Here is some additional information on cup-face technology:
http://blog.hirekogolf.com/2008/05/30/what-is-cup-face-technology-will-it-help-me-drive-the-ball-farther/

1. My first club would be called the Caiman Black Label – The black label is the same shape as the normal Caiman with same “eyes” but really made for low handicappers (Called black label because players that hit from the “tips” or black tees would play this driver). It would have neutral bias for workability and with same black PVD finish. and a semi-pear/triangular shape. It would come in 9, 10 and 10.5 degree lofts (also, if I were to make a ladies model, it would be pink or deep purple with black or red “eyes). The fairway and hybrids would match the look of the driver. However, the irons would be gun-metal black, cnc milled blades.

2. The Caiman Blue Label – This one is for mid-handicappers – The blue label has a deep blue PVD finish and has a bullet shape. This driver would come in draw and neutral models. For mid-handicappers, this club would come in 10, 10.5 and 12 degree lofts. Fairways and hybrids would match look of driver. The irons would be similar to the xmoi transitional hybrid set but the 5-pw would be traditional irons.

3. Finally, The Caiman White label – This one is for high-handicappers – or players hitting from the white tees. This model would have a chrome pvd finish with a white crown. It would be square shaped with lofts of 10.5 and 12. Fairways and Hybrids would match look of driver. Irons would be exactly like the xmoi hybrids but with a chrome finish with white cavity back insert.

Yes, I realize you were just asking for driver ideas, but I need to tie it all together

The Rapture is a traditional shape. The Mizuno is a carbon crown head designed to lower the CG and launch the ball higher. Ping concentrated on crown and face structures to help optimize performance and sound.

Anyway, each bag of balls at the range contains approximately 35. During an “inactive period,” I hit three bags (105 balls) once in a month. I usually use just my driver for all of the balls. During a “driving range fever” period, I can hit nine bags (315 balls) twice a week, for two weeks (1260 balls total), all with my driver. I use my driver a lot.

The most balls I have ever hit with a 320cc+ driver before it broke are around 630 (105/month for six months). If I have “the fever,” I can hit 630 balls in just one week! I can not afford (and it would be too aggravating) to break a driver every week to six months. I play all year. The smaller titanium drivers that I use now last an exponentially longer time. I have not managed to wear one out yet. The paint job goes crazy and the face flattens slightly, but that is it.

Even if I used my driver only 18 times every week on average like a normal (but still active) golfer might, it would only take around eight months to need another one. That is still a short time. I know other golfers that break their drivers this often, so my numbers should be meaningful. Modern drivers do not last long enough.

A square profile is a nice indicator of what the face angle should be. It is easy to properly align a closed or open face when you have a square profile to aim with. On the other side, in my opinion, non-square faces look awful on square clubheads. Still, performance wise, I think at least one side of the clubhead being square is very useful.

The triangular profile is exciting to me. It looks fast and gives me a psychological boost. The triangle is fun, but may make me swing to hard. Thinking fast and thus swinging too fast is a big disadvantage. Additionally, the face of the club looks smaller on triangles, resulting in less confidence on my part. The triangle is the club I wish I could use, but can’t.

“Skirtless” clubheads just plain look better to me. The skirtless heads I have used in the past have almost all been top performers. From what I have heard, they are less aerodynamic, though. I believe the positive psychological influence of a skirtless club is greater than any possible aerodynamic (or otherwise) performance advantage. My impression is that the skirtless driver probably performs better, regardless of what I have heard, anyway.

I think scooped crowns are interesting, but wouldn’t the crown just going straight back to the skirt or sole be more efficient and save some mass that can be redistributed for the same affect or greater than a scoop. A straight line is shorter than a curve to the same point. An extreme scoop might help me with visualizing the sole position like Bill Berninghausen mentioned. I really like that idea.

All of my thoughts considered and combined, I would say that a geometry with the heal a slightly rounded square and the toe side a very pointed triangle would be good. The face would not extend far towards the toe, but would be normal on the heel side. There would be no offset.

The main difference with “Hereko’s 1st Response” in my profile would be the back of the driver’s clubhead. I would want it square with the target, not pointing like an extremely open clubface. Additionally, an extreme scoop combined with the no-skirt configuration would be preferred by me. I would not want any ridges inside the scoop to strengthen the crown or encourage closing the face. Those things are not as big a factor to me as the “Berninghausen Scoop” idea.

I do not need a sole that aids in alignment on a driver. I hold the head above the ground (no contact) at address like I would want to swing though the ball and not take any divot. I would appreciate a sole designed to eliminate turf drag when contact with the ground does occur, though. Not anything overly elaborate, just a “T-Sole” with a relatively great deal of depth to the recessions on each side of the area behind the face. The “T-Sole” has no recession behind the face along the middle.

Anyway, just a thought, but I find limiting design emphasis to the geometry of the head not good. Geometry is not THAT big an issue to me. Geometry is exciting and needs to be perfected for modern standards, but simply, the durability of the head is my main concern. Gigantic, 460ish, mostly constructed of 6-4 titanium drivers have very thin side walls and sometimes weak welds or brazing. They don’t hold up to frequent, repeated, and prolonged use. Make a high quality 320cc driver with my preferred geometry, and I’m sold! I don’t consider buying drivers larger than that, and have been that way for a long time after much testing of that conviction.