Part of the reason, according to Tom Wishon, that many drivers have better results higher up on the face is that many/most are still designed with bulge and roll in the face (a curved surface). This results in the upper part of the face producing a higher launch angle, which when combined with the fact that most folks are not using enough loft on the driver, tends to produce better trajectory and distance than a 'center' face contact.

I've always read you get higher launch along with lower spin up there.

Thought it had to do with CG and not bulge and roll.

Yes it does.

Chapter 4 of Hebron's Secrets and Lies book goes into this in great detail. Bob Bush, former Titleist designer responds to a Q&A from Hebron.

It feels like you're hitting "up" but that's because of how the weight is distributed in the clubface. Mike Tait of SMT says the sweet spot is a smidge up and in from the center of the club. No one has remembered in this thread that the ball moves while on the club face, inside quadrant and all that good stuff, so sweet spot being up and in makes sense to me...Watch Yoda's video with Brian G for good practical driver technique.

Here's the link:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=1Aj22YYI1-Q

Bunch of vids on the right sidebar.

Shows closeups of impact.

+ these:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OrXIT...elated&search=
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rBosT...elated&search=

One point about the closeups...
 

I don't have a dog in this fight, just making observations. But besides Phil's shot (Phil says that he hits the driver on the downswing and it's very obvious on film), it almost appears (on video)that the clubhead is being "driven down" by the collision with the ball, as opposed to moving down through the ball. In other words, the club looks to be moving down after impact, but not necessarily before.

That's a pretty good observation....I see it.

The only clip I see where the head moves up some is the first Tiger vid.

Do you have a link for a slow motion video of Phil? It may appear the way you describe but if you consider the considerable momentum of the clubface at impact, you know it can't be true. Here's a video of one of his team mates :eyes:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xy9GTAENiJA

http://sonicboomgolf.com/PowerGolfSpeedSwingVideos.php

This has Phil's swing, and a few others.

About the collision at impact, if you watch the videos that show closeups at impact, you can clearly see the direction of the club being altered. One of the benefits of sustaining the lag through impact is to try to offset the affects of the impact collision. If impact with the ball is capable of caving in or cracking a clubface, or snapping off the clubhead at the hosel, then surely the force at impact is sufficient enough to alter the path of the club through impact, especially since it is essentially a glancing blow (given that the club has loft).

Thanks for the link but I see no such evidence here: http://sonicboomgolf.com/PhilMickels...eSwingKeys.php
No evidence here of what you speak.

Breakdown of the materials of the clubhead is more likely to be due to faulty components of same. Do you remember when John Daly first appeared on the scene and talked of the number of clubheads that he had broken, and the move to Kelvar if memory serves me correctly. None of that today. Maybe someone here with math/physics can calculate the effective momentum of the clubhead at impact and compare it to the mass of the golfball (it has no momentum, being stationary) and show just how wrong your claim is.