Hi there! The X will provide forgiveness and performance levels similar to the Darkspeed Max. The biggest difference will be with the LS where you'll deal with much lower spin rates and much less forgiveness than the other models. Hope this helps!
@ I wanted to see the comparison, as the X and DS go much further than the max. So it isn’t really a fair comparison to compare the shortest darkspeed to the oldest clubs when they are made for different purposes. Would you compare 20year old blades with modern game improvement irons and call it a direct comparison?
@@keyboardoracle1044 We compared the Max against the L4V-M as they have the most similar profiles, rather than the X, which has a draw-bias design, and the LS, which benefits from tech that gives it slower spin rates. If it was a pure distance test, of course, we would've gone with the LS model (That's what Lou is fitted for), but the goal here was to compare two similar profiles and see how many improvements we can observe over almost two decades of innovations, not limiting ourselves to distance, but also taking spin rates, launch angles, dispersion, and other factors into account. Hope this helps clear up any confusion.
How does it go against the X and ds?
Hi there! The X will provide forgiveness and performance levels similar to the Darkspeed Max. The biggest difference will be with the LS where you'll deal with much lower spin rates and much less forgiveness than the other models. Hope this helps!
@ I wanted to see the comparison, as the X and DS go much further than the max. So it isn’t really a fair comparison to compare the shortest darkspeed to the oldest clubs when they are made for different purposes. Would you compare 20year old blades with modern game improvement irons and call it a direct comparison?
@@keyboardoracle1044 We compared the Max against the L4V-M as they have the most similar profiles, rather than the X, which has a draw-bias design, and the LS, which benefits from tech that gives it slower spin rates. If it was a pure distance test, of course, we would've gone with the LS model (That's what Lou is fitted for), but the goal here was to compare two similar profiles and see how many improvements we can observe over almost two decades of innovations, not limiting ourselves to distance, but also taking spin rates, launch angles, dispersion, and other factors into account. Hope this helps clear up any confusion.