Which drivers are square/open at address?

[SilverUberXeno]

From reading various posts on here, it seems that only higher end models (Burner TP as opposed to regular Burner) are actually square, or more specifically, NOT closed at address. I'm getting slightly annoyed with my Lancher's closed face, because I feel like I'm always fighting off that draw it wants to make. I'm looking to either hit straight, or hit a little fade.

That being said, what would be a safe investment for me? I don't really have the cash to spend on a Burner TP to "test" this theory on my swing, as much as I thought those pics Ez took of his were awesome. (Speaking of which, it made me wonder if more clubmakers were going to start putting some subtle designs on the crown of their drivers. I think it'd be neat.)

Would it be majorly less expensive to find an R7 TP to try, as opposed to buying a brand new model (Superquad/Burner)?

 

[Rockford35]

Generally speaking, the higher lofted OEM clubs are closed faced. The more lower handicap style drivers often are less lofted, 8-9* and will have square to open faces as a result.

The Geek line can be had with open faces should you request one. The Tour version of the HiBore XL and the FT-5 are also open faced (although, not much).

I'm sure someone can chime in on the TM drivers and their faces. I don't know much about them....well, I've just never cared enough to notice....

R35

 

[SilverUberXeno]

Open is less desired to me that totally squared. Or if that's not feasible, even just BARELY closed. Is there anywhere I can find the particular angle of the face at address? Is it "face angle"?

I suppose given that information I could just find these answers myself. =P I wonder if Youngun still has your Hibore head

 

[Rockford35]

Dunno. Here's one tho:

HiBore Tour Head FS

R35

 

[Sandpiper3]

Titleist drivers are all square.

 

[MIKE1218]

My Bridgestone seems to be a touch open. Definately gives you a fade, but that's why I bought it.

 

[LyleG]

Any component head you buy can be hand picked for face angle.

 

[Eracer]

Not knowing much, I'm amused by the issue of face angle.

1. I can open or close the clubface at address. Yes, this changes the effective loft. But if you want your clubface open, then rotate the club open.

2. The difference between a closed, square, and open face angle is what, 4-degrees? I can't come close to repeating a 4-degree standard deviation in my swing.

3. I would think that the weighting and MOI would have a much greater affect on face angle at impact than static face angle ever would.

4. Centerness of hit. What's that?

I know that low-cappers can control their swings much better than I can, but can you guys who demand a square to open face angle really control it that well? Do you really see a difference in a driver that has all variables equal, except for a 2-degree face angle?

I'm really not trying be a smart-ass here - it just seems like emphasis is being put on a measurement that has very little bearing on things, considering how difficult it is to repeat a golf swing.

 

[Andy299]

Not knowing much, I'm amused by the issue of face angle.

1. I can open or close the clubface at address. Yes, this changes the effective loft. But if you want your clubface open, then rotate the club open.

2. The difference between a closed, square, and open face angle is what, 4-degrees? I can't come close to repeating a 4-degree standard deviation in my swing.

3. I would think that the weighting and MOI would have a much greater affect on face angle at impact than static face angle ever would.

4. Centerness of hit. What's that?

I know that low-cappers can control their swings much better than I can, but can you guys who demand a square to open face angle really control it that well? Do you really see a difference in a driver that has all variables equal, except for a 2-degree face angle?

I'm really not trying be a smart-ass here - it just seems like emphasis is being put on a measurement that has very little bearing on things, considering how difficult it is to repeat a golf swing.

Eracer, i tend to agree with you even though I can hit most of my shots out of the sweet spot. The face angle is only a factor if you hit it from the sweet spot already and do not like or want to turn the head square or open in your grip, just like you would do with any other club when you open the face. In other words you can compensate for the face being a bit closed in its natural position.

Having said that, I prefer a square faced driver myself.

Also, perceptions are very important. If you think / convinced that you are going to hit a hook with a club, you are halfway there doing so.

 

[BStone]

The thing about a lot of drivers that do have a closed face is that the internal weighting also favors the heel side, this helps the player release through the ball and can lead to some hooks as well. The face angle is simply the visual associated with this built in draw bias. Personally, I would not want to have to manipulate the face each shot, it is too hard to duplicate the set up from shot to shot, especially when you take into account the very valid point you made about a repeating swing. Now there are two variables to control at once.

As far as what clubs tend to set up square, Titleist drivers, all of the "Tour/Pro" versions of drivers, and component heads will sit square to open at address. Also, tolerances on face angle can make a club that is spec at square sit up to a degree or two closed or open.