@@hanj31 Surely you could just compare it to another driver like the mini driver hit 5-10 shots each and than just work out which was more consistent and longer. Though Rick would probably need to change the shaft some how.
So first thank you Rick for taking the time to review our driver. I'm going to try and address a few of the things mentioned in the comments. First is the failure on my part to warn Rick of the possibility the monitor may have trouble picking up the ball. We have used the GC Quad two other times and the First time was when we had the Driver tested at Golf Laboratories Inc. They had trouble with the monitor picking up the ball and put reflective dots on the face and it eliminated the problem. The second time was at a friends home. He has the same set up as Rick and there were no problems picking up the ball. I did not decide not to tell rick I just simply didn't. In hindsight I 100% wish I would have remembered to tell him, especially after seeing his frustration. Second is the comments regarding our driver as a gimmick club or a money grab. It is neither. We stand by our claims on the drivers performance and with stats and video from Rick possibly re testing it or with some of our own video or both will substantiate those claims. Third I completely understand all of the negative or condescending remarks made. The Driver has a some unique and different features as well as some aspects that may be modified slightly to better suit a wider range of golfers. I see the negative comments equally as important if not more important than the positive ones. I appreciate everyone who took the time to watch as well as comment. I would love to hear more from all of you good and bad. Lastly, I have played many rounds with this driver and stand behind the claim of the most accurate driver. The fairway is a much better place to be hitting your second shot and this driver has increased my fairways hit substantially. Tom Shockwave Golf
This is probably more of a question than a comment. But how does the club hold up to wear an tare? Being made of similair material to the out side of balls which can scuff up fairly easily.
@@aaronmelbourne9506 After 300 or so balls hit on the range with the same club there wasn't any wear or damage to the head. There was somewhat significant visual wear but nothing that didn't come off with hot water soap and a scotch brite pad. On the coarse I would say about the same. Being white it definitely shows grass marks. But again nothing that doesn't come off with soap and water. Hopefully that answers your question. Thanks
Even though both a golf ball and our club are both made from urethane, the strength or hardness are much different. Our driver hardness is around an 80 shore D and a golf ball cover is much softer around 60 shore A.
Hmm... maybe take it outside and test it in the real world? Or somewhere with a trackman? Not sure if I trust the numbers if the quad has so much issues with recognizing the shot at all...
Thats an issue with the club though. Like, the club maker would know this would be an issue with most reviewers. While I do agree he could go out and test it on the course, that shouldn't be the only way.
@@bluetoughguy I don't see where he said it should be the only way. If anything, you just confirmed that it, also, should not be only tested on a launch monitor alone
Good Day, This is Tom from Shockwave Golf. First I want to say thank you for being so prompt and timely in your communications leading up to Rick's evaluation of our driver. I also would like to thank Rick for taking the time to do the review. Rick is the number 1 guy in this space. I have followed him and his content for a while. He always seems to be unbiased in his reviews and has very professional content. That is why we sent our driver to him. I just wonder why he treated this one different. Possibly the frustration of the GC Quad not working properly! Watching the video, I could see his obvious frustration with the way things were going! A pretty good show in itself LOL! He hit the ball well but the results were all wonky! So why give an opinion on results that ended up having no usable data to use for evaluation? He almost figured it out though, installing black tape on the side of the club! The GC Quad had trouble identifying the club head face since it was white, the same color as the ball! The professional testing labs are aware of this problem and attach targets to the club face, so they obtain accurate results! We have found, using the GC Quad, simply changing the studio lighting so a shadow is cast on the club face as it hits the ball, works well too! I get the sentiments about the club head cover being cheap, it is, and that it looks weird, etc. But none of those things means our driver doesn't do what we claim. We are not selling head covers! We are selling the latest, patentable technologies in the form of shock wave control and use thereof as well as boundary layer drag reduction in the form of micro vorticie orientation, Not high drag turbulators, plus composite urethane head construction similar to the core material of the best golf balls, thereby providing longer drives, more on line hits and lower scores! ! In light of the identified lighting problems associated with the white club face / GC quad, I would hope Rick might consider another review. I attached a video of myself hitting a few balls using the GC Quad, showing it tracking accurately in corrected lighting. Please forgive the quality of the video due to the auto/iris compensation because of the light reflection off the screen. ruclips.net/user/shortsfAU706zgVs4 Sincerely Tom Freng
It is like Rick said but mate, he had to hit 25 balls to get a result of 10 and in no way were they longer or more forgiving drives. Not a single shot he hit went over 290 and his normal drive carry is 280 to 290 with max distances being 305 to 320. Even in your video, there was no real show of forgiveness, no consistent shots and cutting the video to only good shots you want people to see. Maybe just take this one on the chin and go back to the drawing board
@BeyondtheRedZone thanks for your response. What makes you think those 10 shots Rick deemed to be accurate data were accurate. Your right Rick hits the ball much further than the shits that were deemed to be accurate. That tells me those 10 weren't accurate either. I only cut one shot from the video and it was because the lighting was incorrect and didn't allow for the monitor to properly track. That's why Rick wasn't able to get data. All he had to do is change the lighting.
