Flexie-T Golf Tee Review

From time to time we are lucky enough to get a hold of golf products that are not yet available on the market. Sort of a pre-screening of the product before it hits the shelf for sale to the public

This time it was a newly designed golf tee, and one that just got approved and is a legal tee to use when playing.

The name of this new product is the “Flexie-T”

Flexie-T new golf tee reviewed

It’s sort of a combination of a rubber tee like from any driving range and a hard plastic spike to push in the ground.

It’s a pretty good idea but, but how well does it work ?

To be quite honest we were very stand-offish about this product when we first saw it. Some of us thought it would be great and others thought it would be horrible. At first glance you think “Oh that won’t work well, it’s too big, it’s too stiff”.

Flexie-T with regular golf ball on it

Well everyone here at Ty Daniel’s Golf that said negative things about it, ate their words !

Completely threw us a curve-ball, the tee was quite impressive. Regardless of the look and flash-backs it will give you of the driving range, the Flexie T will be an asset in your bag.

As you know we are always very tough on our reviews and ratings and we pride ourselves on being brutally honest. Sometimes that doesn’t go over too well with golf courses, and golf product manufacturers, but “Oh well” that’s what we do.

As for the positives of the Flexie-T, we found that:

  1. It was basically the perfect height for todays big driver heads. (PING G2, Cleveland Launcher, and Callaway Big Bertha, to name a few)
  2. It flexes just like it’s names claims to.
  3. You can reuse it and basically never have to worry about buying more tees.

The negative aspects of the Flexie T that we found were:

Broken Flexie Tee

The look, a lot of people had a hard time just getting past their prejudgement’s of it.

It is a starts out a little stiff but just flexing the tip a few times while waiting to tee off seemed to help soften it up, for better flexibility.

If you hit low on the ball or have a smaller driver head you might find yourself looking for your Flexie T after you tee off.

Since your club head will sometimes grab the tee, pull it out of the ground and send it flying. But that will happen with just about any tee, the difference is the Flexie-T is reusable, so you better go and find it. ;)

We also found that these tees can break just like any other tee, but they last a lot longer than the standard wooden tee.

Overall we liked this product and were quite surprised that we did.

If you like the idea of reusable tees, like the Zero Friction Tee, or the Brush-Tees, then you will probably like this one too.

For more information about this new product you can go to their Flexie-T official site and see where you can buy one.

Are Reusable Golf Tees Worth it ?

Are reusable golf tees worth the extra money ? Or are they just a gimmick !

Compaired to Old Reliable the standard wooden golf tee that is a dime-a-dozen.

Above are three different types of reusable golf tees, ranging from the Brush Tee, Zero Friction Tee, and the newer Flexie-T.

We wanted to see how they compare to the standard wooden golf tee; in veristilaty, use, and reliability.

We took time to play with all of them and we have seen that there are differences. The tees biggest differences were in their versatility, not being able to accommodate for difference club head sizes, from irons and woods to drivers. Even though you can buy different size reusable tees, it just means spending more money.

But, we also cant fully base our opinion on that only, so we are breaking it up in to two separate results.

  • Best over all tee category covers all tee box situations irons, woods, hybrids, and drivers.
  • Best driving tee category is only covering driving tees. (coming soon)

Best Over All Tee

Reusable Tees

Usability

Reliability

Versatility

Longevity

Zero Friction Tee
Brush Tees
Flexie-T Golf Tee
Wooden Tee

After everything

There are benifits form all the tees we reviewed here, and we do plan to review other reusable tees to compare to these as well. Some of the beifits include, more reliable tee heights, last much longers, and can limit the “fiction” of the ball leaving the tee.

PRO’s

CON’s

Zero friction Tee Different heights, and Biodegradable “Jury is still out !”
Brush Tees Smooth leaving the tee Gets messed up easily
Flexie-T Golf Tee Same height everytime Heavy ficture hitting tee
Standard Wooden Tee Cheap, & Relieable Doesn’t last long

We will be adding more tee reviews soon, make sure to keep checking back !

Glow Light Up Golf Balls Patent Infringement Lawsuits

There are 4 main different kinds of glowing or light up night time golf balls, made by 2 different companies, Chemical Light, Inc. and Sun Products USA, Inc.

Chemical Light makes:

  • Glow Flyer Golf ball with single use glow stick inside.
  • Night Flyer Golf ball with LED light inside.

Sun Products USA makes:

  • Twilight Tracer Balls Golf ball with red blinking LED lights inside.
  • Twilight Supernova Balls Golf ball with non-blinking blue LED lights inside.

Chemical Light is currently suing Sun Products for patent infringement. Also Sun Products is trying to get a Judgement saying they are not infringing on United States Patent No. 6,042,487 entitled “Illuminated Golf Ball”.

