Equipment

Edwin Watts debuts “ARC” club matching

Published

13 years ago

Apr 8, 2013

Golf retailer Edwin Watts has announcing the debut of its new “ARC,” a system, which will be released as part of the company’s Clubsmarts Report and provide golfers with a matrix that will help them find the club that best matches their particular needs.

The ARC system is the results of robot testing, conducted to try and help golfers find clubs that suit them. Edwin Watts has tested most of the big name drivers in a variety of categories and posted the results on its site (http://www.edwinwattsgolf.com/ARC.aspx) in order to show golfers unbiased results of club testing, which can be viewed free of charge.

Unbiased club testing is a pretty important tool in 2013, because manufacturers have been bery aggressive in their marketing strategies, hoping to convince golfers that new products are considerably better than previous models.

That is not to say that Edwin Watts’ system is perfect, because it is not. Most golfers don’t swing clubs like robots do, although I imagine the results might be appreciated by someone like say, Martin Kaymer, who might actually be a robot. And some golfers aren’t going to be fit into stock-length clubs, or stock-shafted clubs. But it will be a good starting point for many golfers to begin their testing. Furthermore, Edwin Watts doesn’t suggest you buy clubs based on this test, only that you use it as a guide for further testing based on your swing/impact type.

Screen Shot 2013-04-08 at 11.39.38 AM

So what does the ARC club matching system reveal? Well, it shows a list of top-three performers for various categories, further subdivided by the type of contact made by the golfer (in this case, a robot). Do you hit most your shots off the toe? If so, maybe you should consider lessons.

But if you believe that lessons are for sissies, you could check the ARC results and see that the Tour Edge Exotics gave the robot the most distance on toe hits. Or you could find out that the RBZ had the highest ball speeds, or that the RBZ Stage 2 was the most accurate in terms of dispersion.

What if you tend to hit your drives thin (low on the face)? Well, if you are looking for distance on thin shots you might want to test the Ping Anser, which also had the fastest ball speed on those shots. So let me put it to you this way: If you hit it thin, just go buy a Ping Anser, OK buddy?

Of course, if you are like me and you hit dead solid perfect basically every time, the robot tells you that the Cleveland Classic is a low-spin bomber, as is the TaylorMade R1. Did I recently want to buy a Cleveland Classic? Yes I did. And now I want to even more, so thanks Edwin Watts!

The tests show results in five different categories: most distance, highest ball speeds, highest launch, most accurate and lowest spin. Those categories are further broken down into as many as six different categories based on where golfers can impact their drivers — high on the face, low on the face, on the toe, heel, sweet spot and an “overall” rating. Using those categories, golfers can pick some clubs to test based on their tendencies and see if they get similar results.

The results also seem pretty unbiased. Why do I say this? I’ll give you two reasons: Wilson and D100.

Screen Shot 2013-04-08 at 11.39.57 AM

That club, which we’re yet to see used by anyone on the PGA Tour, was sprinkled all over the test. It ranks in the top three in a lot of the distance and ball speed categories, so much so that I thought for a second that Wilson endorser Padraig Harrington hacked into Edwin Watts website and just started doing stuff.

Would you have tested a Wilson club in your 2013 driver shootout? Put your hand down Kevin Streelman, because we know you would have. Then again, you happily hit your Ping G20 en route to his first Tour win at The Tampa Bay Championship, so maybe not.

While the robot results likely aren’t perfect, golfers would be foolish not to consult the Edwin Watts ARC results before they do their next round of driver testing. There are a lot of club tests out there, but very few that actually rank clubs based on anything not subjective, or that don’t recognize many different clubs with the same award.

Anything that helps golfers filter through the hype and even make an attempt to classify things in an organized matter is OK in my books.

Screen Shot 2013-04-08 at 11.40.16 AM

Of course, Edwin Watts’ test doesn’t tell you at what swing speed the robot was set to, and the ARC system has not yet tested 3-woods, hybrids or even irons. But these are things that can be easily be done in the coming months and years. And while my guess is people will demand they provide a bit more details into the settings and results of the ARC tests, the bottom line is they have released information to the public that no one else has, and it’s something that can help the average golfer.

So good for Edwin Watts, good for us, and good for Wilson!