@@BeyondtheRedZone Thank you for your comment. So why on earth would you think the 10 shots that were "properly tracked" were correct. Time after time the GC Quad was not accurately reading. I would say those 10 shots were no different. Rick hits the ball much further than any of those results even more reason to think the data was not correct. In my video I was not selective about which shots I put on. There was one shot, the first one that the lighting was incorrect. Rick is a much more consistent and longer hitter than I am. If I was hitting the ball 280 Rick would have been as well. All the data was inconclusive.
@ becoming very defensive there buddy. As I clearly said, he had to hit over 25 shots to get proper readings to be able to compare. If your going to give your product to one of the most reputable golf reviewers on RUclips, you have to be willing to take on the criticism that comes with it. You make claims on your driver being the most forgiving, your personal video and Ricks video are proof, they are the furthest from the most forgiving, hence the size and the results. Business 101 learn from the reviews and better the product. Trail and error, try and fail. Now learn and move on! Make the product better
@BeyondtheRedZone again sir criticism is not a problem when it is critical of an actual thing. I have the same appreciation for Rick as I did before the review. He is no doubt the number one guy in the space. I have said before that's why we sent him the club. With an adjustment in the light he could have based his review on some actual data.
Looks like a get rich scheme that only suckers would buy. For $400 bucks you should get a shaft that isn't purchased from Walmart. Thanks for the honest review Rick
Love it...the video! Genuinely miss seeing Rick doing random club reviews! I know top manufacturers have to come first and I like those videos, but these reviews are always fun!
Rick, as many golf clubs that you have in that studio club room, you don't have a single old wooden head club? You need to least one old persimmon or laminate driver and a fairway wood. I love taking a few old clubs every now and then just to hit some from the screws. I dont trust the quad for this test. That same club but on a radar launch monitor, or at the very least, take it to the course or driving range.
Tape could shift cg to toe make a bit over draw bias I’d take tape off and try it outside maybe hit 5 and hit 5 with current and see distance difference and dispersion difference
Wow the comments. Thanks Rick for your opinion. Personally it’s probably geared for a lower swing speed golfer that’s happy with a 225 yard drive. But they sent it to you to give a review. Thanks for being honest.
Nah. Stiffer shaft isn't going to give him the 35-40 more yards needed for this club to actually contend with any traditional offering. Some clubs just suck...
Take it to the course! Old school side by side test against a normal driver. Who knows if the ones it picked up are actually good data? Also, can it take a different shaft?
my first set of 2nd hand clubs had solid resin woods. they were basically the same as the persimmon and maple woods of the time. metal sole plate, face insert, hosel whipping etc. seemed to go ok but i wasn't really good enough to tell.
I’m always shocked how often YT reviewers will guesstimate the CCs of the club. It takes 1 minute to fill up a measuring cup, dip the club in, and see that each 1 mL rise on the measuring cup = 1 cc.
I agree with everyone else saying it has to be hit outside…but it will be hard still to measure the distance. Still fun video to watch. I can’t believe that a mid to high handicap could use this club.
It’s awful ballsy for a tiny company like this to send their flagship product to one of the most well-known golf influencers in the world with the intent of that person to review their product. You tear the hell out of big brands when they don’t stack up, why the hell wouldn’t you do the same thing to them? I hope they at least take the critique and work on their product, and that this doesn’t cripple them.
