Jump to content
TESTERS WANTED! ×

Torque in shafts


Recommended Posts

So I'm looking for shafts to try when I get a new driver. I'm wondering if I should be looking at shafts that have similar torque ratings as my gamer? Will that give me similar feel?

Driver:   :callaway-small: Epic 10.5 set to 9.5 w/ Tour AD-DI 44.5

FW:   :cobra-small: F6 baffler set at 16º

Hybrid:  NONE
Irons:   :taylormade-small:  3i 2014 TP CB  4-PW 2011 TP MC w/ TT S400

Wedges:   :nike-small: 52º :nike-small: 56º  :edel-golf-1: 60 º w/ KBS C-Taper XS Soft-stepped

Putter:   :ping-small: Sigma G Tyne 34 inches Gold dot

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Driver -  :taylormade-small: M1 9.5* w/ Aldila Rogue Silver 70X

Fairway -   :taylormade-small: M1 5W 19* w/ Aldila Rogue Silver 70X

Hybrids -   :ping-small: G25 4H 23*

Irons -  :mizuno-small: JPX 850 Forged 4-PW w/ Nippon N.S. Pro 1150S

Wedges - :mizuno-small: S5 50*07, 54*12, 58*12 w/ Nippon N.S. Pro 1150S

Putter - Oddyssey Metal-X #7 w/ SuperStroke Pistol GT 2.0

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So I'm looking for shafts to try when I get a new driver. I'm wondering if I should be looking at shafts that have similar torque ratings as my gamer? Will that give me similar feel?

Considering the difference in the spec between the Paderson I'm testing and the Fujikura I've been gaming, I think that may be less important than I thought.  I'm getting tighter distribution with the Paderson, which actually has a higher torque rating than the Fujikura.  I think it's ONE of the factors, but not necessarily the most important.

What's In the Bag

Driver - :callaway-small: GBB 

Hybrids  :cleveland-small: Halo XL Halo 18* & :cobra-small: T-Rail 20*

Irons  :cobra-small: T-Rail 2.0

Wedges :ping-small: 60* TS / SCOR 48* 53* 58*

Putter     :scotty-small:

Ball :callaway-logo-1:

Bag Datrek DG Lite  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The question about torque in Paderson shafts was the first question I had when I found them. Here is the direct answer Jason gave me:

 

The specifications for torque and cpm were precisely set in each shaft technology, shaft type and flex code option at the conclusion of our thorough robot testing, which required over a year of R&D.

 

We set each spec upon quantifying increases in ball speed and tighter dispersion all shafts KINETIXx versus the industry leading most popular shafts. In each and every shaft technology drivers through to irons. We found in some of our shafts, higher torque values equated to increased ball speed and tighter shot dispersion on impacts across the face. This enabled us to increase the quantity and therefore contribution of the exotic materials used in each shaft.

 

Golfers interpret low torque as high strength and necessary for tighter dispersion and that's misnomer. Whereas Torque can contribute to shaft speed and recovery through impact. Torque specs for the most part have been established as a threshold number relative to material performance and durability.

 

Our methods of construction are unlike any other shaft company in the WORLD! Because of this, KINETIXx loaded technologies, IMRT and VMT both use materials that have an appreciably greater degree of elastic strength and elongation as compared to all other premium table rolled shafts marketed today.

 

The KVMT LD shaft is an extension of our VMT line that uses Amorphous material, nanotechnology in conjunction with our proprietary thermosetting resin composition and vacuum curing process. Producing a composition 5-6x the elastic strength of the conventional LD shafts and therefore higher in torque yet capable of increasing in frequency the greater the force applied.

 

 

There is a lot of information in that post, but I wanted to share it bc he explains that the technology is more than just numbers.

"You have an army, we have a HULK"-Tony Stark

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's a question that rarely gets answered - how is torque measured?

