Cloned Glof Clubs

GinjaNinja

Alright all,

I've been looking around the web and have spotted alot of these cloned golf sets/clubs.
Turbo power etc.........

Has anyone any experience with them are are they just rip offs.

any help would be great.

Chris

slumped

rip-offs.

TheDoc

rip offs, best avoiding them

Clones sometimes cannot include some technology that real clubs have which makes the difference.

GinjaNinja

thought so, just need to make sure .
have to trawl the interweb now for the cheapest R7 draws and a R540 Draw driver.


thanks

TheDoc

Ebay, wont find cheaper

Sandwich

Cloned clubs rip-offs ?

I thought they were supposed to be the best value. Same fundamentally as the 'named' version but cheaper because you dont have to pay for the advertising, endorsements, higher overheads and profits of the big companies etc.

GreenHorn

Never owned any myself - although I know one or two who got em and were delighted with em...

Their lack of resale value seems to be the biggest issue with them.

One Cold Hand

Steer well clear of them, they're absolutely useless.
As said previously they don't have the same technology in them. Also they're generally cheap alloy, i.e. they have really cheap metals mixed in to make them even cheaper. For example irons will have aluminium mixed in with the steel. This means that you won't get the same feel or forgiveness out of the iron and they tend to snap and break easier. I've seen 'Titanium' drivers with cracks in the faces. If they say 'Titanium' on them they probably contain about 5% Ti.

If your looking for a cheap set of decent clubs, go for a brand like MacGregor or Wilson. They do beginner sets that you will pick up in mcguirks or golfworks for €250 or cheaper.

Sandwich

One Cold Hand wrote:

As said previously they don't have the same technology in them. Also they're generally cheap alloy, i.e. they have really cheap metals mixed in to make them even cheaper. For example irons will have aluminium mixed in with the steel. This means that you won't get the same feel or forgiveness out of the iron and they tend to snap and break easier.

Reading too many golf magazine adds?

1. If its a clone then surely it has exactly the same amount of technology 'in' the club - if such a quality is even measurable or meaningful.
2. Aluminium is more expensive than steel.
3. Aluminium is a softer metal than iron. It improves feel and forgiveness.
4. I've never seen a broken clubhead in my life. Broken shafts are so rare that it should have no bearing on your choice of club.

kagni

I'm not sure if some people commenting above are confusing cloned clubs with counterfeit clubs but there is nothing wrong with clone clubs and they work just as well as some big name brands. I have used a set of Acer XDS Wide Sole irons for about three years and they are excellent. I can't tell any difference between them and the Callaway's they are a copy of and would buy them again without hesitation.
I'm sure there are poor quality clones (just like there are poor quality major manufacturers) but if you stick with the bigger brands (Acer, Turbo Power, etc.) you should be fine.

When it comes to golf equipment there is a lot of snobbery where people think that because they haven't heard of a brand or someone on tour doesn't play it that it must be crap. In fact the money the clone manufacturers save by not paying millions in sponsorship to Tiger and the rest of the tour players is the reason you can get decent clubs from them at a bargain price.

The major problem with clones is re-sale value as someone already mentioned.
If you are going to change your irons regularly you would be better off looking for a set from a major name brand on e-bay.

One Cold Hand

Sandwich,

-Apologies, I've no idea about prices of metals, it must not be Aluminium, but some other cheaper metal that is used.
-As regards the technology a lot of these clones lack most basic of technology, such as the correct weight distribution, meaning that the centre of gravity isn't in the centre of the club.
-Yes aluminium is a softer metal, but I'm sure you wouldn't want a random softer insert in the middle of your 6-iron. It'd go about half the distance.
-Ive worked in golf shops for a few years and have seen all type of broken clubs, breaks at the hosel, cracks in the face etc.

Kagni,
Yes there are good clones and bad clones/counterfeits. Nickent are another excellent clone. However there are a lot of really sh1te copies and these are the ones I was referring to above.
As regards snobbery I don't know if you were referring to me or not, but I didn't mean to come across like that. It's something I really hate in golf.

TheDoc

Copied clubs cannot exactly replicate originals due to copyright and patent.

You may think they are the same but they are missing on a certain point or technology that you may think useless but can be the difference.

The taylormade R7 is THE only club patented to use weight technology, all the other copies use either A) wrong weights weights at the wrong angle in the club.

The cloned clubs that come out are not exact replicas, and the originals are usually always better.

However nickents bb plus irons where copies of the callaway irons and were very good copies.

Iron copies can be ok as irons dont really have alot of patent material, drivers on the other hand, your best getting originals.

Sandwich

[DM]-TheDOC- wrote:

Iron copies can be ok as irons dont really have alot of patent material, drivers on the other hand, your best getting originals.

Patents are driven by manufacturers desire to try to protect their designs, so that they get a return for the expensive promotion of the 'features' of the patent. The patented feature doesnt actually provide any real advantage to the club - its just the trigger to enable the promotion of the idea that it does.