Everyone keeps saying test it outside but it's gotten pretty cold already and a lot of courses are probably closing for the winter, and the ball won't go as far in the cold so it wouldn't do it justice anyway
Would like to see yourself and Finch try this out on the course, good concept and completely different from anything tried before, so have to give it a real course review
In theory, if the club compresses the same as a ball, it could do what they say it does; but with two elastic forces acting opposite to one another at the same time, that might actually give the opposite effect from the desired consistency... You'd really need to see it operate with high speed cameras and analyse the result, which I'm pretty sure that they've done during production, so I'd say that this is a pretty unfair review given that the device checking the results didn't work with it, so you can't trust the data - but that's not how you play golf, is it! Take it out on to a range or a course!
It reminds me of John Daly‘s Cobra Jumbo Ultramid Kevlar driver from 1991 that he used to win the 1991 PGA Championship. That one had a light yellow head on it.
Swap out the shaft, you shouldn't be swinging an ultralite regular flex. Not saying it'll fix everything, but that shaft is probably causing a lot of inconsistency
I’m astonished that so many of you want more info and are mad that he didn’t take it outside for “better” data. It’s a gimmick club. Website has the club cut and pasted on photos of golfers with other clubs. Not all the club review videos are serious. I like that he does them because it’s funny “to me” and it shows to not trust these money grab companies.
“ test it outside”… in November in the UK. That’ll definitely give you more accurate numbers compared to all the other drivers that were tested in the summer lol
So I would like to address some things that have been said in the comments with a somewhat general way. There are too many to address individually but in general they are all saying one of two things. 1. How could any conclusion be made when the results were obviously at best inaccurate and test again or 2. This club is garbage and isn't worth testing in the first place. Generally those are the 2 sides. Addressing #1 Rick is the number 1 guy in this space. He is respected as he should be, he creates top of the line content, and gives honest opinions on the equipment he reviews. That is why we chose to send him our club hoping he would review it. I am just left wondering why this review was different than others he has given. Rick gave an opinion at the end of the review as he always does. But this opinion wasn't based on results because he didn't have any results. He said the club felt good sounded good then with no reliable data said it wasn't what it had claimed? Number 2. There were many comments on look or the price or how stupid we are for even sending the club to Rick. Well many of those claims are not inaccurate. It does look like a 3D printed club. But it's not. It is comparable to the size of a 3 wood. But it's should all the comments dogging us and our club. I get it. I really do. But the fact is no one knows for sure because the data was absent. I have attached a video in the comments showing that it is possible for the GC Quad to properly track using our driver. I would genuinely hope Rick would take a few moments to hit the club on the course or in the studio again with different lighting. Rick is the man and that's why it matters.
What loft is it? Just looking at it it not a driver, not a mini driver, its a 3 wood but that doesn't sound cool.How would it stand up against a proper 3 wood?
Very interesting claim around @7:35 that the energy "goes out at the back of the club head" - does it leave a little flaming trace, too? I mean energy does not just say good-bye and leave...
The energy created in the form of a shockwave or sound wave does travel through the club and continues to travel until it comes to a more dense median. In the case of a metal driver after the initial contact those waves travel through the face of the club and out the back and sides and all directions unless the face of the club is a different material than the rest of the club head. And if the face is a different material the waves could never reflect back to the face fast enough to make an impact unless precisely place at a distance that would allow it. Which we have done.
So I can tell you as a golf part hording clubsmith that the shaft label under Shockwave's sticker would be that of MG Golf, a southern U.S. based company that has popped up for having lovely cabretta golf gloves at a great price that have been used on major tours and previously they were a consistently good blip on the MyGolfSpy Ball Test with their C4 Tour (still the longest ball I've ever hit and it is sadly no longer made, was only $20/dozen!) and their CEO has a long history of also carrying real "odds and ends" random golf parts and gear like a range finder, or here, they had a value-priced shaft called the CX-60 AND THIS HERE IS THAT under the sticker. Curious.
To clarify the shaft is not fantastic. They could have spent up to like $25-30 per shaft and done much more properly by including an aftermarket quality shaft, versus these CX-60 could not have cost them more than like $5-7 each.