Related Topics:

Up Next

Mickelson confirms plan to use “Phrankenwood”

Don't Miss

Phil’s Secret Weapon: The “Phrankenwood”

Jeff Singer

Jeff Singer was born and still resides in Montreal, Canada. Though it is a passion for him today, he wasn't a golfer until fairly recently in life. In his younger years Jeff played collegiate basketball and football and grew up hoping to play the latter professionally. Upon joining the workforce, Jeff picked up golf and currently plays at a private course in the Montreal area while working in marketing. He has been a member of GolfWRX since 2008

22 Comments

thatsjapanesesfor far

May 1, 2013 at 11:36 am

I appreciate any testing of clubs and i think ewg is less biased than say golf digest since golf digest does get big advertising dollars from the major companies but i love reading their testing also get all the info available and go enjoy the game more, make friends make birdies, make great memories.

Reply Report comment
Kj

Apr 20, 2013 at 8:23 am

As a data point I think this is great. Bottom line, you have to get fit. The hardest part for some of us is that very few fitting carts have X flex shafts. It becomes a guessing game after that.

Reply Report comment
BobD

Apr 9, 2013 at 4:07 pm

This relative ranking is next to useless without the associated data. You need to publish the means and standard deviations for each driver in each category as well as the configurations and environmental data for this to be meaningful at all.

Reply Report comment
Roger Faithfull

Apr 9, 2013 at 1:34 pm

Well done Erwin Watts! A simple visual guide punters can understand. If Wilson has a $100 lower price point…………
Thats called winning market share.
If the TEE works real well, and has a more consistent flexing shaft
in true CPM numbers than this years Callaways (all over the place based on reader reports) then test it out and be Open Minded!
I will bag any brand that works Better Than What I Got Now
and hits More Fairways/Greens in Regulation. 44/45 inch Drivers will help you get Centre Impact…but we all knew that. Cheers.

Reply Report comment
naflack

Apr 9, 2013 at 12:33 pm

I agree that this very unscientific but a great place to get the ball rolling…

Reply Report comment
Joe S

Apr 9, 2013 at 12:05 pm

This testing is flawed for sure; And they do need to provide more info. like clubhead speed, AofA, Path, etc. (i.e. full ‘trackman’ data points) and shafts utilized. That said, this is FREAKIN AWESOME. There is so little objective/’scientific data’ out there, I feel this is a big step forward; maybe will help get the ball rolling for more and help us see thru the haze of the manufacturers hype. Robot testing is fine as far as I can see to help establish a base line; particularly as it would relate to ball flight characteristics/spin rates on center /off center hits. I applaud EW for their efforts.

Reply Report comment
Bill Marshall

Apr 9, 2013 at 9:24 am

You want fitted clubs that work for you,go to a professional club fitter,and not some cut and glue guy.You want the same thing you currently have,clubs that don’t work as described for you,go to an “off the rack” store. Newer version than current heartache,but still a heartache. Bill Marshall, certified level 10 club fitter AGCP,Lakeland Florida

Reply Report comment
J

Apr 8, 2013 at 8:17 pm

So… The Wilson and the Exotics come with aftermarket real deal shafts.

Not sure, but the comment seemed like a backhanded insult to those drivers…

Seems to me that those are great driver options at a great price point with great shafts..

I don’t and won’t play either one of them but for someone’s money… Seems like a good deal

Reply Report comment
- hbugolf89
  
  Apr 9, 2013 at 10:09 am
  
  False…….TEE uses watered down versions of these high end shafts with the retail graphics. The CB 4 had a made for RIP and the XCG series has a made for DI shaft. Not big into following Wilson, but I’m sure it correlates respectivly.
  
  Reply Report comment
  - Joe Golfer
    
    Apr 10, 2013 at 1:00 am
    
    I’m not surprised. Clubs would be too expensive if they used the real deal aftermarket shafts. The Graphite Design Tour AD DI, if that’s what you mean by the “DI”, retails for $380. The Aldila RIP shafts go for about $160.
    What is even more amazing is that, some “made for” shafts are actually made by the same company that has the graphics, just watered down versions with lower technology, less graphite and more resin, higher torque, etc etc…
    And some of those “made for” shafts are not even made by the company that has their name on them. This was revealed in a blog by component company Hireko’s Jeff Summit. The real deal shaft company just takes the money and lets the clubmaker use their name and graphics, but the clubmaker can have a totally different company make that shaft, which just might be a piece of garbage or it might be something reasonably decent, but hardly the quality of the real deal.
    
    Reply Report comment
- thatsjapanesesfor far
  
  May 1, 2013 at 11:29 am
  
  they are not aftermarket shafts they are the stock shaftsthose companies choose and most all major companies have the same ability to put whatever shaft in they like the pings and titleist do not have made for shafts in 2013 it is the true shfts which sell for big dollars as well as the callawy razr extreme with the same shaft as exotics in it’s option package
  
  Reply Report comment
paul

Apr 8, 2013 at 2:56 pm

I tried the Wilson D100 at the golf show when it came to town. What a great club. I hit it farther then the anser…

Reply Report comment
Adam

Apr 8, 2013 at 1:51 pm

I can say with 100% certainty that this testing is bogus. There is no way that the Ping Anser is the highest launching anything.

