One thing about OEMs though is that they test their products quite extensively, both with swing machines and real golfers.
The clubs that I can buy off the shelf from an OEM have never / ever been hit by a machine or a human.
Golfsmith have carried out the only objective testing of ’spine aligning’ that I know of, but I am not sure if they have published the results yet.
I’d be interested in seeing that since they promote "pureing" as being different and superior to "spine aligning." Dave Clary/Corpus Christi, Tx Home: http://home.stx.rr.com/dclary RSG Roll Call http://www.rec-sport-golf.com/members/?rollcall=claryd
Some things are inevitable–death, taxes, Mike and Rob on club fitting… And so it goes. :-) Dave Clary/Corpus Christi, Tx Home: http://home.stx.rr.com/dclary RSG Roll Call http://www.rec-sport-golf.com/members/?rollcall=claryd
Some things are inevitable–death, taxes, Mike and Rob on club fitting… And so it goes. :-)
Actually, our views are quite complimentary. My beleif is that you need to spend a good amount of time selecting the right shaft, clubhead, length of club etc while Mike puts a lot into how the clubs are made once you select what you have determined will work best for you. — RSG Masters 2004 pre-preliminary format http://home.att.net/~frostback2002 RSG Roll Call: http://rec-sport-golf.com/?rc=frostback "The privilege of a lifetime is being who you are" Joseph Campbell
Golfsmith have carried out the only objective testing of ’spine aligning’ that I know of, but I am not sure if they have published the results yet. I’d be interested in seeing that since they promote "pureing" as being different and superior to "spine aligning."
I cannot see how ‘pureing’ can be different and superior to ’spine aligning’ as they are essentially both the same! So-called ‘pureing’ comes from the use of the automatic and computerised ‘SST Pure’ system that is the product of the Dick Weiss patent. This patent does not claim any rights to the notion of ’spine aligning’ (although the hype makes it appear so). The inventive feature of the patent is the computerised machine that does it automatically. Apart from the automation it simply does what you or I would do in order to ’spine align’ manually. In addition to the simple manual process the ‘computer’ also produces ‘before’ and ‘after’ printouts of the familiar polar plot of the movement of the shaft tip, showing the non-spined version and the neat straight line spined version. I believe it also provides other printout data which includes a ‘certificate’ to show that it has been done. The patent provides a protected marketing tool for licensees who have purchased or are using the machine as part of their business. cheers david
I have B-C weights in both my Callawat 2-ball and SC Newport putters. I have the full insert which weighs 54grams with the additional 50gram weight screwed into it for a 104gram total.
That’s interesting……how were you ‘fitted’ for these weights? Are they arbitrarily provided or did you go through some fitting process…I understand different golfers need different weights…probably in accordance with the sensitivity in their fingers. I have now had an opportunity to road test the effect of adding weights in terms of grip sensation felt when lightly tapping the club face against a piece of wood. With the putter I actually used a ball on the carpet at home! There is no doubt about it….as you progressively add weight you feel an increasing ‘tingling’ sensation in your fingers as you tap the ball/wood. I progressively added weight until I could feel a slightly crisp woody sort of feel in the fingers and then did practice swings to get a feel for it. I used test weights in the form of strips of plumbers lead sheet (3lb/sq. ft)…I had a 24 grm weight, a 42 gram weight, a 61 gram weight and a 140 gram weight….which used in combinations gave me a choice of 24grams, 42 grams, 61 grams, 66 grams, 85 grams, 103 grams, 127 grams,140 grams etc. These were strips about 1" wide up to 4 or 5" long, simply wrapped around the top of the grip……the 140 gram weight was about 2 1/2" wide strip. In my putter..a 33 1/2" head weight augmented Ping Derby…..a total of 127gm seemed to produce the best results on the carpet putting tests. In my Orlimar 16*+ (4 1/2 wood-Grafalloy Solite shaft) a total of 24 grams gave the crispest feel…and in my 44 1/2" 365cc Deep Red driver I got the best results with 66 grams added weight. I’ll now have some proper ‘plugs’ machined to fit inside the grip end of the shafts and try them all out on the range. I was intrigued to find that the apprpriate high weight added to the putter grip more or less conformed with the 100+ gram weight added to the grip ends of your putters! This is promising! cheers david
That’s interesting……how were you ‘fitted’ for these weights? Are they arbitrarily provided or did you go through some fitting process…I understand different golfers need different weights…probably in accordance with the sensitivity in their fingers. I have now had an opportunity to road test the effect of adding weights in terms of grip sensation felt when lightly tapping the club face against a piece of wood. With the putter I actually used a ball on the carpet at home!
The weights are removeable, came in 10/20/30/50 grams. I just tried the 10 and kept progressing from there until it "felt" right. The weights screw in from the top of the butt so changing them took all of two minutes. There is no doubt about it….as you progressively add weight you feel an increasing ‘tingling’ sensation in your fingers as you tap the ball/wood. I progressively added weight until I could feel a slightly crisp woody sort of feel in the fingers and then did practice swings to get a feel for it. I used test weights in the form of strips of plumbers lead sheet (3lb/sq. ft)…I had a 24 grm weight, a 42 gram weight, a 61 gram weight and a 140 gram weight….which used in combinations gave me a choice of 24grams, 42 grams, 61 grams, 66 grams, 85 grams, 103 grams, 127 grams,140 grams etc. These were strips about 1" wide up to 4 or 5" long, simply wrapped around the top of the grip……the 140 gram weight was about 2 1/2" wide strip.
I do not get any "tingling" sensation at all. Rather the putter feels heavier and more stable. Certainly the plumbers’ lead would be a much cheaper alternative, and at 4-5" long would replicate pretty closely the length of the B-C insert. In my putter..a 33 1/2" head weight augmented Ping Derby…..a total of 127gm seemed to produce the best results on the carpet putting tests. In my Orlimar 16*+ (4 1/2 wood-Grafalloy Solite shaft) a total of 24 grams gave the crispest feel…and in my 44 1/2" 365cc Deep Red driver I got the best results with 66 grams added weight. I’ll now have some proper ‘plugs’ machined to fit inside the grip end of the shafts and try them all out on the range. I was intrigued to find that the apprpriate high weight added to the putter grip more or less conformed with the 100+ gram weight added to the grip ends of your putters! This is promising! cheers david
Looks like you are on the right track, david. Interesting stuff!! — David Sneddon Hi-Tech Turf Synthetic Turf Applications Tel: 519-259-2092
One thing about OEMs though is that they test their products quite extensively, both with swing machines and real golfers. Many people use their clubs quite successfully right off the rack. Local clubmakers make a lot of claims about value added serives they provide that OEMs don’t, but lack any test results. Despite a vested interest like Bruinswick matching shafts to their Brunswick slope, they have not produced and data to show that such matching makes a difference over trimming according to manufacturers instructions. Vested interests like SSTpureing align shafts, but have no data that aligning makes any real difference, only some hype about "feel". Clubmakers use peer pressure, personal incredulity/credulity and bullying to promote their value added services; as I have personally experienced on RSG, for example. As I state repeatedly, there is no substitute for trial and error. With trial and error you *KNOW* from personal experience what works best for you. The best feeling clubs I ever hit were Mizuno Sures with R/S flex shafts (they were red in colour), and I hit a lot of nice shots, but the dispersion pattern was not very good. OTOH, the shafts I hit the ball best with felt a little harsh and clunky in comparison to other graphite shafts, but data showed that over hundreds of shots, I made more shots with those shafts than the others I looked at. I *KNOW* that my shotmaking is twice as good with graphite compared with steel, over thousands of shots, because the difference is so great, the best steel was nowhere close to the worst graphite. — RSG Masters 2004 pre-preliminary format http://home.att.net/~frostback2002 RSG Roll Call: http://rec-sport-golf.com/?rc=frostback "The privilege of a lifetime is being who you are" Joseph Campbell
When you see people who are supposedly matching sets and not using some sort of alignment reference, you’re probably not getting as matched a set as they–and you–think. Even steel shafts like Dynamic Gold shafts have some variation in flex depending on what orientation they are measured in. If they’re not matching on the frequency-measured plane and making marks indicating what that plane is, then it’s quite possible they’re being mismatched at assembly.
This is one thing I made sure of when I assembled my set. I marked the shafts and clubheads so they had the same orientation when I frequency measured and assembled them. When the epoxy had set over night I rechecked them the next day and every club had a 4 cpm differential through the set. David Laville, G.S.E.M. The Golfing Machine Authorized Instructor
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Some things are inevitable–death, taxes, Mike and Rob on club fitting… And so it goes. :-) Actually, our views are quite complimentary. My beleif is that you need to spend a good amount of time selecting the right shaft, clubhead, length of club etc while Mike puts a lot into how the clubs are made once you select what you have determined will work best for you. That’s an interesting spin. Perhaps you could get a part time PR gig with the Lakers. :-) Dave Clary/Corpus Christi,TX Home: http://home.stx.rr.com/dclary RSG Roll Call http://www.rec-sport-golf.com/members/?rollcall=claryd
Lakers don’t need Rob. They need a Point Guard who’s not going to jail.
Some things are inevitable–death, taxes, Mike and Rob on club fitting… And so it goes. :-) Actually, our views are quite complimentary. My beleif is that you need to spend a good amount of time selecting the right shaft, clubhead, length of club etc while Mike puts a lot into how the clubs are made once you select what you have determined will work best for you.
That’s an interesting spin. Perhaps you could get a part time PR gig with the Lakers. :-) Dave Clary/Corpus Christi,TX Home: http://home.stx.rr.com/dclary RSG Roll Call http://www.rec-sport-golf.com/members/?rollcall=claryd
I thought the joy of a pure strike was that the golfer doesn’t feel *anything*. Now Mr Lindner wants to set us up so we still feel something, even when the impact is perfect?
There is something to that Colin, the sensation with a perfect strike from a 3-iron ‘blade’ says it all! However, you can still ‘feel’ that in order to have any sensation at all! in which you don’t feel ‘anything’! cheers david
The new jazz on the block is something called ‘Balance_Certification’ by Balance Certified Golf, Inc. A Patent Application has recently been published by Jeffrey Lindner, CEO, Publication Number US 2003/0148819, Publication Date August 7, 2003……and it is described as a ‘Method and Apparatus for Improving Dynamic Response of Golf Club’.
I have B-C weights in both my Callawat 2-ball and SC Newport putters. I have the full insert which weighs 54grams with the additional 50gram weight screwed into it for a 104gram total. I really like them – the extra weight in the butt end would appear to take the wrist out of the stroke for the most part. They have them for woods and irons too, but I don’t like the feel – clubhead is too light, IMHO. My friend plays one in his driver – absolutely loves it. — David Sneddon Hi-Tech Turf Synthetic Turf Applications Tel: 519-259-2092
: Read an interesting article today about spine aligning. The article said : that a set of clubs you purchase could have all their spines aligned : differently , thus insuring inconsistancy no matter how good your swing. : : For what you pay for OEM clubs, this is a crying shame. One thing I can say : is that lie angles in OEM clubs are not always consistant. When I had my : irons adjusted to 2 degrees up, the fitter said two of my irons already were : 1- 2 degrees up! Based on this experience, I have bought my last set of OEM : clubs. There is just too much good component stuff out there and for less : price it seems like the quality control offered by a qualified fitter is : much higher. : : I have a set of Wishon heads waiting to be assembled. I am going the whole : route, frequency matching, spine aligning, lie checks, etc. Want to do it : right this time. When I hit it in the woods, I want 100% of the blame, : instead of 6.3% on the equipment!!. : : Anyone have experience to relate regarding spine aligning and is it all that : it is cracked up to be? : : Eric "the Hammer" No experience at all, but…my set of Wishon heads arrived today! I got 4 550C heads (3i-6i) and 4 550M heads (7i-PW). I took ‘em up on their shaft sale too, got a dozen Dynamic Gold R300s. I don’t have the stuff to find the NBP or measure frequencies in different orientations, but I am going to weight-sort the shafts, make sure the swingweights are right (got a dozen of the swingweight bore brass weights) and hope for the best. — http://rec-sport-golf.com/members/?rollcall=oinesroald Please remove the under_scores if sending me mail.
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Read an interesting article today about spine aligning. The article said that a set of clubs you purchase could have all their spines aligned differently , thus insuring inconsistancy no matter how good your swing. For what you pay for OEM clubs, this is a crying shame. One thing I can say is that lie angles in OEM clubs are not always consistant. When I had my irons adjusted to 2 degrees up, the fitter said two of my irons already were 1- 2 degrees up! Based on this experience, I have bought my last set of OEM clubs. There is just too much good component stuff out there and for less price it seems like the quality control offered by a qualified fitter is much higher. I have a set of Wishon heads waiting to be assembled. I am going the whole route, frequency matching, spine aligning, lie checks, etc. Want to do it right this time. When I hit it in the woods, I want 100% of the blame, instead of 6.3% on the equipment!!. Anyone have experience to relate regarding spine aligning and is it all that it is cracked up to be? Eric "the Hammer"
As you know, I’ve done this for quite a while. I don’t build a club where I don’t do it, in fact, whether it be steel or graphite. It’s especially important for graphite, and I do it for steel as well. Not only do I believe that this improves the performance of the club, but it’s also necessary to do some kind of aligning to properly match a set. Here’s why: Most graphite shafts, if they’re sheet wrapped especially, do not have the same frequency response (read: flex) in all orientations. In other words, a shaft can play stiffer with the label up, say, as opposed to the label being sideways. Or vice versa. I’ve seen shafts with 1/2 flex difference or more just based on this orientation. If you want to match the frequency (flex) of a set, you have to establish a plane in which you are measuring frequency, and then make sure you orient that plane in the same direction for all clubs in the set. What I’ll do is spine the shafts, and identify the neutral bending point (or plane) as the orientation I want facing the target. Then I’ll measure the frequency of the shaft in that plane. When it’s time to assemble the club and match it to a specific frequency slope, I’ll tip-trim the shaft until I get exactly the frequency I want, *in that plane.* Then when it’s time to assemble, I’ll put the shaft in my spinjig and FLO it vertically in that plane (it’s much easier to do that way given the setup I have). Then I’ll turn the shaft 90* in the spinjig (the whole purpose of using the spinjig), and then affix the clubhead with the leading edge square to that FLO plane. I’ll then use masking tape to make alignment marks to retain that orientation when I epoxy the clubs. This way I know what the frequency is going to be in the plane of unloading the shaft through the hitting zone. When you see people who are supposedly matching sets and not using some sort of alignment reference, you’re probably not getting as matched a set as they–and you–think. Even steel shafts like Dynamic Gold shafts have some variation in flex depending on what orientation they are measured in. If they’re not matching on the frequency-measured plane and making marks indicating what that plane is, then it’s quite possible they’re being mismatched at assembly. I’ve seen such shafts w/ a 3-4 cpm difference depending on orientation. Imagine how the flexes will differ if you measure the low frequency and install it in the high-frequency orientation on your 7-iron, and do the opposite on your 6-iron. They’ll differ by half a flex just from that, if you’re unlucky enough for it to work out that way. I believe that spining matters somewhat in steel shafts in irons, but the effect is less than you will see in graphite shafts, and especially less than you’ll see in graphite shafts in woods. The upshot of all this is that you are not going to get this from the OEM people. I’ve checked a number of sets; none have been matched, to say nothing of spine aligned. That doesn’t mean that OEM stuff is garbage, but that there just isn’t the kind of matching you might get in other contexts. I think Titleist makes some pretty decent drivers; Taylormade, too. Callaway, on the other hand, is known for having shafts of somewhat lesser consistency in their drivers, for instance. Just don’t assume that you’ll automatically get premium quality in OEM stuff, premium assembly and matching, because the evidence suggests otherwise. Mike Mike Dalecki GCA Accredited Clubmaker RSG-Wisconsin 2003 Information: http://dalecki.net/rsgwis2003 RSG Roll Call: http://rec-sport-golf.com/members/?rollcall=daleckim I do not patronize spammers. Help keep RSG clean!
The new jazz on the block is something called ‘Balance_Certification’ by Balance Certified Golf, Inc. A Patent Application has recently been published by Jeffrey Lindner, CEO, Publication Number US 2003/0148819, Publication Date August 7, 2003……and it is described as a ‘Method and Apparatus for Improving Dynamic Response of Golf Club’. The ‘invention’ relies on the fact that when a golf club vibrates at its natural (unpinned) frequency (ie. hit the club and suspend it freely) it sets up a fundamental single ‘vibration’ wave along its length…the node of the wave at the grip end is demonstrated both in practice and mathematically to be approximately 26% of the club length from the grip end.
Where will it end? I thought the joy of a pure strike was that the golfer doesn’t feel *anything*. Now Mr Lindner wants to set us up so we still feel something, even when the impact is perfect? Maybe we all need a different sort of certification! 
— Cheers Colin Wilson RSG Roll Call: http://rec-sport-golf.com/members/?rollcall=wilsonc Trentham Golf Club: http://www.trenthamgolf.com
Anyone have experience to relate regarding spine aligning and is it all that it is cracked up to be?
Golfsmith have carried out the only objective testing of ’spine aligning’ that I know of, but I am not sure if they have published the results yet. There is a consensus that ’spine aligning’ does nothing for distance..but contributes quite significantly to accuracy….ie. all clubs will err the same way! The new jazz on the block is something called ‘Balance_Certification’ by Balance Certified Golf, Inc. A Patent Application has recently been published by Jeffrey Lindner, CEO, Publication Number US 2003/0148819, Publication Date August 7, 2003……and it is described as a ‘Method and Apparatus for Improving Dynamic Response of Golf Club’. The ‘invention’ relies on the fact that when a golf club vibrates at its natural (unpinned) frequency (ie. hit the club and suspend it freely) it sets up a fundamental single ‘vibration’ wave along its length…the node of the wave at the grip end is demonstrated both in practice and mathematically to be approximately 26% of the club length from the grip end. This ‘node’ is where there is absolutely no vibration to be felt at all….and is commonly at the point on the shaft (especially a putter) where it would be relatively close to the lower hand in a normal grip. This is the ‘feel’ hand that is looking for feedback from a stroke. If it is directly on the node there would be no tangible ‘feedback’….and hence a frustrating lack of control and feel in the stroke. The invention notes that if weight is added at the grip end of the club this will perturb the position of the node and move it further up the shaft by anything up to 15% of its length…thus moving it away from the common grip position. This will bring a palpable degree of the natural vibration of the club into the actual grip area….and thus provide all the feedback that is needed. The sort of weights involved appear to be of the order of 10, 20 or 30 grams only…and need to be established for each individual club according to the response felt by the player. The actual weight used is quite important….and a 5 or 10 gram error can have a significant effect. Clearly, this also falsely affects the measured ’swing weight’ of the club …..but the effective ’swing weight’ is still there, so this is not really a problem. The overall effect is that the player obtains a real ‘feel’ response, being able to ‘feel’ the head at all times and especially the contact with the ball…leading to much more confident strokes.. leading to an overall improvement in distance and accuracy. These improvements are measurable and in pro hands they mean ‘money’!! Apparently Scott Hoch has adopted the system….and his putting statistics have moved him up some 100 places in the putting stakes in quite a short period of time! I am currently experimenting with my putter..wrapping different weights of lead around the tip of the grip…and I must say there does appear to be something to it!! The ‘feel’ of each shot does seem quite different! cheers david
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Read an interesting article today about spine aligning. The article said that a set of clubs you purchase could have all their spines aligned differently , thus insuring inconsistancy no matter how good your swing. For what you pay for OEM clubs, this is a crying shame. One thing I can say is that lie angles in OEM clubs are not always consistant. When I had my irons adjusted to 2 degrees up, the fitter said two of my irons already were 1- 2 degrees up! Based on this experience, I have bought my last set of OEM clubs. There is just too much good component stuff out there and for less price it seems like the quality control offered by a qualified fitter is much higher. I have a set of Wishon heads waiting to be assembled. I am going the whole route, frequency matching, spine aligning, lie checks, etc. Want to do it right this time. When I hit it in the woods, I want 100% of the blame, instead of 6.3% on the equipment!!. Anyone have experience to relate regarding spine aligning and is it all that it is cracked up to be? Eric "the Hammer"
For graphite shafts, yes. Very important to have the Neutral Bending point on the plane. This will have a serious affect on shsft to shaft consistency. It’s equally important- At The Same Time- to frquency match them so the flexes are all the same. With stell shafts, the spin alignment thing is basically a non-issue, but frequency matching them for flex is just as important. The Club Doctor did a blind test with three otherwise identical graphite shafted drivers. He correctly aligned one club perfectly, and purposely miss-aligned the other two. He sent all 3 clubs to various folks to hit. Everyone was able to identify which club was properly aligned. Everone. They simply strike the ball and feel much better. Longer, straighter, etc. It was no contest.
