Question:
| I am very new to the game and was looking to purchase and inexpensive | "starter" set of clubs. A friend of mine told me to get a set of | Clones. Do any of you have any experiences with these "Clones"? If | so could you please tell me about any good or bad ones. If you had a | good experience, please tell me how to contact them. Thanks in | advance Wanna have some fun and save a LOT of money at the same time??? Make your own clubs. If you have any manual dexterity at all, get a component catalog, like the Golfsmith catalog and a copy of their 50 page booklet – The Basics of Golf Clubmaking – and read it. You really don’t need any special tools other than a special $3 hacksaw blade if you use graphite shafts. MAKING GOLF CLUBS IS NOT THAT HARD TO DO! And the more you know about golf, the easier it is to do. It is a fun project for an afternoon and your costs will be less than half the cost of new clubs. And then there is the intangible of pride…when someone asks which brand of clubs you use. "well, I looked at them all and decided to make my own, to my own specifications." 
Response:
Whoa, whoa, whoa!!! As was said in another thread just a little while ago, there are a lot of duffers going around with equipment completely unsuited to their game (blades for a high-handicapper, stiff shafts for a player with a slow swing speed, etc.) The leading reason for this is marketing hype and endorsements (‘Corey plays ‘em’).
Or consumers bent on instant gratification. So I asked: how ethical is it for the big-name manufacturers to pump all this marketing $$$ into giving people the idea that if they buy these clubs, they’ll play like Corey?
Which was a very nifty way to sidestep the ethical issue of clones. Clones are theft. And while I don’t necessarily agree with some of the marketing tactics used by the OEM’s, it is hypocritical to question the ethics of their deception while supporting another form of deception through the purchase of clones. How ethical is it for the clone makers to give people the idea that if they buy clones, they will play like the real thing? That’s just as deceptive as an OEM implying that you’ll play just like their pro. Clubs made from legal components can be just as inexpensive as clones. Given identical cost, what is the factor that drives a person to choose an illegal clone over a legal component? Ego? Are they trying to fool other people, or themselves, into thinking that they actually have the real thing? A lot less ethical than spending half that $$$ on training salespeople/fitters and making demo sets readily available so potential customers can see how those clubs will help them play better and enjoy the game more. The margin on a $300 driver is enough at all levels to support a much higher level of service.
Most of the brand-name manufacturers sponsor demo days at courses and driving ranges all over the country. You can walk into a golf store and hit almost any club you like. Many are also providing custom-fitting programs. Many have repair/replacement policies that go beyond expectations. IMHO, the OEM’s have come a long way in providing better service before and after the sale. You might get lucky with clones. You might find someone who fits them properly, who assembles them well, and who stands behind them 100 percent. But a well-fitted, well-made, guaranteed clone is still theft. — John W. Griffin
Response:
Three, we always question the ethics of selling clubs on the ‘just like Big Berthas’ basis. Shouldn’t we also be questioning the ethics of selling clubs to high-handicappers on the basis of ‘Corey plays ‘em; you should too’??? I don’t buy this, for anyone who cares to find out, you can find out what is really in CP’s bag, and proceed from a tech perspective. On the other hand, many people get a kick out of playing the same thing their favorite pro does, and there is no harm in that. Also it is a form of guarantee knowing that a particular brand has the expertice to outfit a major winner, which is probably true of some weekend clubmakers also, but who is to know.
Whoa, whoa, whoa!!! As was said in another thread just a little while ago, there are a lot of duffers going around with equipment completely unsuited to their game (blades for a high-handicapper, stiff shafts for a player with a slow swing speed, etc.) The leading reason for this is marketing hype and endorsements (‘Corey plays ‘em’). So I asked: how ethical is it for the big-name manufacturers to pump all this marketing $$$ into giving people the idea that if they buy these clubs, they’ll play like Corey? A lot less ethical than spending half that $$$ on training salespeople/fitters and making demo sets readily available so potential customers can see how those clubs will help them play better and enjoy the game more. The margin on a $300 driver is enough at all levels to support a much higher level of service. Regardless of what you pay, you ought to hit some balls with them first. At minimum, swing every one to ensure a consistent feel. You’ll probablyfind some you hate the feel of, even at top prices. And for clones, there’s no better proof of workmanship than how they hit. Actually how they hit doesn’t nail down workmanship, for instance poor glueing may take a while to show up.
Sure you won’t find every fault until you’ve owned the clubs a while, but the obvious flaws will be picked up: grips not installed well, poor matching of swingweight or length or overall weight. If all that’s right, you probably can be confident about the glueing.
Response:
Clones are fairly controversial, as many people (myself included) view them as blatant rip-offs of the research and marketing efforts of the brand names… My $0.02 is to stay away from clones. You can do much better for the same amount of money.
I share John’s view. One, I wouldn’t be so quick to generalize. Agreed that the workmanship on some clone clubs can be so bad as to wreck anyone’s game… On the other hand, reputable clubmakers using look-alike components can make you a set that’s almost as good as the $800 clubs, fit you properly, and do it all for $300 or less.
