Hoping to see the same results when mine arrive!
Can better shafts transform your game?
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2018
- Messages
- 16,230
- Reaction score
- 4,352
- Location
- Edmond, Oklahoma (NW OKC)
- Handicap
- -10.0
That shaft is definitely not for everyone.
- Joined
- Apr 22, 2014
- Messages
- 71
- Reaction score
- 91
- Handicap
- 10
Hey Folks -
It's been a while since I've been one here but thought I'd weigh in on this issue (and will start getting back on here 3-4x/wk hopefully to help y'all out in any way I can...). And this is going to be a bit involved so go grab a beer....
...!
Ok. There's been a bunch of comments on all sides of the original questions of a "better shaft"... Let's start there.
Contrary to a couple comments, there are better shafts. For example as most of you know the OEM mass merchandised clubs which comes with the whooping cost to them of $7-$9 (irons $4 - $5...)....which barely covers even a Chinese factory's cost. The designs themselves are typically 4 patterns vs. say a premium shaft which has 10-14 individual patterns. The quality inspection protocols are much less stringent, the longitudinal and rotational stiffness consistencies++ shaft-shaft are not even close to most premium shafts (note I said "most"...more on that later).
So are practically all more premium shafts "better" if better is defined as a shaft-shaft consistency....you betcha!
Now regarding premium shafts, are there some out there that also are subject to a lack of consistency shaft-shaft? You betcha Part Deux. I know...I've measured them all...and you'd be surprised which ones but I NEVER have nor ever will make the consistency of my shafts look better at the expense of saying a competitors' particular shaft line isn't consistent. Nope...
But a consistent shaft in all mechanical properties' aspects IS a better shaft. It may not be the right shaft for someone, but it is "better".
Now...which is more important the head or the shaft? The answer...neither. Folks get a bit one way or the other needlessly. The fact is they work together as a SYSTEM to optimally take advantage of simple physics...launch, clubbed/ball velocity and spin.
Let's look at someone whose clubbed speed is 95mph with a resulting ball speed ranging somewhere between 135 to 140 mph depending on angle of attack. Going to extremes then someone who has a big negative angle of attack would launch the ball perhaps 4-5* lower than flushing it at 0* and spin would increase by almost 1000 rpm from someone with the same speed and a positive angle of attack. Reverse these numbers with a good zero or positive angle of attack the ball speed would go up by 3-4mph, spin would decrease by 1000-1200 rpm...and a distance increase of around 12-14 yards would be the results.
So does fitting play a role here? You betcha Part Tres...
Could a shaft with a stiffer lower section - notice I didn't say "stiffer tip" - help in this situation? A shaft "reported as having a stiff tip can be 1000% misleading - especially since having a stiffer, lower 6" doesn't do squat. The lower 11-26"? Now we're talking a major effect on effective launch and spin...and distance of course. Buyers of innuendo beware...
Could a change in head do this? Of course as well. A simple change in loft can help tremendously...and vice-versa so can a change in shafts...especially if one understands the stiffness distribution of shaft A vs shaft B. THAT'S my job to help y'all understand the nuances of distributed properties. Hell, I brought EI Curve evals to the industry with Matt Cackett - a fellow G.Dynamics aerospace engineer who wound up at Callaway (not the other guy). I also consulted/helped bring about the easier way to measure using on zones\freqs. AND know how to interpret one shaft vs another (again...not the other guy who cannot and who poo-poos zones...ridiculous...).
Kats like me and Matt came first into this industry from a very rigid curriculum of design and understanding design and flight dynamics...and couldn't figure out these terms called "flex point", "kick point" etc. for a good reason...they DO NOT exist. Sorry folks. They don't. As I'be been hammering since I started in this industry, there is no magical point on a shaft that effects flight....its the distribution of stiffness...the distribution of weight....the distribution of even a shaft's torsional resistance...AND the mass properties distribution of a particular head in relation to a particular way of delivering said head to the impact zone...THAT'S what makes a difference. Hi flex/kick pts...exists mostly in the feel of a club's release.
So now, the idea of "it all starts with the head" is misleading in a number of ways.
The very first thing that's important with any head is this...does it subjectively "fit" a golfer's eyes and in some abstract way inspire confidence? Confidence...in any sports ability can start right there. Think you can....most times you will. Think you can't...well...you're done...
