Jump to content

jaskanski

Member
  • Content Count

    760
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Everything posted by jaskanski

  1. You should probably read this before making ay modifications: https://forum.mygolfspy.com/topic/18091-setting-the-record-straight-on-tipping/?tab=comments#comment-248218
  2. Just drill it out with a .335" bit.
  3. Correct. You may want to check shaft length too, which is slightly too long (assuming your set up is perfect lol) which accounts for towards the toe hits. As always, check your metrics first. By that I mean actual measurements. It's all very well saying that they are "1 degree upright and +0.5" long" - but from what? They were originally 18" long with a 30 degree lie angle?. In other words, have a reference measurement to start from (this will be the OEM spec or 'blueprint' measurement). From that you can extrapolate real data, rather than any of this 1up x long guff. In fitting we only use one specific term for length and lie - and that is the correct length and lie. The deviation up or down is irrelevant.
  4. jaskanski

    Snapping a Shaft

    From my experience, shaft breakage (specifically at the tip section above the ferrule) is the result of improper installation - period. Shafts installed into club heads are designed to cope with impacts in whatever form they come, so to blame breakage squarely on to poor impact is absolutely bogus. If the tip section has been improperly prepared and installed however, then you are basically waiting for a failure to happen. The tip section for one has to be prepped correctly. Any coarse abrasion to the tip can lead to weakness in the tip fibres and cause failure. Secondly, any lateral stress to the tip can also be the cause of tip failure - this is why we never install a graphite directly into an adapter of club head without first ensuring that the entry is either chamfered to mitigate side stress, or a collared ferrule is used to alleviate the same tip to entry stress. If you have a combination of these factors, then you have a recipe for disaster. I don't want to call out Ping themselves, but their mass produced orders are likely to be the cause of some (but not all) failures and not wishing to call out Golf Galaxy either, but their level of post assembly scrutiny simply does not match those of any professional club builder whatsoever. I guess you can probably attribute these failures to either one of these poor assembly techniques, but I guess these are also symptomatic to the general level of quality inspection that they get these days too - which is close to zero. I'm quite sure that both Ping and GG offer a full money back guarantee on the products sold - but the emphasis always seems to be on the sale rather than the the product these days, hence the increasing number of failures which are regrettably down to mass produced non-skilled labour techniques.
  5. I really don't get it. Would you buy a cake based on an algorithm's opinion on what you perceive as good? Or (as many do) seek a diagnosis for a medical condition based on an online "tool" ? The bottom line is that even though online tools exist to "help" in making choices, the sad fact is that they rely on user input to determine a recommendation - and guess what? people still lie about their own ability to "fit" themselves. Alternatively, you could go and see a fitter and you would know in an instant if something felt right or gave the kind of performance to match your ability - the naked eye only gives the naked truth after all. So if you want to get a medical diagnosis, see a doctor. For a cake, go see a baker and for a set of golf clubs - go see a shrink. Just kidding - get fitted. You could probably find one online - but you don't need me to tell you that now do you?
  6. Long story short - get fitted properly. Heel strikes are indicative of several different types of issues, but in essence the iron length to your swing path is wrong - which means the length is probably too long for the given swing, hence the strikes tend to be towards the heel instead of in the centre of the face. If the length was too short, the strikes would tend to be towards the toe. There are several other causes to take into effect, not least of which is the switch from 95g steel to 65g graphite, but the overall flex profile may also compound the error of length thus making consistent strikes almost impossible. Toe droop on irons is real and a critical factor in getting the length to lie ratio correct in fitting. If you haven't been properly fitted, you will also struggle to get it right. Two things to take away from this: 1. Don't expect miracles from an OTR set of irons that were never fitted for you in the first place. Get fitted first, then buy irons - don't try to fit yourself into a set. 2. Always compare apples to apples. Graphite and steel are similar in function but streets apart in how they perform per user. Graphite is a good choice to reduce stress and fatigue caused by repetitive ball striking, but you have to take the other factors into account to gain the most benefit of their advantages. Hitting towards the heel isn't going onto any list of advantages.