Reputable clubmakers don’t make clubs for sale with look-alike components. Before you react to this, continue reading… Two, there isn’t always a clear picture of what is an unethical or illegal attempt to trade on someone else’s ideas or reputation. Some are obvious, like bronze-color ‘Bomber’ woods. But the woods I play (Omega Dragon) have the same shape soleplate as Big Berthas, but have a conventional hosel; does that make them Bertha clones?
No, it doesn’t. A "clone" is a deliberate attempt to copy a club for SALE purposes. Typically (admittedly not always, but far too often) a clone will concentrate on LOOKING like the original, but not worry at all about specs, consistency, playability, etc. There are plenty of clubs with the same sole, but are clearly doing nothing else to look like BBs. If it’s a matter of the technical or design innovation, shouldn’t we be condemning all deep cavity, deep sole irons?
Actually, none of the clone lawsuits (and the cloners lose every one!) is based on specific technical details, but on "trade dress". In fact, Taylor Made has prosecuted its suits (w.r.t. the "Bubble") by showing that they LOOK the same but they DO NOT copy the specs — showing intent to be a parasite on TM’s reputation alone. There has been a lot of discussion of this on RSG. Look it up in a newsgroup archive. Or check out the last chapter of my Club Design Notes (download from dunkin.princeton.edu) for the difference between "clones" (bad IMHO, and apparently IYHO) and "performance clones" (no problem, in either of our opinions). Cheers! Dave
Response:
Three, we always question the ethics of selling clubs on the ‘just like Big Berthas’ basis. Shouldn’t we also be questioning the ethics of selling clubs to high-handicappers on the basis of ‘Corey plays ‘em; you should too’???
I don’t buy this, for anyone who cares to find out, you can find out what is really in CP’s bag, and proceed from a tech perspective. On the other hand, many people get a kick out of playing the same thing their favorite pro does, and there is no harm in that. Also it is a form of guarantee knowing that a particular brand has the expertice to outfit a major winner, which is probably true of some weekend clubmakers also, but who is to know. The going rate for used pro-line clubs is disappointingly high for the good of the game. As long as the big names keep charging upwards of $1000 a set (they’re making $200 A CLUB irons these days!) they’re gonna face this kind of competition. IMHO, they oughta swallow hard and introduce some mid-price ($400) models to reach the players considering clones.
Well it is a business issue, mostly it is the big name sponsors who support the tours, which as far as I can see are a large part of the "good for the game". Tiger Woods is probably going to make this sport cool for a whole age group 10 yrs yonger than currently cares. This stuff costs, and golf is pretty expensive. There are definetly haves and have nots in this sport. Finally, if you are considering clones, it’s probably a good idea to stay away from designs which are technically-oriented (strange hosels, for example–the cloner may not understand the design principle and won’t make full use of it; or worse yet, has to modify it so as not to get into legal trouble) or are difficult to reproduce without careful workmanship (Black Cats and others with channels around the perimeter. Take a look at a full set and see how the design progresses from one to the next: smoothly and in a way that makes sense, or do they seem mismatched.
My advice would be to deal with someone who is either of known credentials or character, or who has at a minimum, a hitting area, speedmeter, frequency analyser, and brand name shafts. The reality, at least until the OEMs suck up the shaft business with propritary shaft features, is that currently the key component in most good golf clubs is a steel shaft that cost $6-10, or about $30-40 for a good graphite shaft. Fitting these is the key, the heads are secondary. Regardless of what you pay, you ought to hit some balls with them
first. At minimum, swing every one to ensure a consistent feel. You’ll probablyfind some you hate the feel of, even at top prices. And for clones, there’s no better proof of workmanship than how they hit.
Actually how they hit doesn’t nail down workmanship, for instance poor glueing may take a while to show up.
Response:
Clones are fairly controversial, as many people (myself included) view them as blatant rip-offs of the research and marketing efforts of the brand names. This doesn’t bother some people – the ethical decision is yours to make. My $0.02 is to stay away from clones. You can do much better for the same amount of money.