Original drivers are the greatest wastes of money of all. The makers exploit its King-of-the-golf-clubs position as everyone strives for more length of the tee, and its status as a 'unique' club in the bag that most people choose to buy as a one-off, and without reference to any other clubs in their bag. The margins earned are far higher than any iron. Many would happily spend E400 on a premium driver, but would laugh if it was suggested they needed to spend E5000 to have a similar standard with the other clubs in their bag.

kagni

just to clarify I am talking about clones not counterfeit clubs, I think there is a big difference.

Taylor Made haven't patented the technology of movable weights, many of the other manufacturers are now offering movable weight drivers.
They would only infringe any Taylor Made patent if they exactly copied the appearance of the Taylor Made drivers, which they don't.
The clone manufacturers do copy the appearance but not closely enough to draw legal attention from the original manufacturers (although I am sure there have been occasions where they have been told to stop marketing a certain design to avoid prosecution).

Do you avoid buying Scotty Cameron putters because they are "clones" of the original ping anser?
Do you avoid buying cavity backed irons because they are clones of the original pings?
Have you ever purchased a generic brand at the chemist, supermarket, etc.
I don't see why people view good quality clones of golf equipment differently than the do copying in other areas.

P.S. Nickent no longer manufacture clones and successfully market their own designs.

Sandwich

kagni wrote:

I don't see why people view good quality clones of golf equipment differently than the do copying in other areas.

Because virtually all golf clubs are of the same 'quality'. Prestige and cosmetics are the critical factors (lie, swing weights, shaft stiffness etc that are actually important are very minor factors) in decision making for most clubs bought.

People want badge of prestige more than a particular design, and so are prepared to pay for it.

People pay for coping in other areas when there is a clear utility in the item rather than just a brand name.

Golferx

Genuine Clubs are made by manufacturers in business to make a profit. Nothing wrong with that, at all, but there sure is a hell of a lot wrong with the makers of rip-off/cloned clubs. Their products are inferior and are riding on the back of other peoples' efforts.

Buying cloned/copied clubs is no better than supporting the likes of the IRA and those other smugglers, the copiers of DVDs etc.


If something is too expensive then don't buy it but FFS don't support the thieves and fraudsters by buying the rip-off stuff.

Sandwich

Golferx, have you a stake in golf equipment retail per chance ?

Golferx

Have I a stake in golf equipment retail per chance?

Not in the slightest. I'm just someone who believes in the legitimacy of contract law and IP rights. I don't subscribe to any counterfeiters. There are affordable golf clubs for every ability, one doesn't need to buy sub-standard rip-offs if one is too tight to buy a proper set of clubs.

kagni

Golferx wrote:

Buying cloned/copied clubs is no better than supporting the likes of the IRA and those other smugglers, the copiers of DVDs etc.

Buying clone golf clubs isn't illegal, buying/selling pirated DVD's is.
The major manufacturers rip each other off all the time, (look at the current fad for square drivers) but because they make the appearance of their clubs slightly different little is said.
Scotty Cameron has made a career (and a fortune) from ripping off the Ping Anser design but because he charges top dollar people are conned into believing the hype.
If you buy a decent set of clone clubs and put a good quality shaft and grip on it you will have the equal (if not better) than most of what the large manufacturers offer.

Golferx

I'm sure Scotty Cameron would love to be accused of "ripping off" others' designs. Do you honestly think, for one minute, that PING would tolerate another manufacturer copying , or ripping off, their designs? The USA is the most litigious country in the world. It hasn't happened.

As for buying crap clubs then changing the shaft and grip? Are you for real? Why not go straight to Golfsmith and just buy a head.


Clone clubs are manufactured with inferior head material. There are no standards governing them and all that is required is they must look the part. Their function is never tested, unlike products from reputable manufacturers.

Why should some manufacturer of a cloned Taylor Made club be supported with business? Give me one good reason?

kagni

Golferx wrote:

I'm sure Scotty Cameron would love to be accused of "ripping off" others' designs. Do you honestly think, for one minute, that PING would tolerate another manufacturer copying , or ripping off, their designs? The USA is the most litigious country in the world. It hasn't happened.

The same goes for clone manufacturers who also haven't been prosecuted.

Golferx wrote:

As for buying crap clubs then changing the shaft and grip? Are you for real? Why not go straight to Golfsmith and just buy a head.

I am talking about buying a good quality clone and having it assembled with the shaft/grip of you choice.

Golferx wrote:

Clone clubs are manufactured with inferior head material. There are no standards governing them and all that is required is they must look the part. Their function is never tested, unlike products from reputable manufacturers.

That is your opinion, I don't agree with it. Clone clubs can be ordered from reputable companies who stand behind their product every bit as strongly as the major manufacturers.

Golferx wrote:

Why should some manufacturer of a cloned Taylor Made club be supported with business? Give me one good reason?

Because I believe they offer value for money.

At a site like the one below you can get a quality set of clones
with True Temper shafts and Golf Pride grips all built to your desired length and grip size for around €260.
http://www.irishgolffitting.com/Tienda/portada.aspx

I would be just as happy to buy a good set of used clubs from ebay or a proshop for a similar price, but the original poster asked for info from people who have experience with clone clubs and my experience has been nothing but positive.