You need to do a round of gold with Peter Finch where you each pick the worst clubs for each other, legal clubs, and then play a round of matchplay. Sabotage golf... try to handicap each other as much as possible!!
i think your brain got confused because during the swing all it picked up was the shaft it wasn't picking up the clubhead and either was the GC quad. and unless you know where the center of the clubhead is your instinctively use the shaft as the you're hitting the shaft center of the ball in the back of it, mishits to the left or right are expected. it tricked your eye domination factor. wondered if UV clear coat dotting on both the game changer been?
At the 3-minute mark, you should have explained the GCQ doesn't work and you're moving the review to the range to hit some balls without the extra weight from the tape on the club.
Was anyone else shouting at the screen “TEST IT OUTSIDE” 😂
Love it though Rick!
absolutely I was.
Raining probably .
Sure was!!!
still need the GC quad to measure launch angles ball speed spin rate and distance.
@@hanj31 Surely you could just compare it to another driver like the mini driver hit 5-10 shots each and than just work out which was more consistent and longer. Though Rick would probably need to change the shaft some how.
So first thank you Rick for taking the time to review our driver. I'm going to try and address a few of the things mentioned in the comments. First is the failure on my part to warn Rick of the possibility the monitor may have trouble picking up the ball. We have used the GC Quad two other times and the First time was when we had the Driver tested at Golf Laboratories Inc. They had trouble with the monitor picking up the ball and put reflective dots on the face and it eliminated the problem. The second time was at a friends home. He has the same set up as Rick and there were no problems picking up the ball. I did not decide not to tell rick I just simply didn't. In hindsight I 100% wish I would have remembered to tell him, especially after seeing his frustration.
Second is the comments regarding our driver as a gimmick club or a money grab. It is neither. We stand by our claims on the drivers performance and with stats and video from Rick possibly re testing it or with some of our own video or both will substantiate those claims.
Third I completely understand all of the negative or condescending remarks made. The Driver has a some unique and different features as well as some aspects that may be modified slightly to better suit a wider range of golfers. I see the negative comments equally as important if not more important than the positive ones.
I appreciate everyone who took the time to watch as well as comment. I would love to hear more from all of you good and bad.
Lastly, I have played many rounds with this driver and stand behind the claim of the most accurate driver. The fairway is a much better place to be hitting your second shot and this driver has increased my fairways hit substantially.
Tom
Shockwave Golf
This is probably more of a question than a comment. But how does the club hold up to wear an tare? Being made of similair material to the out side of balls which can scuff up fairly easily.
@@aaronmelbourne9506 After 300 or so balls hit on the range with the same club there wasn't any wear or damage to the head. There was somewhat significant visual wear but nothing that didn't come off with hot water soap and a scotch brite pad. On the coarse I would say about the same. Being white it definitely shows grass marks. But again nothing that doesn't come off with soap and water. Hopefully that answers your question. Thanks
Even though both a golf ball and our club are both made from urethane, the strength or hardness are much different. Our driver hardness is around an 80 shore D and a golf ball cover is much softer around 60 shore A.
$400 bucks you should get a shaft that isn't purchased from Walmart
Did you mean to send Rick a regular flex shaft?
Hmm... maybe take it outside and test it in the real world? Or somewhere with a trackman? Not sure if I trust the numbers if the quad has so much issues with recognizing the shot at all...
The Quad is the best indoor monitor. I guess it's just not build for white clubs.
Trackman is the same. Doesn’t pick up white clubs either
Deffo got one in order lol 😆
@@jakeaimshigh3241 🤣🤣
Yeah definitely needs to go outside and try. I can’t trust it jumping with numbers so much
Make another video Rick, we all would watch you try this thing outside.
How much more would he punish himself? I'd definitely be interested in watching!
No we wouldn’t
Did you try it on the course? Seems like you didn't give it a fair crack. Can't trust the monitor when it's messing up like that 11:24
Thats an issue with the club though. Like, the club maker would know this would be an issue with most reviewers. While I do agree he could go out and test it on the course, that shouldn't be the only way.