Reply Report comment
purkjason

Apr 8, 2013 at 1:32 pm

I smell money being exchanged under the table on this testing. Like everyone else I was shockingly suprised with the outcome of this testing. 1)Wilson Staff D100 …. now that’s funny. 2) Where are all the Adams Drivers? 3)The lack of Callaway hitting better scores. I did my own testing this weekend for 4.5 hours hitting every driver possible at Dick’s Sporting Goods and Golf Galaxy and the “Winner For Me” in distance and accuracy was the Callaway X Hot 9.5 Standard Head with a FREE upgrade Project X Velocity Pro 5.5 Shaft cut down 1.5″ to make it feel more like a 6.0 . The “FREE UPGRADED SHAFT” is what made the “BIG DIFFERENCE”. Outdrove every driver with that shaft by 9 yards !

Reply Report comment
- thatsjapanesesfor far
  
  May 1, 2013 at 11:32 am
  
  Funny you should say that since dicks doesnt carry wlson products anyway.
  
  Reply Report comment
rtylerg

Apr 8, 2013 at 1:12 pm

This ARC system is not a scientific test. Unless they’re using the same shaft with the same length in each of these heads matched to the same swing weight, which wasn’t mentioned anywhere on the website, there are far too many variables to determine which head is really the best. After checking on the Wilson D100 and Tour Exotics specs, it turns out that both these drivers come with premium aftermarket shafts whereas the other heads come with “made for” shafts. I could put a premium shaft in a KMart driver head and it would perform better than most drivers with “made for” shafts. I guess if you just want to buy a driver off the shelf then this testing is fine. However, most good manufacturers have aftermarket shaft options that will make a world of difference compared to their “off the shelf” shafts. Those of you using premium shafts in your drivers know what I’m talking about.

Reply Report comment
- SV
  
  Apr 11, 2013 at 11:56 am
  
  This article simply states the ARC system gives starting information for people to consider based on manufacturer offering. It doesn’t pretend to be all encompassing. The majority of people can’t break 90 and a lot can’t break 100. I doubt premium shafts are going to make a difference. Until you have someone consistently in the low to mid 70s the premium shafts are just an ego trip and a waste of money.
  
  Reply Report comment
- thatsjapanesesfor far
  
  May 1, 2013 at 11:26 am
  
  Thw matrix in the exotics and wilson are stock shafts and the shafts for ping and titleist are not made for shafts anymore either the callaway raxr x has the same matrix shaft as the exotics also But just the comment itself is a little funny to me, if you go looking at a corvette and a chevy cruz do you ask them to put the ls9 in th cruz to check performance no you test what the companies produce so that arguement is kind of silly sounding.
  
  Reply Report comment
Double Mocha Man

Apr 8, 2013 at 1:07 pm

Very good catch John.

Reply Report comment
John

Apr 8, 2013 at 12:10 pm

Very good article

Reply Report comment
Jaacob Bowden

Apr 8, 2013 at 12:07 pm

Interesting. 🙂

Wish this test would include a lot of the smaller manufacturers that have great products but limited marketing budgets.

Last I checked, I found 97 different companies that make a driver model…bet there would be some surprises in there.

Reply Report comment
Displayname

Apr 8, 2013 at 11:59 am

This is awesome! Glad to see Wilson shine, but I really wish Adams would have been included.

Reply Report comment

Cancel reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Equipment

Tour Edge unveils all-new Exotics mini driver

Published

1 day ago

May 12, 2026

Gianni Magliocco

Tour Edge Golf has today introduced the all-new Exotics mini driver, engineered to deliver a powerful combination of speed, control, and versatility in the long game.

The Exotics Mini combines a titanium face with a stainless-steel body in design to balance ball speed with stability and control, creating a versatile option at the top end of the bag.

At the core of the design is Tour Edge’s proprietary Combo Brazing technology, a high-precision thermal bonding process that seamlessly fuses a titanium cup face to a stainless-steel body into a single, continuous structure. By eliminating energy loss found in traditional multi-piece constructions, Combo Brazing is designed to deliver faster face response, more efficient energy transfer, and a uniquely powerful yet controlled feel.

The multi-material construction also allows mass to be positioned lower and deeper in the head in a bid to increase stability, while the thin titanium face is engineered to maintain ball speed across a wider impact area.