There are three different cases that deal with the on going lawsuits here are some of the court documents:

First Chemical Light sued Sun Products back in 2003, Sun Products agreed to a settlement, by becoming a licensed distributor under Chemical Light and administratively dissolved through the Secretary of State of Minnesota. But then after that, it seems they rescinded on the settlement and reopened as Sun Products USA and began selling the Twilight Supernova. Seems that Sun Products then filed for Judgement to show they were not infringing on the Chem Light Patent. The third case shows that Chemical Light then sued them again for patent infringement.

The most recent updates we have are:

1:11-cv-05667 Chemical Light, Inc. v. Sun Products USA, LLC. et al:

      • There is that there is a phone conference scheduled for 12/5/2011.

      • Filed & Entered:  11/03/2011
        Docket Text: MINUTE entry before Honorable Matthew F. Kennelly: Status hearing held with attorneys for plaintiff and Mr. Gill appearing for himself and for the “LLC” defendant. The Court advised Mr. Gill that an “LLC” defendant cannot appear pro se and must have an attorney and that the Court will hold Sun Products, LLC in default unless an answer has been filed by counsel representing Sun Products, LLC. A telephone status hearing, to be initiated by the parties, is set for 12/5/2011 at 9:00 A.M. Mailed notice by judge’s staff. (srb,)

0:11-cv-02107-JNE-JJG Sun Products USA, LLC v. Chemical Light, Inc.

    • Sun Products are reissued the Summons with Complaint.

    • Filed & Entered: 11/21/2011
      Docket Text: Summons Reissued as to Chemical Light, Inc.

We will try to keep everyone up to date to see what the courts say about this. We are very interested because it could change what night golf balls are available on the market and in the end it could even effect the quality of the balls, depending on whom is still making them.

Email us with any questions or comments, we will post them here…

More Updates

1:11-cv-05667 Chemical Light, Inc. v. Sun Products USA, LLC. et al:

12/06/2011 Expedited referral to magistrate judge

    • Docket Text: Pursuant to Local Rule 72.1, this case is hereby referred to the calendar of Honorable Jeffrey T. Gilbert for the purpose of holding proceedings related to: settlement conference. (gl) Judicial staff mailed notice.

12/06/2011 set/reset hearings

    • Docket Text: MINUTE entry before Honorable Jeffrey T. Gilbert: This case has been referred to Magistrate Judge Gilbert for the purpose of conducting a settlement conference. Status hearing scheduled for 12/15/11 at 9:45 a.m. No initial status report required. However, the parties should be prepared to address the subjects referenced in Magistrate Judge Gilbert’s Standing Order for Initial Status Report posted on the Court’s website as applicable to referral cases. Mailed notice (ep)

12/05/2011 text entry

    • Docket Text: MINUTE entry before Honorable Matthew F. Kennelly: The parties’ disclosures and materials under the Local Patent Rules (LPR) are due as follows: LPR 2.1 – 12/23/11; LPR 2.2 – 1/6/12; LPR 2.3 – 1/20/12; LPR 2.5 – 2/3/12; LPR 3.1 – 6/1/12; LPR 3.2 – 6/29/12; LPR 4.1 – 7/13/12; opening claim construction brief is due 8/17/12; response is due 9/14/12; reply is due 9/28/12; joint claim construction chart and status report per LPR 4.2(f) is due 10/5/12. Claim construction hearing pursuant to LPR 4.3 is set for 11/9/12 at 10:00 a.m. The Court calls to the parties’ attention its decision in Illinois Computer Research, LLC v. Harpo Productions, Inc., 2010 WL 2136665 (N.D. Ill. May 26, 2010). (mk)

12/06/2011 status hearing

    • Docket Text: MINUTE entry before Honorable Matthew F. Kennelly:Rule 16(b)status hearing held on 12/5/2011, with attorneys for both sides. The case is referred to Magistrate Judge Gilbert to conduct a settlement conference. Status hearing is set for 2/7/2012 at 09:30 AM.Judicial staff mailed notice (gl)

12/02/2011 attorney appearance

  • Docket Text: ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendants John M. Gill, Sun Products USA, LLC. by Howard B. Rockman (Attachments: # (1) Notice of Filing)(Rockman, Howard)

Glow Light Up Golf Balls Patent Infringement Lawsuits

There are 4 main different kinds of glowing or light up night time golf balls, made by 2 different companies, Chemical Light, Inc. and Sun Products USA, Inc.

 

Chemical Light makes:

  • Glow Flyer Golf ball with single use glow stick inside.
  • Night Flyer Golf ball with LED light inside.

Sun Products USA makes:

  • Twilight Tracer Balls Golf ball with red blinking LED lights inside.
  • Twilight Supernova Balls Golf ball with non-blinking blue LED lights inside.

Chemical Light is currently suing Sun Products for patent infringement. Also Sun Products is trying to get a Judgement saying they are not infringing on United States Patent No. 6,042,487 entitled “Illuminated Golf Ball”.

