting metric but MGS seems fairly consistent with it’s application and I don’t think there is anything wrong with it in this test. My guess is that Callaway’s dispersion probably wasn’t great even though it was long.

Tim

3 years ago

How can a driver that got two 1sts, a 2nd and a 4th come in 4th, while one with just one 1st, two 3rds and a 5th (!) place comes in 1st? Makes no sense at all.

Ryan

3 years ago

Probably just the way the “strokes gained” algorithm calculates things. The chart with the rankings is mis-leading as that is not the criteria they use to determine the winner. They use the strokes gained method and G410 came out on top there so it is the winner. Besides that, the ball speed and distance category are very closely related so that 2 victories is really like 1 and the difference in score on that victory might be extremely small. It says the top 3 in distance were separated by 1 yd so it’s possible that the callaway was only 1.5-2 yards longer than the Ping.

StrokerAce

3 years ago

Algorithms are a funny thing – just ask Google, they’re currently in hot water for how they rank their results.

It’s the secret sauce, black box stuff.

On the one hand MGS says they’re “data driven and transparent” but on the other there is an ‘algorithm’ that does rankings which isn’t shared.

which is it?
if they want consumers to trust then be 100 pct transparent. if not then don’t say that you are.

David Dulen

3 years ago

I agree with your assessment.

Sydney

3 years ago

I suppose the differences were negligible for most categories… did I miss the data tables?

MyGolfSpy

3 years ago

Tim

3 years ago

Looks like you guys decided to remove the placement by category. Prolly for the best considering the winner looked the definition of mediocre in those placements. Thanks.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.