  7. I wouldn't be too hasty in thinking that. Regardless of the cost of manufacture for graphite becoming cheaper, steel still beats that price by a large margin. If you factor in the durability and easier assembly/prep processfor steel shafts too, I don't think they're going anywhere soon. Sure, graphite has it's adavantages but steel is still the king of iron shafts - and will probably remain so for a very long time.
  8. What head type are you putting it in? It can make a difference. https://forum.mygolfspy.com/topic/18091-setting-the-record-straight-on-tipping/?tab=comments#comment-248218
  9. Good question. OEM's are limited to what price point they sell their equipment at. If labour costs for measuring and assembly are not controlled to a tolerance you have two possible outcomes: 1. Clubs built to a really high tolerance will be reflected in their cost - expensive. 2. Clubs built to a low tolerance will be of poor quality and will not sell in large volumes. Neither of these is really what most major OEM's are looking for. Instead, they are looking to build a club to an acceptable cost to quality ratio that consumers will empathise with. How much this tolerance actually is can be variable but for most OEM's they can be pretty sloppy compared to the "blueprinted" published specs. This can mean for length +/- 1/4" - for swing weight +/- 1 point - for loft and lie +/- 1 degree - for flex +/- 5cpm. These are relatively acceptable tolerances for OTR sets and at the limits of what the average golfer can detect with the human eye and swing. Modern manufacturing techniques can keep the tolerances fairly tight and consistent, but if anything is selling at an RRP lower than average, then you can bet that the tolerance will be lower as a result and/or the material/component cost/ quality - some pretty sloppy iron sets get the the consumer on a regular basis. Thankfully, the big OEM's (insert your favourite brand here) are usually pretty good when it comes to material and component quality. The don't peddle junk because their brand reputation depends on it. Of course, there are always some horror stories from some OTR clubs that are compared to spec and are WAY off... If you want a set of clubs to be spot on for spec - what we call "blueprinted" or what the actual published specs say - then unfortunately the consumer will have to bear the cost of this level of scrutiny and precision of assembly - major OEM's simply can do this at an acceptable cost to the consumer. Also if you have a sophisticated and costly assembly process, you get to pay for that too. Hand finishing, grinding, polishing, stamping, etching, engraving etc all add up to the final value - not to mention custom options. You basically get what you pay for - well, most of the time anyway. If you really want a set of clubs that are built to your exact requirements then you really need to be fitted by a professional and built by a professional - which may not be the same person in many cases. As for the tech - it's all pretty basic really. You just have to have attention to detail and measure everything - and I mean EVERYTHING. Cut and glue? Yes, but measure the cut AND the thickness of the cutting wheel - and measure the weight of the glue. Don't guess - measure it. Grips, ferrules, tape often get missed in the grand scheme of things. Flo and spine? yep - especially if you're building a SET rather than an individual club. Once you have the precision to build to spec, you can then reap the benefits of the precision the components offer (eg aftermarket shafts). If your precision is off, the rest of the build will suffer as a result. At the end of the day, materials are one cost that can be pretty easy to apply a unit price to, but someone's time and expertise are another entirely different cost that a lot of folks simply don't appreciate when it comes to golf clubs. For me personally, my time and expertise doesn't come for free. Typing this costs 30 bucks alone...
  10. Hot melt has it's uses, but most modern drivers and fairways/hybrids also have interchangeable weights to adjust swing weight. The Srixon Z785 can be adjusted quite easily: https://www.srixon.co.uk/on/demandware.static/-/Sites-masterCatalog_ClevelandGolf/default/dw520ce6fc/pdf/16_SX_Z65-Series-Instruction-Manual.pdf Head Tac is pretty much useless for swing weight adjustment. It is designed to be used to stop head rattles by applying a thin coat to the entire inside of the club head - since it isn't a heat setting medium, it will remain at a viscosity at a level that will be affected by ambient temperatures - meaning it will run to the direction of gravity if used in great enough quantities to affect swing weight and it's warm enough outside. Like sunshine and the trunk of your car in summer. It would recommend it's use only as a quick and dirty rattle stop solution.