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Read an interesting article today about spine aligning. The article said that a set of clubs you purchase could have all their spines aligned differently , thus insuring inconsistancy no matter how good your swing. For what you pay for OEM clubs, this is a crying shame. One thing I can say is that lie angles in OEM clubs are not always consistant. When I had my irons adjusted to 2 degrees up, the fitter said two of my irons already were 1- 2 degrees up! Based on this experience, I have bought my last set of OEM clubs. There is just too much good component stuff out there and for less price it seems like the quality control offered by a qualified fitter is much higher. I have a set of Wishon heads waiting to be assembled. I am going the whole route, frequency matching, spine aligning, lie checks, etc. Want to do it right this time. When I hit it in the woods, I want 100% of the blame, instead of 6.3% on the equipment!!. Anyone have experience to relate regarding spine aligning and is it all that it is cracked up to be? Eric "the Hammer"
Hey Eric, I will also never buy a set of OEM clubs again. I paid $1300 for a set of graphite regular shafted Ping I3 OBlades earlier this year after being fitted by a pro Ping fitter person. I couldn’t hit that set of clubs to save my life and asked Ping if I could return them. Nope, sorry. So I sent them to a club maker who frequents this group to have them reshafted. He frequency tested the shafts and found them all to be so far away from regular stiffness that it was, well, a very sad display of quality control. So, I sent the frequency test chart to Ping along with another request to return my money. Lo and behold, they refunded my whole amount with the comment "if you would have asked us we would have frequency tested those shafts for you". WHAT? You pay $1300 bucks for a set of irons and you have to ASK to have them tested? Never again for me. Btw, I ended up ordering a set of graphite shafted Callaway Hawkeye VFT knockoffs, which I hit very well, for around $500. — Dave Jones RSG Roll Call http://rec-sport-golf.com/members/?rollcall=jonesd
Read an interesting article today about spine aligning. The article said that a set of clubs you purchase could have all their spines aligned differently , thus insuring inconsistancy no matter how good your swing. For what you pay for OEM clubs, this is a crying shame. One thing I can say is that lie angles in OEM clubs are not always consistant. When I had my irons adjusted to 2 degrees up, the fitter said two of my irons already were 1- 2 degrees up! Based on this experience, I have bought my last set of OEM clubs. There is just too much good component stuff out there and for less price it seems like the quality control offered by a qualified fitter is much higher. I have a set of Wishon heads waiting to be assembled. I am going the whole route, frequency matching, spine aligning, lie checks, etc. Want to do it right this time. When I hit it in the woods, I want 100% of the blame, instead of 6.3% on the equipment!!. Anyone have experience to relate regarding spine aligning and is it all that it is cracked up to be? Eric "the Hammer"
If you are so a mind to, go to a Golfsmith location, or an outlet that sells components, buy a ten dollar book on clubmaking, the necessary components / accessories, and assemble your own clubs. Independent golf equipment outlets usually have cloned clubs for sale. Look around in your neighborhood. —— Thanks. Could you recommend me where can I get the best deal, if you know any good place. Kev
m h o
Tiger was interviewed by Dan Patrick on ESPN radio today and one of the things they discussed was the fact that some great courses are becoming obsolete for the pros. Tiger chimed in as being in favor of ball and COR restrictions. One thing he said that I didn’t know was that Nicklaus was saying the same thing about balls the 70s! You can hear the segment on espnradio.com. Click on the Dan Patrick show, and they the playback for today’s show. Fast forward to 1:19. Dave Clary/Corpus Christi, Tx Home: http://home.stx.rr.com/dclary RSG Roll Call http://www.rec-sport-golf.com/members/?rollcall=claryd
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Tiger was interviewed by Dan Patrick on ESPN radio today and one of the things they discussed was the fact that some great courses are becoming obsolete for the pros. Tiger chimed in as being in favor of ball and COR restrictions. One thing he said that I didn’t know was that Nicklaus was saying the same thing about balls the 70s! You can hear the segment on espnradio.com. Click on the Dan Patrick show, and they the playback for today’s show. Fast forward to 1:19. Dave Clary/Corpus Christi, Tx Home: http://home.stx.rr.com/dclary RSG Roll Call http://www.rec-sport-golf.com/members/?rollcall=claryd
Someone was saying that the CORs should be unrestricted because there is a limit but that the balls should be controlled. Made sense to me. Geez, some guy won a long ball driving contest with 400+ yds.
Tiger was interviewed by Dan Patrick on ESPN radio today and one of the things they discussed was the fact that some great courses are becoming obsolete for the pros. Tiger chimed in as being in favor of ball and COR restrictions. One thing he said that I didn’t know was that Nicklaus was saying the same thing about balls the 70s! You can hear the segment on espnradio.com. Click on the Dan Patrick show, and they the playback for today’s show. Fast forward to 1:19.
Thanks for the exact location, or I never would have found it. I wonder why ESPN keeps it a secret? No mention of Tiger on the web page, and no mention of Tiger in the show’s opening list of what’s coming. Strange. As for the comments, how can anyone dispute that the ball has to be restricted? What are they waiting for, 500-yard drives?
The only difference is, back in the 70’s golfers actually HAD balls. Now they’re just whiny, homogenized, impotent, mama’s boys, who do more complaining than golfing. And through the wonder of evolution, the next generation of golfer will be so worthless and weak, their spinal columns will be structurally unable to support the weight of their own malformed mongoloid craniums. Let’s hope abortion is still legal then, or we’ll be up to our asses in them.
Kudos for the well-crafted words and syntax and though it makes for an interesting read, it has great form but no substance. The controversy about golf equipment ruining the integrity of the game will always be there and as a previous poster noted, even Jack Nicklaus himself apparently complained about the balls. Ultimately it’s really the USGA that has to make the decision and way back in the 1980s, I remember they made clubs with "square grooves" illegal because they made it easier to spin the ball compared to the "v" groove clubs and thus supposedly devalued the importance of shotmaking. Having said that, I will agree that players do whine more than ever but that is true not only if golf but in ALL professional sports. Look at the current NBA players. They’re just spoiled millionaires who live a charmed life and really have nothing to complain about. In short, your prognosis about the demise of the professional golfer is greatly exaggerated. Or at least I hope it’s exaggerated because it’s a trend that exists not only in golf but in all of sports in general, be it professional or amateur. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – The only difference is, back in the 70’s golfers actually HAD balls. Now they’re just whiny, homogenized, impotent, mama’s boys, who do more complaining than golfing. And through the wonder of evolution, the next generation of golfer will be so worthless and weak, their spinal columns will be structurally unable to support the weight of their own malformed mongoloid craniums. Let’s hope abortion is still legal then, or we’ll be up to our asses in them.
Golf can sometimes place too much control in the players hands. In every pro sport (baseball, football, hockey, tennis, etc) the league issues the object (ball, puck, etc) and no other can be used. Imagine if when Barry Bonds came to the plate he handed the pitcher a sack of balls that he wanted pitched to him. Is this not rediculous? Is pro golf not the same for allowing players this much control over their game (and subsequent opportunity to gain an unfair advantage?) Good for you Tiger! Your legacy to golf may not be wins, money and majors, but bringing a standardization to the pro golf that is long long overdue.
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Tiger was interviewed by Dan Patrick on ESPN radio today and one of the things they discussed was the fact that some great courses are becoming obsolete for the pros. Tiger chimed in as being in favor of ball and COR restrictions. One thing he said that I didn’t know was that Nicklaus was saying the same thing about balls the 70s! You can hear the segment on espnradio.com. Click on the Dan Patrick show, and they the playback for today’s show. Fast forward to 1:19. Dave Clary/Corpus Christi, Tx Home: http://home.stx.rr.com/dclary RSG Roll Call http://www.rec-sport-golf.com/members/?rollcall=claryd
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Kudos for the well-crafted words and syntax and though it makes for an interesting read, it has great form but no substance. The controversy about golf equipment ruining the integrity of the game will always be there and as a previous poster noted, even Jack Nicklaus himself apparently complained about the balls. Ultimately it’s really the USGA that has to make the decision and way back in the 1980s, I remember they made clubs with "square grooves" illegal because they made it easier to spin the ball compared to the "v" groove clubs and thus supposedly devalued the importance of shotmaking. Having said that, I will agree that players do whine more than ever but that is true not only if golf but in ALL professional sports. Look at the current NBA players. They’re just spoiled millionaires who live a charmed life and really have nothing to complain about. In short, your prognosis about the demise of the professional golfer is greatly exaggerated. Or at least I hope it’s exaggerated because it’s a trend that exists not only in golf but in all of sports in general, be it professional or amateur. The only difference is, back in the 70’s golfers actually HAD balls. Now they’re just whiny, homogenized, impotent, mama’s boys, who do more complaining than golfing. And through the wonder of evolution, the next generation of golfer will be so worthless and weak, their spinal columns will be structurally unable to support the weight of their own malformed mongoloid craniums. Let’s hope abortion is still legal then, or we’ll be up to our asses in them.
Do you work for a golf ball company?
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Tiger was interviewed by Dan Patrick on ESPN radio today and one of the things they discussed was the fact that some great courses are becoming obsolete for the pros. Tiger chimed in as being in favor of ball and COR restrictions. One thing he said that I didn’t know was that Nicklaus was saying the same thing about balls the 70s! You can hear the segment on espnradio.com. Click on the Dan Patrick show, and they the playback for today’s show. Fast forward to 1:19. Dave Clary/Corpus Christi, Tx Home: http://home.stx.rr.com/dclary RSG Roll Call http://www.rec-sport-golf.com/members/?rollcall=claryd
Maybe there is money to be made for some company who makes a perfectly round and balanced ball with throttled distance and a distinctive color that people can play and that will be obvious that they are supporting golf as a sport instead of a business.
well besides the ball, players do have tons of control over their games. Baseball players can choose what bats, cletes, gloves to use. In hockey there is a big difference in sticks and goalie equipment. The guys running around with them Easton Synergys are just blasting the puck around the ice. If they used a standard wood stick, there shots wouldnt be as hard. Is this not rediculous? Is pro golf not the same for allowing players this much control over their game (and subsequent opportunity to gain an unfair advantage?)
I dont think its ridiculous. The rules apply to everyone. Phil Mickelson can use TW’s ball, TW’s can use someone elses ball. If one player has an unfair advantage because of a ball, you can bet the rest of the field would have the same ball the next week. In the PGA I think everyone is on a pretty close playing field as far as clubs and balls are concerned. Most of them use the ProV1, ProV1*, a few Srixon, Precept users, the callaway ball. Nobody out there has a significant advantage becasue of ball or club, just let the guys play….. Maybe I just dont understand what the big deal is…. who cares how far they will be able to hit the ball? Just make everyone use the old persimmon woods……
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Golf can sometimes place too much control in the players hands. In every pro sport (baseball, football, hockey, tennis, etc) the league issues the object (ball, puck, etc) and no other can be used. Imagine if when Barry Bonds came to the plate he handed the pitcher a sack of balls that he wanted pitched to him. Is this not rediculous? Is pro golf not the same for allowing players this much control over their game (and subsequent opportunity to gain an unfair advantage?) Good for you Tiger! Your legacy to golf may not be wins, money and majors, but bringing a standardization to the pro golf that is long long overdue. Tiger was interviewed by Dan Patrick on ESPN radio today and one of the things they discussed was the fact that some great courses are becoming obsolete for the pros. Tiger chimed in as being in favor of ball and COR restrictions. One thing he said that I didn’t know was that Nicklaus was saying the same thing about balls the 70s! You can hear the segment on espnradio.com. Click on the Dan Patrick show, and they the playback for today’s show. Fast forward to 1:19. Dave Clary/Corpus Christi, Tx Home: http://home.stx.rr.com/dclary RSG Roll Call http://www.rec-sport-golf.com/members/?rollcall=claryd
Maybe I just dont understand what the big deal is…. who cares how far they will be able to hit the ball? Just make everyone use the old persimmon woods……
In the interview, Tiger said he does hit persimmon in practice, and when he hits it square, he gets only about five yards less than with titanium. He said the real difference is when you don’t hit it square.
Maybe I just dont understand what the big deal is…. who cares how far they will be able to hit the ball? Just make everyone use the old persimmon woods……
One thing Woods said in the interview was that he still practices with persimmons and loves to hit them. And he says that the titanium drivers don’t hit the ball much further—-IF you make good contact. Off center hits are another matter. Dave Clary/Corpus Christi, Tx Home: http://home.stx.rr.com/dclary RSG Roll Call http://www.rec-sport-golf.com/members/?rollcall=claryd
BUT!!!! Will tiger practice what he preaches? I doubt we will ever know as NO ONE will ever snitch on tw.
Maybe there is money to be made for some company who makes a perfectly round and balanced ball with throttled distance and a distinctive color that people can play and that will be obvious that they are supporting golf as a sport instead of a business.
There’s no money to be made deliberately limiting the distance of the ball without any USGA and R&A ruling in effect. But if the ball was limited by rule I don’t think the ball makers would miss a beat. You can still market a Pro V2x or Top Flight if they go 290 when Tiger hits a good one instead of 340. What ball makers would really fear would be the PGA Tour making a different ball spec a local rule ("condition of competition") above and beyond the rules of golf like their current requirement that a player has to play the same make of ball for all 18 holes of a round. Then if Tiger used a "Nike TW2" and Mickelson a "Pro V2x" the amateurs wouldn’t buy them, and it’d be harder to convince people that they are getting the same thing they pro does when they buy the same brand, just longer. Anyway, you don’t want it a different color, it has to be a different size — slightly larger. That way it’ll be easy to tell if a ball is compliant, and the wind will affect it more to get back some of the challenge that hitting into a stiff wind used to provide pre-Pro V1. — "I feel sorry for people who don’t drink. When they wake up in the morning, that’s as good as they’re going to feel all day" — Frank Sinatra
The distance that the Pros and top amateurs hit the ball does not relate to how they play against each other, It relates to the way they are overpowering golf courses. Great places where golf was once played by the greats now are little more than playgrounds for weekend hacks. The PGA, USGA and the courses owners themselves are spending millions making courses longer. The Governing bodies need to put a stop and backup of ball technology for the good of the game. PS. A pro can hit a Pro V1x just as far with a Persimmon driver as he can with a new space age driver….it’s the ball that makes the difference
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Maybe I just dont understand what the big deal is…. who cares how far they will be able to hit the ball? Just make everyone use the old persimmon woods……
<snip PS. A pro can hit a Pro V1x just as far with a Persimmon driver as he can with a new space age driver….it’s the ball that makes the difference
Even on off center hits? I think this is also a what can make the difference (in addition to the ball).
Maybe I just dont understand what the big deal is…. who cares how far they will be able to hit the ball? Just make everyone use the old persimmon woods…… In the interview, Tiger said he does hit persimmon in practice, and when he hits it square, he gets only about five yards less than with titanium. He said the real difference is when you don’t hit it square.
That’s pretty much what I gather from the golf web sites I read. The titanium allows for lighter, and hence bigger, heads, and the bigger heads and smoother weight distribution reduce the penalty for mis-hits. Same idea with perimeter weighted irons.
well besides the ball, players do have tons of control over their games. Baseball players can choose what bats, cletes, gloves to use.
I think "besides the ball" is the key point, since the ball seems to be the most important factor in distance, in both sports. And I don’t think we’ll see Sammy Sosa using an aluminum bat any time soon.
Let’s break this down . . . . Baseball players (MLB) are ONLY allowed wood bats (not aluminum, graphite, fiberglass, etc). Let’s only allow permisson drivers on the PGA, OK? Cletes are also regulated (although more for safety issues). Gloves are regulated for size and "sticky-ness", especially for outfielders. The NHL has set up a new office to crack down on goalie equiptment (and its about time! look what its down to the league!!). They have set up measures and testing to determine if goalie pads, blockers, etc are regulation. Let’s see how well this gets enforced. Why do you think Patrick Roy retired when clearly, he had a few more years left in him? Most "play-makers" and stick-handlers don’t like the Synergy or other single piece stitcks. They say they loose all feel and the "softness" which is essential for them (hmmm, sounds like the titatium vs. permisson debate). Only players like Brett Hull who set up on the slot use these these sticks. Besides, are they scoring 200 goals a season with them? Look at it another way. Pro tennis did not check the explosion of technology in their sport at it nearly decimated the sport. Gone are the classic Borg-McEnroe rallies. Now we have target practice with two ball machines firing at one another. This is a complex issue and I don’t think that there is a single cure-all out there. My point is that pro golf is soarly lacking both regulation and enforcement. These phantom measures such as COR limits are doing nothing to help. On another point, why is even the USGA and R&A even involved in dictating to the pros? Are there any other sports where the amateur organizations regulates the professional leagues? Just curious.