There are three different cases that deal with the on going lawsuits here are some of the court documents:

  • 1:03-cv-01279 Chem Light Inc v. Sun Prod Inc
    Date filed: 02/20/2003
    Date terminated: 11/13/2003
    Date of last filing: 11/18/2003
  • 0:11-cv-02107-JNE-JJG Sun Products USA, LLC v. Chemical Light, Inc.
    Date filed: 07/27/2011
    Date of last filing: 11/21/2011
  • 1:11-cv-05667 Chemical Light, Inc. v. Sun Products USA, LLC. et al
    Date filed: 08/19/2011
    Date of last filing: 11/03/2011

First Chemical Light sued Sun Products back in 2003, Sun Products agreed to a settlement, by becoming a licensed distributor under Chemical Light and administratively dissolved through the Secretary of State of Minnesota. But then after that, it seems they rescinded on the settlement and reopened as Sun Products USA and began selling the Twilight Supernova. Seems that Sun Products then filed for Judgement to show they were not infringing on the Chem Light Patent. The third case shows that Chemical Light then sued them again for patent infringement.

The most recent updates we have are:

1:11-cv-05667 Chemical Light, Inc. v. Sun Products USA, LLC. et al:

      • There is that there is a phone conference scheduled for 12/5/2011.

      • Filed & Entered:  11/03/2011
        Docket Text: MINUTE entry before Honorable Matthew F. Kennelly: Status hearing held with attorneys for plaintiff and Mr. Gill appearing for himself and for the “LLC” defendant. The Court advised Mr. Gill that an “LLC” defendant cannot appear pro se and must have an attorney and that the Court will hold Sun Products, LLC in default unless an answer has been filed by counsel representing Sun Products, LLC. A telephone status hearing, to be initiated by the parties, is set for 12/5/2011 at 9:00 A.M. Mailed notice by judges staff. (srb,)

0:11-cv-02107-JNE-JJG Sun Products USA, LLC v. Chemical Light, Inc.

    • Sun Products are reissued the Summons with Complaint.

    • Filed & Entered: 11/21/2011
      Docket Text: Summons Reissued as to Chemical Light, Inc.

We will try to keep everyone up to date to see what the courts say about this. We are very interested because it could change what night golf balls are available on the market and in the end it could even effect the quality of the balls, depending on whom is still making them.

Email us with any questions or comments, we will post them here…

More Updates

1:11-cv-05667 Chemical Light, Inc. v. Sun Products USA, LLC. et al:

12/06/2011 Expedited referral to magistrate judge

    • Docket Text: Pursuant to Local Rule 72.1, this case is hereby referred to the calendar of Honorable Jeffrey T. Gilbert for the purpose of holding proceedings related to: settlement conference. (gl) Judicial staff mailed notice.

12/06/2011 set/reset hearings

    • Docket Text: MINUTE entry before Honorable Jeffrey T. Gilbert: This case has been referred to Magistrate Judge Gilbert for the purpose of conducting a settlement conference. Status hearing scheduled for 12/15/11 at 9:45 a.m. No initial status report required. However, the parties should be prepared to address the subjects referenced in Magistrate Judge Gilberts Standing Order for Initial Status Report posted on the Courts website as applicable to referral cases. Mailed notice (ep)

12/05/2011 text entry

    • Docket Text: MINUTE entry before Honorable Matthew F. Kennelly: The parties disclosures and materials under the Local Patent Rules (LPR) are due as follows: LPR 2.1 12/23/11; LPR 2.2 1/6/12; LPR 2.3 1/20/12; LPR 2.5 2/3/12; LPR 3.1 6/1/12; LPR 3.2 6/29/12; LPR 4.1 7/13/12; opening claim construction brief is due 8/17/12; response is due 9/14/12; reply is due 9/28/12; joint claim construction chart and status report per LPR 4.2(f) is due 10/5/12. Claim construction hearing pursuant to LPR 4.3 is set for 11/9/12 at 10:00 a.m. The Court calls to the parties attention its decision in Illinois Computer Research, LLC v. Harpo Productions, Inc., 2010 WL 2136665 (N.D. Ill. May 26, 2010). (mk)

12/06/2011 status hearing

    • Docket Text: MINUTE entry before Honorable Matthew F. Kennelly:Rule 16(b)status hearing held on 12/5/2011, with attorneys for both sides. The case is referred to Magistrate Judge Gilbert to conduct a settlement conference. Status hearing is set for 2/7/2012 at 09:30 AM.Judicial staff mailed notice (gl)

12/02/2011 attorney appearance

  • Docket Text: ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendants John M. Gill, Sun Products USA, LLC. by Howard B. Rockman (Attachments: # (1) Notice of Filing)(Rockman, Howard)