  11. That shaft code is for a KBS tour V wedge. Not exactly a S400.
  12. I found it very similar to the original Diamana Blueboard, in like for like weights - which ain't no bad thing... The Tensei simply offers more lighter options.
  13. Mind you, you can probably see why with these beauties... I think he's probably going with a progressive iron set (CB/MB) 4-PW and 3 wedges to satisfy his 10 club deal. I expect the Tmag woods and ball will remain.
  14. World #2 Justin Rose has left his long time equipment partner Taylormade and signs a multi-year deal with Japanese premium brand Honma. JR had been with Taylormade since turning pro in 1999 - I guess he could probably sign with anyone he wants, but Honma was certainly an eyebrow raiser for sure. https://www.golf.com/gear/2019/01/01/justin-rose-signs-10-club-equipment-deal-honma-golf/
  15. It's one of those questions that gets asked a lot, but has no definitive answer. If we take into account the preferrences of the touring professionals, then we tend to see most pros going with a wedge shaft that is softer than their respective iron shafts. Why? Well when you think about it, how many wedge shots are you going to play with the same swing as your irons? The wedge shots in particular around the green which may account for a greater majority played will be by their nature of a delicate touch type shot, or a partial swing or chip or similar. Therefore the same flex as the iron shaft isn't really necessary or conducive to enhanced spin. Solution? They use a softer shaft to give better feel and spin. If you take the popular X100 DG shaft played by pros, you will find quite a few players usinfg the slightly softer (and heavier) S400 in their wedges precisely for this reason. Like I said it doesn't always work for everyone and preferrences can manifest themselves in many forms, but these trends are the key factors that provide the theory behind the decision to use a softer and/or heavier shaft for the wedges. As with anything else, try for yourself to see what gives the best results.
  16. Just a bit petty maybe, but I find it annoying when the shaft is often erroneously referred to as the "engine of the golf club". It isn't. If you're looking for automotive simile to liken the golf shaft to, then are more accurate description would be "transmission". You - the person swinging the golf club - is the originator of the energy to power the golf club and hence the "engine". The shaft, which transmits that energy in a manner to strike the golf ball is just a dumb inert piece of material when at rest - it's not an engine of any kind. A better description would be a "transmission" in that it harnesses the power developed by the swing and allows that energy to be transferred to the golf ball via the club head ( which would make the club head tyres I guess? lol). Anyhoo - just needed to get that off my chest to satisfy my OCD count for today...
  17. As stated, shaft extensions are pretty easy to get hold of and fit. Obviously, adding length to your wedges will have a knock-on effect with other things - notably added swing weight but also your distance gapping may change significantly. If you add length, you will automatically add clubhead speed too (although the added swing weight may offset this slightly) so be prepared to tweak the lofts or alter your swing length to dial in your yardages. Lie angle will also be critical if you add length - the higher the loft the more critical it becomes for potentially hitting off line. Check the lies after any alterations always, particularly with added length because the added swing weight can have an effect on toe droop at impact and ultimately flex - which in turn refers you back to yardages etc. Be prepared to get your logical thinking cap on and work out the best solution in each case - from my experience, it's a lot better to alter to serve a purpose rather scratch an itch, so maybe experiment on one wedge first before committing to the rest. And lastly, never alter your swing to suit your equipment - instead, alter your equipment to suit your swing.
  18. Thanks for the responses folks. I was beginning to think that everyone was taking a break since the forum format change (not a fan to be honest), but clearly the right kind of topic gets the right kind of replies. Keep up the good work - I'm still here.
  19. Sorry to post this, but the lack of recent feedback, slow response to thread time (like over 6 months), low active user count (like less than 40 per day) all point towards a rather lame forum for anyone who likes to talk anything golf. Unless the trend starts to change, it makes for a rather bland forum (as has been for some time). Thoughts?
