I called PXG yesterday to get their opinion. I spoke with two separate fitters, and neither knew much about the Proto vs. Gen 4 debate. It’s quite shocking.
I just asked the first guy what the changes were between the Proto and the Gen 4, and he was at a loss for words and had to consult the internet for answers. The only thing he could think of was that the Gen 4 X, unlike the Proto, comes in a range of lofts rather than just 9*.
I inquired about the four weights in Proto vs. three in Gen 4. He told me that the weights don’t really matter, and that most people just leave them at their default settings. PXG was supposed to be all about the weight adjustability, right?
Then there’s the fact that he claims PXG holds out on releasing new equipment unless they have something that represents a significant advancement. I inquired as to how they went from Proto to Gen 4 in less than a year in the driver and a month or two in the fairways and hybrids. That was a question for which he had no response.
The truth is I had a great time with the Gen 4 yesterday. I was hitting it routinely 20-25 yards past my G400 Max (outdoor range). I was able to control the spin at a minimum and hit it dead straight.
I didn’t bother hitting the Proto because it was released less than a year ago, so I was not sure whether there’s a significant change in performance.
That’s why I put them to test today and I will share with you the experience I had using these two drivers.
PXG Gen 4 X Driver Review
I played the Gen 4 and had a great time. I was expecting to speak with someone from PXG about the distinctions between the two clubs.
The Gen 4 has already won on the LPGA Tour. When you visit the PXG website, you’ll notice the same buzzwords: multi-material crown, high-speed face, and TPE in the sole, but nothing substantive.
On both pure and mishit shots, the gen4 x averaged 4-5 yards more carry. For the most part, it did a better job of managing spin for me. The feel and sound were actually a little better than the prototype, in my opinion.
I also tested out the XT, which is a fascinating driver. With the smaller head, I was able to increase my swing speed by 3-4 MPH. I felt like I was driving a three-wheeler, and I could really shape the ball if I wanted to. That one will require a lot of fine tuning. Depending on the shot shape, I had photos with spins ranging from 1600 to 3200. With the XT, I was able to travel the farthest distances.
In terms of size and CG, XF is a little different. Proto x+ is more forgiving than proto x. Gen4 X is comparable to Gen4 X. I chose 45inch because that’s what I usually play.
The raw crown is unique; I truly like the way it looks, which is unusual for raw material. Plus, compared to the Proto’s more matte black, the black is a really lovely dark black. It’s no more irritating to me as a Sim or ping, but I’m more concerned about how a driver sits and how his or her face appears at address than with how the crown appears.
Conclusion
My first few shots on the range were a little crooked, but I was able to correct them very quickly. I began with the hefty weight in front of me. I put the hefty weight in the back after a few holes.
Furthermore, I continued to blast it a comparable distance (for me), but the spiny slice reappeared on bad hits (Bad strikes, on the other hand, travelled significantly further than Ping slices).
I liked the feel of the club with the weight in the back, and I think I have a little more control on excellent strikes, but my dreaded slice is still a factor. I couldn’t slice it with the weight in front of me, and misses would be left (and far!).
This driver is a game changer for a gamer like myself. I can see balls that would have spun right and perished with my Ping powering down the fairway now that the weight is in the front. I am quite delighted with my buy.
PXG Proto X Driver Review
By far the longest and easiest to hit was the X. It had a lower spin than the X+, and as a result, I was around 10 yards longer than the X+. That said, I was a lot more inconsistent, so I went with the X+’s big weight in the front with an extra 7.5 in the toe because I had a more consistent dispersion/shot shape with it.
The X and X+ each have only one loft, whereas the G4 has several. The toe weight option was deleted because to mass properties, and “most didn’t utilize it anyway,” according to the reading I did from their main engineers.
The main modifications I can detect are that the G4 now employs aluminum vapor instead of carbon fiber, similar to the Tensei raw lines, and that the face has been redesigned. They also appeared to reshape the drivers based on the profile XT, X, and XF (size, depth, etc.)
For me, the Proto x+ has outperformed numerous well-known drivers, including the 410 LST, TSi3, Sim, Mavrik, and SZ. It has the best combination of performance, appearance/shape, and sound that I’ve come across (love the matte head). In a sea of Callaway and TM, it’s also unique.
Protos are fantastic! Unless you truly want the newest toy, there isn’t much of a performance difference to justify a change if you already have one. They even display performance data in a comparison chart on their website.
For me, the XF is now piqued my interest, but it appears to be so similar to my tuned Proto+, which performs an excellent job of protecting distance on course with my miss (low center hit) and is as long as the others when flushed.
I’ve hit 4-5 balls off tees with Gen4X, SIM2Max, and Proto+ on numerous holes on different days and walked them off with GPS in less than 4-5 yards either way. If you like the stock shaft offerings for fitting, the PXG equipment is a deal at these current rates, and if TM didn’t pay so much for Tour driver play, you’d see a lot more of them in Tour bags.
They’re that dependable. To me, the PXG has the correct combination of muted thwack with a hint of titanium sound, but the SIM2 items are obviously more muted thwack with no hint of titanium sound in the feedback. Subjectively, I like the PXG combination. Both are effective, with PXG providing somewhat more feel for center strikes.
