Takomo is offering customers who bought its Ignis D1 driver a free replacement after learning it would not receive R&A and USGA compliant status.
MyGolfSpy learned of the issue late last week following posts on Reddit and Facebook. Those posts showed images of an email from Takomo customer service informing them of the issue.
“We have been made aware of a compatibility issue with the Ignis D1 you purchased,” the email said. “When the heaviest weight is placed on the toe, some drivers exceed the conforming limits for competitive use. If you compete with this driver and it is tested, there is a chance that your specific driver will not qualify.
“We will provide you with a new and improved driver as soon as possible. We are in the process of designing a new version (that will be compatible) of the driver that we will send to you free of charge.”
The email says the new driver leaders should be ready by early this summer.
Meanwhile, the Ignis D1 has been removed from the Takomo website.
Takomo’s official statement:
MyGolfSpy received this statement from Takomo CEO Sebastain Haapahovi this morning:
“Throughout this process of launching a driver, we worked closely with the R&A to ensure the driver was compliant. The biggest mistake we made was over-relying on our internal testing, which all gave a green light for compliance based on R&A standards. Once the driver was submitted to the R&A, it became very clear that our internal testing systems were not calibrated to the correct red light.
“After all, when the heaviest weight included in the Ignis D1 is placed on the toe and the second heaviest weight is placed on the heel, some of the drivers may break the CT limit.
“Once this became clear, we made the Ignis D1 unavailable for purchase while we began working on a solution for customers. At this point, we have contacted all driver purchasers to let them know the situation and have offered to send a new compliant driver, which is scheduled for July. At this time, we have received word from the R&A that a new initial driver review will have passed in accordance with the new driver prototypes. future As we rework the driver, we’re taking some liberties to configure the performance for more forgiveness and tuning of the sound profile.
“This situation is ultimately on us and we’ve let our customers down. That’s why we’re working to provide a solution to our customers that they’ll love and get a compliant replacement for their bags as soon as possible. If a customer has been affected by this issue, we’ve already reached out several times, but our customer success team is ready to provide additional support wherever needed.”
Is this a ban?
A kind. The R&A and USGA operate under the same set of equipment rules, so compliance with one is compliance with the other. Being a European company, Takomo worked exclusively with R&A. So technically, even though the R&A told Takomo no, the USGA has taken no official action.
That it wasn’t listed should come as no surprise. The R&A and USGA do not automatically test or list clubs from OEMs. The manufacturer must formally submit the heads for conformity testing. Smaller direct-to-consumer brands don’t always apply right away, with some skipping it entirely unless they’re targeting the competitive game.
This is clearly what happened here. Taking Haapahov’s statement at face value, Takomo was confident that the Ignis D1 would pass. The problem was a flaw in its internal testing procedures.
Again, it’s important to note that “some” Ignis drivers “may” not conform to the configuration Haapahovi mentions. There is a subtle distinction to be made here, and it is one we have seen before.
Not the first time, probably won’t be the last
If this narrative sounds familiar, it should.
It’s eerily similar about what happened to Wilson after the first season of Driver vs Driver in 2016. The winning driver, the Triton, was announced just before Thanksgiving and hit retail on Black Friday. There was just one problem: Wilson didn’t submit the Triton to the USGA for testing beforehand. Therefore, the USGA did not have time to fully test the product before the finals. Whether that decision was deliberate to keep the winning driver a secret (the last episode was filmed last July) or whether it was just a matter of waiting for the stock to arrive is an open question.
The problem was that the Triton was already on store shelves by the time the USGA decided it was non-compliant. As with the Ignis D1, the main issue was one of sole weights. The Triton had three interchangeable single weights. When tested with a 12-gram weight on the toe and six grams on the heel and back, the Triton’s characteristic time (CT) was just over the limit. That environment promoted a heavy face/slice bias, and Wilson admitted he didn’t appreciate the Triton’s CT in that setup.
In a normal world without a TV show, Wilson would have presented prototypes to the USGA much earlier. Any changes would have been made immediately. Wilson removed 12 grams of weight from all of its accessory kits to solve the CT problem. It also shaves two millimeters off the Triton’s interchangeable soleplates to fix a relatively minor “simple fit” problem. The company offered a trade-in program for anyone who had already purchased a Triton.
So is the Ignis D1 “illegal?”
Based on Haapahov’s statement, yes, as it has not received approval from the R&A.
Again, we need to emphasize the specifics. According to Takomo, “some” drivers “may” exceed the limits only when the heaviest weight of the sole is placed on the toe and the second heaviest on the heel. The fact that Takomo uses the words “some” and “may” is troubling and may speak to production inconsistencies.
As we have seen, this has happened before. It’s embarrassing for Takomo, for sure, and the company will take a significant financial hit for its mistake. It’s also a lesson in why there is a difference between drivers from major OEMs and DTC brands. That gap is closing, to an extent, but it exists in what each is able to consistently produce, and how close they can design to the CT limits without exceeding them.