The second is the dynamic loft a head brings to a particular swing and ball flight parameters....along WITH whatever shaft is being used. An example I've run into a zillion times over the years is when golfers get a bit older, they still swear they still need a 9* head and a stiff shaft. Can a shaft help get the ball up on that head? Of course. can a new head with a 11-12* loft help? Well...duh...
So I'm bouncing here around the notion of fitting. I loved the comment...."then what are we here for...?" Bravo Mi 'Migo!!
Proper fitting is the single most important aspect in equipment that can help a mid-higher handicap golfer hit the little white orb farther and more consistent. Let's say that regardless of the repeatability of the delivery of the head to impact that someone can indeed repeat their swing say 5 times outta 10. Those 5 swings will produce FAR better results than with someone whom has been fit incorrectly.
So in a nutshell here is fitting important? MORE so to a higher handicap player than someone who's scratch....but even the Pros with the advent of launch monitors are still getting fit almost every week to shave off a 1/2 stroke here and there+++. Different world....same needs but too a different degree.
But the obvious answer to all this...to ANYTHING - any sport - any endeavor++... is practice, practice, practice WITH the right instruction to understand and reasonably (sometimes) consistently perform the very basic swing fundamentals. There is nothing more important to any sport than the sound fundamentals. Nada, nyet, no way Jose! Are there exceptions? Jeez they abound...just look at Matt Wolff. But the thing with any good-great golfer, to any baseball, tennis or hockey player...at impact they ALL LOOK THE SAME! How you get there is sometimes irrelevant...but get there! There is NO replacement for putting the good work in...none.
AND coaches, fitters, clubmakers and ole, imagineer designers like Moi...it's ALL of our jobs to get players THERE!
AND not withstanding...is the ball itself. When I came into the industry there was a somewhat dearth of sound engineering principles in almost every category. I perhaps brought an understanding to shaft design, especially light weight shaft design, different materials and manufacturing. Demi-gods like Gary Adams, Karsten Solheim, Eli Callaway, John Hoeflich and just a couple others brought in new ways of looking at head designs....and head-shaft "systems"! And the ball guys? Jeez...NO ONE was really understanding and measuring ballistics until the ball engineers stepped up. They've really changed the game as much, perhaps more so than all the rest of us. If you don't believe me...ask Mr. Nicklaus+++. But even here, the absolute best ball for someone's particular swing...won't help if they're poorly fit...and have some semblance of understanding the swing.
Ok...now finally the question of weight and it's ability to "cure" a swing. I think you probably already know my thoughts there. But the basic adage of "swing the lightest shaft you can consistently control" remains somewhat true. But I'd add..."swing the shaft/head combination that you can consistently control AND get the most efficient ballistic results on a golf ball given your particular ability to deliver the club head to the impact zone.
Now I could've simply said re all this..."the answer is complicated"...but hell this is more fun! <<Sorry for the novel but I even left a bunch out...>>
Choose You Weapons Wisely My Friends!
Robin
It's been a while since I've been one here but thought I'd weigh in on this issue (and will start getting back on here 3-4x/wk hopefully to help y'all out in any way I can...). And this is going to be a bit involved so go grab a beer....
...!Ok. There's been a bunch of comments on all sides of the original questions of a "better shaft"... Let's start there.
Contrary to a couple comments, there are better shafts. For example as most of you know the OEM mass merchandised clubs which comes with the whooping cost to them of $7-$9 (irons $4 - $5...)....which barely covers even a Chinese factory's cost. The designs themselves are typically 4 patterns vs. say a premium shaft which has 10-14 individual patterns. The quality inspection protocols are much less stringent, the longitudinal and rotational stiffness consistencies++ shaft-shaft are not even close to most premium shafts (note I said "most"...more on that later).
So are practically all more premium shafts "better" if better is defined as a shaft-shaft consistency....you betcha!
Now regarding premium shafts, are there some out there that also are subject to a lack of consistency shaft-shaft? You betcha Part Deux. I know...I've measured them all...and you'd be surprised which ones but I NEVER have nor ever will make the consistency of my shafts look better at the expense of saying a competitors' particular shaft line isn't consistent. Nope...
But a consistent shaft in all mechanical properties' aspects IS a better shaft. It may not be the right shaft for someone, but it is "better".