@@bluetoughguy I don't see where he said it should be the only way. If anything, you just confirmed that it, also, should not be only tested on a launch monitor alone
ruclips.net/user/shortsfAU706zgVs4?si=uOHza4EIbhaVFjQt
Can’t believe you actually posted this video. Would’ve been a better idea to scrap the video and take the club outside to test
It makes for an interesting video
So what people can keep asking him about 1000 times like the fitment video... No thanks
Good Day,
This is Tom from Shockwave Golf. First I want to say thank you for being so prompt and timely in your communications leading up to Rick's evaluation of our driver. I also would like to thank Rick for taking the time to do the review.
Rick is the number 1 guy in this space. I have followed him and his content for a while. He always seems to be unbiased in his reviews and has very professional content. That is why we sent our driver to him.
I just wonder why he treated this one different. Possibly the frustration of the GC Quad not working properly! Watching the video, I could see his obvious frustration with the way things were going! A pretty good show in itself LOL! He hit the ball well but the results were all wonky! So why give an opinion on results that ended up having no usable data to use for evaluation? He almost figured it out though, installing black tape on the side of the club! The GC Quad had trouble identifying the club head face since it was white, the same color as the ball! The professional testing labs are aware of this problem and attach targets to the club face, so they obtain accurate results! We have found, using the GC Quad, simply changing the studio lighting so a shadow is cast on the club face as it hits the ball, works well too! I get the sentiments about the club head cover being cheap, it is, and that it looks weird, etc. But none of those things means our driver doesn't do what we claim. We are not selling head covers! We are selling the latest, patentable technologies in the form of shock wave control and use thereof as well as boundary layer drag reduction in the form of micro vorticie orientation, Not high drag turbulators, plus composite urethane head construction similar to the core material of the best golf balls, thereby providing longer drives, more on line hits and lower scores! ! In light of the identified lighting problems associated with the white club face / GC quad, I would hope Rick might consider another review. I attached a video of myself hitting a few balls using the GC Quad, showing it tracking accurately in corrected lighting. Please forgive the quality of the video due to the auto/iris compensation because of the light reflection off the screen.
ruclips.net/user/shortsfAU706zgVs4
Sincerely
Tom Freng
It is like Rick said but mate, he had to hit 25 balls to get a result of 10 and in no way were they longer or more forgiving drives. Not a single shot he hit went over 290 and his normal drive carry is 280 to 290 with max distances being 305 to 320. Even in your video, there was no real show of forgiveness, no consistent shots and cutting the video to only good shots you want people to see. Maybe just take this one on the chin and go back to the drawing board
@BeyondtheRedZone thanks for your response. What makes you think those 10 shots Rick deemed to be accurate data were accurate. Your right Rick hits the ball much further than the shits that were deemed to be accurate. That tells me those 10 weren't accurate either. I only cut one shot from the video and it was because the lighting was incorrect and didn't allow for the monitor to properly track. That's why Rick wasn't able to get data. All he had to do is change the lighting.
@@BeyondtheRedZone Thank you for your comment. So why on earth would you think the 10 shots that were "properly tracked" were correct. Time after time the GC Quad was not accurately reading. I would say those 10 shots were no different. Rick hits the ball much further than any of those results even more reason to think the data was not correct. In my video I was not selective about which shots I put on. There was one shot, the first one that the lighting was incorrect. Rick is a much more consistent and longer hitter than I am. If I was hitting the ball 280 Rick would have been as well. All the data was inconclusive.
@ becoming very defensive there buddy. As I clearly said, he had to hit over 25 shots to get proper readings to be able to compare. If your going to give your product to one of the most reputable golf reviewers on RUclips, you have to be willing to take on the criticism that comes with it. You make claims on your driver being the most forgiving, your personal video and Ricks video are proof, they are the furthest from the most forgiving, hence the size and the results. Business 101 learn from the reviews and better the product. Trail and error, try and fail. Now learn and move on! Make the product better
@BeyondtheRedZone again sir criticism is not a problem when it is critical of an actual thing. I have the same appreciation for Rick as I did before the review. He is no doubt the number one guy in the space. I have said before that's why we sent him the club. With an adjustment in the light he could have based his review on some actual data.
