As to an average bogey golfer, inconsistent swing and limited golfing time, would the repositioned CG, or multi-functional sole design, or strategically-located inverted cone, or varying shaft kick-point location, or unique COR values, or optimally-shaped and sized heads, or varying top-line widths actually does matters? Without sophisticated launch monitors and distance-measuring equipment, would he be able to discern what this club was or wasn't doing for him?
With such thoughts occuring around in my head, I took the TaylorMade Burner 2.0 Irons to Arizona recently not entirely convinced they would perform any differently to the multitude of other top-notch irons already on the market. And could it possibly be better than the original Burner?
The Burner 2.0 Iron really comes with a fine looking head. The blade devotee will likely baulk at the offset 1mm in the lob wedge up to 6.5mm in the 3-iron and all the techy stuff going on round back, but the average golfer should feel comfortable with a Burner 2.0 for sale up behind the ball.
The heads have a silver/gray face, and are black in the back, heel and toe which has the effect of making the clubhead look a little smaller than the corresponding iron in the original Burners - something that won't appeal to everybody, but which undeniably gives the new club a smoother, sleeker finish.
I'm probably too inconsistent a ball-striker nowadays to say much about whether or not the CG location made much difference, but I would say the TaylorMade Burner 2.0 Driver was pretty easy to get up in the air - not quite as easy as a hybrid club with similar loft perhaps, but markedly easier than my Cleveland 4-iron. The short irons did penetrate a little better because of the higher CG which I think is preferable to a high, floaty shot that's at the mercy of the wind. I had a little trouble hitting intentional hooks and slices when I landed behind a large saguaro, but minor fades and draws are certainly possible.
TaylorMade came out with a ball that seeks to do all things for all golfers, and the TaylorMade Burner 2.0 perhaps tries to be the iron equivalent. It might not excite golfers who adamantly refuse to consider anything but the understated elegance of a blade, but for the cheap golf clubs vast majority of golfers the Burner 2.0 should make the game significantly more enjoyable.