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – well besides the ball, players do have tons of control over their games. Baseball players can choose what bats, cletes, gloves to use. In hockey there is a big difference in sticks and goalie equipment. The guys runnin g around with them Easton Synergys are just blasting the puck around the ice. If they used a standard wood stick, there shots wouldnt be as hard. Is this not rediculous? Is pro golf not the same for allowing players this much control over their game (and subsequent opportunity to gain an unfair advantage?) I dont think its ridiculous. The rules apply to everyone. Phil Mickelson can use TW’s ball, TW’s can use someone elses ball. If one player has an unfair advantage because of a ball, you can bet the rest of the field would have the same ball the next week. In the PGA I think everyone is on a pretty close playing field as far as clubs and balls are concerned. Most of them use the ProV1, ProV1*, a few Srixon, Precept users, the callaway ball. Nobody out there has a significant advantage becasue of ball or club, just let the guys play….. Maybe I just dont understand what the big deal is…. who cares how far they will be able to hit the ball? Just make everyone use the old persimmon woods…… Golf can sometimes place too much control in the players hands. In every pro sport (baseball, football, hockey, tennis, etc) the league issues the object (ball, puck, etc) and no other can be used. Imagine if when Barry Bonds came to the plate he handed the pitcher a sack of balls that he wanted pitched to him. Is this not rediculous? Is pro golf not the same for allowing players this much control over their game (and subsequent opportunity to gain an unfair advantage?) Good for you Tiger! Your legacy to golf may not be wins, money and majors, but bringing a standardization to the pro golf that is long long overdue. Tiger was interviewed by Dan Patrick on ESPN radio today and one of the things they discussed was the fact that some great courses are becoming obsolete for the pros. Tiger chimed in as being in favor of ball and COR restrictions. One thing he said that I didn’t know was that Nicklaus was saying the same thing about balls the 70s! You can hear the segment on espnradio.com. Click on the Dan Patrick show, and they the playback for today’s show. Fast forward to 1:19. Dave Clary/Corpus Christi, Tx Home: http://home.stx.rr.com/dclary RSG Roll Call http://www.rec-sport-golf.com/members/?rollcall=claryd
Kudos for the well-crafted words and syntax and though it makes for an interesting read, it has great form but no substance. The controversy about golf equipment ruining the integrity of the game will always be there and as a previous poster noted, even Jack Nicklaus himself apparently complained about the balls. Ultimately it’s really the USGA that has to make the decision and way back in the 1980s, I remember they made clubs with "square
Just curious. COuld The Masters, which has a lot of clout, go ahead and require standardized balls that all participants have to use? Or does the USGA decide that?
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Kudos for the well-crafted words and syntax and though it makes for an interesting read, it has great form but no substance. The controversy about golf equipment ruining the integrity of the game will always be there and as a previous poster noted, even Jack Nicklaus himself apparently complained about the balls. Ultimately it’s really the USGA that has to make the decision and way back in the 1980s, I remember they made clubs with "square Just curious. COuld The Masters, which has a lot of clout, go ahead and require standardized balls that all participants have to use? Or does the USGA decide that?
The Masters isn’t a USGA event. That would be interesting and that course, being one of, if not the most prestigious course where the golfers and their performances of years gone by are compared to the present, and since the whole thing was Bobby Jones creation, it seems like the best place to experiment with controlled balls. Good idea!
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Maybe I just dont understand what the big deal is…. who cares how far they will be able to hit the ball? Just make everyone use the old persimmon woods…… In the interview, Tiger said he does hit persimmon in practice, and when he hits it square, he gets only about five yards less than with titanium. He said the real difference is when you don’t hit it square. That’s pretty much what I gather from the golf web sites I read. The titanium allows for lighter, and hence bigger, heads, and the bigger heads and smoother weight distribution reduce the penalty for mis-hits. Same idea with perimeter weighted irons.
And golfers can swing harder at drive because the penalty for mishits is less so it does affect distance.
Augusta National (Hootie)has debated that very issue. The PGA and USGA have nothing to do with the Masters. Hootie can do what he wants.
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Kudos for the well-crafted words and syntax and though it makes for an interesting read, it has great form but no substance. The controversy about golf equipment ruining the integrity of the game will always be there and as a previous poster noted, even Jack Nicklaus himself apparently complained about the balls. Ultimately it’s really the USGA that has to make the decision and way back in the 1980s, I remember they made clubs with "square Just curious. COuld The Masters, which has a lot of clout, go ahead and require standardized balls that all participants have to use? Or does the USGA decide that?
rec.sport.golf with: That’s pretty much what I gather from the golf web sites I read. The titanium allows for lighter, and hence bigger, heads, and the bigger heads and smoother weight distribution reduce the penalty for mis-hits. Same idea with perimeter weighted irons. And golfers can swing harder at drive because the penalty for mishits is less so it does affect distance.
Well, probably. I think the pros would swing as hard with the old as the new, as evidenced by the Woods quotes. Those guys are where they are because they already have minimized mis-hits, and Woods admits that the newer clubs are longer, just not that much longer. For a duffer like myself, when I find the tempo in my round that gives me consistent hits (which usually means I have slowed down), I am going to do everything I can to keep that tempo and not get speedy again. If I swing too hard, it seems no club in the world will minimize a mis-hit. I don’t think I get that much margin for error, but I will agree that the margin is increased with the bigger clubs. Al The best way to know God is to love many things. - Vincent Van Gogh
The NHL has set up a new office to crack down on goalie equiptment (and its about time! look what its down to the league!!). They have set up measures and testing to determine if goalie pads, blockers, etc are regulation. Let’s see how well this gets enforced. Why do you think Patrick Roy retired when clearly, he had a few more years left in him?
The pad restrictions the NHL has put in are very easy to get around. They restricted pad height…. big deal….. they’ll just use thighboards instead to compensate….. Patrick Roy is 38 years old. Its not like he’s just some young buck that just quit the game. The guy has been in the NHL since 1986 and its just time for him to move on. If you think he retired because of pad restrictions you are a complete moron. Most "play-makers" and stick-handlers don’t like the Synergy or other single piece stitcks. They say they loose all feel and the "softness" which is essential for them (hmmm, sounds like the titatium vs. permisson debate). Only players like Brett Hull who set up on the slot use these these sticks. Besides, are they scoring 200 goals a season with them?
No, but the shots are amazingly hard compared to what they would normally be with a wooden stick.
On another point, why is even the USGA and R&A even involved in dictating to the pros? Are there any other sports where the amateur organizations regulates the professional leagues? Just curious.
I don’t think it’s accurate to call the USGA and R&A "amateur organizations." Here’s what the USGA says on it’s website" "The United States Golf Association (USGA) has served as the national governing body of golf since its formation in 1894. It’s a non-profit organization run by golfers for the benefit of golfers. The Association sponsors programs that benefit everyone who plays the game. These essential services affect all golfers, whether they are amateurs or professionals, public- or private-course players. " There is a parallel in another sport–the UCI (Union Cycliste Internationale) in cycling. Dave Clary/Corpus Christi, Tx Home: http://home.stx.rr.com/dclary RSG Roll Call http://www.rec-sport-golf.com/members/?rollcall=claryd
I’ll go out on a limb and speak for the four of us (Kathi, Roger, Carol Ann, and me), we had a great time! The weather was fantastic!! We got started on Saturday morning with Carol Ann graciously picking us up at our hotels. After a bite to eat, we landed at Zoo Atlanta. Pretty much walked over the entire place, as far as I could tell. We then headed over to Fernbank for the Natural History Museum, which was pretty cool. We saw a film at the IMAX called Stomp that I really enjoyed. I only wish it had lasted longer. All LCers should visit the Fire of Brazil if/when in Atlanta. Pricey, no doubt, but the food was great. I’m sad to say that I ate too much 
I learned that I’m no fan of gater, too 
After getting a chance to freshen up a bit (and write to Luna), we headed over to the International Bowling Alley. I was all primed to really stomp the others at bowling, but since I hadn’t picked up my ball since ‘94, my skills were totally nonexistant. Kathi, Roger (Kathi’s hubby)), and Carol Ann all had turns trouncing me good. About the only thing I could do was get some speed on the ball, but without being able to hit the pocket (or the pins), that made no difference at all. BTW — Luna — cosmic bowling is lame — hated it! I can’t believe people like that. Fortunately, we only had to play about 10 minutes under those lousy conditions. I had a lot of fun bowling, though, so I hope I can find some time to do it more frequently than once every 9 years! The event ended with Sunday morning brunch. I ate too much again — so no more eating today for me. But it was worth every minute (and every carb) because I was in good company the entire time. This is the second such event I have attended since finding my way to this newsgroup. I truly wish that more of you were able to attended and that others consider attending such events in the future. It really is fun to meet in person the face behind the poster. It drives home the "human" element of online social interactions. Finally, the pictures….there are some coming. Carol Ann took several before she dropped and broke her digital. I’m not sure if she will be able to recover any of those…. Kathi and Roger took some on a film camera. So we’ll have to wait on those to get developed. Roger (Kathi’s hubby) has photo duty, so we’re hoping that something happens soon — even though I hate seeing ME in a photo! PS: My glutes are sore from bowling! Yikes!
I’ll second what you said! I had an absolutely fantastic time!!! I’m so glad that I had a chance to spend time with you, Roger Zoul, for the second time! Vegas was nice, but Atlanta was REALLY nice. We could not have asked for better weather! I couldn’t believe it. Kathi and Roger (Kathi’s husband) are a fantastic, easy going, fun couple! Kathi looks like Cybil Shepard to me! She even SOUNDS like her! I surely hope we plan more weekends in the future. Roger Zoul looks fantastic! We had a great time at the Atlanta Zoo (the red pandas and gorillas were my favorite!). We got to meet the people from the new reality series on Animal Planet called King of the Jungle! We all got pins and I got pictures and all of their autographs. Then, I dropped and broke my camera. BUMMER! The Fernbank Museum of Natural History was okay. But the IMAX film was fabulous. If we meet again in Atlanta, we should try Sci-Trek www.scitrek.org . Since the two Rogers are into technology! We should also visit the Fernbank Museum of Science. There really is so much to do! Bowling was fun but I could only play two games. My scores? 85 and 85. Horrible! I’m not giving up, though! Let’s go again! Brunch today was very nice. I hated to see the weekend end. Thank you, Roger, Kathi and Roger, for driving all the way to Atlanta to spend the weekend together and for buying my shoe rental, sodas, lunch….Perhaps we can get more and more people interested for future Retreats. If any of you low carbers want to have one, just post about it and make it happen! It’s a great way to share ideas, meet nice people and develop lasting relationships. We did discuss that we would try to plan a physical activity in the future. For example, a Walkathon! So, that’s it. Now we wait to hear from Kathi and get the pics! ~Carol Ann We did talk about Callaway Gardens* in the future! If you want to see something really nice, perhaps we can meet in November/December for their Holiday Festivities called Fantasy in Lights. They even have a March of Dime NIGHTWALK! Wouldn’t that be fun?? http://www.callawaygardens.com/events/fil/fil.htm http://www.callawaygardens.com/ Callaway is an award-winning, 14,000-acre gardens, resort and preserve nestled in the southernmost foothills of the Appalachian Mountains, in Pine Mountain, Georgia. In addition to three types of accommodations, a choice of restaurants and plenty of shopping, guests at this family-friendly getaway enjoy lots to see and do. The Virginia Hand Callaway Discovery Center, Birds of Prey shows, Cecil B. Day Butterfly Center, John A. Sibley Horticultural Center, Mr. Cason’s Vegetable Garden, Callaway Brothers Azalea Bowl, Overlook Garden and miles of nature trails showcase the beauty of nature. The 10-mile, paved Discovery Bicycle Trail provides an invigorating way to see the Gardens. For the sports enthusiast, championship golf courses, including Mountain View Golf Course, former home of the PGA Tour’s Buick Challenge, are a good place to start. Callaway is consistently recognized as one of the Top 50 Tennis Resorts in the Country by Tennis magazine thanks to its Mountain Creek
I picked up a driver at Wal-Mart manufactured by company called Intech.. It was a knock off of the Wilson Deep Red. Only paid $49.00 Canadian for it. It has a 450CC head, and exactly same colour as the Wilson Deep red with a graphite shaft. I am hitting it great. So I don’t think the real thing would do any better except cost me a lot of money.
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – As many of you may know, I was having some bad driving problems. Thanks to a generic 420cc driver I got for $40 I can now expect to hit most fairways and carry the ball about 250 yards. Before buying this driver, I demo’ed a Taylor Made R580. It was almost identical to the generic one I got, with a slight size difference. The brand name did no better than the generic. I think that the major manufacturers of golf clubs have to charge a fortune to support their addiction to paying tour pros to carry their clubs. Most of the guys on tour make more money than the average working man just to carry a certain type of club. $2000 a week for a driver, a ball, a wedge, a putter, a brand of iron, etc. I don’t know about you, but I am not going to help these companies pay these guys $10,000 a week to play their clubs. If they were the best, the players would do it for free, don’t you think? It would be interesting if someone could get hold of the annual accounts for a company like Taylor Made or Callaway and work out what percentage of a $500 driver goes on R&D, manufacturing costs, materials, advertising, pro endorsements, etc. I would love to believe that this is true. I noticed that there is a company called "Pro Select" that makes knock-off’s of many major brands. They’re better than half the price of the real thing, but I’ve always believed that you get what you pay for. Does anyone have any insight into this company or just the idea of knock-off’s in general? I think that OEM clubs as a general rule are very overpriced for what you get. They are not, generally, matched clubs, and the kinds of shafts used in them are often not very good. This, BTW, from experience in examining such sets. There are good OEM clubmakers, but you’re paying for the advertising, the tour players, all the extra stuff that doesn’t make a club play better. And what you don’t get is a custom set, made to specific specs and matched. There are some very good OEM products. Titleist makes some outstanding drivers. So does TaylorMade. And there are some decent sets of irons out there–just remember that they’re likely to be glue-and-stick, and as such, may not be really deserving of the prices charged for them. Knockoffs are not, IMO, very good clubs. They’re an attempt to come close to what you think you get when you buy an OEM set, but they can’t be too close or they’d be sued. So what you get is something that looks sort of like it, but can’t really play like it. That doesn’t mean that they’re bad, just that they’re not a cheaper version. Component clubs that are custom made are IMO a very good value. They can be half the price of the OEM stuff, and made to much higher quality standards. Components are not the same as knockoffs. I’ve made clubs using components from KZG, Golfworks, Golfsmith, Dynacraft, and several others. They are, as a rule, very good. I’ve disassembled OEM sets and find that their adherence to tolerances is about the same as what you get from the above component manufacturers. IMO, you are far ahead to get a good set of custom component clubs, and spend the difference from OEM clubs on lessons. BTW, in the interests of full disclosure, I make clubs. So do a lot of people here on RSG, an awful lot. Anybody who wants to learn can figure out how to make clubs that are at least as good as they’d get from an OEM (provided they use steel shafts), with a little advice from the darksiders here. They can do it for a fraction of what they’d pay for OEM stuff. And so can you. Mike — Mike Dalecki GCA Accredited Clubmaker RSG-Wisconsin 2003 Information: http://dalecki.net/rsgwis2003 RSG Roll Call: http://rec-sport-golf.com/members/?rollcall=daleckim I do not patronize spammers. Help keep RSG clean!
As many of you may know, I was having some bad driving problems. Thanks to a generic 420cc driver I got for $40 I can now expect to hit most fairways and carry the ball about 250 yards. Before buying this driver, I demo’ed a Taylor Made R580. It was almost identical to the generic one I got, with a slight size difference. The brand name did no better than the generic. I think that the major manufacturers of golf clubs have to charge a fortune to support their addiction to paying tour pros to carry their clubs. Most of the guys on tour make more money than the average working man just to carry a certain type of club. $2000 a week for a driver, a ball, a wedge, a putter, a brand of iron, etc. I don’t know about you, but I am not going to help these companies pay these guys $10,000 a week to play their clubs. If they were the best, the players would do it for free, don’t you think? If short putting is a target game shouldn’t you play it like one? www.targetputting.com
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – As many of you may know, I was having some bad driving problems. Thanks to a generic 420cc driver I got for $40 I can now expect to hit most fairways and carry the ball about 250 yards. Before buying this driver, I demo’ed a Taylor Made R580. It was almost identical to the generic one I got, with a slight size difference. The brand name did no better than the generic. I think that the major manufacturers of golf clubs have to charge a fortune to support their addiction to paying tour pros to carry their clubs. Most of the guys on tour make more money than the average working man just to carry a certain type of club. $2000 a week for a driver, a ball, a wedge, a putter, a brand of iron, etc. I don’t know about you, but I am not going to help these companies pay these guys $10,000 a week to play their clubs. If they were the best, the players would do it for free, don’t you think?
It would be interesting if someone could get hold of the annual accounts for a company like Taylor Made or Callaway and work out what percentage of a $500 driver goes on R&D, manufacturing costs, materials, advertising, pro endorsements, etc.
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – As many of you may know, I was having some bad driving problems. Thanks to a generic 420cc driver I got for $40 I can now expect to hit most fairways and carry the ball about 250 yards. Before buying this driver, I demo’ed a Taylor Made R580. It was almost identical to the generic one I got, with a slight size difference. The brand name did no better than the generic. I think that the major manufacturers of golf clubs have to charge a fortune to support their addiction to paying tour pros to carry their clubs. Most of the guys on tour make more money than the average working man just to carry a certain type of club. $2000 a week for a driver, a ball, a wedge, a putter, a brand of iron, etc. I don’t know about you, but I am not going to help these companies pay these guys $10,000 a week to play their clubs. If they were the best, the players would do it for free, don’t you think? It would be interesting if someone could get hold of the annual accounts for a company like Taylor Made or Callaway and work out what percentage of a $500 driver goes on R&D, manufacturing costs, materials, advertising, pro endorsements, etc.
I would love to believe that this is true. I noticed that there is a company called "Pro Select" that makes knock-off’s of many major brands. They’re better than half the price of the real thing, but I’ve always believed that you get what you pay for. Does anyone have any insight into this company or just the idea of knock-off’s in general?
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – As many of you may know, I was having some bad driving problems. Thanks to a generic 420cc driver I got for $40 I can now expect to hit most fairways and carry the ball about 250 yards. Before buying this driver, I demo’ed a Taylor Made R580. It was almost identical to the generic one I got, with a slight size difference. The brand name did no better than the generic. I think that the major manufacturers of golf clubs have to charge a fortune to support their addiction to paying tour pros to carry their clubs. Most of the guys on tour make more money than the average working man just to carry a certain type of club. $2000 a week for a driver, a ball, a wedge, a putter, a brand of iron, etc. I don’t know about you, but I am not going to help these companies pay these guys $10,000 a week to play their clubs. If they were the best, the players would do it for free, don’t you think? It would be interesting if someone could get hold of the annual accounts for a company like Taylor Made or Callaway and work out what percentage of a $500 driver goes on R&D, manufacturing costs, materials, advertising, pro endorsements, etc. I would love to believe that this is true. I noticed that there is a company called "Pro Select" that makes knock-off’s of many major brands. They’re better than half the price of the real thing, but I’ve always believed that you get what you pay for. Does anyone have any insight into this company or just the idea of knock-off’s in general?