It's a shame they didn't make the shaft white too
Should have spray painted the head black once you realized the color issue. Not sure the tape covered enough of the head to "trick" GC Quad.
Exactly what I was shouting at the screen! 😂
Same here, nip to halfords 😊
Got to take this outside to see.
Maybe take it to an actual driving range?
Looks like a get rich scheme that only suckers would buy. For $400 bucks you should get a shaft that isn't purchased from Walmart. Thanks for the honest review Rick
Maybe try it outside? 🌳
surely thats begging for the ball cutter Rick
Love it...the video! Genuinely miss seeing Rick doing random club reviews! I know top manufacturers have to come first and I like those videos, but these reviews are always fun!
Rick, as many golf clubs that you have in that studio club room, you don't have a single old wooden head club? You need to least one old persimmon or laminate driver and a fairway wood. I love taking a few old clubs every now and then just to hit some from the screws. I dont trust the quad for this test. That same club but on a radar launch monitor, or at the very least, take it to the course or driving range.
Shaker can of paint or yellow Pro V1 might help 🤷♂️
Great idea! Coloured ball, Rick would definitely has some lying around the store room
Tape could shift cg to toe make a bit over draw bias I’d take tape off and try it outside maybe hit 5 and hit 5 with current and see distance difference and dispersion difference
Wow the comments. Thanks Rick for your opinion. Personally it’s probably geared for a lower swing speed golfer that’s happy with a 225 yard drive. But they sent it to you to give a review. Thanks for being honest.
John Daly played with similar driver from cobra with a similar material to win the PGA championship in 1991.
Made of lexan.
Need to re-color it and send you one in a stiffer flex shaft for a better review. I don’t think regular flex is right for your swing speed
Nah. Stiffer shaft isn't going to give him the 35-40 more yards needed for this club to actually contend with any traditional offering. Some clubs just suck...
"I don't think regular flex is right for your swing speed" - well no sht sherlock, Rick uses x-flex shafts...
ruclips.net/user/shortsfAU706zgVs4?si=uOHza4EIbhaVFjQt
Take it to the course! Old school side by side test against a normal driver. Who knows if the ones it picked up are actually good data? Also, can it take a different shaft?
I agree, take it outside. PLEASE do a follow up and let us know, Because I'm very interested. 😊
1991 COBRA Ultramid (bullet proof vest material). Add a titanium shaft and you have John Daly winning the PGA !!
The sarcastic thumbs up says a lot about my feelings on the energy transfer claim. LOL
my first set of 2nd hand clubs had solid resin woods. they were basically the same as the persimmon and maple woods of the time. metal sole plate, face insert, hosel whipping etc. seemed to go ok but i wasn't really good enough to tell.
Looks like a white Yonex graphite/composite headed driver my Dad used to use in the 90's.
Spot on. A mate of mine played one. Dreadful looking things they were, too 😂
Congrats on the new channel. Keep up the great content
I’m always shocked how often YT reviewers will guesstimate the CCs of the club. It takes 1 minute to fill up a measuring cup, dip the club in, and see that each 1 mL rise on the measuring cup = 1 cc.
Tape across the top of the head to simulate the face angle may help.
My dad still plays a full set (driver, 3, 5 wood) of the old wooden pings.. swears by them. They are not long but he hits dang near every fairway
Agreed, white crown can jack with most launchies, like back in the day about 12 years ago at a Golfsmith we had a dickens of a time with the RBZs.
Y'all saw the Bryan Bros video!! PUT SOME RESPECT ON RICK'S NAME!!! LFG Big Dawg!!! 🔥 ⛳
That camera problem happens with IRONs sometimes, which is why the indoor measurements seem to be faster
I agree with everyone else saying it has to be hit outside…but it will be hard still to measure the distance. Still fun video to watch. I can’t believe that a mid to high handicap could use this club.
That third shot cracked me up laughing😂😂
Did you have the metallic dots on the clubface ? That would have helped the quad decipher one from the other
imagine you're a small mom and pop brand and the biggest RUclips reviewer just logs your invention lolol
Well that went well. RIP Shockwave...