“While the initial goal was to enhance control and versatility in the long game, Combo Brazing ultimately drove measurable gains in ball speed and distance within the mini driver category. In robot testing, we’ve documented higher ball speeds, higher launch, reduced spin, and increased carry and total distance compared to leading models.” – Vice President of R&D Matt Neeley

In addition to distance performance, the Exotics mini emphasizes forgiveness through a heavier stainless-steel body that shifts mass toward the perimeter. This configuration increases MOI relative to traditional all-titanium mini drivers, helping preserve ball speed and directional stability on off-center strikes. Paired with Pyramid Face Technology from the Exotics metalwood line, the design is intended to support consistent speed across the face.

To further enhance MOI, a lightweight carbon fiber crown frees additional mass that is strategically repositioned low and deep in the head in design to improve stability and promote optimal launch with controlled spin.

“We designed the Mini to be about five millimeters shallower than other mini drivers on the market. That change improves playability off the deck. From a clean fairway lie, it can function as a strong 3-wood alternative while still providing control off the tee.” – Tour Edge CEO David Glod

An adjustable hosel system allows for loft and lie tuning to dial in trajectory and shot shape, while a fixed 13-gram rear weight helps stabilize the head through impact to improve dispersion consistency. The Exotics Mini Driver is available in 11.5 and 13.5-degree lofts in right-handed models.

Pricing & Availability

The Exotics Mini Driver is available for pre-order beginning today for $399.99 USD at touredge.com, and will be available for purchase at retail outlets worldwide on May 22, 2026.

Equipment

Srixon ZXi combo or TaylorMade P7CB/770 combo? – GolfWRXers discuss

Published

1 day ago

May 12, 2026

Gianni Magliocco

In our forums, our members have been pitting a Srixon ZXi combo against a TaylorMade P7CB/770 combo. WRXer ‘edutch22’ is on the hunt for a new set of irons and kicks off the thread saying:

“Looking at picking up a new set of irons and think I’ve narrowed it down to Srixon ZXi combo or Taylormade P7CB/770 combo. I am currently a 5 cap and allbeit I feel irons are my weakness. My miss is a little to the toe side. I am decently steep at 4-5 down. Always thought I am high spin but recently on trackman my 7 was spinning at 5800 roughly.

My question or looking for thoughts on which one would benefit me more from a forgiveness standpoint? Or is there another iron is should be looking at entirely? I only get to play about once or twice a week, if I am not playing a 2-3 day event. Thanks in advance.”

And our members have been sharing their thoughts and suggestions in response.

Here are a few posts from the thread, but make sure to check out the entire discussion and have your say at the link below.

manima1: “You just can’t go wrong with Srixon ZXi7.”
MattM97: “You have to hit them to know, the V-Sole on the Srixon can be make or break for many.”
dmeeksDC: “P7CB is more forgiving for me than ZXi7 because my main miss is low middle and the P7CB still flies and spins great on that miss. These are both really nice irons but I like the P7CB more than the Zxi7 and the P770 (or P790) more than the Zxi5. The Srixons are larger so if that gives you confidence that is the way to go. I don’t feel like I get any benefit from the V-sole and the P7CBs live up to their high Maltby forgiveness rating so the TaylorMades have been great for me.”

Entire Thread: “Srixon ZXi combo or TaylorMade P7CB/770 combo? – GolfWRXers discuss”

Equipment

From the GolfWRX Classifieds: 2024 Wilson Staff CB/Blade combo

Published

1 day ago

May 12, 2026

Gianni Magliocco

At GolfWRX, we are a community of like-minded individuals who all experience and express our enjoyment of the game in many ways.

It’s that sense of community that drives day-to-day interactions in the forums on topics that range from best driver to what marker you use to mark your ball. It even allows us to share another thing we all love – buying and selling equipment.

Currently, in our GolfWRX buy/sell/trade (BST) forum, @pianoman0123 has a 2024 Wilson Staff CB/Blade combo up for grabs.

From the listing: “2024 Wilson Staff CB/Blade Combo. 4-8 irons are CB’s and the 9,PW are Blades. 5-PW have Project X 6.0 Shafts and the 4 Iron has a Steelfiber CW110 Stiff Shaft. Standard Length, Lie and Lofts. These are in very good condition the shafts just don’t work for me. Like new Lamkin Grips on the 5-PW and a stock Golf Pride on the 4 Iron. $525 OBO.”

To check out the full listing in our BST forum, head through the link. If you are curious about the rules to participate in the BST Forum, you can learn more here: GolfWRX BST Rules