I think that OEM clubs as a general rule are very overpriced for what you get. They are not, generally, matched clubs, and the kinds of shafts used in them are often not very good. This, BTW, from experience in examining such sets. There are good OEM clubmakers, but you’re paying for the advertising, the tour players, all the extra stuff that doesn’t make a club play better. And what you don’t get is a custom set, made to specific specs and matched. There are some very good OEM products. Titleist makes some outstanding drivers. So does TaylorMade. And there are some decent sets of irons out there–just remember that they’re likely to be glue-and-stick, and as such, may not be really deserving of the prices charged for them. Knockoffs are not, IMO, very good clubs. They’re an attempt to come close to what you think you get when you buy an OEM set, but they can’t be too close or they’d be sued. So what you get is something that looks sort of like it, but can’t really play like it. That doesn’t mean that they’re bad, just that they’re not a cheaper version. Component clubs that are custom made are IMO a very good value. They can be half the price of the OEM stuff, and made to much higher quality standards. Components are not the same as knockoffs. I’ve made clubs using components from KZG, Golfworks, Golfsmith, Dynacraft, and several others. They are, as a rule, very good. I’ve disassembled OEM sets and find that their adherence to tolerances is about the same as what you get from the above component manufacturers. IMO, you are far ahead to get a good set of custom component clubs, and spend the difference from OEM clubs on lessons. BTW, in the interests of full disclosure, I make clubs. So do a lot of people here on RSG, an awful lot. Anybody who wants to learn can figure out how to make clubs that are at least as good as they’d get from an OEM (provided they use steel shafts), with a little advice from the darksiders here. They can do it for a fraction of what they’d pay for OEM stuff. And so can you. Mike — Mike Dalecki GCA Accredited Clubmaker RSG-Wisconsin 2003 Information: http://dalecki.net/rsgwis2003 RSG Roll Call: http://rec-sport-golf.com/members/?rollcall=daleckim I do not patronize spammers. Help keep RSG clean!
Will the high COR help a medium or slow swing speed or just the higher speeds like the golf balls need compression to really be useful? I have been on a 6 month hunt for a new driver. I have been tested and fitted by club pros and clubmakers. After all the information has been culled for usefullness, I know the type of shaft flex, torque, kick point and length. With a driver swing speed of only 95 (smooth without having to put shoes back on) one pro says that the high COR is not useful because of low swing speed. The clubmaker that I have chosen says he does not know (hard to believe and he is a RSGer) and would be interested along with me in more information. Paul retiredusarmy proud to be a part of the Atlanta redneck group
Will the high COR help a medium or slow swing speed or just the higher speeds like the golf balls need compression to really be useful? I have been on a 6 month hunt for a new driver. I have been tested and fitted by club pros and clubmakers. After all the information has been culled for usefullness, I know the type of shaft flex, torque, kick point and length. With a driver swing speed of only 95 (smooth without having to put shoes back on) one pro says that the high COR is not useful because of low swing speed. The clubmaker that I have chosen says he does not know (hard to believe and he is a RSGer) and would be interested along with me in more information. Paul retiredusarmy proud to be a part of the Atlanta redneck group
I saw something on the golf channel where someone of stature (don’t remember who) said high cor benefits high swing speeds more than low… but helps everyone. The low swinger may gain a couple yards or 3 where the higher swinger may gain 10 or 15 or whatever. If true this is a spike in the heart of the people that think hig cor should be availble to hackers
i can only share with you my story, whether that helps or not who knows. was hitting the callaway greatest big bertha ( don’t know what the cor is on it ) until a couple months ago, and switched over to an adams redline ( 830 cor ). my swing speed is in your range, and i picked up 30 yards easy with the adams. my advice is try before u buy. P.S. everything on the adams and the callaway is stock – right off the shelf
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Will the high COR help a medium or slow swing speed or just the higher speeds like the golf balls need compression to really be useful? I have been on a 6 month hunt for a new driver. I have been tested and fitted by club pros and clubmakers. After all the information has been culled for usefullness, I know the type of shaft flex, torque, kick point and length. With a driver swing speed of only 95 (smooth without having to put shoes back on) one pro says that the high COR is not useful because of low swing speed. The clubmaker that I have chosen says he does not know (hard to believe and he is a RSGer) and would be interested along with me in more information. Paul retiredusarmy proud to be a part of the Atlanta redneck group
Will the high COR help a medium or slow swing speed or just the higher speeds like the golf balls need compression to really be useful? I have been on a 6 month hunt for a new driver. I have been tested and fitted by club pros and clubmakers. After all the information has been culled for usefullness, I know the type of shaft flex, torque, kick point and length. With a driver swing speed of only 95 (smooth without having to put shoes back on) one pro says that the high COR is not useful because of low swing speed. The clubmaker that I have chosen says he does not know (hard to believe and he is a RSGer) and would be interested along with me in more information.
From all I’ve been able to gather about the whole COR issue, trampoline effect faces work two ways: 1. Trampoline effect face deforms, giving way before the ball, thus spends more time in contact with the ball; that’s why the COR goes up. 2. Since the face deforms so much, the ball deforms less than usual. This cradling effect reduces the spin on the ball. If you put too much spin on the ball, then this will increase your distance. If you don’t put enough spin on the ball, like most slow-swinging-amateurs, this will decrease your distance because it will reduce hang-time. Cheers, Loren
Paul, Greetings from another ex-mil Redneck, The coefficient of restitution is the ratio of the velocity on impact and the velocity at rebound of a projectile fired at the clubface. There is a specified velocity for the test. The ratio would change if the impact velocity changed, but the relationship should be relatively proportional to the velocity. Having said all that drivel, if you purchase a driver with a high COR, regardless of the swing speed, you should get some benefit over a driver with a lower COR. I think there are several other variables that would weigh into the equation: Ball compression, ball dimple pattern, impact path and angle, face hardness, clubface loft, shaft flex, kick point, ball and clubface temperature, and possibly even swing tempo (acceleration at impact). For example, you get all fitted up with your high COR driver and get 5 extra yards. You change to a Maxfli Noodle and get another yard or two. You change your ball position in your stance and gain a half yard on average. You take a lesson and the pro sees you are not square at impact and you gain another few yards. You change from a fade to a draw and gain another two yards. And last of all, you learn Sparky’s limber wrist technique and gain another 50 yards. Just my personal opinion, but you buy the highest legal COR you can get and swing away. PS: Go to Google and look up Peter Strauss’s discussion on shaft flex. He gave up some mileage for lower shot dispersion. Golf Magazine also had an article once on the relationship for how much distance you’d have to gain to compensate for missing a fairway. It was pretty damming on the search for distance if you lose any shot control. Gaines
Will the high COR help a medium or slow swing speed or just the higher speeds like the golf balls need compression to really be useful?
Yes! If the club manufacture has designed the club to have a higher COR than is normally available from bog standard clubs then this must help any player who can swing a club properly. Of course, to take real advantage of designed high COR, the player needs to have an exceptionally high swing speed….yet even a moderate swing speed with a maximum legal COR will produce spectacular results for a player who is used to playing with clone clubs, persimmons or WalMart standard clubs. Modern golf balls (even the Noodles etc) are designed to take advantage of the higher CORs available today…and combining the two, high COR and suitable matching ball will produce good results for even the slowest swingspeeds. — cheers david "Somewhere in the world a village is missing an idiot!" - McCord SPAM-FIX. The owner of privacy.net has given permission to use this address for the purpose of protection from spam. If you want to contact me send to dsantwyk<ATbigpond<DOTnet<DOTau…thankyou!
I saw something on the golf channel where someone of stature (don’t remember who) said high cor benefits high swing speeds more than low… but helps everyone. The low swinger may gain a couple yards or 3 where the higher swinger may gain 10 or 15 or whatever. If true this is a spike in the heart of the people that think hig cor should be availble to hackers
It sure is. I know this is my soapbox, but these equipment changes are wrong, wrong, wrong. In an effort to get closer to the pros, we’ve totally shot ourselves in the foot. Yes, we might hit it 10 yards farther, but the pros are hitting it 40 yards farther. We are now FARTHER from the pros than ever. And who foots the bill? We do, of course, in higher golf fees because of longer golf courses needing more real estate, more water, more man power and labor time, more fertilizer, more pesticides – not to mention slower rounds of golf.
i can only share with you my story, whether that helps or not who knows. was hitting the callaway greatest big bertha ( don’t know what the cor is on it ) until a couple months ago, and switched over to an adams redline ( 830 cor ). my swing speed is in your range, and i picked up 30 yards easy with the adams. my advice is try before u buy.
May be, but that isn’t due (mostly) to COR.
Will the high COR help a medium or slow swing speed or just the higher speeds like the golf balls need compression to really be useful?
It will help all swingspeeds, but the problem is that it helps higher swing speeds more. And not just more percentwise, but in a non-linear fashion. For example, someone with a swingspeed of 80 might hit it 200, and 90 = 220, and 100 = 250, and 110 = 290, and 120 = 350. I have been on a 6 month hunt for a new driver. I have been tested and fitted by club pros and clubmakers. After all the information has been culled for usefullness, I know the type of shaft flex, torque, kick point and length. With a driver swing speed of only 95 (smooth without having to put shoes back on) one pro says that the high COR is not useful because of low swing speed. The clubmaker that I have chosen says he does not know (hard to believe and he is a RSGer) and would be interested along with me in more information.
The pro is wrong. He should have said it’s not AS useful as if you had a swing speed of 110, but it is definitely useful.
2. Since the face deforms so much, the ball deforms less than usual. This cradling effect reduces the spin on the ball. If you put too much spin on the ball, then this will increase your distance. If you don’t put enough spin on the ball, like most slow-swinging-amateurs, this will decrease your distance because it will reduce hang-time.
Too much spin does not increase distance, unless you don’t put enough spin on the ball and you have low swing speed to boot. Most people are trying to reduce their spin with the driver, and probably increase their loft, so that the launch angle is up over 10 and their spin is down near 3,000 or below.
2. Since the face deforms so much, the ball deforms less than usual. This cradling effect reduces the spin on the ball. If you put too much spin on the ball, then this will increase your distance. If you don’t put enough spin on the ball, like most slow-swinging-amateurs, this will decrease your distance because it will reduce hang-time. Too much spin does not increase distance, unless you don’t put enough spin on the ball and you have low swing speed to boot. Most people are trying to reduce their spin with the driver, and probably increase their loft, so that the launch angle is up over 10 and their spin is down near 3,000 or below.
You misread me. I confess I could have been clearer. There is a problem with an unclear pronoun reference in that sentence. I meant that the reduced spin would increase distance for people who normally put too much spin on the ball. How do you know you put too much spin on the ball? Drives balloon and drop dead at 200 yards. How do you fix it? Either fix your swing or get a new toy. Cheers, Loren
You misread me. I confess I could have been clearer. There is a problem with an unclear pronoun reference in that sentence. I meant that the reduced spin would increase distance for people who normally put too much spin on the ball. How do you know you put too much spin on the ball? Drives balloon and drop dead at 200 yards. How do you fix it? Either fix your swing or get a new toy.
As much as I enjoy arguing with people, I can’t argue with that. I would add though that most people have a misconception about the best trajectory for the drive – most people think it’s too low. The low, slow riser looks powerful to most people. What you really want is a ball that gets up high quickly and then stays there – at cruising altitude, without continuing to rise ("flat" trajectory at the top). The only way you can do that is with a high launch angle and low spin.
Mid-handicap I would assume to be around a 15 or so. The BB2s should still working well for you but if you have decided that you want a new set have a look at one of the combo sets by Taylor Made, Nike, MacGregor, Adams, or Ping G2. Try the steel shafts as well as the graphite when you get fitted for your new irons.
I was in the same boat 3 years ago, playing X12 irons with Rifle shafts. Never got very accurate with the X12s….they were like swinging cantaloupes on the end of a broom.. Went with Mizuno True forged blades…my iron play –especially under 150 yds — improved almost overnight…
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I am a mid handicapper playing the graphite(regular) Callaway BB 2002 irons. My game is progressing and I feel like I am ready for the next step, irons that you can work with. Thinking of the Cobra SSI irons, Ping I plus or….(steel instead of graphite?) Can anyone with perhaps the same experience in developing the game give me some advise? Thanks
I am a mid handicapper playing the graphite(regular) Callaway BB 2002 irons. My game is progressing and I feel like I am ready for the next step, irons that you can work with. Thinking of the Cobra SSI irons, Ping I plus or….(steel instead of graphite?) Can anyone with perhaps the same experience in developing the game give me some advise?
Clubs won’t make much difference. — RSG Masters 2004 pre-preliminary format http://home.att.net/~frostback2002 RSG Roll Call: http://rec-sport-golf.com/?rc=frostback "The privilege of a lifetime is being who you are" Joseph Campbell
Mizuno MP-30s I am a mid handicapper playing the graphite(regular) Callaway BB 2002 irons. My game is progressing and I feel like I am ready for the next step, irons that you can work with. Thinking of the Cobra SSI irons, Ping I plus or….(steel instead of graphite?) Can anyone with perhaps the same experience in developing the game give me some advise? Clubs won’t make much difference.
Thanks in advance!!! Regards, Steve B.
steel, or graphite? the selection should be made on the basis of – which you prefer. I have used both, but for the long / short irons, I prefer the steel. both are ok – as long as their characteristics are factored in for a balanced club. graphite shafts absorb the "shock" maybe better than steel, which would add some relief to those arthritis conditions. your set of clubs seem to be holding up pretty well with your form of play, so I would bear in mind – that new clubs alone – is not likely to lower your score, however they might, or might not – elevate your mood to some extent, and consequently lower your scores. and you know that you, and you alone is the one behind the gun, so I would entertain all "help" aids, and only use the ones that seem logical to you. what has worked for one, in the way of golfing aids – may, or may not work for everyone. If there were panaceas "available" for all the golfing errors, just visualize the "unemployment " that it would create.:–) some other poster(s) can possibly give you their experience with the two iron brands you mentioned. I have used cobra clones w/steel shafts for abt.10 years w/no problems. If one is experiencing a downward trend in their iron game, after years of success, then it is time for the player to exercise a little introspect in determining the cause(s). ===== I am a mid handicapper playing the graphite(regular) Callaway BB 2002 irons. My game is progressing and I feel like I am ready for the next step,
irons that you can work with. Thinking of the Cobra SSI irons, Ping I plus or….(steel instead of
graphite?) Can anyone with perhaps the same experience in developing the game
give me some advise? Thanks
Thanks for the information. I checked out the list of "Golf Achiever" users and found that a country club about two minutes up the street uses one when fitting clubs. I also found that Golf Works (http://www.golfworks.com) and Dynacraft Golf (http://www.dynacraftgolf.com) both use it. Both of these companies are in my home town, so when I visit my parents or my inlaws, I can swing by and check it out. I know both of these companies are supposed to make good components, but I haven’t heard if they actually make clubs for customers or if they refer you to a local club maker. Michael
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – For what it’s worth, last winter I visited the Tiburon resort in Naples, Florida, and was fitted there as part of a Rick Smith session using a laser-based system that would measure all the parameters you describe (The machine is called "The Achiever" http://www.golfachiever.com/) and could be used outdoors so I could see the ball flight as well. They made me up a great set of Infiniti irons with custom shafts. These are without doubt the best clubs I have ever owned. Their skill at fitting AND building the clubs was obvious. I would think that you could find something similar if you live near Vegas; but, if you ever go to Naples, I can’t think of anyone better than these guys. If you want names and phone numbers, let me know. Jeff After playing a few years with a $90 Walmart set of Dunlops, I have the wife’s approval to purchase a new set of clubs – regardless of price. That is cool, but where should I go to purchase the clubs? SNIP I recently visited a store in Vegas (St. Andrews Golf Store in the Caesers Forum) and they have one of these indoor driving ranges, but they claim that their radars actually measure shaft flex and torque during the swing, the club face angle, and the over/under spin and side spin of the ball as it leaves the club face. Callaway actually calls it "Callaway Golf Performance Center" (http://www.callawaygolf.com/customerservice/fitting_intro.asp). This seems cool and all, and if it performed as advertised, would be great. If I recall correctly, once they fitted you with the test club (6 iron, I believe), you could try each of the other clubs that was suggested to insure it was correct and possibly make corrections to the longer/shorter clubs. I am wondering if I should trust the computer, of go to the driving range and see where the ball goes. Any suggestions? – Michael
For what it’s worth, last winter I visited the Tiburon resort in Naples, Florida, and was fitted there as part of a Rick Smith session using a laser-based system that would measure all the parameters you describe (The machine is called "The Achiever" http://www.golfachiever.com/) and could be used outdoors so I could see the ball flight as well. They made me up a great set of Infiniti irons with custom shafts. These are without doubt the best clubs I have ever owned. Their skill at fitting AND building the clubs was obvious. I would think that you could find something similar if you live near Vegas; but, if you ever go to Naples, I can’t think of anyone better than these guys. If you want names and phone numbers, let me know. Jeff – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – After playing a few years with a $90 Walmart set of Dunlops, I have the wife’s approval to purchase a new set of clubs – regardless of price. That is cool, but where should I go to purchase the clubs? SNIP I recently visited a store in Vegas (St. Andrews Golf Store in the Caesers Forum) and they have one of these indoor driving ranges, but they claim that their radars actually measure shaft flex and torque during the swing, the club face angle, and the over/under spin and side spin of the ball as it leaves the club face. Callaway actually calls it "Callaway Golf Performance Center" (http://www.callawaygolf.com/customerservice/fitting_intro.asp). This seems cool and all, and if it performed as advertised, would be great. If I recall correctly, once they fitted you with the test club (6 iron, I believe), you could try each of the other clubs that was suggested to insure it was correct and possibly make corrections to the longer/shorter clubs. I am wondering if I should trust the computer, of go to the driving range and see where the ball goes. Any suggestions? – Michael
: After playing a few years with a $90 Walmart set of Dunlops, I have the : wife’s approval to purchase a new set of clubs – regardless of price. That : is cool, but where should I go to purchase the clubs? <SNIP : I am wondering if I should trust the computer, of go to the driving range : and see where the ball goes. : Any suggestions? : – Michael poster in the 49ers newsgroup as well as a follower of the NFL team with the blue star??? If so, fear not, I am not one of the posters you regularly do battle with and I won’t tell anyone you play golf. I have traded postings with you a few times over the years, though. If you are not the "Spike" to which I refer, then my apologies for the diversion. With regards to your golf equipment question: I faced a similar situation last year. The club selection out there is pretty amazing. How to choose??? Where to go??? I’ll tell you what I did. I am an Engineer and as such, I don’t plunk down my money without doing some research. (Way too much research if you ask my wife! "Come on Honey. I just want a new TV. Why is it taking you 3 months to figure out which one we can buy???"). I searched the newsgroups and found rsg. You’ve already taken that step and if you have been reading the group for long you probably already know that there is some really good golfers and good information here. Of course, you have to weed through some garbage as well to find it. It is here that I learned about the benefits of Component Clubs. Many choices in head designs, choice of shaft, custom fit, frequency matching etc. etc. etc. When going in to the golf stores, they always tell you "Sure, we custom fit". Usually though, this ends up being a few minutes in the swing booth and then the salesman says: "You need 1/2 inch over size and standard lie" or some such quick assessment that may or may not be even close. The REAL Ping club fitters do a better job, I am told, and there may be others as well. But even the Ping clubs and the other "Top Of The Line" clubs don’t give you everything that a good club builder can give you such as frequency matching the shafts and spine alignment. The OEMS just don’t take the time on each set to get it down to that level. How much does that matter? It depends. It might not be much or it could be a lot. It’s kind of a crap shoot but there are enough stories of guys having one or two clubs out of a brand new set that seem "funny" and it turns out to be a frequency matching issue that I was convinced. To further convince myself, I spent a lot of time reading on a website: www.golfclubreview.com. There they review all kinds of clubs and golf equipment, both OEM and component clubs. It was very interesting learning about the different types of clubs and the kinds of golfers that are best suited for them. For awhile, I was really leaning towards OEM "Name Brand" clubs but eventually I realized that I could get similar quality clubs, custom built for me, for significantly less money. The only thing missing is the Name Brand. How much is that worth? To me, not that much. What matters is how many strokes does it take to get the ball in the hole. Not whether my clubs say Nike, Ping or Golfsmith on them. So, in the end, I purchased a set of Golfsmith Tour Cavity Pros from a club builder in Wisconsin. I live in California. How was this going to work??? Well, I first sent him my 5 Iron and my swing speed information as well as the recommendations I got from a local golf shop and a couple of online club fitting programs. He built me a 5I based on that info and sent it to me. I tried it out on the driving range and then sent it back after I called him with my results. He reshafted it a bit stiffer and sent it back again. We did one more cycle to adjust lie angle and then the club felt perfect. He built the rest of my set based on that 5I and I couldn’t be happier with the results. The clubs look great in my bag and I’d stack them up against any OEM clubs for fit and finish. The cost?? He made my 11 club set (3I-9I, PW, AW, SW, LW) for a little over $500, total cost. From what I have seen, Name Brand clubs start at $500 for an 8 club set (3I-PW) and go up from there. You can get over $800 in a hurry. Could I afford a more expensive set? Sure. Would a more expensive set have been a better set? I seriously doubt it. I really think this is a case of getting more for less. If you would like more info, just let me know. Marshall Ward, Life Long 49er Fan and Golfer
There’s nothing like watching the ball fly on the driving range. The question that you should ask yourself is "do I want to spend $799 for a new set of irons, when I can spend half that and get a completely fit set of clubs?" There is nothing like going through a complete fitting from a clubmaker. He takes more measurements, takes more care in building your clubs than anyone else will. The problem will be in finding a competent clubmaker in your area. For every good clubmaker, there are 3-4 bad that do a complete disservice to those wanting to make a buck at the game. That’s my ramblings on the subject, good luck with your decision. Chris S.
