ProSpec

DD, where do the 201s fit in? They seem like a good compromise between the 202s and 23s. You have any experience with 'em? Thank's.

If thats it , I think somebody at ping forgot to put the tin foil on his head to keep the aliens away :lol: Have you seen the CRAZ-E? Makes this thing almost look good.

You have two sets that are very similar in purpose. That's the TS201's and the X CB's. The Z's are also very similar but touted as more of a players CB. The TS201, TS202's and XCB's are connected through lineage of a line really. Each one replace the other. I think the XCB's would be the way to go with this because they are the newest. The Z's are being discontinued. In fact, they are very difficult to find right now and are becoming classics. Go with the latest and the greatest and that is the X CB's, IMHO. Keep in mind the X CBs will be about double the price of the others. FAQ, how do you compare the 201s and 202s? I've read that the 201s don't feel quite as good.

Title pretty much says it all. Would like the 5 iron to be at least 38.5". Thank's

First off I want to tell Chris awesome job on the pics. thank's Scoop :D Someone on another board compared this technology to the move from persimmon to steel. This isn't really innovative. There have been quite a few companies in the past that have brought adjustable clubs to market with very poor results. Just too many foreseable problems with this driver. The average golfer doesn't want to put this much thought or work into their equip. Maybe a little lead tape at most. Here you've got 4 different ports, 8 or so diff. weights for each port and a lilttle "tool kit" to boot. Weights will be lost, weights will get changed during rounds, players will be second guessing weight configurations.... too much to worry about. This is a niche product at best. Big OEMs don't stay in business by catering to a niche market. IMO They will need another more "standard" driver in their line up to appeal to the masses. I also wanted to applaud TM for loosing the awful marketing campaign of the R5 series. Where we had to wait months and get teased all along the way untill we actually got to see the head. Also, as Boyce pointed out I agree that the holes or ports where the weights go do look quite similar to the perceived "hole" in the J. Rose pic. If this driver has already been introduced, there is no doubt in my mind that there were plenty of protos. using this tech. out during the time the Rose pic. was taken. Oh yea, almost forgot. The staff bag looks really good. And who's gonna get this driver and attach the "launch control system" wheel to their bag like a bag tag. Should look sweeeeet!

Well as far as compromising the driver with a 2" insertion... The Aldila tech. (I believe it's John) recommends the 1.75 or 2" insertion for flex control, so I would think it's fine. btw. I agree about talking insertion in a Tit. head. Always seems kinda dirty when your typing it. p.s. A lot of PGA guys play the 983s with 2" insertion

Not a problem at all Philly. True if you insert the NV (any shaft) all the way in the Titleist it will play about one flex stiffer than stated. A 1.75 or 2" insertion would allow it to play true to flex and perform exactly like a fully inserted "Titleist NV" from the custom dept. I believe all Aldila does for Tit. is add 2" to the tip of a standard NV so it plays true to flex when fully inserted. Quite a few, not all, of the shafts Titleist uses in the custom dept. are made like this for them. btw. The NV installed in a 983 is available through Tit. custom right now.

I ordered a custom set of 101s through an ebay retailer. 1 up and .75" over (5 iron is at 63* and 38.5"). I paid less than $650 for 3-pw and received them in only a week. Work was done well, I'm really happy with them.