Now...which is more important the head or the shaft? The answer...neither. Folks get a bit one way or the other needlessly. The fact is they work together as a SYSTEM to optimally take advantage of simple physics...launch, clubbed/ball velocity and spin.
Let's look at someone whose clubbed speed is 95mph with a resulting ball speed ranging somewhere between 135 to 140 mph depending on angle of attack. Going to extremes then someone who has a big negative angle of attack would launch the ball perhaps 4-5* lower than flushing it at 0* and spin would increase by almost 1000 rpm from someone with the same speed and a positive angle of attack. Reverse these numbers with a good zero or positive angle of attack the ball speed would go up by 3-4mph, spin would decrease by 1000-1200 rpm...and a distance increase of around 12-14 yards would be the results.
So does fitting play a role here? You betcha Part Tres...
Could a shaft with a stiffer lower section - notice I didn't say "stiffer tip" - help in this situation? A shaft "reported as having a stiff tip can be 1000% misleading - especially since having a stiffer, lower 6" doesn't do squat. The lower 11-26"? Now we're talking a major effect on effective launch and spin...and distance of course. Buyers of innuendo beware...
Could a change in head do this? Of course as well. A simple change in loft can help tremendously...and vice-versa so can a change in shafts...especially if one understands the stiffness distribution of shaft A vs shaft B. THAT'S my job to help y'all understand the nuances of distributed properties. Hell, I brought EI Curve evals to the industry with Matt Cackett - a fellow G.Dynamics aerospace engineer who wound up at Callaway (not the other guy). I also consulted/helped bring about the easier way to measure using on zones\freqs. AND know how to interpret one shaft vs another (again...not the other guy who cannot and who poo-poos zones...ridiculous...).
Kats like me and Matt came first into this industry from a very rigid curriculum of design and understanding design and flight dynamics...and couldn't figure out these terms called "flex point", "kick point" etc. for a good reason...they DO NOT exist. Sorry folks. They don't. As I'be been hammering since I started in this industry, there is no magical point on a shaft that effects flight....its the distribution of stiffness...the distribution of weight....the distribution of even a shaft's torsional resistance...AND the mass properties distribution of a particular head in relation to a particular way of delivering said head to the impact zone...THAT'S what makes a difference. Hi flex/kick pts...exists mostly in the feel of a club's release.
So now, the idea of "it all starts with the head" is misleading in a number of ways.
The very first thing that's important with any head is this...does it subjectively "fit" a golfer's eyes and in some abstract way inspire confidence? Confidence...in any sports ability can start right there. Think you can....most times you will. Think you can't...well...you're done...
The second is the dynamic loft a head brings to a particular swing and ball flight parameters....along WITH whatever shaft is being used. An example I've run into a zillion times over the years is when golfers get a bit older, they still swear they still need a 9* head and a stiff shaft. Can a shaft help get the ball up on that head? Of course. can a new head with a 11-12* loft help? Well...duh...
So I'm bouncing here around the notion of fitting. I loved the comment...."then what are we here for...?" Bravo Mi 'Migo!!
Proper fitting is the single most important aspect in equipment that can help a mid-higher handicap golfer hit the little white orb farther and more consistent. Let's say that regardless of the repeatability of the delivery of the head to impact that someone can indeed repeat their swing say 5 times outta 10. Those 5 swings will produce FAR better results than with someone whom has been fit incorrectly.
So in a nutshell here is fitting important? MORE so to a higher handicap player than someone who's scratch....but even the Pros with the advent of launch monitors are still getting fit almost every week to shave off a 1/2 stroke here and there+++. Different world....same needs but too a different degree.
But the obvious answer to all this...to ANYTHING - any sport - any endeavor++... is practice, practice, practice WITH the right instruction to understand and reasonably (sometimes) consistently perform the very basic swing fundamentals. There is nothing more important to any sport than the sound fundamentals. Nada, nyet, no way Jose! Are there exceptions? Jeez they abound...just look at Matt Wolff. But the thing with any good-great golfer, to any baseball, tennis or hockey player...at impact they ALL LOOK THE SAME! How you get there is sometimes irrelevant...but get there! There is NO replacement for putting the good work in...none.
AND coaches, fitters, clubmakers and ole, imagineer designers like Moi...it's ALL of our jobs to get players THERE!