One, I wouldn’t be so quick to generalize. Agreed that the workmanship on some clone clubs can be so bad as to wreck anyone’s game. But that’s also the case for some department store clubs, and amazingly enough for some $800 pro-line clubs. On the other hand, reputable clubmakers using look-alike components can make you a set that’s almost as good as the $800 clubs, fit you properly, and do it all for $300 or less. It really comes down to the guy assembling and selling them. If he does everything by mail, has no warranty, and is only known as an 800 number; you’re not all that likely to get clubs you’ll want to keep playing–$200 clubs are a bad investment if you gotta scrap them after the first season. You mention department store clubs–you don’t get any useful fitting or selection help there, so I’d be wary. Two, there isn’t always a clear picture of what is an unethical or illegal attempt to trade on someone else’s ideas or reputation. Some are obvious, like bronze-color ‘Bomber’ woods. But the woods I play (Omega Dragon) have the same shape soleplate as Big Berthas, but have a conventional hosel; does that make them Bertha clones? There are plenty of clubs with the same sole, but are clearly doing nothing else to look like BBs. If it’s a matter of the technical or design innovation, shouldn’t we be condemning all deep cavity, deep sole irons? After all, Spalding had ‘em first with their Executives twenty years ago. Where the manufacturer has patented the design, trademarked the ‘trade dress’ (stuff like the bronze color of Taylor Made woods), and is going after the people making knock-offs, it’s pretty clear they don’t wish to have anyone clone their clubs. But what about the designs which the manufacturer doesn’t bother to patent? Three, we always question the ethics of selling clubs on the ‘just like Big Berthas’ basis. Shouldn’t we also be questioning the ethics of selling clubs to high-handicappers on the basis of ‘Corey plays ‘em; you should too’??? The going rate for used pro-line clubs is disappointingly high for the good of the game. As long as the big names keep charging upwards of $1000 a set (they’re making $200 A CLUB irons these days!) they’re gonna face this kind of competition. IMHO, they oughta swallow hard and introduce some mid-price ($400) models to reach the players considering clones. Finally, if you are considering clones, it’s probably a good idea to stay away from designs which are technically-oriented (strange hosels, for example–the cloner may not understand the design principle and won’t make full use of it; or worse yet, has to modify it so as not to get into legal trouble) or are difficult to reproduce without careful workmanship (Black Cats and others with channels around the perimeter. Take a look at a full set and see how the design progresses from one to the next: smoothly and in a way that makes sense, or do they seem mismatched. Regardless of what you pay, you ought to hit some balls with them first. At minimum, swing every one to ensure a consistent feel. You’ll probably find some you hate the feel of, even at top prices. And for clones, there’s no better proof of workmanship than how they hit. Dr. Matt (aforementioned Dragons, Z-model 2 clone irons from Omega Golf [EXCELLENT clubs--very consistent: look at the yardage, pick the club without second thought, and stick it hole high], a Triumph Tempo one-iron, dept. store gap and lob wedges, and a Knight putter–Rossie II look-alike, bought second-hand from an rsg’er, just what I needed. The set’s helped me down from 100ish to high 80s this season.)
Response:
I am very new to the game and was looking to purchase and inexpensive "starter" set of clubs. A friend of mine told me to get a set of Clones. Do any of you have any experiences with these "Clones"? If so could you please tell me about any good or bad ones. If you had a good experience, please tell me how to contact them. Thanks in advance
Clones are fairly controversial, as many people (myself included) view them as blatant rip-offs of the research and marketing efforts of the brand names. This doesn’t bother some people – the ethical decision is yours to make. There are plenty of other inexpensive alternatives: - Go to K-Mart or Walmart and buy a starter set for under $200. You won’t be paying for a name, and you’ll still get a decent set. - Buy a set of used brand name clubs in your price range. Check the classifieds and look at the trade-ins at your local golf stores. - Buy a set of custom-made non-clone component clubs. They’re just as inexpensive as the clones, and chances are they will be of better quality. - You don’t have to buy a full set of clubs, especially as a beginner. Consider buying a set of 3W, 5W, and 3,5,7,9I,SW and a putter. You’ll save money up front (may I suggest spending the savings on lessons?), and later you can either fill in the gaps or replace them if your swing has outgrown them. My $0.02 is to stay away from clones. You can do much better for the same amount of money. — John W. Griffin
Response:
I am very new to the game and was looking to purchase and inexpensive "starter" set of clubs. A friend of mine told me to get a set of Clones. Do any of you have any experiences with these "Clones"? If so could you please tell me about any good or bad ones. If you had a good experience, please tell me how to contact them. Thanks in advance Mark Solomon
Response:
I am very new to the game and was looking to purchase and inexpensive "starter" set of clubs. A friend of mine told me to get a set of Clones. Do any of you have any experiences with these "Clones"? If so could you please tell me about any good or bad ones…
There’s a clone FAQ on dunkin.princeton.edu. Also, the last few pages of my Club Design Notes (also on dunkin) deals with the difference between: - Cosmetic clones (clubs that try to fool you with looks, but don’t play like the originals), and - Performance clones (clubs that probably don’t look anything like the originals, but are tuned to play like them). My take is: cosmetic clones (look-alikes) are a bad idea. Custom-built clubs, made to perform for you, are a good idea. For a raw beginner (LIKE YOU) cheap used clubs, plus lessons and practice, is the best idea. Put fresh grips on them, and trim or pad to the right length for you while the grips are off. Don’t worry about the shiny new clubs until you have a repeatable swing. Until then, anything you get is likely to be wrong for you. Hope this helps. Dave
Response:
I am very new to the game and was looking to purchase and inexpensive "starter" set of clubs. A friend of mine told me to get a set of Clones. Do any of you have any experiences with these "Clones"? If so could you please tell me about any good or bad ones. If you had a good experience, please tell me how to contact them. Thanks in advance Mark Solomon
Mark: I got a set (3,5,7) of BB clones in Myrtle beach a few years ago. Cost $150.00 for the set, made on premesis. Love them! Tony