Since torque is much maligned anyway (because torque is related to force and load and not angular displacement in degrees) what method do any of the manufacturers use to quantify it or build to spec in their shafts and measure them?

For instance:

At what point on the shaft is the "torque" relevant?

The tip?

The middle?

The butt?

Multiple points?

An average of them all?

What force is applied to deflect or twist the shaft?

What is the length of the fulcrum used to apply the force?

Is the force constant?

What effect does variable force have?

At what rate does the shaft twist return to rest?

The same as the initial deflection?

Faster?

Slower?

What effect does head weight and trimmed length have on the "torque" figure?

Are there any actual measuring standards?

 

Until somebody can answer any of these questions (let alone some of the shaft companies that bombard us and baffle us with BS) then I'll just keep referring to "torque" as pretty insignificant in shaft selection - only that low torque tends to feel harsh and high torque tends to feel softer when you hit the ball. It has absolutely zero effect on dispersion from my experience and when you compare it to steel shafts the whole generalisation goes out the window anyway.

 

Your move Paderson.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've got a beer and some popcorn...

Driver -  :taylormade-small: M1 9.5* w/ Aldila Rogue Silver 70X

Fairway -   :taylormade-small: M1 5W 19* w/ Aldila Rogue Silver 70X

Hybrids -   :ping-small: G25 4H 23*

Irons -  :mizuno-small: JPX 850 Forged 4-PW w/ Nippon N.S. Pro 1150S

Wedges - :mizuno-small: S5 50*07, 54*12, 58*12 w/ Nippon N.S. Pro 1150S

Putter - Oddyssey Metal-X #7 w/ SuperStroke Pistol GT 2.0

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Man if all of that is going through your head when you hit a drive...

Driver: :taylormade-small: SLDR w/ Fujikura Ventus Black

3w: :taylormade-small:'16 M2 hl w/ Diamana D+ 82

5w: :cleveland-small: Launcher HB w/ HZRDUS Yellow

Hybrid: :cleveland-small: 22 deg. Launcher HB w/ HZRDUS Black

Irons: :cleveland-small: 5i - gap Launcher CBX w/ Nippon Modus 3 125

Wedges: :cleveland-small: 54 CBX & 58 Zipcore w/ Nippon Modus 3 125

Putter: :odyssey-small: Red 7s

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seriously...jasanski, were you chosen to test the Paderson shafts? If you had ever hit this shaft, you know how solid it is.

Paderson isn't feeding BS, unless by BS you are talking about ball speed or ball spin. Because this shaft is ball speed and ball spin king. The question I asked regarding the torque is:

In the past, I have always heard that lower toque is better for tighter shot dispersion. How is it that with a shaft that has twice the torque as others my dispersion is a lot tighter than with the lower torque shafts with an increase in ball speed?

"You have an army, we have a HULK"-Tony Stark

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 How is it that with a shaft that has twice the torque as others my dispersion is a lot tighter than with the lower torque shafts with an increase in ball speed?

My theory involves tiny magical leprechauns.  It's also why the shaft is green.  I may be wrong, but until proven otherwise...

Driver: :taylormade-small: SLDR w/ Fujikura Ventus Black

3w: :taylormade-small:'16 M2 hl w/ Diamana D+ 82

5w: :cleveland-small: Launcher HB w/ HZRDUS Yellow

Hybrid: :cleveland-small: 22 deg. Launcher HB w/ HZRDUS Black

Irons: :cleveland-small: 5i - gap Launcher CBX w/ Nippon Modus 3 125

Wedges: :cleveland-small: 54 CBX & 58 Zipcore w/ Nippon Modus 3 125

Putter: :odyssey-small: Red 7s

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My theory involves tiny magical leprechauns.  It's also why the shaft is green.  I may be wrong, but until proven otherwise...

Makes sense to me, as long as it works!

