 Felly, rydw i wedi gwneud eich boddi'r gwahodd y bwysig yng Nghyrchgrifennu a'r gwahodd o'r ysgolion gyda'r ddweud. Felly, mae'r ddweud o'r ddweud. Felly, mae'n ddweud o'u ddweud, ond mae'n ddweud y gwrtho'n gweld rwynt. Mae'n ddweud o'r ddweud deilig, ac yn wirio'n ddweud, mae'r ddweud yn ei ddweud. Mae'r ddweud o'r ddweud o'r ddweud. Mae'n ganddo i'r rhaid i'r gwahodd,yn ar unigion iawn ar dda, yn hynny, mae'n gweithio'n dwylai i ddim eich dwylai, yn ymgylch ar y cymdeithas chi, dwi'n credu gyda gweld i'n amlwg yma dwi'n cwell yn y ZU-85, a mae'n rhaid atyent o'r cr�au hynny o'i byddaeth Cymru, ond mae'n gwneud o gael ei perffynu adeiladau hynny, a unigion ac yn rhaid i'r gweithio'r cyfan sy'n'r ZU-65, y yw'r ysgrffennu erionol yn yrheaid. ac hynny'n mynd i'r gyflog i'r canwr ac yn edrycharnnol yn arwag o werth a dwi'n gwneud bod rhaid i'r gwneud yr un oedd ymgrIF. Ac mae un fel'r rai gwahanol gwahanol'r clubs a'r cyflog ar y cyflog ar amser. Rydyn ni'n meddwl gwybod 3 o ddechrau eu bod yn gyfrur o'u gradd o ddechrau. Al wna directly i ddim yn gwneud dydd o ddechrau'n gwybod i'r plwys. Mae mynd i nid yn gyrwyll y clyw yn eich rhywbeth sy'n cael ei ddegweithio mewn ddiolol If you're looking to take something like this from the T in type R4s, then these are the kind of options that are open to you and like I said, there's similarities but there are also some differences as well, but maybe we can see that in the test that I do. I'm going to talk too much about the individual clubs because I've reviewed each of these in their own right. I'm going to use the numbers that from the ZU85 that I've just achieved an hour or so ago for the independent review of that product on its own. So I'm going to start off hitting some of these to others and then I'll talk about my thoughts on the differences and perhaps why you might choose one or not the other and that again will be very much dependent on what it is you're looking for. I'm not going to hit, the data I'm going to record is going to be from this kind of fluffier piece of turf if you like. I'm going to tee these up. I'm going to take it off the ground because I also like the idea of the versatility of this club, not only just to be able to play it from the T but also to play it from lies on the fairway. First of all, a gap of clubs, we're using a three and we're using the gap of three has got 18 degrees worth of loft. It's the chunkiest version. It's got a lot of meat round the back of it. It's I think something that will appeal to some and not all. Again, the looks got a bit of a, I would say, got a bit of a hammering in terms of looks in terms of the comments I read. Not a lot of people like this one. Graphite shaft in it, this KBS hybrid shaft, 80 gram stiff and I'm going to try and hit some golf shots and give you my thoughts on it. Sat behind the ball like I said, I think this is very much down to a personal preference as to whether or not you might like this or not. It offers up a lot of meat. You tend to think you're going to get, that's a solid start. You tend to think you're going to get a bit of help from this one. Like I said, just by the sheer meat that's packed into this club, it looks powerful. The noise on this is very much more, I would say, of a hybrid type of sound rather than of an iron sound. So again, something quite different. I certainly had a good old start with the two strikes that I've hit there. I'll hit some more with this. Like I said, even judging by those two, a fairly low penetrating ball flight, I'm expecting it to be fairly low spinning. But the two balls that I've hit off and previous use of this, I've tested this on the course, this is a low ball flight. We'll go next into the Callaway because it's probably the most from one end of the spectrum to the other in terms of the differences how these things differ in appearance as much as anything else. This Callaway Forged iron, and that's one thing to mention first of all, this is a forged head club. It's a very slim profile. It's very compact. It's very much a traditional old style three iron. There's not a lot of meat in there. Again, this is going to be appealing to people who have got confidence in their ball striking capabilities with these type of iron. It's very much more compact. You don't see a lot on meat behind a ball at all. This is very much, like I said, almost blade-like in its looks. So it will appear to, certainly, I would think, the better player I would say. First of all, let's have a look what it does in terms of differencing feel with the forged. Decent ball strike again, that is. I do like this type of club, and again, I don't think they appeal to everybody. But for whatever reason, they suit my eye, they suit my game. I don't know, I do like to take this type of club, like I said, off the tee. And again, a decent strike there. Totally different feel, totally different sound. Just pull that one a little bit down the left. I mean, the thing to note is straight away, like I said, there's a major, major difference between what you might like behind the ball. Like I said, this is going to appeal to a totally different eye, but that's a decent ball as well. Why can't I do this on a fairway? That is, again, much softer sound, much softer feel. Stunning golf could play with this out on the golf course as