Don’t you just hate it when you test a club at the driving range and are just striping it perfectly? Take out the credit card, pay for it, and for the first round or two, it is absolute bliss. Then, by the third round or so, the magic wears off and the club just stops working. Now you’re furious because you just paid retail for what was supposed to be the latest and greatest but turned out to be a dud.
We’re going save you some heartache by revisiting some of the new clubs that we featured earlier in the year; specifically, the TaylorMade M4 driver, the Callaway Epic Subzero fairway wood and the Odyssey O-Works Red 7s.
Odyssey O-Works Red 7s
The putter is generally a difficult club to replace, especially if the old one is working well. I’ve been gaming an Odyssey O-Works 7 in the Versa black/white/red color scheme. It’s been very effective and has largely provided what I need in a putter. The requirements of distance control, forgiveness and feel have all been addressed with the O-Works 7, but the putter wasn’t a natural fit for a golfer accustomed to a blade putter.
While it cannot be argued that mallets offer the golfer the ideal putting solution, it is with the more feel based players that there is more resistance to the head shape. This has less to do with how the putter works and more to do with how it looks.
Optics are a vital component of a good putter. The golfer has to know where the putter is pointing instinctively. You might adjust to it, but one can never be completely comfortable with a putter if you can’t be sure where it’s aimed.
Another part of the equation is the balance of the putter. Most blade putters are balanced with the toe of the putter pointing down from four-to-six o’clock, while most mallets are face-balanced, which means that the putter face points skyward. Golfers used to one have a great deal of difficulty with the other.
This deprives the golfer of the rest of the technological package that Odyssey has put on offer—the enhanced forgiveness on mishits, which is the result of the optimization of the mallets’ center of gravity. The effectiveness of the latest breed of roll-enhancing technology is something that shouldn’t be passed up on either.
The short, slant hosel on the Red O-Works 7s addresses the issue of looks and balance. Balanced slightly toe-down, it feels natural in the hands. Aiming is now instinctive, and the putter moves as it should throughout the stroke. Misses on the toe were forgiven but for a bit of distance. Heel hits suffered in both areas. Not a real problem, but just something of which to be aware.
The O-Works insert is Odyssey’s best yet. It is the best-feeling insert they’ve produced thus far, and it seems to work as advertised. There’s no skidding of bouncing around with it; the ball just rolls smoothly and silently toward the hole.
The Red color is just fun. If it matters, you can also get it in Black, and if the number 7 isn’t your cup of tea, Odyssey makes three other iconic mallets with the short, slant neck. Still not for you? The O-Works insert is available in a slew of head shapes, and there’s bound to be something that will work for you.
Odyssey’s plan to put a mallet in every golfer’s hands is a good one, and putters like the O-Works Red 7s will go a long way to making it a reality.
TaylorMade M4 Driver
Every year manufacturers make bolder and bolder claims for their drivers, so it was a bit of a shock when the two largest antagonists in the distance wars changed direction with their ad campaigns; instead of touting the greater distances their driver would send the golf ball, both were promoting technologies to help the average Juan find more fairways.
The M4, TaylorMade’s horse in this race, heralds TM’s latest innovation, something called Twist-Face Technology. Looking down at the clubhead in hand, you barely notice it, in spite of the branding there to tell you otherwise. It’s subtle and has proven to be quite effective. But while Twist Face has taken the lead role in the campaign, it is the other technologies that work in concert to guarantee the effectivity of the package.
You can’t argue with physics. Therefore, the work to lighten the structure and come up with twice the discretionary weight in the M2 guaranteed that the M4 would be easier to hit and yield better results on misses. Hammerhead technology strengthened the face structure, returning more energy directly into the golf ball. The cherry on top was the aero package, which, in most un-TaylorMade fashion, wasn’t even branded.
The M2 as a package works fabulously. Let me say that I loved my M2. I was supremely confident with it more so than with any other driver. I felt it would be nearly impossible to surpass, but the M4 did so with ease.
It swings perceptibly faster than the M2. The M4 cuts through the air like a knife and, although I haven’t tested this configuration on a launch monitor, the added distance I’m seeing in real life is more than enough validation.
The M4 continues its stellar performance. Though visually smaller than its predecessor, the M4 surpasses it in ease of use. This is an incredibly easy driver to hit. Mishits almost travel as far as the good shots with only a slight penalty in direction.
Say good-bye to the M2. The M4, in my humble opinion, TaylorMade’s best driver ever. It is everything that you could ever want in a driver, and I cannot imagining anything being better. But I said that about the M2, and look where we are today.
Callaway Epic Subzero Fairways
Fairway woods are the most difficult clubs to replace in the bag. In twenty-something years of golf, I’ve only had four different sets; the first was a knock-off component strong 3-wood that served double duty as a driver for quite some time until I cracked the face. Then came my trusty TaylorMade V-Steel. That served me for almost a decade and gave me my first hole-in-one. The last two were sets of Nike VR Pro Limited-Edition fairways and then the first of the adjustables; a pair of TaylorMade RBZ Stage II TPs.
The RBZs were getting long in the tooth, and I was looking for fairways that were easier to hit when the Callaway Epic Subzero fairways appeared on my radar. I considered the Epic fairways initially but loved the way the smaller head sat. The fact that I got on quite well with the Fujikura Speeder 4 that the Epic Subzero came with pretty much sealed the deal, so taking a leap of faith, I sprung for the Subzeros.
Any concerns about the smaller head being harder to hit vanished almost immediately. The Subzero fairway features a pair of moveable weights (22 and 3 grams) that amount to 25 grams of discretionary weight. That’s huge for a small fairway wood and makes the Epic Subzero quite easy to hit. It is very stable through impact and sends the ball off at the optimum trajectory (to my eyes).
The precisely located weights paired with the ultralight crown make for ideal CG locations in the clubhead. The Optifit hosel offers meaningful adjustments to further tweak ball flight if need be but I didn’t find it necessary.
My samples came with Fujikura Speeder 4 60-gram shafts in stiff flex. Having come from heavier shafts in my fairways and hybrids, I was anxious try a lighter shaft in the hopes of finding a few more yards in a club that was easier to hit.
Things worked out perfectly.
The Callaway Epic Subzero fairways were everything I hoped they would be. They are longer and easier to hit than my much loved RBZ Stage II TP. They feel more responsive and more solid off the clubface. It doesn’t improve performance, but it’s a welcome development. These things are weapons for the given distances. They work so well, they’ve made me more aggressive from longer distances. Although I’ll have to temper said aggression, this is certainly a good thing.
The Callaway Epic Subzero fairways are going to be awfully hard to get out of my bag.