What's In the Bag

Driver - :callaway-small: GBB 

Hybrids  :cleveland-small: Halo XL Halo 18* & :cobra-small: T-Rail 20*

Irons  :cobra-small: T-Rail 2.0

Wedges :ping-small: 60* TS / SCOR 48* 53* 58*

Putter     :scotty-small:

Ball :callaway-logo-1:

Bag Datrek DG Lite  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My theory involves tiny magical leprechauns. It's also why the shaft is green. I may be wrong, but until proven otherwise...

It is that time of year isn't it? I think we have found the pot at the end of the rainbow and it's called, Paderson KINETIXx.

"You have an army, we have a HULK"-Tony Stark

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is that time of year isn't it? I think we have found the pot at the end of the rainbow and it's called, Paderson KINETIXx.

I still have more testing to do before I form my final opinion, but I will say this.

 

Before my first round this year I bought a Titleist 915 D3.  Played it for my first 3 rounds of the year and liked it. Last Friday we decided to play more holes so we went out and finished another 14, I played my SLDR with the Paderson in it for those extra 14 holes.  I went home and sold the 915 the next day.

Driver: :taylormade-small: SLDR w/ Fujikura Ventus Black

3w: :taylormade-small:'16 M2 hl w/ Diamana D+ 82

5w: :cleveland-small: Launcher HB w/ HZRDUS Yellow

Hybrid: :cleveland-small: 22 deg. Launcher HB w/ HZRDUS Black

Irons: :cleveland-small: 5i - gap Launcher CBX w/ Nippon Modus 3 125

Wedges: :cleveland-small: 54 CBX & 58 Zipcore w/ Nippon Modus 3 125

Putter: :odyssey-small: Red 7s

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seriously...jasanski, were you chosen to test the Paderson shafts? If you had ever hit this shaft, you know how solid it is.

Paderson isn't feeding BS, unless by BS you are talking about ball speed or ball spin. Because this shaft is ball speed and ball spin king. The question I asked regarding the torque is:

In the past, I have always heard that lower toque is better for tighter shot dispersion. How is it that with a shaft that has twice the torque as others my dispersion is a lot tighter than with the lower torque shafts with an increase in ball speed?

 

I'm not bashing Paderson shafts - in fact I'm actually agreeing with you somewhat.

The problem is, any shaft manufacturer (Paderson included) is rather quick to tell us that their method of making shafts is ground-breaking and technologically advanced and yet struggle to explain how their shaft specs are measured or created. Just about the only thing you can measure on a shaft is the weight and length. 

If "torque" really had an impact on dispersion though, it is rather tough to explain why the face is straighter through impact (the ONLY way to hit it straighter) if the alleged "torque" is specified as a certain deflection in degrees. This does not compute, simply because it does not work for everyone. 

A steel shaft with a torque of 1.2 degrees is just as capable of hitting a ball as straighter or as loose as a graphite shaft with a torque of 5.5. Why? Did the twisting of the shaft have any effect on the ball through impact? No it didn't - in fact the ball was several yards away before any twisting effect of the clubhead can be detected.

Your post #4 is all very well when you share Padersons line on how their shafts are made and how the technology is "more than just numbers" - but the question is: where are the numbers in the first place?

Sadly, this is where everyone drinking the torque kool-aid suddenly goes quiet. All I'm asking is where is the data that backs up any performance claim? How is the torque measured? Nobody from any manufacturer (Paderson included) has thus far given any explanation how their process works of linking a shaft to how much it twists into a quantifiable unit of measurement. If somebody has the data, then I'm all ears. 

Don't just take my word for it though - I've discussed this topic at length with Tom Wishon before and he seems to be in agreement with me. Please don't shoot the messenger - I'm only taking about one aspect of shafts (torque was in the title of the discussion wasn't it?). I'm sure Paderson make solid shafts, but any claim that "torque" engineered into the manufacturing process has a performance advantage is bogus without any data to back it up. 