That’s the truth! But it’s fun to shop clubmakers. Just take the view that you won’t buy anything unjtil you’ve seen several. Check out products online. Ask questions on clubmaking forums and on GEA. There are a lot of good clubmakers who will respond. A little knowledge goes a long way. — RSG Masters 2004 pre-preliminary format http://home.att.net/~frostback2002 RSG Roll Call: http://rec-sport-golf.com/?rc=frostback "The privilege of a lifetime is being who you are" Joseph Campbell
There’s nothing like watching the ball fly on the driving range. The question that you should ask yourself is "do I want to spend $799 for a new set of irons, when I can spend half that and get a completely fit set of clubs?" There is nothing like going through a complete fitting from a clubmaker. He takes more measurements, takes more care in building your clubs than anyone else will. The problem will be in finding a competent clubmaker in your area. For every good clubmaker, there are 3-4 bad that do a complete disservice to those wanting to make a buck at the game. That’s my ramblings on the subject, good luck with your decision. Chris S.
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – After playing a few years with a $90 Walmart set of Dunlops, I have the wife’s approval to purchase a new set of clubs – regardless of price. That is cool, but where should I go to purchase the clubs? At the three driving ranges that I visit, each has a Ping cart, a Titleist cart and a Griffits(?) that they use when people buy clubs. They have other clubs (Armour, Cobra, Cleveland, etc), but for these, they take your measurements and then order the clubs. For the clubs that they have the fitting cart, they get some preliminary measurements to take a first guess at what club is best for you, and after a few swings and seeing what the ball does, they might a few changes to the club until they end up with "the right club for you". Since you get to see the path of the ball on the range, it seems like it would give you good feedback regarding how you hit the club. I think that they fit you with a 6 iron until they get one that fits, and then use the specs from that to project how the whole set should fit. At the local Golf Galaxy, they have an "indoor driving range" that consists of you hitting the the ball and a radar measuring the club head speed and ball direction, and they compute how the ball would travel. Since you ball hits the hanging screen after 10 feet or so, you don’t get a good eye for how you actually hit the ball, so you have to trust the radar. This seems not so good. I recently visited a store in Vegas (St. Andrews Golf Store in the Caesers Forum) and they have one of these indoor driving ranges, but they claim that their radars actually measure shaft flex and torque during the swing, the club face angle, and the over/under spin and side spin of the ball as it leaves the club face. Callaway actually calls it "Callaway Golf Performance Center" (http://www.callawaygolf.com/customerservice/fitting_intro.asp). This seems cool and all, and if it performed as advertised, would be great. If I recall correctly, once they fitted you with the test club (6 iron, I believe), you could try each of the other clubs that was suggested to insure it was correct and possibly make corrections to the longer/shorter clubs. I am wondering if I should trust the computer, of go to the driving range and see where the ball goes. Any suggestions? – Michael
After playing a few years with a $90 Walmart set of Dunlops, I have the wife’s approval to purchase a new set of clubs – regardless of price. That is cool, but where should I go to purchase the clubs? At the three driving ranges that I visit, each has a Ping cart, a Titleist cart and a Griffits(?) that they use when people buy clubs. They have other clubs (Armour, Cobra, Cleveland, etc), but for these, they take your measurements and then order the clubs. For the clubs that they have the fitting cart, they get some preliminary measurements to take a first guess at what club is best for you, and after a few swings and seeing what the ball does, they might a few changes to the club until they end up with "the right club for you". Since you get to see the path of the ball on the range, it seems like it would give you good feedback regarding how you hit the club. I think that they fit you with a 6 iron until they get one that fits, and then use the specs from that to project how the whole set should fit. At the local Golf Galaxy, they have an "indoor driving range" that consists of you hitting the the ball and a radar measuring the club head speed and ball direction, and they compute how the ball would travel. Since you ball hits the hanging screen after 10 feet or so, you don’t get a good eye for how you actually hit the ball, so you have to trust the radar. This seems not so good. I recently visited a store in Vegas (St. Andrews Golf Store in the Caesers Forum) and they have one of these indoor driving ranges, but they claim that their radars actually measure shaft flex and torque during the swing, the club face angle, and the over/under spin and side spin of the ball as it leaves the club face. Callaway actually calls it "Callaway Golf Performance Center" (http://www.callawaygolf.com/customerservice/fitting_intro.asp). This seems cool and all, and if it performed as advertised, would be great. If I recall correctly, once they fitted you with the test club (6 iron, I believe), you could try each of the other clubs that was suggested to insure it was correct and possibly make corrections to the longer/shorter clubs. I am wondering if I should trust the computer, of go to the driving range and see where the ball goes. Any suggestions? – Michael
You seem to be on the right track with the source below. You should buy on the basis of "satisfaction guaranteed" – when you shell out that kind of dough. Their method for fitting – sounds logical. How many satisfied / dissatisfied customers do they have? You have to trust – somebody. ====== I recently visited a store in Vegas (St. Andrews Golf Store in the
Caesers Forum) and they have one of these indoor driving ranges, but they claim that their radars actually measure shaft flex and torque during the swing, the club face angle, and the over/under spin and side spin of the ball as it leaves the club face. Callaway actually calls it "Callaway Golf Performance Center"
I know that hitting a consistent draw is one of the toughest things in golf. I have also heard that my Ping ISI-K’s are hard to shape with. Well after a summers worth of work I have now finally figured out how to draw the ball pretty consistently with my 4 and 5 irons. I have 3 holes at my home course that are doglegs left and a driver will run you out of fairway pretty quick so a draw has become a necessity. It feels pretty good to stay in the fairway and get be a little closer on the second shot. I only wish that I could have had my driver going today too or I would have had a much better round. young…
You mentioned in another thread that you hit the Wilson Smart Core. I just came from my local Sports Authority and they were clearing out their stock for $16 for 24 balls (reg $38). They had 20 or so boxes. I stocked up on my beloved Callaway hx red for $21 for 12. (reg. $39). If you have a SA by you check ‘em out or let me know and maybe we can figure how to get ‘em out to you. FreddyV
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I know that hitting a consistent draw is one of the toughest things in golf. I have also heard that my Ping ISI-K’s are hard to shape with. Well after a summers worth of work I have now finally figured out how to draw the ball pretty consistently with my 4 and 5 irons. I have 3 holes at my home course that are doglegs left and a driver will run you out of fairway pretty quick so a draw has become a necessity. It feels pretty good to stay in the fairway and get be a little closer on the second shot. I only wish that I could have had my driver going today too or I would have had a much better round. young…
You mentioned in another thread that you hit the Wilson Smart Core. I just came from my local Sports Authority and they were clearing out their stock for $16 for 24 balls (reg $38). They had 20 or so boxes. I stocked up on my beloved Callaway hx red for $21 for 12. (reg. $39). If you have a SA by you check ‘em out or let me know and maybe we can figure how to get ‘em out to you. FreddyV
Sometimes you wonder how Sports Authority can stay in business. Then you see things like this as a "Best Seller". It’s not all their fault, but it’s still the worst deal I’ve ever seen for golf balls: http://www.thesportsauthority.com/product/index.jsp?productId=766175&… –Blair "Al Davis who?"
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – You mentioned in another thread that you hit the Wilson Smart Core. I just came from my local Sports Authority and they were clearing out their stock for $16 for 24 balls (reg $38). They had 20 or so boxes. I stocked up on my beloved Callaway hx red for $21 for 12. (reg. $39). If you have a SA by you check ‘em out or let me know and maybe we can figure how to get ‘em out to you. FreddyV Sometimes you wonder how Sports Authority can stay in business. Then you see things like this as a "Best Seller". It’s not all their fault, but it’s still the worst deal I’ve ever seen for golf balls: http://www.thesportsauthority.com/product/index.jsp?productId=766175&… –Blair "Al Davis who?"
I guess i’ll probably grab two buckets and with shipping that should be close to $400 Canadian for 72 balls. I wish I could find a few more bargains like this. young…
Sometimes you wonder how Sports Authority can stay in business. Then you see things like this as a "Best Seller". It’s not all their fault, but it’s still the worst deal I’ve ever seen for golf balls: http://www.thesportsauthority.com/product/index.jsp?productId=766175&… "Al Davis who?" I guess i’ll probably grab two buckets and with shipping that should be close to $400 Canadian for 72 balls. I wish I could find a few more bargains like this.
I don’t know if I should mention this, but those of us not in the Raider Nation are well-served by the fact that those in the Raider Nation tend to display the signets of their psychosis, allowing us to pinch our noses, avoid eye contact, and stop our change from jangling. –Blair "What color casket does Romo sleep in?"
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Sometimes you wonder how Sports Authority can stay in business. Then you see things like this as a "Best Seller". It’s not all their fault, but it’s still the worst deal I’ve ever seen for golf balls: http://www.thesportsauthority.com/product/index.jsp?productId=766175&… "Al Davis who?" I guess i’ll probably grab two buckets and with shipping that should be close to $400 Canadian for 72 balls. I wish I could find a few more bargains like this. I don’t know if I should mention this, but those of us not in the Raider Nation are well-served by the fact that those in the Raider Nation tend to display the signets of their psychosis, allowing us to pinch our noses, avoid eye contact, and stop our change from jangling. –Blair "What color casket does Romo sleep in?"
I have to just bite my tongue cause my Lions look to stink the joint ip again this year. young…
beware…some of us look like your next-door neighbor. never can tell w/ those Raider fans. cheers, Mike – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I don’t know if I should mention this, but those of us not in the Raider Nation are well-served by the fact that those in the Raider Nation tend to display the signets of their psychosis, allowing us to pinch our noses, avoid eye contact, and stop our change from jangling. –Blair "What color casket does Romo sleep in?"
I don’t know if I should mention this, but those of us not in the Raider Nation are well-served by the fact that those in the Raider Nation tend to display the signets of their psychosis, allowing us to pinch our noses, avoid eye contact, and stop our change from jangling. beware…some of us look like your next-door neighbor.
Possibly. He don’t look to stable neither. never can tell w/ those Raider fans.
Sure you can. Foot-high sticker in the back window of the F-150. –Blair "Little toy set of spiked shoulder pads hanging from the rear-view."
Possibly. He don’t look to stable neither.
The redneck comes out and the pseudo-intellectual stumbles down. HAR HAR! Reiver
[snip] I have to just bite my tongue cause my Lions look to stink the joint ip again this year.
Hey, they wouldn’t be the Lions if they didn’t. I heard they hung out with the Tigers all summer.
Hey, they wouldn’t be the Lions if they didn’t. I heard they hung out with the Tigers all summer.
But certainly not with the Red Wings. How are the Wings as golf players? A bunch of Avalanche have single digit handicaps.
I know that hitting a consistent draw is one of the toughest things in golf. I have also heard that my Ping ISI-K’s are hard to shape with. Well after a summers worth of work I have now finally figured out how to draw the ball pretty consistently with my 4 and 5 irons. I have 3 holes at my home course that are doglegs left and a driver will run you out of fairway pretty quick so a draw has become a necessity. It feels pretty good to stay in the fairway and get be a little closer on the second shot. I only wish that I could have had my driver going today too or I would have had a much better round. young…
So what did you do to your swing in your "summer’s worth of work" to get you to draw the ball? CJ
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I know that hitting a consistent draw is one of the toughest things in golf. I have also heard that my Ping ISI-K’s are hard to shape with. Well after a summers worth of work I have now finally figured out how to draw the ball pretty consistently with my 4 and 5 irons. I have 3 holes at my home course that are doglegs left and a driver will run you out of fairway pretty quick so a draw has become a necessity. It feels pretty good to stay in the fairway and get be a little closer on the second shot. I only wish that I could have had my driver going today too or I would have had a much better round. young… So what did you do to your swing in your "summer’s worth of work" to get you to draw the ball? CJ
I did a lot of actual hard work at the range and got the Pings. They are my first foray into a decent set of clubs and they helped my ball striking a ton. I seemed to have figured out with my irons how to keep the club face square at impact and that helped me figure out how to open and close enough to hit a draw or fade. Now don’t get me wrong I hit my share of fat shots and shanks and sometimes my fades become slices but I have been pretty consistent with drawing the ball. My course has three holes that demand a draw with a long – mid iron off the tee and this alone prompted me to work on it. I think it may be that the Pings are a pretty heavy club and that may be what I need to keep a better swing plane. I don’t know 100 percent what I did just that it happened and I am very thankful that I have been able to reproduce the results. I also bought a couple of new drivers this year to try the most recent being a Nike 350cc with an X stiff shaft. This was recommended from my swing analysis. However I still have a hard time fighting a slice while with my old steel shafted driver I have a tendency to hook the ball or pull it. I have been hacking away for about ten years and this is the first year I have tried to play seriously. Before this year I had only ever broken 100 once and scored only one ever birdie. This year I broke 100 about 10 times and shot an 89 at a tournament I entered. I have scored numerous birdies and even have two eagles to my credit which I chalk all up to some long hard work at the range. FWIW the driving range in my small town here is at the sportspark and both my girls play soccer so my wife and I had a deal that on practice nights I got to go to the range and on game nights if we had time after I could take my girls (7+4) to hit some balls. Can’t wait until my son (4 months old) is ready to come too. Sorry about the long post. young…
Possibly. He don’t look to stable neither. The redneck comes out and the pseudo-intellectual stumbles down. HAR HAR!
When you’re done playing with your sock-puppets, how about going and playing in traffic. –Blair "There are Hanna-Barbera characters deeper than you."
I play in traffic every day. Today I only got 9 pedestrians… Reiver – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Possibly. He don’t look to stable neither. The redneck comes out and the pseudo-intellectual stumbles down. HAR HAR! When you’re done playing with your sock-puppets, how about going and playing in traffic. –Blair "There are Hanna-Barbera characters deeper than you."
{snip} Why do you think a club builder would want to report making such a find of Callaways? Nice easy sale of some services, n’est pas? This customer was dis-satisfied with the 3 same clubs the clubfitter found "out of frequency". The customer is my cousin. I can’t hit any of them better than my piece-o-crap yardsale, mis-matched clubs.
Did he try Callaway? They have a pretty good rep for customer service. If they were out of spec., Callaway might have fixed them for free. — RSG Masters 2004 pre-preliminary format http://home.att.net/~frostback2002 RSG Roll Call: http://rec-sport-golf.com/?rc=frostback "The privilege of a lifetime is being who you are" Joseph Campbell
You set yourself up as an expert, and when given a chance to prove it, you run with your tail between your legs. That says it all.
Well Geeeez Mike, he said he bought 2 graphite shafts and claims they were consistent as advertised. Certainly that proves to Rob that all graphite shafts are already frequency perfect. Of course since there is no data or evidence to prove to Rob that it makes any difference anyway, I wonder why it was important for him to see if the 2 shafts were matched. The fact that they did match, then proves to the world that there is no data anyway. Thats why he put them in his wedges. Get it?
I’m certainly no authority on the issue anyways, so why waste my time on questions that are completely irrelevant to the main point? The issue is that you make statements criticising the main point. Then when questioned about your criticism, you refuse to answer or defend them. Then, in your usual way you hide and claim.." I’m no authority anyway". I’d simply agree with that and agree that you are no authoruty.
I’m not hiding anything. I don’t buy the freq. matching or the spine aligning. I don’t see it as that big a deal. You know well from my previous posts on this that I select my clubs by trial and error testing using a statisticial model. I think it has worked quite well for me. The questions are a red herring. So I pull out some book, or reference a website with instructions as to how to match on the brunswick slope, it doesn’t relate at all to effects of spine aligning on club performance. However, you want to freq. match shafts? I would do it with differential tip trimming. But if you tip trim for freq. you compromise length. What to do? Butt trim? Ok, but then you alter the diameter at the end of the club and alter the position of the kick point relative to where you grip the club. What else you going to do? Every little thing you do when you dick around with clubs has a consequence. Real clubheads you buy don’t increase 7 grams per unit number. What you gonna do? Drill out the hosel or add weight to the hosel? How does that affect the distribution of weight in that clubhead relative to others? Maybe it’s a really small amount of weight, sort of like inconsistencies causeing one part of a shaft to flex a little differently than another part of a shaft under a 205g load. Does it really affect the performance of the club? It’s all a matter of personal preference in the absence of real data on performance. I don’t have any real answers. I don’t have any real data. Neither does anyone else. Nothing wrong with frequency matching clubs right down to 1CPM. Nothing wrong with not doing it either, IMHO. Same goes for spine aligning. — RSG Masters 2004 pre-preliminary format http://home.att.net/~frostback2002 RSG Roll Call: http://rec-sport-golf.com/?rc=frostback "The privilege of a lifetime is being who you are" Joseph Campbell
I’m certainly no authority on the issue anyways, so why waste my time on questions that are completely irrelevant to the main point?