well. Early part of this year when it came out, and the feel out of this is totally different to that of the Gapa Club. I would say that less room for error in terms of assistance, forgiveness, whatever you want to use in terms of terminology. With that thing, if you get it wrong, you're going to get it wrong, I'm afraid. Maybe, like I said, a lot more help out of the Gapa Club. The last one I'm going to look at is this Strixon ZU-85, the newest release just come out in the last few weeks. If we're just looking, I'll try and get a close-up if I remember to take this photo beforehand before I leave today. Just pure width of sole unit on these two, almost half an inch thicker on the ZU-85. Thing to mention with the ZU-85 is the numbers have been achieved there. Three iron has 20 degrees worth of loft, and again, I know a lot of you might pick up and say, well, this is not a fair head-to-head. I don't see this as a competition as to a winner or a loser in this. I'll try to do these videos head-to-head comparisons to give you an idea of the differences between them, and then maybe look at performances and how the performances differ. So, arguably, this should be 18 degrees worth of loft to make this a fair head-to-head if we're running it as a competition, I suppose. But, yeah, 20 degrees worth of loft on this. Different profile altogether, again, than the two we've just looked at. Much thicker and visible top line in the sense of looking at an iron down at a thick, chunky iron, and then you have the meat on the back of the club that sits down and low behind the ball, which, again, in the thick sole unit tends to give you, it's a lot more confidence-inspiring than what you would be looking for from the Callaway product. Anyway, I've hit this already, but we'll hit a few more on cameras just to keep the three in my mind as to how they differ. Now, straight away, first ball out, and we talked about the fairness of the head-to-head, if you like, then that is a lot higher launching club, two degrees higher in terms of a loft, so you would expect that. And that's the first noticeable thing. So maybe these numbers you're going to have to... Oh, it's beautiful. I mean, out of the oddly enough, and it'd be interesting to see in the numbers where they're landing, they don't seem that different in terms of where they're landing. The ball flight is completely different between the three, and it looks to me like the flatter ball flight is coming from the gapper product. For me, this three, it's got a lot easier in terms of launch. It seems like a lot more... I always use this word, forgiveness, assistance. That one, come out the bottom. I don't know if it came where it's finished, but it came out the bottom. There wasn't the best of strikes out of all that I've just hit on camera. It just tends to, again, just gives you the impression, and it may be incorrect, the impression that it's got that little bit more forgiveness, that little bit more assistance. It certainly packs a punch in there. So for me, you've almost got a combination of the two products there. You've got a bit of meat that's in the gapper club in terms of, and a bit more bulk in terms of a bit of confidence inspiring, but you've got the forged head that is in the Callaway product. So mix them both together, and you've got the best of both worlds, I think. So I'll have a look at the numbers, but at the moment, I'm really liking the way the ZU-85 performs overall for an average golfer. Let's hit one more ball because I'm not finishing. I hate to finish on a bad man, and like I said, that was a bit thin. See what we can do. What better? Right, that's golf balls hit, data collected, and I didn't get a chance to finish off the video yesterday. So here we are, and I'm going to get straight into the numbers, starting off with the tailor-made product. Here they come in front of you now. OK, so ball speeds on this one, 130 on average, certainly flew off the club face this thing. 13.5 degrees in terms of launch, 2899 spin, PK8 26, 205 carry. Just very quickly, just wanted to talk about ball speeds. Yes, it was very fast off the face. It launched, for me, varied a little bit, so 12, 11.9, right up to 15.6. So very much dependent, obviously, a lot to do with my strike, but there was variables in there. Spin fairly consistent around the three number, and again, PK8 had variables, 19 yards right the way up to 33 yards in PK8. So ball flight changed quite a lot, and 205 on average in terms of overall carry. So in terms of overall carry, average-wise, exactly where I expected to be. This is a club for me that isn't around that 200 yard mark. For me, a little bit clicky in terms of sound on the tailor-made product. Confidence inspiring a Sapiana ball, and like I said, anything around that 200 yard mark, I'd be happy to pick this club up. Now then, we talked about variables between the three clubs, and the main one being the amount of loft that differed, and also perhaps the shaft type. But I'm going to throw up straight away now the ZU85 Bumers, which was exactly the same loft, and exactly the same profile, I would say, as this tailor-made gap-up club. OK, so 126 ball speeds, so a lot slower in terms of ball speed off the club face than the tailor-made product. 16 degree in terms of average launch angle, so a lot higher in terms of launch. 