Shockwave owners…. It’s a wrap.
ruclips.net/user/shortsfAU706zgVs4?si=uOHza4EIbhaVFjQt
It’s awful ballsy for a tiny company like this to send their flagship product to one of the most well-known golf influencers in the world with the intent of that person to review their product. You tear the hell out of big brands when they don’t stack up, why the hell wouldn’t you do the same thing to them? I hope they at least take the critique and work on their product, and that this doesn’t cripple them.
Everyone keeps saying test it outside but it's gotten pretty cold already and a lot of courses are probably closing for the winter, and the ball won't go as far in the cold so it wouldn't do it justice anyway
Would like to see yourself and Finch try this out on the course, good concept and completely different from anything tried before, so have to give it a real course review
this isnt a driver its a slightly bigger 3 wood.
Need to take it outside. Clearly not correct data…
In theory, if the club compresses the same as a ball, it could do what they say it does; but with two elastic forces acting opposite to one another at the same time, that might actually give the opposite effect from the desired consistency... You'd really need to see it operate with high speed cameras and analyse the result, which I'm pretty sure that they've done during production, so I'd say that this is a pretty unfair review given that the device checking the results didn't work with it, so you can't trust the data - but that's not how you play golf, is it! Take it out on to a range or a course!
Looks like a "Pimp Stick" driver. 🔥 Rock on RS 🤘😎
It reminds me of John Daly‘s Cobra Jumbo Ultramid Kevlar driver from 1991 that he used to win the 1991 PGA Championship. That one had a light yellow head on it.
Swap out the shaft, you shouldn't be swinging an ultralite regular flex. Not saying it'll fix everything, but that shaft is probably causing a lot of inconsistency
I’m astonished that so many of you want more info and are mad that he didn’t take it outside for “better” data. It’s a gimmick club. Website has the club cut and pasted on photos of golfers with other clubs. Not all the club review videos are serious. I like that he does them because it’s funny “to me” and it shows to not trust these money grab companies.
I think you hit the nail on the head - sold out everywhere but they only made a handful - marketing BS 🤦♂
I would paint it and try the test again. I would not trust those readings. I have a quad and it was struggling.
Great job as always
Would using a different color ball work?
Great promo video I guess. I’m intrigued enough to check them out so I go can test it outside since you won’t 😂
“ test it outside”… in November in the UK. That’ll definitely give you more accurate numbers compared to all the other drivers that were tested in the summer lol
Just get a wooden driver with a graphite shaft. I have a wood bros driver, 3.5 & 4.5 wood in my bag. Some of the best feeling clubs you can hit.
Thats a beaty of a review. I'm laughing so much 😅 I can hardly type. Your reaction to the first shot was 😂😂😂 top drawer.
Outside seems to be the general consensus here, Rick. Grab your sweater and get to the range.
So I would like to address some things that have been said in the comments with a somewhat general way. There are too many to address individually but in general they are all saying one of two things. 1. How could any conclusion be made when the results were obviously at best inaccurate and test again or 2. This club is garbage and isn't worth testing in the first place. Generally those are the 2 sides. Addressing #1 Rick is the number 1 guy in this space. He is respected as he should be, he creates top of the line content, and gives honest opinions on the equipment he reviews. That is why we chose to send him our club hoping he would review it. I am just left wondering why this review was different than others he has given. Rick gave an opinion at the end of the review as he always does. But this opinion wasn't based on results because he didn't have any results. He said the club felt good sounded good then with no reliable data said it wasn't what it had claimed? Number 2. There were many comments on look or the price or how stupid we are for even sending the club to Rick. Well many of those claims are not inaccurate. It does look like a 3D printed club. But it's not. It is comparable to the size of a 3 wood. But it's should all the comments dogging us and our club. I get it. I really do. But the fact is no one knows for sure because the data was absent. I have attached a video in the comments showing that it is possible for the GC Quad to properly track using our driver. I would genuinely hope Rick would take a few moments to hit the club on the course or in the studio again with different lighting. Rick is the man and that's why it matters.
Just wanted to take a moment to appreciate the clipboard. Solid.
Brand it though please 😂
What loft is it? Just looking at it it not a driver, not a mini driver, its a 3 wood but that doesn't sound cool.How would it stand up against a proper 3 wood?
Different color ball?
