Not way back, I wrote a story about the rise in Mini driver offerings and hopefully supplied some insights into whether or not a mini could be best for you.
Alongside the best way, I prompt that maybe that, whereas intriguing, the mini method may not be best for common golfers. Most of us could be higher served with a full-sized driver reduce all the way down to extra playable (fairway wooden) lengths.
Having tried an identical construct, I can inform you that if straighter tee pictures are your aim, it really works as marketed (insomuch as shorter driver builds have ever been marketed).
The final considering behind these sort of builds is that, opposite to what many consider, a 3-wood isn’t prone to be extra correct off the tee than a driver and whereas higher off the tee than a fairway wooden, a mini driver goes to be more durable to hit off the deck.
It’s why one reader known as the mini driver a worst of each worlds resolution. Harsh, however if you wish to learn that mini drivers have a restricted viewers, that’s doubtless truthful.
Macro > Mini
Inside this context, it’s not less than attention-grabbing that you just gained’t discover PING among the many record of manufacturers rumored to have a mini driver within the short-term pipeline. That’s to not say PING doesn’t assume there’s worth in a extra controllable driver however it seems the corporate thinks that if you’ll want to hit pictures off the deck with any regularity, keep your 3-wood. If you happen to don’t, you would possibly need to take into account what is typically known as a “thriver.”
Merely, a thriver or what PING’s VP Becoming and Efficiency, Marty Jertson, suggests may be known as a “macro driver”, is a full-sized driver head with a shaft reduce all the way down to 3-wood (43.5 inches), 5-wood (43) and even 7-wood (42.5) size.
Jertson posted the graphic under. It offers some key insights into who ought to take into account a thriver/macro driver in addition to some knowledge from PING’s Proving Grounds exhibiting comparisons between a shorter driver construct and a standard 3-wood.
The abstract model is that the … let’s name it a “macro driver”, I actually like that … hit 10 p.c extra fairways and produced 40 p.c tighter dispersion than a PING LST 3-Wood.
In contrast to mini drivers, there’s no suggestion that the macro driver (I’m sticking with that) goes to work off the deck. At 3-wood size, it’s going to fly about so far as 3-wood however you’re getting added management.
Because the graphic suggests, that makes the macro driver an amazing possibility for golfers who have already got loads of distance, want one thing extra controllable than a driver and should you’re going to drag your 3-wood, aren’t usually inclined to hit 3-wood off the deck anyway.
The place to begin
The really helpful start line for a macro driver construct is a 12-degree G440 head. PING has quite a lot of supported shafts that help you construct to 3-, 5- or 7-wood size. Presumably, management will increase as shaft size decreases.
As with mini drivers, you could not have a spot in your bag for a macro driver however should you assume it could be a superb match in your recreation, it’s most likely value spending a while with a PING fitter.
Have your say
Do you assume a macro driver makes extra sense than a mini driver? Tell us.
The submit Never Mind The Mini. Do You Need A Macro Driver? appeared first on MyGolfSpy.