2945, really good spin number, 30 yard peak height, and 200 yard carry. Now again, just going through the analysis quite quick. I think it was very consistent in terms of ball speeds. If you took the 118 out of the equation, then it's very, very consistent up there, sort of 126 to 130 ball speeds. It launched visibly higher than the TM product. And average at 16, but it was sort of consistently at 15 up to 18 degrees in terms of launch. And again, that'll be very much down to the delivery, how I've delivered the club at impact. And peak height, as you can see, a lot higher, but a lot consistently in terms of ball flights higher. And the number in terms of carry distance, again, take that one ball out with 183, which is a bad one thrown in there. They were all consistent in and around once again, in and around that 200 yard carry. But they were achieved in different ways in terms of ball flight. And once again, there are differences that you need to understand what it is that you want from the club itself. What are you looking for? Why would you want to use this type of utility club? Anyway, before we go into that, third and final club was quite a bit different. It was the blade-like construction of the Callaway X4 utility club. It was lower lofted in terms of 18 degrees, and it had a steel shaft. So, yes, lots of variables for a comparison video. But adding in the end, it turned out to be a real good way of further highlighting the differences between these three clubs. And I'll throw up the numbers for the Callaway club right now. OK, starting off ball speeds, 127 on average, 13.1 launch, 2 seconds spin, 23 peak height and 199 carry. So, again, going back through averages, very consistent in terms of the average ball speed at 127. Consistence in terms of ball flight, it was considerably lower, visibly considerably lower. I could see that, like I said from the assessment when I was hitting the balls out there into the range. It was a lot more lower penetrating ball flight. Peak height was as low as 23 yards in height, so a lot different to the other two. Spin number was similar in around a 3,000 and 199 carry. So, once again, similar sort of yard is achieved but in a different way with a totally different ball flight. And for me, really, the differences between the three clubs are probably a to do with your ability to control and use the type of club like the Callaway Xforge. It will be limited. It's certainly aimed at a better player. There's no doubt about that. And I think at my level, I would certainly, when you hit that club, that Callaway Xforge, it feels absolutely superb and there's no better feeling than hitting that type of club pure. The problem is, is how often would someone of my ability hit that ball pure compared to the two other products that are an option and perhaps offer quite a lot more assistance. So, the tailor made product, again, for me, like I said, a little bit clicky in terms of sound. Very confident in spying behind a ball. It's a big, big piece of meat stuck behind that ball. You don't really feel as though you can go wrong. And there's definitely some fast ball speeds coming off that clubface. The thing I was probably disappointed with was the variables in terms of ball flight. Like I said, plenty of variables in my swing, so that's no doubt a lot to do with the way the performance was, the data came out. But yeah, it did vary quite a lot in terms of ball flight. Then on to the Z85 from Strickson. And I think this is, for me, the real sort of winner in the sense that, I like to say this isn't a competition, winner's the wrong word. For something that I would choose out of three personally at my level is one, the Z85 offers a very, very good feel, very good sound. Not as good as the Callaway, but very, very close indeed. And it has a lot more bulk behind the club, behind the ball, within that clubhead, within the mass of the clubhead, which was a little bit more confidence inspiring for me personally. I think there's no doubt a bigger sweet spot, there's no doubt more room for error, and there's no doubt more assistance. The one thing it got for me and why I choose it over the TM product is simply because of the consistency. Two things really, consistency in the ball flight, but also how easy it was to achieve that ball flight. It was high launching, like I said on the video, without being floaty, it still fired it out there. And like I said, it's a great option, it's a great option for me to have in the bag for off the tee. And like I said, I know I'd be more than comfortable to take that off of a tight line on the fairway as well. Anyway, these products have been on the market for quite a while now, some of these. So every chance you might have tried them too, and that's the opinion I'm more interested in. So your thoughts and feedback, would you buy any of these clubs? If you did, which one would it be? Looks, performance if you tried them, where would you go? Would you agree with the average goal for or would you not? As ever, I love the comments down below. Thank you for watching. This is the end. It's Friday evening. It's the end of Stricks and Week. Five videos on the trot this week, and we've got plenty more to come next week. So keep watching, and as ever, I will see you very soon.