  20. The Recoils are taper tip and ascending weight (and balance point probably) so any attempt at frequency matching is pretty difficult really. The difference in weight and balance point account for the increase in cpm you're getting from 7 to 8-iron for instance. Have you tried each shaft without tip weighting to see what dry fit swing weight you have? And how are you measuring the frequency?
  21. It affects several things. Taper tips are normally constant weight shafts - ie the 9-iron shaft weighs the same as the 3-iron shaft despite the difference in length. The flex progression or "slope" is pretty constant too, meaning it's a much easier task for club builders to make a set to spec and if the end user likes a swing weight matched set. Parallel tips are slightly different. Each shaft comes from a set length blank which has to be trimmed at the tip to achieve the desired flex and trimmed at the butt to achieve the desire length - or a combination of both. This creates a descending weight shaft (if you have descending length set of irons) which makes for much more detailed work for the club builder to get a set built to spec. It has advantages such as making a specific flex frequency, but it is very much under used in the industry and by OEM's for the labour intensive assembly process when using them. Is there a performance difference? Well that depends on how you've made the set to perform. If you're comparing apples to apples in for example the venerable Dynamic Gold - they're nothing like each other at all even when built to the same flex - simply because of the weight difference, but also because the tip to first step flex is completely different too, making the launch and spin different. Tapers are softest in the long irons and stiffest in the short irons whereas Parallels tend to be stiffer in the longer irons and softer in the shorter irons - good players will notice the difference instantly, but in general the Taper shaft plays much stiffer in the tip than it's Parallel counterpart. As mentioned before because of the trimming involved, the parallel shaft will work out much lighter when trimmed to length especially in the shorter irons. For example a wedge DG shaft will be around 123g trimmed to length for a taper, whereas the Parallel shaft trimmed to the same length will be 110g - a big difference.
  22. I would say they are probably .370" How you measure the shaft bore without pulling shafts is pretty much guesswork - hence your measured .365" is questionable... Be that as it may....if you actually DO have .365" - The easiest (and most sensible) option would be to use .355" taper shaft with a shim - problem solved. The next option would be a gentle ream out to .370" - problem solved. If you're feeling adventurous, you could cross cut .370" tips and see if the resulting taper fits - Callaway used this concept to get .363" in some of their irons. Or if you're planning and reshafting them anyway, just pulll the shafts, clean the bores out and get the correct measurement.
  23. 4B2M is generally regarded as "average joe" for a driver shaft and would tend to gravitate towards the 60g range mid launch area - exactly like the YS6+ which is good all round shaft, particularly in fairways woods given it's launch characteristics. The Diamana Blueboard would also be my pick - a great fairway shaft. I was a long time user of the V2 myself and in 66g it worked perfectly for me - very stable and a lot better feel than it's 75g brother. However the 66g falls outside the 4B2M category - you would need a 55g or high launch version to get 4B2M territory. If you're looking for lower launch and lower spin, you won't find it with any 4B2M shaft - period. To be honest, there is no real clear winner unless you try them out for yourself. If you had good results with the V2 and Gd YS6+ in the past, then I'd follow that route and stick with what works.
  24. Both? When you think about it, regardless of your ability your clubs should "fit" your physical dimensions, your stance, your strength and ultimately the way you swing. That element doesn't change so much. Lessons are a means of learning an effective and efficient way to deliver the club to the ball as well as learning how and when to play certain shots. BOTH elements of fitting and lessons share one common goal - to enable you to be hitting the ball better every time. The fitted clubs simply increase the chances of finding the centre of the clubface, regardless of your ability. Lessons increase your ability. So it's a self perpetuating win-win situation.
  25. Hmm. I guess if you spend half as much time thinking about stats and twice as much time practicing, you might begin to see an improvement....in your stats. Oh the irony.
×
×
  • Create New...