After all of the hype I am hearing regarding the new RBZ 3 wood from Taylor Made and how fantastic but more importantly how LONG it is, I thought i 'd give it a test.
My own 3 Wood is an Adams GT Tight Lies Strong 3 wood with 13 degrees of loft with a stiff EI70 shaft in it. I found that this sits nicely distance-wise in-between my Driver and my favourite golf club - my 1 Iron.
The RBZ I am testing it against is an RBZ Tour with 14.5 degrees of loft and again has a stiff shaft fitted.
Looking at these characteristics the strong 3 wood is designed to go further than a 3 wood. it has less loft and is slightly longer in length. Both characteristics mean more speed and therefore more distance.
In terms of looks, both clubs look great behind the ball. Both sit well, both look sleek and are low profile rather than bulky. If anything my own personal taste favours the adams as I struggle with the RBZ being bright white. I guess its just not the colour for me!
Anyway onto the stats. I hit a number of shots with each club using the Trafford Golf Centre's Flightscope machine to measure the results. All shots were hit well with similar shape and on the day I was hitting balls into a slight headwind. Here are the results....
My own 3 Wood is an Adams GT Tight Lies Strong 3 wood with 13 degrees of loft with a stiff EI70 shaft in it. I found that this sits nicely distance-wise in-between my Driver and my favourite golf club - my 1 Iron.
The RBZ I am testing it against is an RBZ Tour with 14.5 degrees of loft and again has a stiff shaft fitted.
Looking at these characteristics the strong 3 wood is designed to go further than a 3 wood. it has less loft and is slightly longer in length. Both characteristics mean more speed and therefore more distance.
In terms of looks, both clubs look great behind the ball. Both sit well, both look sleek and are low profile rather than bulky. If anything my own personal taste favours the adams as I struggle with the RBZ being bright white. I guess its just not the colour for me!
Anyway onto the stats. I hit a number of shots with each club using the Trafford Golf Centre's Flightscope machine to measure the results. All shots were hit well with similar shape and on the day I was hitting balls into a slight headwind. Here are the results....
Looking at the analysis, as I said before the strong 3 wood should produce more speed which it did - swinging 3 mph faster through the ball than the RBZ. The spin rates were very similar and the less loft on the Adams gave that club a slightly lower launch angle. However even at a slower swing speed the RBZ produced 10 yards more distance overall!!
How is that possible? Well the 3 wood is fitted with a 'speed pocket' behind the clubface which allows the clubface be made extremely thin in the middle and thick around the edges. The clubface on impact then can spring the ball - a little like a trampoline - and therefore project the ball faster off the clubface. So for example in the stats above, my Adams went in at 103 mph and the ball came out at 149.5 mph. However the RBZ rocketed the ball out at 151.7 mph even though it went in slower at 100.5 mph.
Would I recommend it? Why wouldn't I? It felt great, sat behind the ball well and hit it further! I guess the hype was justified.....
How is that possible? Well the 3 wood is fitted with a 'speed pocket' behind the clubface which allows the clubface be made extremely thin in the middle and thick around the edges. The clubface on impact then can spring the ball - a little like a trampoline - and therefore project the ball faster off the clubface. So for example in the stats above, my Adams went in at 103 mph and the ball came out at 149.5 mph. However the RBZ rocketed the ball out at 151.7 mph even though it went in slower at 100.5 mph.
Would I recommend it? Why wouldn't I? It felt great, sat behind the ball well and hit it further! I guess the hype was justified.....
RSS Feed