The issue is that you make statements criticising the main point. Then when questioned about your criticism, you refuse to answer or defend them. Then, in your usual way you hide and claim.." I’m no authority anyway". I’d simply agree with that and agree that you are no authoruty.
Puff away all day. The fact remains that there are no data to support that spine aligning makes any difference with a decent shaft AND that such tests are technically quite easy to do. The fact also remains that there are no data to show that highly specific freq. matching makes any difference either, and those tests are just as easy to do. These are facts, not opinions, and everything you blow here is just smoke. I still stand by the statement that if there is evidence, I will go for it 100%.
You’ve been presented evidence. You continue to ignore it. That makes you a troll or a fool. Which is it? Saying you present data and presenting data are two different things, of course.
I presented it in my earlier post, the part you so judiciously chose not to address. Troll or fool? The fact is you don’t even attempt to present evidence that spine aligning has an effect on club performance in the post to which I first responded.
Sorry, untrue. Go back and read. All you did in that post was run down SK Fiber shafts, for whatever reason, and then claim you didn’t in the following post!
You’re simply a fool or a liar, now. Which would it be, Rob? I don’t set myself up as any sort of expert, and I am personally convinced that you are far from expert, otherwise you would not have to run me or anyone else down who does not buy the Mike Dalecki concept of clubmaking hook line and sinker.
You set yourself up as an expert, and when given a chance to prove it, you run with your tail between your legs. That says it all. You would have the confidence to accept the reality that there are different strokes for different folks here. The differences we have are personal pereference, and nothing more.
You’re simply ignorant of what is. It’s been demonstrated repeatedly. The only reason I pay any attention to you at all is that RSG should be a resource for golf, clubmaking included. Your commentary is simply wrong, and as such should be corrected, just as the incorrect information about epoxy presented by FiveIron needed to be corrected. That’s all. I asked but one question of you for which you should have the answer: what happened to the great spine aliging test of April 2003?
I don’t know what you’re talking about. I asked previously what it was, and you ignore my question. Are you an idiot? My gosh, how much simpler can it be? I am not claiming any great authority here; you are.
Please point out where I have claimed to be a great authority. Point it out. If you can’t, then you’re nothing but a liar. Point it out, or be exposed for what you are. That I don’t want to answer condascending questions means nothing,
It means you don’t know what you’re talking about. Fool or troll, which is it? that you don’t want to answer a direct, simple question tells all.
What on earth are you talking about? Mike Dalecki GCA Accredited Clubmaker http://clubdoctor.com RSG-Wisconsin 2003 Information: http://dalecki.net/rsgwis2003 RSG Roll Call: http://rec-sport-golf.com/members/?rollcall=daleckim I do not patronize spammers. Help keep RSG clean!
Your condascending list of questions will remain, as always, unanswered, as I am in no sense required to answer to you. Figgered
It absolutely does! Why would I waste my time on some sort of treatise on something I don’t believe in? I have wasted a couple or 10 shafts seeing how much the frequency changes as you nibble off little bits just for the halibut. So what though? I’m certainly no authority on the issue anyways, so why waste my time on questions that are completely irrelevant to the main point? — RSG Masters 2004 pre-preliminary format http://home.att.net/~frostback2002 RSG Roll Call: http://rec-sport-golf.com/?rc=frostback "The privilege of a lifetime is being who you are" Joseph Campbell
Puff away all day. The fact remains that there are no data to support that spine aligning makes any difference with a decent shaft AND that such tests are technically quite easy to do. The fact also remains that there are no data to show that highly specific freq. matching makes any difference either, and those tests are just as easy to do. These are facts, not opinions, and everything you blow here is just smoke. I still stand by the statement that if there is evidence, I will go for it 100%. Saying you present data and presenting data are two different things, of course. The fact is you don’t even attempt to present evidence that spine aligning has an effect on club performance in the post to which I first responded. All you did in that post was run down SK Fiber shafts, for whatever reason, and then claim you didn’t in the following post! I don’t set myself up as any sort of expert, and I am personally convinced that you are far from expert, otherwise you would not have to run me or anyone else down who does not buy the Mike Dalecki concept of clubmaking hook line and sinker. You would have the confidence to accept the reality that there are different strokes for different folks here. The differences we have are personal pereference, and nothing more. I asked but one question of you for which you should have the answer: what happened to the great spine aliging test of April 2003? I am not claiming any great authority here; you are. That I don’t want to answer condascending questions means nothing, that you don’t want to answer a direct, simple question tells all. RSG Masters 2004 pre-preliminary format http://home.att.net/~frostback2002 RSG Roll Call: http://rec-sport-golf.com/?rc=frostback "The privilege of a lifetime is being who you are" Joseph Campbell
Your condascending list of questions will remain, as always, unanswered, as I am in no sense required to answer to you.
Figgered
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – It’s sorta like corked bats though. They tested them. The tests show corking makes no difference, but many MLB players swear by it. MLB has a rule against it. Whatever. The evidence says otherwise. That you can’t see it simply means something about your ability to see. The corked bat data are public domain, which you can find for yourself if you care so much, and there are lots of players and managers who have referenced it with respect to the issue. That’s a side issue though.
We’re talking about golf clubs, not corked bats. It amazes me how hot under the collar some clubmakers get on this issue of twanging properties of golf shafts.
Twanging properties? What’s that? I have to assume that they have married their credibility 100% to this phenomenon, and as I have said before, show me the data and I’ll buy it 100%; but no data are forthcoming,
I presented some to you in my post, which presentation you conveniently snipped. Why did you not respond to what I said? despite an extensive vested interest in the subject, and the fact that the tests are brutally easy for interests with the facilities. No reply from anyone on the great April 2003 test either. My condition here is pretty simple. I’m not asking for much.
You set some conditions? I don’t recall that. Complaining about and condeming SK Fiber shafts without ever looking at them yourself is pretty childish.
Now you’re really going off the deep end. I didn’t complain about them, nor did I condemn them. Show me where in anything I wrote that I did that. Do you not realize how this makes you look? They have been around for a while now and are advertized as highly consistent, and the two I bought conform. I see no reason for some criticism of that.
Let me see if I get this straight: They are *advertised* as being highly consistent, so that must be true. Buy any land in FLorida lately? I make clubs for my own personal use, and I investigate the issue of clubmaking out of personal interest. I have no interest in selling any product or service to anyone, or even the selling of myself as some great expert. I do reserve the right to make on topic comments on fora like RSG tough, despite the WAAAAY OT response from certain clubmakers on the topic (to me and others), simply becaue I feel like it. Pretty reasonable for an open forum, IMHO.
Just as I reserve the right to point out when you’re wrong. You simply don’t know what you’re talking about. Cutting and trimming shafts and adding wieght to the hosel simply to make them conform to some arbitrary standard is not something I want for my clubs.
So? What other standard would you like? How about to a standard that works well for you? I swear, you must never read this stuff before you push the send button. Someone else wants it, whats it to me? I want the butt ends to all be the same; I don’t want even slightly different thicknesses at the grip end. I don’t want shaft extenders. I don’t want any weights in the hosel either, especially any significant amount. I prefer tape on the clubhead behind the sweetspot, but not more than maybe 4 grams. I want a reasonable progression in my clubs for both weight or length, but don’t see how differentially trimming ends or adding weight to the clubhead simply to conform excessivley rigidly to some arbitrary standard that has no demonstrated practical value that it is of any use to me. I tip trim for flex (I don’t care if it’s perfect). Other people feel differently? That’s fine with me.
It’s fine however you want it. What’s not so kosher is when you start implying you know things about clubmaking that you simply do not know, as if your simple cut-and-stick experience has granted you some higher-order knowledge. You simply understand this stuff very poorly. That doesn’t make you a bad person, but it does make you a bad source of information. I MOI matched my current set, but I plan to replace the shafts and SW match them just to see what it feels like. I simply adjust the length of the club and use tape on the clubhead to get the clubs to match. They don’t adhere rigidly to any "slope" or anything like that, but I’m happy with them, and that’s all that matters to me. I don’t make clubs to impress other people in any sense. I make clubs so that I can play golf with them.
Really? I thought people mostly made them for other purposes. Not that this has anything to do with what I wrote, which is the standard Rob Hamilton response pattern. Not that forcing clubs to conform to these standards is any sort of technical feat. I’ve dicked around with it,
Exactly. You have very limited experience (2 shafts!) and thus you’re now an expert. and it’s just not worth it *TO ME*. If it’s worth it to you, adjust away with my best wishes; I’m certainly not here to run you down simply because you make your clubs differently than I do. Your condascending list of questions will remain, as always, unanswered, as I am in no sense required to answer to you.
That’s what I thought: You don’t know what you’re talking about. It would be very easy to put me in my place by showing me–and everyone else–that you know the answers. You don’t, which means your standard response is just blowing air. I’ve got you pegged pretty well here, don’t I? You gotta be kiddin’ me with that crap.
Really? You’re the one who has just exposed himself for his lack of knowledge. Of course what’s how I make clubs to you in any event? I’m not selling anything, and this is a free for all non commercial type forum, so there’s nothing to promote here, and certainly no business interest, it’s just people expressing their views.
You’re making claims about clubmaking, the facts of which are not in evidence. I punted my freq. meter because the clamp sucked.
Are you serious? You decided that a frequency meter is not a valuable tool because your CLAMP sucked? I’m just amazed–you bought an inferior piece of equipment and because you were not a better consumer, now frequency analysis is no good? Omigod. Also, the thing can be very sensitive to ambient vibrations,
Yours was, maybe, but mine’s not. something I should have known from other experience with similar devices, but I don’t have any confidence in the accuracy of the things anyways, so rather than buy a dampening pad/table, I got rid of it. (Leveling is also a bitch with those things) They are very primitive sorts of devices in my eye.
If you buy a primitive device, you get what you pay for. You should have bought a good one. As I said before, I’m making a neufinder2, and I think that it will render a freq. meter obsolete.
Well, we disagree there. I’ve followed the neufinder discussions from back when they were trying to find a name for the neufinder I, and they still aren’t there. I’ve got a neufinder II. I think you’ll find they’re not accurate enough. Further, they won’t provide you with any way to evaluate assembled clubs in a way that lets you equate unassembled shafts to them. I am going to put in a digital sensor (actually 2, a "fine" and a coarse" sensor) and I want to investigate issues related to the performance of shafts under the loads they experience under playing conditions (up to 50lbs according to some, but probably more in the 10-20 lbs for me, at least from what people tell me anyways), which are far more than 200-205 g used in twang tests. I am doing this because I feel like it, and I may report my efforts here, I may not. Depends on whether I feel like it. I really don’t know what, if anything, I can observe, but I feel like doing it, I can do it, so what?
I will say this; Now you’re actually trying to get some experience in all this, from which your opinion might carry some weight. Ya want something really irrational?
No. I’ve had my fill. Mike Mike Dalecki GCA Accredited Clubmaker http://clubdoctor.com RSG-Wisconsin 2003 Information: http://dalecki.net/rsgwis2003 RSG Roll Call: http://rec-sport-golf.com/members/?rollcall=daleckim I do not patronize spammers. Help keep RSG clean!
<snip clubmaking lore I want to be a master club maker when I grow up. -b
It’s sorta like corked bats though. They tested them. The tests show corking makes no difference, but many MLB players swear by it. MLB has a rule against it. Whatever. The evidence says otherwise. That you can’t see it simply means something about your ability to see.
The corked bat data are public domain, which you can find for yourself if you care so much, and there are lots of players and managers who have referenced it with respect to the issue. That’s a side issue though. It amazes me how hot under the collar some clubmakers get on this issue of twanging properties of golf shafts. I have to assume that they have married their credibility 100% to this phenomenon, and as I have said before, show me the data and I’ll buy it 100%; but no data are forthcoming, despite an extensive vested interest in the subject, and the fact that the tests are brutally easy for interests with the facilities. No reply from anyone on the great April 2003 test either. My condition here is pretty simple. I’m not asking for much. Complaining about and condeming SK Fiber shafts without ever looking at them yourself is pretty childish. They have been around for a while now and are advertized as highly consistent, and the two I bought conform. I see no reason for some criticism of that. I make clubs for my own personal use, and I investigate the issue of clubmaking out of personal interest. I have no interest in selling any product or service to anyone, or even the selling of myself as some great expert. I do reserve the right to make on topic comments on fora like RSG tough, despite the WAAAAY OT response from certain clubmakers on the topic (to me and others), simply becaue I feel like it. Pretty reasonable for an open forum, IMHO. Cutting and trimming shafts and adding wieght to the hosel simply to make them conform to some arbitrary standard is not something I want for my clubs. Someone else wants it, whats it to me? I want the butt ends to all be the same; I don’t want even slightly different thicknesses at the grip end. I don’t want shaft extenders. I don’t want any weights in the hosel either, especially any significant amount. I prefer tape on the clubhead behind the sweetspot, but not more than maybe 4 grams. I want a reasonable progression in my clubs for both weight or length, but don’t see how differentially trimming ends or adding weight to the clubhead simply to conform excessivley rigidly to some arbitrary standard that has no demonstrated practical value that it is of any use to me. I tip trim for flex (I don’t care if it’s perfect). Other people feel differently? That’s fine with me. I MOI matched my current set, but I plan to replace the shafts and SW match them just to see what it feels like. I simply adjust the length of the club and use tape on the clubhead to get the clubs to match. They don’t adhere rigidly to any "slope" or anything like that, but I’m happy with them, and that’s all that matters to me. I don’t make clubs to impress other people in any sense. I make clubs so that I can play golf with them. Not that forcing clubs to conform to these standards is any sort of technical feat. I’ve dicked around with it, and it’s just not worth it *TO ME*. If it’s worth it to you, adjust away with my best wishes; I’m certainly not here to run you down simply because you make your clubs differently than I do. Your condascending list of questions will remain, as always, unanswered, as I am in no sense required to answer to you. You gotta be kiddin’ me with that crap. Of course what’s how I make clubs to you in any event? I’m not selling anything, and this is a free for all non commercial type forum, so there’s nothing to promote here, and certainly no business interest, it’s just people expressing their views. I punted my freq. meter because the clamp sucked. Also, the thing can be very sensitive to ambient vibrations, something I should have known from other experience with similar devices, but I don’t have any confidence in the accuracy of the things anyways, so rather than buy a dampening pad/table, I got rid of it. (Leveling is also a bitch with those things) They are very primitive sorts of devices in my eye. As I said before, I’m making a neufinder2, and I think that it will render a freq. meter obsolete. I am going to put in a digital sensor (actually 2, a "fine" and a coarse" sensor) and I want to investigate issues related to the performance of shafts under the loads they experience under playing conditions (up to 50lbs according to some, but probably more in the 10-20 lbs for me, at least from what people tell me anyways), which are far more than 200-205 g used in twang tests. I am doing this because I feel like it, and I may report my efforts here, I may not. Depends on whether I feel like it. I really don’t know what, if anything, I can observe, but I feel like doing it, I can do it, so what? Ya want something really irrational? I want to make my neufinder2 out of brass…because I feel like it. Finding the brass at a decent price, now that’s technically demanding! — RSG Masters 2004 pre-preliminary format http://home.att.net/~frostback2002 RSG Roll Call: http://rec-sport-golf.com/?rc=frostback "The privilege of a lifetime is being who you are" Joseph Campbell
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Just met my local clubfitter recently. He mentioned that a customer brought a new set of Callaways to him complaining that 3 irons in the set he ‘couldn’t hit worth a shit’. Jim (the clubfitter) said he checked out the whole set, and those three clubs were ‘way out of frequency’. $1200.-$1400. set of clubs. Jim re- shafted these 3 clubs for the guy and now happy customer. He also mentioned that he runs into this all the time, from the cheapest clubs right up to and including the best. Not very encouraging. My questions are: 1) How does spline alignment, frequency analysis, optimizing (various custom clubfitters on the net) and PUREing (Golfsmith) of shaft relate to each other? It seems obvious that only spline alignment is available to the beginning (wanna-be) hobbiest. 2) Which is better? 3) At what point does a golfer benefit from this? A certain handicap? A certain proficiency level? Much like the adage "practice makes permanent" aren’t we beating our heads against the wall with bad (not matched in SOME way) clubs? There is no actual evidence that any of this makes any difference at all. I still wonder what happened to the great April 2003 test of spine aligning. You can buy graphite shafts pretty cheap (like 15 bucks each) that have no spine and don’t vary for frequency, for example. IMHO, the one benefit from all this spine aligning/freq matching stuff is that graphite shaft makers have started to make shafts with no spine and that do match well for frequency (something you will never be able to do with the cheapo steel inb steel golf shafts). All in all though, it’s fun to fool around with clubmaking, at least for me; but like it or not, it’s not any sort of high tech exercise, its a hunk of metal on the end of a stick. Anyone can make golf clubs, and while some may make snotty remarks about this or that meaningless picky property, the fact is that it doesn’t make that much difference in the end. You learn as you go along, and as you learn, you are able to make clubs that match what you want, you like and you can afford in a way that no one else can. I found a sucker…er buyer for my frequency meter, for example, and it is long gone. I’m hoping to find time to make a neufinder2, hopefully by Xmas, which is all I need to root out bad shafts, IMHO. Which graphite shafts can I buy for $15 ea that have no spines and do not vary in Frequency? I want to buy a dozen and have them checked here locally and report back. I’ll use a company called HotStix here in Scottsdale. I’m sure you are correct…..which ones should I order? I’ll post the results here to verify your claims. In the original post above, if graphite shafts are made with consistant freqs, why did the club builder find that several of the Callaways were ‘way out of freq’? How is this possible in light of your comments that the graphite shafts are now made consistent for freq? I thank you in advance for your answers. Try SK fiber for one. There are others. Do some research. Make your report. You might also want to report on the test of spine aligning from April, since you have such a passion for this. The website shows nothing. Why do you think a club builder would want to report making such a find of Callaways? Nice easy sale of some services, n’est pas? — Where can I order them from, can you suggest a supplier? Je parle un peu de Francais seulment. Dynacraft sells some of them. SK Fiber has a website as well. I tested the 2 I put in my wedges, and they were as advertized, even for FLO (a bit of variation, but not like other shafts), which I didn’t expect.