AND not withstanding...is the ball itself. When I came into the industry there was a somewhat dearth of sound engineering principles in almost every category. I perhaps brought an understanding to shaft design, especially light weight shaft design, different materials and manufacturing. Demi-gods like Gary Adams, Karsten Solheim, Eli Callaway, John Hoeflich and just a couple others brought in new ways of looking at head designs....and head-shaft "systems"! And the ball guys? Jeez...NO ONE was really understanding and measuring ballistics until the ball engineers stepped up. They've really changed the game as much, perhaps more so than all the rest of us. If you don't believe me...ask Mr. Nicklaus+++. But even here, the absolute best ball for someone's particular swing...won't help if they're poorly fit...and have some semblance of understanding the swing.
Ok...now finally the question of weight and it's ability to "cure" a swing. I think you probably already know my thoughts there. But the basic adage of "swing the lightest shaft you can consistently control" remains somewhat true. But I'd add..."swing the shaft/head combination that you can consistently control AND get the most efficient ballistic results on a golf ball given your particular ability to deliver the club head to the impact zone.
Now I could've simply said re all this..."the answer is complicated"...but hell this is more fun! <<Sorry for the novel but I even left a bunch out...>>
Choose You Weapons Wisely My Friends!
Robin
DG_1234
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2015
- Messages
- 6,211
- Reaction score
- 1,931
- Handicap
- 2
Hey Folks -
It's been a while since I've been one here but thought I'd weigh in on this issue (and will start getting back on here 3-4x/wk hopefully to help y'all out in any way I can...). And this is going to be a bit involved so go grab a beer....
Ok. There's been a bunch of comments on all sides of the original questions of a "better shaft"... Let's start there.
Contrary to a couple comments, there are better shafts. For example as most of you know the OEM mass merchandised clubs which comes with the whooping cost to them of $7-$9 (irons $4 - $5...)....which barely covers even a Chinese factory's cost. The designs themselves are typically 4 patterns vs. say a premium shaft which has 10-14 individual patterns. The quality inspection protocols are much less stringent, the longitudinal and rotational stiffness consistencies++ shaft-shaft are not even close to most premium shafts (note I said "most"...more on that later).
So are practically all more premium shafts "better" if better is defined as a shaft-shaft consistency....you betcha!
Now regarding premium shafts, are there some out there that also are subject to a lack of consistency shaft-shaft? You betcha Part Deux. I know...I've measured them all...and you'd be surprised which ones but I NEVER have nor ever will make the consistency of my shafts look better at the expense of saying a competitors' particular shaft line isn't consistent. Nope...
But a consistent shaft in all mechanical properties' aspects IS a better shaft. It may not be the right shaft for someone, but it is "better".
Now...which is more important the head or the shaft? The answer...neither. Folks get a bit one way or the other needlessly. The fact is they work together as a SYSTEM to optimally take advantage of simple physics...launch, clubbed/ball velocity and spin.
Let's look at someone whose clubbed speed is 95mph with a resulting ball speed ranging somewhere between 135 to 140 mph depending on angle of attack. Going to extremes then someone who has a big negative angle of attack would launch the ball perhaps 4-5* lower than flushing it at 0* and spin would increase by almost 1000 rpm from someone with the same speed and a positive angle of attack. Reverse these numbers with a good zero or positive angle of attack the ball speed would go up by 3-4mph, spin would decrease by 1000-1200 rpm...and a distance increase of around 12-14 yards would be the results.
So does fitting play a role here? You betcha Part Tres...
Could a shaft with a stiffer lower section - notice I didn't say "stiffer tip" - help in this situation? A shaft "reported as having a stiff tip can be 1000% misleading - especially since having a stiffer, lower 6" doesn't do squat. The lower 11-26"? Now we're talking a major effect on effective launch and spin...and distance of course. Buyers of innuendo beware...
Could a change in head do this? Of course as well. A simple change in loft can help tremendously...and vice-versa so can a change in shafts...especially if one understands the stiffness distribution of shaft A vs shaft B. THAT'S my job to help y'all understand the nuances of distributed properties. Hell, I brought EI Curve evals to the industry with Matt Cackett - a fellow G.Dynamics aerospace engineer who wound up at Callaway (not the other guy). I also consulted/helped bring about the easier way to measure using on zones\freqs. AND know how to interpret one shaft vs another (again...not the other guy who cannot and who poo-poos zones...ridiculous...).