So in response to the OP - yes, similar "torque" values will give similar feel. That's it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dont believe I have enough technological acumen to focus on torque. I can see ball flight and can look at a dispersion pattern and figure out from there if the clubhaed shaft combo works for me. I'll go with what works, if it feels and sounds good that's a bonus but trust me if it works I'll get used to how it feels and sounds pretty quickly. I will also get used to the letter stamped on the shaft and the manufacturers specs for things like torque.

Taylor Made Stealth 2 10.5 Diamana S plus 60  Aldila  R flex   - 42.25 inches 

SMT 4 wood bassara R flex, four wood head, 3 wood shaft

Ping G410 7, 9 wood  Alta 65 R flex

Srixon ZX5 MK II  5-GW - UST recoil Dart 65 R flex

India 52,56 (60 pending)  UST recoil 75's R flex  

Evon roll ER 5 32 inches

It's our offseason so auditioning candidates - looking for that right mix of low spin long, more spin around the greens - TBD   

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Torque" is a misnomer for what it is describing in a golf shaft admittedly. It's a measurement of the shaft's resistance to torsion if you want to get technical. But while you're at it, a fulcrum is a point on which a lever pivots. A fulcrum isn't a lever used to apply rotational force to a golf shaft.

 

How exactly "torque" is measured in a shaft, I've never known myself. It would be easy to standardize the measurement. Fix the butt end of an uncut shaft in a clamp and apply a standard amount of inch pounds or foot pounds of torque to the tip and measure how many degrees the shaft twists across its length.

 

Now, do all manufacturers apply the same force in the same setup to their shafts as everyone else? I have no idea.

 

Regardless, it is a player in the feel and performance of a shaft. It will affect how the shaft releases for different players. But if someone finds that a rating of 3.0 is best for them in one shaft, does that mean thats ideal for that person in any shaft? I doubt it. Too many other parameters are in play that are dynamically linked to the end result to make a blanket statement like that.

 

However, I have seen tests with shafts that spec out identical except for the torque rating and it makes a measurable difference. So to say it means nothing is not true.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So from what I'm gathering, if you had two absolutely identical shafts with the only difference being one had a higher torque rating and one lower, then the only difference between the two would be in feel. There would be no discernable effects on ball speed or dispersion or spin?

Driver -  :taylormade-small: M1 9.5* w/ Aldila Rogue Silver 70X

Fairway -   :taylormade-small: M1 5W 19* w/ Aldila Rogue Silver 70X

Hybrids -   :ping-small: G25 4H 23*

Irons -  :mizuno-small: JPX 850 Forged 4-PW w/ Nippon N.S. Pro 1150S

Wedges - :mizuno-small: S5 50*07, 54*12, 58*12 w/ Nippon N.S. Pro 1150S

Putter - Oddyssey Metal-X #7 w/ SuperStroke Pistol GT 2.0

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

However, I have seen tests with shafts that spec out identical except for the torque rating and it makes a measurable difference. So to say it means nothing is not true.

 

Funny that - I've seen tests that say the complete opposite. Even with alleged "torque" ratings in the high 20's (yes I did say 20 degrees of torque) it still makes little difference to ball flight dynamics.

There are two things that are true though - two shafts which are not the same in torque will not be the same in weight, flex or cpm either, simply as a result of how they are manufactured. It might be possible to try to make a shaft with the same characteristics for scientific testing purposes, but it's near impossible to isolate 'torque" as the only differing factor between two shafts for comparison. Check out the difference in specs between UST's VTS line of shafts where they claim torque is the only difference for example - it isn't.

Secondly and perhaps more importantly, nobody has ever hit a shot in their entire lives which has gone off line of target and the single cause of this was the shaft twisting through impact.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I used to be a torque fiend, after trying to play a Miyazaki lightweight shaft that had high advertised torque numbers and even higher real measured in the lab torque numbers.   I could not control it left and right no matter what I did!   So I dumped it for a low torque shaft and the variance immediately went away.   So then I always looked for low torque shafts around the 3.0's.