‘How is this thing sold out?’ seems like a brutal assessment to a test which was faulty and inconsistent from the very first shot
A clear transparent club head and shaft would be awesome. It would be the talk of the club.
Maybe play a few holes... And an open air range with ball tracking... Who knows it may end up in the bag
Very interesting claim around @7:35 that the energy "goes out at the back of the club head" - does it leave a little flaming trace, too? I mean energy does not just say good-bye and leave...
The energy created in the form of a shockwave or sound wave does travel through the club and continues to travel until it comes to a more dense median. In the case of a metal driver after the initial contact those waves travel through the face of the club and out the back and sides and all directions unless the face of the club is a different material than the rest of the club head. And if the face is a different material the waves could never reflect back to the face fast enough to make an impact unless precisely place at a distance that would allow it. Which we have done.
I wonder if there is a way to test this outside
time to take it to the course and truly see if it works.
I speak for everyone in the comments when I say we want to see this tested outside, clearly the quad isn't reliable with the white head.
All I could hear when I first saw this was Rob Potter talking about the white head 😂
Bring back Rob!!!!
As someone who worked at foresight for a couple years, the face being the color of the ball is the biggest issue here.
would the Foresight silver dots have helped on the face ?
Reminds me of John Daly's Kevlar head driver.
Do you guys ever sleep! Non stop videos! Keep them coming
3746 spin! I think that’s my hybrid spin number.
Maybe use a Trackman or mevo+. Something radar based.
Reminds me of the Cobra Aramid driver that Daly used at crooked stick
Should’ve tried it of the deck. Maybe it can compete with those mini drivers.
So I can tell you as a golf part hording clubsmith that the shaft label under Shockwave's sticker would be that of MG Golf, a southern U.S. based company that has popped up for having lovely cabretta golf gloves at a great price that have been used on major tours and previously they were a consistently good blip on the MyGolfSpy Ball Test with their C4 Tour (still the longest ball I've ever hit and it is sadly no longer made, was only $20/dozen!) and their CEO has a long history of also carrying real "odds and ends" random golf parts and gear like a range finder, or here, they had a value-priced shaft called the CX-60 AND THIS HERE IS THAT under the sticker. Curious.
To clarify the shaft is not fantastic. They could have spent up to like $25-30 per shaft and done much more properly by including an aftermarket quality shaft, versus these CX-60 could not have cost them more than like $5-7 each.
Curious what a colored ball will do?
"That's not the golf shot I've just hit." Every time I play on a sim !
Why not used a colloured ball? I think that will help!
One of the greatest swings of our time 🎉🎉🎉
You need to do a round of gold with Peter Finch where you each pick the worst clubs for each other, legal clubs, and then play a round of matchplay. Sabotage golf... try to handicap each other as much as possible!!
Foresight developers hoping these don’t become popular
I don't think they're in any danger...
Forget this driver, can you do a comparison video between Takomo 101T and Vice VGI01
Can you take it to an outdoor range and or play with it?
Probably should have wrapped the hosel as well.
i think your brain got confused because during the swing all it picked up was the shaft it wasn't picking up the clubhead and either was the GC quad. and unless you know where the center of the clubhead is your instinctively use the shaft as the you're hitting the shaft center of the ball in the back of it, mishits to the left or right are expected. it tricked your eye domination factor. wondered if UV clear coat dotting on both the game changer been?
Wondering if the white head was messing with GC Quad calculating a proper ball flight, maybe try it outside?
Reminds me of the Kevlar head Cobra driver Daly used
I was waiting for the can of spray paint to be introduced.
What about a yellow or other non-white ball?
You’ve GOT to do a follow-up now, Rick. Come on! Give it a shot!
At the 3-minute mark, you should have explained the GCQ doesn't work and you're moving the review to the range to hit some balls without the extra weight from the tape on the club.
Game this at the next YT tournament! Whoever wins the hole tees off with this the next hole!
I’m sure the black tape helps the vortex generators. Why not just use a yellow ball 🥴
Need to do an on course test ..gc quad results showed they weren't reliable..
Also could have tried a coloured ball.
😮 Shockwave golf are toast
The shape of the club looks like the ping zing 3 wood from the past