You tested them? How? I’ve asked you before about how you frequency-analyze shafts, and you declined to answer. Do you have a frequency meter? Did you? (It appears that way from an earlier post) If so, how did you use it? What did the results look like? And most important: Did you test every shaft you could get your hands on, or just two? I’ve occasionally found two shafts to be equivalent. I’ve also found a ton of shafts to be different. The fact that you found two (assuming you even *did* analyze them, and assuming you knew what you were doing, evidence for which has been lacking thus far), simply means nothing. As a scientist (putatively), you must certainly know a sample of two means…nothing. One interesting thing I have found in shafts, not an original though, BTW, but from something I read, is that they are not really consistently round all the way along their length, and some can vary quite a bit for this. They can get seriously oval.
You think? Just for the record here, I have nothing in particular against spining and freq. matching. I just don’t see it, especially in the absence of any test data, which should be easy to generate, and after 30+ years of dicking around with golf equipment, and seeing all the data on so many other things, my minds eye is too suspicious at the lack of data on these issues.
When I did my spine alignment experiment a couple of years ago, I reported on the results. The odds of that result (whereby people picked the aligned shaft out of three) was about 1 in 10,000, rather more significant than .05, or .01, or .001. What about that data did you not like? In the cases of frequency matching, when I’ve had people tell me they don’t like some of their clubs, I frequency-analyze them, and then the results confirm what they *didn’t* like–what in those results do you find unconvincing? With some real data I would be an instant convert. It’s no big deal to freq. match, FLO and spine align shafts.
Have you ever done it? And done it to maintain a swingweight profile? I don’t think you ever have. You say you found a sucker for your frequency meter. What kind of meter was it? How long did you use it? When did you own it? What plane did you measure frequency in, and why? Did you find much variation in Type-II graphite shafts? How many different shafts did you test before you decided to sell it? I’ve asked you in the past to tell us how you do frequency analyzing, and you’ve always avoided answering. So now we have a dilemma. Either you’ve never owned a frequency meter which which you’ve done extensive shaft analysis, or you did own one and never admitted it, so far as I can tell, until now. So tell us of your extensive experience with your meter, will you? Tell us how you set it up. Tell us how many orientations you used to evaluate frequency. Tell us what plane you matched on–or did you never match clubs? How did you affix the head when you were matching? Let’s go, Rob–tell us how extensive your knowledge of all this is. Right now, IMHO, you would be better off spending the 20 bucks per shaft on better shafts than on freq. matching and spine aligning.
Well, an opinion. That’s nice. It’s sorta like corked bats though. They tested them. The tests show corking makes no difference, but many MLB players swear by it. MLB has a rule against it. Whatever.
The evidence says otherwise. That you can’t see it simply means something about your ability to see. Mike Mike Dalecki GCA Accredited Clubmaker RSG-Wisconsin 2003 Information: http://dalecki.net/rsgwis2003 RSG Roll Call: http://rec-sport-golf.com/members/?rollcall=daleckim I do not patronize spammers. Help keep RSG clean!
<snip Could you basically get an idea of the frequency by recording the tone of the ‘twang’ of the shaft and analysing the spectrum in a computer? You can get the software for free (audacity), and a mic very cheap. I can hear difference in pitch from my mom’s ladies flex to my s-flex shafts just bumping the butt end of the grip on the floor. — bollod at lycos dot com
I think a better idea is to twang the club and hold a playing card near the shaft so that is makes a whap-whap-whap sound and record that. Before I got a got a frequency meter, I used to do that and used some software where I could look at the wave form and measure the time between the "whap" noises and determine the frequency that way. As Mike correctly points out though, none of this will work with consistency unless you have a clamp that clamps with the same amount of force every time. Kenny — Kenny Stultz – Troll and SPAM intolerant RSG Rollcall: http://rec-sport-golf.com/members/?rollcall=stultzk "Golf is the only sport where a precise knowledge of the Rules can earn one a reputation for bad sportsmanship"
{snip} Why do you think a club builder would want to report making such a find of Callaways? Nice easy sale of some services, n’est pas?
This customer was dis-satisfied with the 3 same clubs the clubfitter found "out of frequency". The customer is my cousin. I can’t hit any of them better than my piece-o-crap yardsale, mis-matched clubs. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – — RSG Masters 2004 pre-preliminary format http://home.att.net/~frostback2002 RSG Roll Call: http://rec-sport-golf.com/?rc=frostback "The privilege of a lifetime is being who you are" Joseph Campbell
{snip} that no one else can. I found a sucker…er buyer for my frequency meter, for example, and it is long gone. I’m hoping to find time to make a neufinder2, hopefully by Xmas, which is all I need to root out bad shafts, IMHO.
What’s a neufinder2 ? Jeff – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – — RSG Masters 2004 pre-preliminary format http://home.att.net/~frostback2002 RSG Roll Call: http://rec-sport-golf.com/?rc=frostback "The privilege of a lifetime is being who you are" Joseph Campbell
Most exellecent post, Mike. Very informative and well explained. I’m still chewing on parts of it!
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Just met my local clubfitter recently. He mentioned that a customer {sip} I have my own tales of woe (ask Dave Jones about his Pings…). OEM clubs are not really much different from what you can put together yourself. My questions are: 1) How does spline alignment, frequency analysis, optimizing (various custom clubfitters on the net) and PUREing (Golfsmith) of shaft relate to each other? It’s actually called spine alignment. PUREing and Spine alignment are essentially the same thing. Optimizing sounds like a buzzword designed to help get people to part w/ their money. It’s what fitting and matching are all about.
Okay, spine. Got it. PUREing looked like frequency analysis. This one I guessed all wrong on. Got optimizing right. Meaning that my sense of marketing told me this. Frequency analysis is what you do to determine whether the flexes of the clubs in a set are matched or not. Stiffness (flex) can be quantified by frequency–clamp the club (sans grip) in a special clamp, then twang the clubhead so the club oscillates up and down, and use a frequency meter to measure the cycles per minute (cpm). The higher the cpm, the stiffer the club.
Does this mean I should buy more shafts than I need? It appears from the above that THIS(frequency analysis) is a requirement to match to MY swing speed. (yes I read ahead) It seems obvious that only spline alignment is available to the beginning (wanna-be) hobbiest. Well, unless you want to spend between $300 and $400 for a frequency meter setup, probably so.
Your post and the little looking around I’ve done has already convinced me that I will leave my clubfitting to someone with your qualifications. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – You can make a good set of irons if you use steel shafts, sort the shafts by weight, and put the lightest shafts in the longest irons (tip trimming to recommendations). They won’t be perfect, but they also will be pretty decent, esp. if you buy a couple extra shafts to cull out any that are way out of line with the others. What a frequency meter allows you to do is to get the clubs to match exactly on frequency, as well as to create a custom frequency match. For example, in my driver I wanted a flex between the regular and stiff that was typical in the Fujikura VP70 shafts. I used a regular flex shaft, and tip trimmed it a bit at a time until I got the frequency I was looking for. 2) Which is better? It’s a question with no real answer. It’s like asking which is better: Butter, or brakes on a car.
Think I got this one (now). You mean that F.A. is stiffness/flex and PUREing is Spine alignment. Never would have got this one from reading the catalogs/ads/web pages, etc. out there. 3) At what point does a golfer benefit from this? A certain handicap? A certain proficiency level? Much like the adage "practice makes permanent" aren’t we beating our heads against the wall with bad (not matched in SOME way) clubs? There’s bad, and then there’s bad, but IMO any golfer will benefit from a fit and matched set of clubs. If you have a set of clubs where the 3-iron is a stiff flex, the 4-iron is a senior (!) flex, the 5-iron a regular flex (something I’ve seen), and so on, how easy is it to develop a swing that is consistent from club to club? Very tough to do, because you have different loading requirements in each case.
I believe you’re refering to an ‘off the rack’ set here? I know that the set of powerbilts (newer) that I have are mostly (6i isn’t bad) inadaquate (for me), but the old Powerbilt ‘Thourghbred’ (kind of squareish lookin, early cavity back) is my favorite iron. It just fits me and my swing. And my swing has changed lots since I first got this club. I say it fits my frame, my physique, just well, naturally. (probably referring at least some to the lie of this club). And there is little doubt in my mind that the flex of this club(shaft) will prove to be close to what a clubfitter would recommend. But there are levels of quality that probably aren’t apparent until you get to mid-teens handicap. Do you need a perfect match on frequency? No. You can get by with some variation. But the better matched a set of clubs is, the less you have to fight the clubs and your swing at the same time.
How much does this affect a typical set of irons anyway? Isn’t all of life a trade off? It also depends on the quality of components. I spine align everything in graphite, simply as a matter of course. But there are higher quality shafts where it doesn’t appear to matter as much, given their quality. But lower-quality graphite, in my experience, often has characteristics which respond to spining.
I take this to mean that it’s risky buying those big head driver clones at the local department store. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Various shafts also have different susceptibilities to alignment issues. Some shafts can be cocked just right in the hosel to create a real problem; others have much less susceptibility to alignment problems, simply because the shaft is more consistent. Here are some things you might get, and what I think their value might be to you, if you’re a 20 hdcp, for instance: matching on frequency (flex): yes, do it. spine alignment: if graphite, yes, if steel, you can get away w/o it. matching on swingweight or MOI: yes, in every case. making sure the lie angles are correct: yes, in every case.
Do you think I should print this and show my local clubfitter(s), or NOT show them and quiz them from this quite comprehensive list you’ve put together for us? In the final analysis, what you want is a set of clubs where you know that any problem is with the operator, not the equipment.
When I got my first new, fast chainsaw (forestry business) I knew that the old days of working myself to death were over. In fact I bacame a better operater with a better tool.! The tool let my natural ablity take over.(maybe?) (semantics discussion deleted here) I see you’re from wisconson. Michigan here. Just north of Muskegon. Thanks again for a great post, Mike Jeff – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Mike Mike Dalecki GCA Accredited Clubmaker http://clubdoctor.com RSG-Wisconsin 2003 Information: http://dalecki.net/rsgwis2003 RSG Roll Call: http://rec-sport-golf.com/members/?rollcall=daleckim I do not patronize spammers. Help keep RSG clean!
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Just met my local clubfitter recently. He mentioned that a customer brought a new set of Callaways to him complaining that 3 irons in the set he ‘couldn’t hit worth a shit’. Jim (the clubfitter) said he checked out the whole set, and those three clubs were ‘way out of frequency’. $1200.-$1400. set of clubs. Jim re- shafted these 3 clubs for the guy and now happy customer. He also mentioned that he runs into this all the time, from the cheapest clubs right up to and including the best. Not very encouraging. My questions are: 1) How does spline alignment, frequency analysis, optimizing (various custom clubfitters on the net) and PUREing (Golfsmith) of shaft relate to each other? It seems obvious that only spline alignment is available to the beginning (wanna-be) hobbiest. 2) Which is better? 3) At what point does a golfer benefit from this? A certain handicap? A certain proficiency level? Much like the adage "practice makes permanent" aren’t we beating our heads against the wall with bad (not matched in SOME way) clubs? There is no actual evidence that any of this makes any difference at all. I still wonder what happened to the great April 2003 test of spine aligning. You can buy graphite shafts pretty cheap (like 15 bucks each) that have no spine and don’t vary for frequency, for example. IMHO, the one benefit from all this spine aligning/freq matching stuff is that graphite shaft makers have started to make shafts with no spine and that do match well for frequency (something you will never be able to do with the cheapo steel inb steel golf shafts). All in all though, it’s fun to fool around with clubmaking, at least for me; but like it or not, it’s not any sort of high tech exercise, its a hunk of metal on the end of a stick. Anyone can make golf clubs, and while some may make snotty remarks about this or that meaningless picky property, the fact is that it doesn’t make that much difference in the end. You learn as you go along, and as you learn, you are able to make clubs that match what you want, you like and you can afford in a way that no one else can. I found a sucker…er buyer for my frequency meter, for example, and it is long gone. I’m hoping to find time to make a neufinder2, hopefully by Xmas, which is all I need to root out bad shafts, IMHO. Which graphite shafts can I buy for $15 ea that have no spines and do not vary in Frequency? I want to buy a dozen and have them checked here locally and report back. I’ll use a company called HotStix here in Scottsdale. I’m sure you are correct…..which ones should I order? I’ll post the results here to verify your claims. In the original post above, if graphite shafts are made with consistant freqs, why did the club builder find that several of the Callaways were ‘way out of freq’? How is this possible in light of your comments that the graphite shafts are now made consistent for freq? I thank you in advance for your answers. Try SK fiber for one. There are others. Do some research. Make your report. You might also want to report on the test of spine aligning from April, since you have such a passion for this. The website shows nothing. Why do you think a club builder would want to report making such a find of Callaways? Nice easy sale of some services, n’est pas? — Where can I order them from, can you suggest a supplier? Je parle un peu de Francais seulment.
Dynacraft sells some of them. SK Fiber has a website as well. I tested the 2 I put in my wedges, and they were as advertized, even for FLO (a bit of variation, but not like other shafts), which I didn’t expect. One interesting thing I have found in shafts, not an original though, BTW, but from something I read, is that they are not really consistently round all the way along their length, and some can vary quite a bit for this. They can get seriously oval. Just for the record here, I have nothing in particular against spining and freq. matching. I just don’t see it, especially in the absence of any test data, which should be easy to generate, and after 30+ years of dicking around with golf equipment, and seeing all the data on so many other things, my minds eye is too suspicious at the lack of data on these issues. With some real data I would be an instant convert. It’s no big deal to freq. match, FLO and spine align shafts. Right now, IMHO, you would be better off spending the 20 bucks per shaft on better shafts than on freq. matching and spine aligning. It’s sorta like corked bats though. They tested them. The tests show corking makes no difference, but many MLB players swear by it. MLB has a rule against it. Whatever. — RSG Masters 2004 pre-preliminary format http://home.att.net/~frostback2002 RSG Roll Call: http://rec-sport-golf.com/?rc=frostback "The privilege of a lifetime is being who you are" Joseph Campbell
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Just met my local clubfitter recently. He mentioned that a customer brought a new set of Callaways to him complaining that 3 irons in the set he ‘couldn’t hit worth a shit’. Jim (the clubfitter) said he checked out the whole set, and those three clubs were ‘way out of frequency’. $1200.-$1400. set of clubs. Jim re- shafted these 3 clubs for the guy and now happy customer. He also mentioned that he runs into this all the time, from the cheapest clubs right up to and including the best. Not very encouraging. My questions are: 1) How does spline alignment, frequency analysis, optimizing (various custom clubfitters on the net) and PUREing (Golfsmith) of shaft relate to each other? It seems obvious that only spline alignment is available to the beginning (wanna-be) hobbiest. 2) Which is better? 3) At what point does a golfer benefit from this? A certain handicap? A certain proficiency level? Much like the adage "practice makes permanent" aren’t we beating our heads against the wall with bad (not matched in SOME way) clubs? There is no actual evidence that any of this makes any difference at all. I still wonder what happened to the great April 2003 test of spine aligning. You can buy graphite shafts pretty cheap (like 15 bucks each) that have no spine and don’t vary for frequency, for example. IMHO, the one benefit from all this spine aligning/freq matching stuff is that graphite shaft makers have started to make shafts with no spine and that do match well for frequency (something you will never be able to do with the cheapo steel inb steel golf shafts). All in all though, it’s fun to fool around with clubmaking, at least for me; but like it or not, it’s not any sort of high tech exercise, its a hunk of metal on the end of a stick. Anyone can make golf clubs, and while some may make snotty remarks about this or that meaningless picky property, the fact is that it doesn’t make that much difference in the end. You learn as you go along, and as you learn, you are able to make clubs that match what you want, you like and you can afford in a way that no one else can. I found a sucker…er buyer for my frequency meter, for example, and it is long gone. I’m hoping to find time to make a neufinder2, hopefully by Xmas, which is all I need to root out bad shafts, IMHO. Which graphite shafts can I buy for $15 ea that have no spines and do not vary in Frequency? I want to buy a dozen and have them checked here locally and report back. I’ll use a company called HotStix here in Scottsdale. I’m sure you are correct…..which ones should I order? I’ll post the results here to verify your claims. In the original post above, if graphite shafts are made with consistant freqs, why did the club builder find that several of the Callaways were ‘way out of freq’? How is this possible in light of your comments that the graphite shafts are now made consistent for freq? I thank you in advance for your answers. Try SK fiber for one. There are others. Do some research. Make your report. You might also want to report on the test of spine aligning from April, since you have such a passion for this. The website shows nothing. Why do you think a club builder would want to report making such a find of Callaways? Nice easy sale of some services, n’est pas? —
Where can I order them from, can you suggest a supplier? Je parle un peu de Francais seulment.
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Just met my local clubfitter recently. He mentioned that a customer brought a new set of Callaways to him complaining that 3 irons in the set he ‘couldn’t hit worth a shit’. Jim (the clubfitter) said he checked out the whole set, and those three clubs were ‘way out of frequency’. $1200.-$1400. set of clubs. Jim re- shafted these 3 clubs for the guy and now happy customer. He also mentioned that he runs into this all the time, from the cheapest clubs right up to and including the best. Not very encouraging. My questions are: 1) How does spline alignment, frequency analysis, optimizing (various custom clubfitters on the net) and PUREing (Golfsmith) of shaft relate to each other? It seems obvious that only spline alignment is available to the beginning (wanna-be) hobbiest. 2) Which is better? 3) At what point does a golfer benefit from this? A certain handicap? A certain proficiency level? Much like the adage "practice makes permanent" aren’t we beating our heads against the wall with bad (not matched in SOME way) clubs? There is no actual evidence that any of this makes any difference at all. I still wonder what happened to the great April 2003 test of spine aligning. You can buy graphite shafts pretty cheap (like 15 bucks each) that have no spine and don’t vary for frequency, for example. IMHO, the one benefit from all this spine aligning/freq matching stuff is that graphite shaft makers have started to make shafts with no spine and that do match well for frequency (something you will never be able to do with the cheapo steel inb steel golf shafts). All in all though, it’s fun to fool around with clubmaking, at least for me; but like it or not, it’s not any sort of high tech exercise, its a hunk of metal on the end of a stick. Anyone can make golf clubs, and while some may make snotty remarks about this or that meaningless picky property, the fact is that it doesn’t make that much difference in the end. You learn as you go along, and as you learn, you are able to make clubs that match what you want, you like and you can afford in a way that no one else can. I found a sucker…er buyer for my frequency meter, for example, and it is long gone. I’m hoping to find time to make a neufinder2, hopefully by Xmas, which is all I need to root out bad shafts, IMHO. Which graphite shafts can I buy for $15 ea that have no spines and do not vary in Frequency? I want to buy a dozen and have them checked here locally and report back. I’ll use a company called HotStix here in Scottsdale. I’m sure you are correct…..which ones should I order? I’ll post the results here to verify your claims. In the original post above, if graphite shafts are made with consistant freqs, why did the club builder find that several of the Callaways were ‘way out of freq’? How is this possible in light of your comments that the graphite shafts are now made consistent for freq? I thank you in advance for your answers.