 

But then I tried the Paderson green.   It states 4.5 and I gotta believe they are measuring accurately because why else would they want to brand themselves with what looks like a higher torque number in a stiff flex shaft?   It played MUCH more true than the 3.4 or 3.6 Rogue shafts I tested it against and better than my 2.9 Fujikura in terms of offline deviation.   It also hooked and sliced less.   So I'm sold on whatever combination of mojo it's currently offering, spec's be damned.  I don't know if torque has anything to do with offline deviation or propensity to hook or slice or loading or anything else.   What I want is for a shot to go reliably straight.   If a higher torque shaft does that, I'm all in.  

 

If I were pushed to isolate a factor that fits my swing, I'd say that swingweight and length of shaft are probably more important than the torque number.  I need something around 70 grams in a stiff cut to a certain length for the driver I'm using now.   If I get outside of that, things go kerflooey.

bag - SunMountain Synch with Ogio Synergy X4 cart
driver - :callaway-small: Optiforce 440, Paderson Kevlar Green stiff 46.5"
fwoods - :taylormade-small: Jetspeed, 3HL regular
irons - :taylormade-small:  Speedblades 3-8, 85g stiff steel, 2 up
wedges - :edilon-small: Scor 40, 45, 50, 54, 58
putter - :ping-small: Ketsch 35" slight arc, SuperStroke 2.0 mid-slim
ball - :titelist-small: ProV1x

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Torque isn't very useful in fittings. The more important factors? Weight, bend point, and overall stiffness. Torque is of very little importance in construction and selection where modern shafts are concerned. The only time one should remotely concern themselves with torque is if you have a real high swingspeed and a very aggressive transition.

 

That's a cliffnotes version of Wishon's explaination on torque.

In The Bag
Driver: TaylorMade M2 (2017) w/ Project X T1100 HZRDUS Handcrafted 65x 
Strong 3 wood: Taylormade M1 15* w/ ProjectX T1100 HZRDUS handcrafted 75x
3 Hybrid: Adams PRO 18* w/ KBS Tour Hybrid S flex tipped 1/2"
4 Hybrid: Adams PRO 20* (bent to 21*) w/ KBS Tour Hybrid S flex tipped 1/2"
4-AW: TaylorMade P770 w/ Dynamic Gold Tour Issue Black Onyx S400

SW: 56* Scratch Tour Dept(CC grooves) w/ Dynamic Gold Spinner
LW: 60* Scratch Tour Department (CC grooves) w/ Dynamic Gold Spinner
XW: 64* Cally XForged Vintage w/ DG X100 8 iron tiger stepped
Putter: Nike Method Prototype 006 at 34"

Have a ton of back-ups in all categories, but there are always 14 clubs in the bag that differ depending on the course and set-up. Bomb and gouge. Yes, I'm a club gigolo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Torque isn't very useful in fittings. The more important factors? Weight, bend point, and overall stiffness. Torque is of very little importance in construction and selection where modern shafts are concerned. The only time one should remotely concern themselves with torque is if you have a real high swingspeed and a very aggressive transition.

 

That's a cliffnotes version of Wishon's explaination on torque.

So you see, I am 130+ and my driver shaft had 5.5* of torque and it's the most accurate and workable shaft I've ever hit. Prior to installation, hitting HOF I could only hit a draw/hook. Now I work it both ways with ease.

"You have an army, we have a HULK"-Tony Stark

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here are some numbers for you, Is this proof enough? This was my first day back hitting balls after 3 months off BC of a hurt shoulder.

 

The numbers are great (they don't give any indication of dispersion though) - but where does torque fit into that equation?

It's all very well saying your shaft with a labelled rating of 5.5 degrees of torque gives you great feedback, but the question we are asking is how does this fit into ball flight dynamics with any relevance (I'm not seeing it from those figures) and how do the shaft manufacturers arrive at the figure of 5.5 degrees in the first place? They won't explain how - and you're not doing much better either.