Kats like me and Matt came first into this industry from a very rigid curriculum of design and understanding design and flight dynamics...and couldn't figure out these terms called "flex point", "kick point" etc. for a good reason...they DO NOT exist. Sorry folks. They don't. As I'be been hammering since I started in this industry, there is no magical point on a shaft that effects flight....its the distribution of stiffness...the distribution of weight....the distribution of even a shaft's torsional resistance...AND the mass properties distribution of a particular head in relation to a particular way of delivering said head to the impact zone...THAT'S what makes a difference. Hi flex/kick pts...exists mostly in the feel of a club's release.
So now, the idea of "it all starts with the head" is misleading in a number of ways.
The very first thing that's important with any head is this...does it subjectively "fit" a golfer's eyes and in some abstract way inspire confidence? Confidence...in any sports ability can start right there. Think you can....most times you will. Think you can't...well...you're done...
The second is the dynamic loft a head brings to a particular swing and ball flight parameters....along WITH whatever shaft is being used. An example I've run into a zillion times over the years is when golfers get a bit older, they still swear they still need a 9* head and a stiff shaft. Can a shaft help get the ball up on that head? Of course. can a new head with a 11-12* loft help? Well...duh...
So I'm bouncing here around the notion of fitting. I loved the comment...."then what are we here for...?" Bravo Mi 'Migo!!
Proper fitting is the single most important aspect in equipment that can help a mid-higher handicap golfer hit the little white orb farther and more consistent. Let's say that regardless of the repeatability of the delivery of the head to impact that someone can indeed repeat their swing say 5 times outta 10. Those 5 swings will produce FAR better results than with someone whom has been fit incorrectly.
So in a nutshell here is fitting important? MORE so to a higher handicap player than someone who's scratch....but even the Pros with the advent of launch monitors are still getting fit almost every week to shave off a 1/2 stroke here and there+++. Different world....same needs but too a different degree.
But the obvious answer to all this...to ANYTHING - any sport - any endeavor++... is practice, practice, practice WITH the right instruction to understand and reasonably (sometimes) consistently perform the very basic swing fundamentals. There is nothing more important to any sport than the sound fundamentals. Nada, nyet, no way Jose! Are there exceptions? Jeez they abound...just look at Matt Wolff. But the thing with any good-great golfer, to any baseball, tennis or hockey player...at impact they ALL LOOK THE SAME! How you get there is sometimes irrelevant...but get there! There is NO replacement for putting the good work in...none.
AND coaches, fitters, clubmakers and ole, imagineer designers like Moi...it's ALL of our jobs to get players THERE!
AND not withstanding...is the ball itself. When I came into the industry there was a somewhat dearth of sound engineering principles in almost every category. I perhaps brought an understanding to shaft design, especially light weight shaft design, different materials and manufacturing. Demi-gods like Gary Adams, Karsten Solheim, Eli Callaway, John Hoeflich and just a couple others brought in new ways of looking at head designs....and head-shaft "systems"! And the ball guys? Jeez...NO ONE was really understanding and measuring ballistics until the ball engineers stepped up. They've really changed the game as much, perhaps more so than all the rest of us. If you don't believe me...ask Mr. Nicklaus+++. But even here, the absolute best ball for someone's particular swing...won't help if they're poorly fit...and have some semblance of understanding the swing.
Ok...now finally the question of weight and it's ability to "cure" a swing. I think you probably already know my thoughts there. But the basic adage of "swing the lightest shaft you can consistently control" remains somewhat true. But I'd add..."swing the shaft/head combination that you can consistently control AND get the most efficient ballistic results on a golf ball given your particular ability to deliver the club head to the impact zone.
Now I could've simply said re all this..."the answer is complicated"...but hell this is more fun! <<Sorry for the novel but I even left a bunch out...>>
Choose You Weapons Wisely My Friends!
Robin
Robin,
Thanks for submitting your comments. I especially like that you mentioned instruction, fundamental technique, practice etc.... because these are factors which equipment company employees and, or, golf club deign engineers usually ignore.
Regarding shaft weight, for several years now the industry has been pushing "lighter is better", but my on course observations are that many players suffer swing tempo-rhythm issues (which translates to shot accuracy problems) from swinging too light of a shaft.