Try SK fiber for one. There are others. Do some research. Make your report. You might also want to report on the test of spine aligning from April, since you have such a passion for this. The website shows nothing. Why do you think a club builder would want to report making such a find of Callaways? Nice easy sale of some services, n’est pas? — RSG Masters 2004 pre-preliminary format http://home.att.net/~frostback2002 RSG Roll Call: http://rec-sport-golf.com/?rc=frostback "The privilege of a lifetime is being who you are" Joseph Campbell
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Just met my local clubfitter recently. He mentioned that a customer brought a new set of Callaways to him complaining that 3 irons in the set he ‘couldn’t hit worth a shit’. Jim (the clubfitter) said he checked out the whole set, and those three clubs were ‘way out of frequency’. $1200.-$1400. set of clubs. Jim re- shafted these 3 clubs for the guy and now happy customer. He also mentioned that he runs into this all the time, from the cheapest clubs right up to and including the best. Not very encouraging. My questions are: 1) How does spline alignment, frequency analysis, optimizing (various custom clubfitters on the net) and PUREing (Golfsmith) of shaft relate to each other? It seems obvious that only spline alignment is available to the beginning (wanna-be) hobbiest. 2) Which is better? 3) At what point does a golfer benefit from this? A certain handicap? A certain proficiency level? Much like the adage "practice makes permanent" aren’t we beating our heads against the wall with bad (not matched in SOME way) clubs? There is no actual evidence that any of this makes any difference at all. I still wonder what happened to the great April 2003 test of spine aligning. You can buy graphite shafts pretty cheap (like 15 bucks each) that have no spine and don’t vary for frequency, for example. IMHO, the one benefit from all this spine aligning/freq matching stuff is that graphite shaft makers have started to make shafts with no spine and that do match well for frequency (something you will never be able to do with the cheapo steel inb steel golf shafts). All in all though, it’s fun to fool around with clubmaking, at least for me; but like it or not, it’s not any sort of high tech exercise, its a hunk of metal on the end of a stick. Anyone can make golf clubs, and while some may make snotty remarks about this or that meaningless picky property, the fact is that it doesn’t make that much difference in the end. You learn as you go along, and as you learn, you are able to make clubs that match what you want, you like and you can afford in a way that no one else can. I found a sucker…er buyer for my frequency meter, for example, and it is long gone. I’m hoping to find time to make a neufinder2, hopefully by Xmas, which is all I need to root out bad shafts, IMHO.
Which graphite shafts can I buy for $15 ea that have no spines and do not vary in Frequency? I want to buy a dozen and have them checked here locally and report back. I’ll use a company called HotStix here in Scottsdale. I’m sure you are correct…..which ones should I order? I’ll post the results here to verify your claims. In the original post above, if graphite shafts are made with consistant freqs, why did the club builder find that several of the Callaways were ‘way out of freq’? How is this possible in light of your comments that the graphite shafts are now made consistent for freq? I thank you in advance for your answers.
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Just met my local clubfitter recently. He mentioned that a customer brought a new set of Callaways to him complaining that 3 irons in the set he ‘couldn’t hit worth a shit’. Jim (the clubfitter) said he checked out the whole set, and those three clubs were ‘way out of frequency’. $1200.-$1400. set of clubs. Jim re- shafted these 3 clubs for the guy and now happy customer. He also mentioned that he runs into this all the time, from the cheapest clubs right up to and including the best. Not very encouraging. My questions are: 1) How does spline alignment, frequency analysis, optimizing (various custom clubfitters on the net) and PUREing (Golfsmith) of shaft relate to each other? It seems obvious that only spline alignment is available to the beginning (wanna-be) hobbiest. 2) Which is better? 3) At what point does a golfer benefit from this? A certain handicap? A certain proficiency level? Much like the adage "practice makes permanent" aren’t we beating our heads against the wall with bad (not matched in SOME way) clubs?
There is no actual evidence that any of this makes any difference at all. I still wonder what happened to the great April 2003 test of spine aligning. You can buy graphite shafts pretty cheap (like 15 bucks each) that have no spine and don’t vary for frequency, for example. IMHO, the one benefit from all this spine aligning/freq matching stuff is that graphite shaft makers have started to make shafts with no spine and that do match well for frequency (something you will never be able to do with the cheapo steel inb steel golf shafts). All in all though, it’s fun to fool around with clubmaking, at least for me; but like it or not, it’s not any sort of high tech exercise, its a hunk of metal on the end of a stick. Anyone can make golf clubs, and while some may make snotty remarks about this or that meaningless picky property, the fact is that it doesn’t make that much difference in the end. You learn as you go along, and as you learn, you are able to make clubs that match what you want, you like and you can afford in a way that no one else can. I found a sucker…er buyer for my frequency meter, for example, and it is long gone. I’m hoping to find time to make a neufinder2, hopefully by Xmas, which is all I need to root out bad shafts, IMHO. — RSG Masters 2004 pre-preliminary format http://home.att.net/~frostback2002 RSG Roll Call: http://rec-sport-golf.com/?rc=frostback "The privilege of a lifetime is being who you are" Joseph Campbell
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Just met my local clubfitter recently. He mentioned that a customer brought a new set of Callaways to him complaining that 3 irons in the set he ‘couldn’t hit worth a shit’. Jim (the clubfitter) said he checked out the whole set, and those three clubs were ‘way out of frequency’. $1200.-$1400. set of clubs. Jim re- shafted these 3 clubs for the guy and now happy customer. He also mentioned that he runs into this all the time, from the cheapest clubs right up to and including the best. Not very encouraging. I have my own tales of woe (ask Dave Jones about his Pings…). OEM clubs are not really much different from what you can put together yourself. My questions are: 1) How does spline alignment, frequency analysis, optimizing (various custom clubfitters on the net) and PUREing (Golfsmith) of shaft relate to each other? It’s actually called spine alignment. PUREing and Spine alignment are essentially the same thing. Optimizing sounds like a buzzword designed to help get people to part w/ their money. It’s what fitting and matching are all about. Frequency analysis is what you do to determine whether the flexes of the clubs in a set are matched or not. Stiffness (flex) can be quantified by frequency–clamp the club (sans grip) in a special clamp, then twang the clubhead so the club oscillates up and down, and use a frequency meter to measure the cycles per minute (cpm). The higher the cpm, the stiffer the club. It seems obvious that only spline alignment is available to the beginning (wanna-be) hobbiest. Well, unless you want to spend between $300 and $400 for a frequency meter setup, probably so. You can make a good set of irons if you use steel shafts, sort the shafts by weight, and put the lightest shafts in the longest irons (tip trimming to recommendations). They won’t be perfect, but they also will be pretty decent, esp. if you buy a couple extra shafts to cull out any that are way out of line with the others. What a frequency meter allows you to do is to get the clubs to match exactly on frequency, as well as to create a custom frequency match. For example, in my driver I wanted a flex between the regular and stiff that was typical in the Fujikura VP70 shafts. I used a regular flex shaft, and tip trimmed it a bit at a time until I got the frequency I was looking for. 2) Which is better? It’s a question with no real answer. It’s like asking which is better: Butter, or brakes on a car. 3) At what point does a golfer benefit from this? A certain handicap? A certain proficiency level? Much like the adage "practice makes permanent" aren’t we beating our heads against the wall with bad (not matched in SOME way) clubs? There’s bad, and then there’s bad, but IMO any golfer will benefit from a fit and matched set of clubs. If you have a set of clubs where the 3-iron is a stiff flex, the 4-iron is a senior (!) flex, the 5-iron a regular flex (something I’ve seen), and so on, how easy is it to develop a swing that is consistent from club to club? Very tough to do, because you have different loading requirements in each case. But there are levels of quality that probably aren’t apparent until you get to mid-teens handicap. Do you need a perfect match on frequency? No. You can get by with some variation. But the better matched a set of clubs is, the less you have to fight the clubs and your swing at the same time. It also depends on the quality of components. I spine align everything in graphite, simply as a matter of course. But there are higher quality shafts where it doesn’t appear to matter as much, given their quality. But lower-quality graphite, in my experience, often has characteristics which respond to spining. Various shafts also have different susceptibilities to alignment issues. Some shafts can be cocked just right in the hosel to create a real problem; others have much less susceptibility to alignment problems, simply because the shaft is more consistent. Here are some things you might get, and what I think their value might be to you, if you’re a 20 hdcp, for instance: matching on frequency (flex): yes, do it. spine alignment: if graphite, yes, if steel, you can get away w/o it. matching on swingweight or MOI: yes, in every case. making sure the lie angles are correct: yes, in every case. In the final analysis, what you want is a set of clubs where you know that any problem is with the operator, not the equipment. Mike Mike Dalecki GCA Accredited Clubmaker http://clubdoctor.com RSG-Wisconsin 2003 Information: http://dalecki.net/rsgwis2003 RSG Roll Call: http://rec-sport-golf.com/members/?rollcall=daleckim I do not patronize spammers. Help keep RSG clean! Could you basically get an idea of the frequency by recording the tone of the ‘twang’ of the shaft and analysing the spectrum in a computer? You can get the software for free (audacity), and a mic very cheap. I can hear difference in pitch from my mom’s ladies flex to my s-flex shafts just bumping the butt end of the grip on the floor. — bollod at lycos dot com
I don’t think so, if I understand what you’re asking. It won’t tell you about how the weight of the clubhead affects frequency. And if I’m wrong about that, you’d still need to calibrate what the tones meant. Also, part of measuring frequency is getting the butt end of the shaft clamped in a special clamp, with the same amount of shaft clamped each time, and clamped at the same pressure. Mike — Mike Dalecki GCA Accredited Clubmaker http://clubdoctor.com RSG-Wisconsin 2003 Information: http://dalecki.net/rsgwis2003 RSG Roll Call: http://rec-sport-golf.com/members/?rollcall=daleckim I do not patronize spammers. Help keep RSG clean!
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Just met my local clubfitter recently. He mentioned that a customer brought a new set of Callaways to him complaining that 3 irons in the set he ‘couldn’t hit worth a shit’. Jim (the clubfitter) said he checked out the whole set, and those three clubs were ‘way out of frequency’. $1200.-$1400. set of clubs. Jim re- shafted these 3 clubs for the guy and now happy customer. He also mentioned that he runs into this all the time, from the cheapest clubs right up to and including the best. Not very encouraging. I have my own tales of woe (ask Dave Jones about his Pings…). OEM clubs are not really much different from what you can put together yourself. My questions are: 1) How does spline alignment, frequency analysis, optimizing (various custom clubfitters on the net) and PUREing (Golfsmith) of shaft relate to each other? It’s actually called spine alignment. PUREing and Spine alignment are essentially the same thing. Optimizing sounds like a buzzword designed to help get people to part w/ their money. It’s what fitting and matching are all about. Frequency analysis is what you do to determine whether the flexes of the clubs in a set are matched or not. Stiffness (flex) can be quantified by frequency–clamp the club (sans grip) in a special clamp, then twang the clubhead so the club oscillates up and down, and use a frequency meter to measure the cycles per minute (cpm). The higher the cpm, the stiffer the club. It seems obvious that only spline alignment is available to the beginning (wanna-be) hobbiest. Well, unless you want to spend between $300 and $400 for a frequency meter setup, probably so. You can make a good set of irons if you use steel shafts, sort the shafts by weight, and put the lightest shafts in the longest irons (tip trimming to recommendations). They won’t be perfect, but they also will be pretty decent, esp. if you buy a couple extra shafts to cull out any that are way out of line with the others. What a frequency meter allows you to do is to get the clubs to match exactly on frequency, as well as to create a custom frequency match. For example, in my driver I wanted a flex between the regular and stiff that was typical in the Fujikura VP70 shafts. I used a regular flex shaft, and tip trimmed it a bit at a time until I got the frequency I was looking for. 2) Which is better? It’s a question with no real answer. It’s like asking which is better: Butter, or brakes on a car. 3) At what point does a golfer benefit from this? A certain handicap? A certain proficiency level? Much like the adage "practice makes permanent" aren’t we beating our heads against the wall with bad (not matched in SOME way) clubs? There’s bad, and then there’s bad, but IMO any golfer will benefit from a fit and matched set of clubs. If you have a set of clubs where the 3-iron is a stiff flex, the 4-iron is a senior (!) flex, the 5-iron a regular flex (something I’ve seen), and so on, how easy is it to develop a swing that is consistent from club to club? Very tough to do, because you have different loading requirements in each case. But there are levels of quality that probably aren’t apparent until you get to mid-teens handicap. Do you need a perfect match on frequency? No. You can get by with some variation. But the better matched a set of clubs is, the less you have to fight the clubs and your swing at the same time. It also depends on the quality of components. I spine align everything in graphite, simply as a matter of course. But there are higher quality shafts where it doesn’t appear to matter as much, given their quality. But lower-quality graphite, in my experience, often has characteristics which respond to spining. Various shafts also have different susceptibilities to alignment issues. Some shafts can be cocked just right in the hosel to create a real problem; others have much less susceptibility to alignment problems, simply because the shaft is more consistent. Here are some things you might get, and what I think their value might be to you, if you’re a 20 hdcp, for instance: matching on frequency (flex): yes, do it. spine alignment: if graphite, yes, if steel, you can get away w/o it. matching on swingweight or MOI: yes, in every case. making sure the lie angles are correct: yes, in every case. In the final analysis, what you want is a set of clubs where you know that any problem is with the operator, not the equipment. Mike Mike Dalecki GCA Accredited Clubmaker http://clubdoctor.com RSG-Wisconsin 2003 Information: http://dalecki.net/rsgwis2003 RSG Roll Call: http://rec-sport-golf.com/members/?rollcall=daleckim I do not patronize spammers. Help keep RSG clean!
Could you basically get an idea of the frequency by recording the tone of the ‘twang’ of the shaft and analysing the spectrum in a computer? You can get the software for free (audacity), and a mic very cheap. I can hear difference in pitch from my mom’s ladies flex to my s-flex shafts just bumping the butt end of the grip on the floor. — bollod at lycos dot com
Just met my local clubfitter recently. He mentioned that a customer brought a new set of Callaways to him complaining that 3 irons in the set he ‘couldn’t hit worth a shit’. Jim (the clubfitter) said he checked out the whole set, and those three clubs were ‘way out of frequency’. $1200.-$1400. set of clubs. Jim re- shafted these 3 clubs for the guy and now happy customer. He also mentioned that he runs into this all the time, from the cheapest clubs right up to and including the best. Not very encouraging.
I have my own tales of woe (ask Dave Jones about his Pings…). OEM clubs are not really much different from what you can put together yourself. My questions are: 1) How does spline alignment, frequency analysis, optimizing (various custom clubfitters on the net) and PUREing (Golfsmith) of shaft relate to each other?
It’s actually called spine alignment. PUREing and Spine alignment are essentially the same thing. Optimizing sounds like a buzzword designed to help get people to part w/ their money. It’s what fitting and matching are all about. Frequency analysis is what you do to determine whether the flexes of the clubs in a set are matched or not. Stiffness (flex) can be quantified by frequency–clamp the club (sans grip) in a special clamp, then twang the clubhead so the club oscillates up and down, and use a frequency meter to measure the cycles per minute (cpm). The higher the cpm, the stiffer the club. It seems obvious that only spline alignment is available to the beginning (wanna-be) hobbiest.
Well, unless you want to spend between $300 and $400 for a frequency meter setup, probably so. You can make a good set of irons if you use steel shafts, sort the shafts by weight, and put the lightest shafts in the longest irons (tip trimming to recommendations). They won’t be perfect, but they also will be pretty decent, esp. if you buy a couple extra shafts to cull out any that are way out of line with the others. What a frequency meter allows you to do is to get the clubs to match exactly on frequency, as well as to create a custom frequency match. For example, in my driver I wanted a flex between the regular and stiff that was typical in the Fujikura VP70 shafts. I used a regular flex shaft, and tip trimmed it a bit at a time until I got the frequency I was looking for. 2) Which is better?
It’s a question with no real answer. It’s like asking which is better: Butter, or brakes on a car. 3) At what point does a golfer benefit from this? A certain handicap? A certain proficiency level? Much like the adage "practice makes permanent" aren’t we beating our heads against the wall with bad (not matched in SOME way) clubs?
There’s bad, and then there’s bad, but IMO any golfer will benefit from a fit and matched set of clubs. If you have a set of clubs where the 3-iron is a stiff flex, the 4-iron is a senior (!) flex, the 5-iron a regular flex (something I’ve seen), and so on, how easy is it to develop a swing that is consistent from club to club? Very tough to do, because you have different loading requirements in each case. But there are levels of quality that probably aren’t apparent until you get to mid-teens handicap. Do you need a perfect match on frequency? No. You can get by with some variation. But the better matched a set of clubs is, the less you have to fight the clubs and your swing at the same time. It also depends on the quality of components. I spine align everything in graphite, simply as a matter of course. But there are higher quality shafts where it doesn’t appear to matter as much, given their quality. But lower-quality graphite, in my experience, often has characteristics which respond to spining. Various shafts also have different susceptibilities to alignment issues. Some shafts can be cocked just right in the hosel to create a real problem; others have much less susceptibility to alignment problems, simply because the shaft is more consistent. Here are some things you might get, and what I think their value might be to you, if you’re a 20 hdcp, for instance: matching on frequency (flex): yes, do it. spine alignment: if graphite, yes, if steel, you can get away w/o it. matching on swingweight or MOI: yes, in every case. making sure the lie angles are correct: yes, in every case. In the final analysis, what you want is a set of clubs where you know that any problem is with the operator, not the equipment. Mike Mike Dalecki GCA Accredited Clubmaker http://clubdoctor.com RSG-Wisconsin 2003 Information: http://dalecki.net/rsgwis2003 RSG Roll Call: http://rec-sport-golf.com/members/?rollcall=daleckim I do not patronize spammers. Help keep RSG clean!
Just met my local clubfitter recently. He mentioned that a customer brought a new set of Callaways to him complaining that 3 irons in the set he ‘couldn’t hit worth a shit’. Jim (the clubfitter) said he checked out the whole set, and those three clubs were ‘way out of frequency’. $1200.-$1400. set of clubs. Jim re- shafted these 3 clubs for the guy and now happy customer. He also mentioned that he runs into this all the time, from the cheapest clubs right up to and including the best. Not very encouraging. My questions are: 1) How does spline alignment, frequency analysis, optimizing (various custom clubfitters on the net) and PUREing (Golfsmith) of shaft relate to each other? It seems obvious that only spline alignment is available to the beginning (wanna-be) hobbiest. 2) Which is better? 3) At what point does a golfer benefit from this? A certain handicap? A certain proficiency level? Much like the adage "practice makes permanent" aren’t we beating our heads against the wall with bad (not matched in SOME way) clubs? Jeff