You have zero "proof" that torque had any part in how well you hit the ball. 

Maybe one day someone will actually give some credible evidence of how "torque" played it's role in how a ball travelled down range - I doubt it though, because I haven't seen anything in the last 35 years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The numbers are great (they don't give any indication of dispersion though) - but where does torque fit into that equation?

It's all very well saying your shaft with a labelled rating of 5.5 degrees of torque gives you great feedback, but the question we are asking is how does this fit into ball flight dynamics with any relevance (I'm not seeing it from those figures) and how do the shaft manufacturers arrive at the figure of 5.5 degrees in the first place? They won't explain how - and you're not doing much better either.

You have zero "proof" that torque had any part in how well you hit the ball.

Maybe one day someone will actually give some credible evidence of how "torque" played it's role in how a ball travelled down range - I doubt it though, because I haven't seen anything in the last 35 years.

Actually, the most reliable source of information In my opinion is independent testing. There are 10-12 guys who were awarded the opportunity to test the Paderson shafts. Yes, maybe one or two didn't get the correct shaft the first time, but I believe everyone who has posted so far also has seen tighter dispersion. Do I know why? Absolutely not, but I do know that you are too worried about why it works instead of just letting it be. There is a thing called theory, which is when you try to explain how things work (key word being try.) there is also a thing called fact, which is when you have proof that it works (As in everyone who has hit the shaft that I know, yes, even professional has said they all hit this shaft straighter). Science sometimes fails us, but the TRUTH SHALL SET YOU FREE.

 

Oh and by the way, in the numbers above...I have never come close to a smash factor of 1.51 until I started hitting Paderson, so for me in that situation...there's my proof

"You have an army, we have a HULK"-Tony Stark

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just an observation, and I'll be the first to admit I only know enough about the technical aspects of club building/fitting to be dangerous.

 

Just like "Flex," the golf industry doesn't really have a defined standard of measurement for "torque."  Without a defined standard, it's impossible to compare "apples to apples" and we can fall into the trap of talking past each other, even if we're basically in agreement.  I've hit some "R" flex shafts that feel "hard," and some "S" flex shafts that feel "soft."  that only tells me that the term "Flex" doesn't tell me much.

 

There are so many factors that go into shaft design and performance, the best we can do is find out what general shaft characteristics are important to our individual swing and work with an experienced fitter (who knows the characteristics of the shafts they work with) to narrow down the selection of shafts until we find one that works (and FEELS) right, for us.

 

I don't know enough to know WHY the Paderson is providing me with a tighter dispersion than my Fujikura.  It's enough for me to know it does.

 

It seems apparent that the "torque" numbers listed for those two shafts aren't the most important factor in achieving that result.

What's In the Bag

Driver - :callaway-small: GBB 

Hybrids  :cleveland-small: Halo XL Halo 18* & :cobra-small: T-Rail 20*

Irons  :cobra-small: T-Rail 2.0

Wedges :ping-small: 60* TS / SCOR 48* 53* 58*

Putter     :scotty-small:

Ball :callaway-logo-1:

Bag Datrek DG Lite  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you see, I am 130+ and my driver shaft had 5.5* of torque and it's the most accurate and workable shaft I've ever hit. Prior to installation, hitting HOF I could only hit a draw/hook. Now I work it both ways with ease.

Again, proves nothing as far as torque is concerned. Proves the shaft is a better fit, flexurally and in relation to the bend point but the torque isn't why.

 

How do I know? The Paterson is a 5.5 torque, which means it's more prone to twisting, not less. Most HOF shafts are at 3 or below.

 

There's also no standard on how to even measure torque. One shaft company's 2.9 could be another's 3.5. There's so many ways to even measure torque that the numbers listed aren't consistent. Check shaftprofiles.com. They test shafts as well and their torque ratings for shafts are different than manufacturer's torque ratings. Why? Due to how they measure. There's no standard, just like theress no flexural stiffness standard that manufacturers use, same reason one company's stiff could be another's regular.

 

With a 5.5 torque rating (more prone to twisting) at your swingspeed you should see more club head twisting, not less. Tells me they may measure torque a bit differently. Most folks at your speed never really go above 4, 4.5 pushing it.

 

Torque is useless when fitting shafts, I'll stand behind that.

In The Bag
Driver: TaylorMade M2 (2017) w/ Project X T1100 HZRDUS Handcrafted 65x 
Strong 3 wood: Taylormade M1 15* w/ ProjectX T1100 HZRDUS handcrafted 75x
3 Hybrid: Adams PRO 18* w/ KBS Tour Hybrid S flex tipped 1/2"
4 Hybrid: Adams PRO 20* (bent to 21*) w/ KBS Tour Hybrid S flex tipped 1/2"
4-AW: TaylorMade P770 w/ Dynamic Gold Tour Issue Black Onyx S400

SW: 56* Scratch Tour Dept(CC grooves) w/ Dynamic Gold Spinner
LW: 60* Scratch Tour Department (CC grooves) w/ Dynamic Gold Spinner
XW: 64* Cally XForged Vintage w/ DG X100 8 iron tiger stepped
Putter: Nike Method Prototype 006 at 34"

Have a ton of back-ups in all categories, but there are always 14 clubs in the bag that differ depending on the course and set-up. Bomb and gouge. Yes, I'm a club gigolo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, the most reliable source of information In my opinion is independent testing. There are 10-12 guys who were awarded the opportunity to test the Paderson shafts. Yes, maybe one or two didn't get the correct shaft the first time, but I believe everyone who has posted so far also has seen tighter dispersion. Do I know why? Absolutely not, but I do know that you are too worried about why it works instead of just letting it be. There is a thing called theory, which is when you try to explain how things work (key word being try.) there is also a thing called fact, which is when you have proof that it works (As in everyone who has hit the shaft that I know, yes, even professional has said they all hit this shaft straighter). Science sometimes fails us, but the TRUTH SHALL SET YOU FREE.

 

Oh and by the way, in the numbers above...I have never come close to a smash factor of 1.51 until I started hitting Paderson, so for me in that situation...there's my proof

 

 

Don't look now, but you still haven't answered my question or explained anything....again. Unfortunately, this is a common theme amongst those who think a single factor is behind their own enhanced prowess.

Judging by your eagerness to share your driving stats, I'm guessing you're itching to strip off into your speedos and rub yourself with baby oil too. Resist that urge please. Instead, try giving the forum some sort of reasoned response which demonstrates that torque is a critical factor in shaft selection.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems to me that we are talking around each other and perhaps Donnie has backed himself into a corner (been there, done that.). This doesn't mean he needs to be taken out and flogged though. Pretty clearly torque numbers are not helpful in fitting unless there is some set standard for the number.

 

That has nothing to do with the quality of the Pderson shafts that we are testing. For my part the shaft is performing well regardless of what it's torque may or may not be.

Taylor Made Stealth 2 10.5 Diamana S plus 60  Aldila  R flex   - 42.25 inches 

SMT 4 wood bassara R flex, four wood head, 3 wood shaft

Ping G410 7, 9 wood  Alta 65 R flex

Srixon ZX5 MK II  5-GW - UST recoil Dart 65 R flex

India 52,56 (60 pending)  UST recoil 75's R flex  

Evon roll ER 5 32 inches

It's our offseason so auditioning candidates - looking for that right mix of low spin long, more spin around the greens - TBD   

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree. The numbers themselves don't mean squat from one shaft to the next if there's no standard way to measure it. But the difference in torque from one shaft to another plays a part in the feel and performance, not the biggest factor, but part of the equation anyway.

 

The bigger question is why, in 2015, has a standard for shaft classification and measurement never been created and applied to everyone?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...