RickyBobby_PR

Haha. Talk about going to the extreme in an experiment. Super low loft 3w, low spin head and a shaft designed to play stiff. Experiment wise it’s not going to hurt anything you will have experimented with the 3 things I mentioned and see what if any you like or don’t like. Although for my personal preference it’s too many variables at once. But hey that’s what makes tinkering fun. As for the adapter if you swap, you may have to trim the tip but I’m not into club/shaft building so not 100% sure on that

I’m not bitching at you. I’m saying he shouldn’t just choose a regular flex based on his swing speed. Swing speed is one of the last things used to choose a shaft. There’s no standard for flex so how can one say that X speed should choose Y flex. Even within a shaft company flexes aren’t the same.

Always logo down. It’s the same way the club manufacturers build and how most shaft brands recommend

You literally chose not To read that I said it’s awesome you were able to improve dispersion thru improved ball flight. Literally telling you that you had a better setup. just want to argue to argue at this point. Again you choosing to ignore what’s been written in several posts of not only me doing my own testing but that there are threads across the internet where people have done their own testing and found that it provided no benefit. You are looking to argue for the sake of argument and ignoring what’s written. It’s awesome for you that you had the experience of a process improving the performance of a diver for you and continue to use it his day even if you don’t do any testing of new shafts before you apply these process to them. Also gear that others you worked with have had success but as usual you want everyone to agree with you and want to put down and discredit everyone else’s opinion and experiences as well the info they provide. I’m out

Spine and flo of shafts is an unsettled process in the golf industry with people on both sides having their own experience whether good or bad. This results in it not being a guarantee that everyone will see a benefit of any kind. If someone believes in it and wants to spend their money based on their past experiences with the process, more power to them. If it works then great. If others choose to not do It because in whatever testing they’ve done they concluded it’s not necessary or the bang for the buck isn’t there, great, more power to them. But to say shafts from years ago are better or worse purely on these process tells us nothing and each person should test shafts and clubs themselves and find what works for them

That’s awesome that you were able to improve dispersion thru improved ball flight. The majority of clubs I have used have either been purchased after a fitting or at least been thru me spending sometime on the range testing head and shaft combos. So pretty similar to the testing you do. I buy and play combos that give me either optimal ball flight or close to it since I am able to self fit myself based on my gained experience and knowledge of club fitting. The clubs perform exactly as I prefer and I don’t have any issues with the clubs that get ordered vs the ones I was fit with. Thats good that others you work with see results but there are plenty of others who don’t see any performance improvement in their testing. I have piece of mind thru my own testing and fitting that what I’m putting in my bag will work for me on the course.

I’m not saying it don’t believe you that it works for you. That’s awesome that it worked for you. There are plenty of threads across golf forums, Facebook groups, YouTube of people doing testing and it not give ing any improvement in performance. So once again it’s a process that isn’t a guarantee of having any improvement on performance. I’ve been fit by guys that have worked on tour and by oem experts. In my fitting with UST with a shaft that came directly from the plant in Texas my launch numbers were optimized for my swing. And the shaft performed the same on course as it did on the range during the fitting. In your testing what performance improvement did you have with the shaft after it went thru the process compared to how it performed for you on the course before hand?

So it’s ok for you to talk with the guy who’s selling the product and a shaft company and go by what they say yet when everyone else does it we are wrong. Can you be anymore of a hypocrite. When you are constantly alone on every subject the problem probably isn’t the rest of the forum Again if it was a guarantee then why wouldn’t it be 100% of the tour. Also what year was this supposed conversation?

Again there’s enough conversation and videos showing that there is no guarantee the process makes any improvement. Therefore I have made the concision decision to not spend money on a process that doesn’t gurantee better performance. If it works better for you then that’s awesome and congrats. As mentioned numerous times in other threads I have been to both PX and UST. I have seen the design process used for shafts, the process for making shafts and how they go from the rolling table thru to paint and then drying. This also includes hand rolling my own 1:1 shaft and comparing that to both the test shaft I received from PX prior to my visit as well as comparing the shaft I rolled agains the shaft that one of the Px shaft makers rolled. Performance was equal across all 3 shafts. I have been fit numerous times and in different shafts across numerous brands over the last 20 years. I know what shafts work for me and what don’t and have great success with shafts that have come straight from the factory.

And if the process of flo’ing or sst pureing were guarantees of better performance on the course every pga tour pro would do it with their clubs and that’s not the case. Theres plenty of videos of guys like DJ, Rory and others clubs being built on the tour van and zero of them being flo’d or pure’d

Not sure why other than boredom that I’m even replying. Better in what means. We have to define what we are going to measure as the baseline. If by quality then yes, in pretty much every way they are better due to better materials, improved QC processes and increased knowledge by the designers and their work with club manufacturers. If going how one matches up to another purely based on a process of flo’ing then that’s a matter of personal preference and if one thinks flo’ing matters which pretty much every shaft company right now states isn’t needed and all recommend playing label down. Also in testing by places like TXG that flo’ing doesn’t guarantee better performance and there’s enough discussion around the internet about flo’ing and sst pureing of a shaft that it’s more snake oil than beneficial. Also saying one shaft is out of alignment compared to another within actually hitting them side by side and comparing performance also doesn’t say anything about one being better than the other. If going of how a shaft performs there’s not measure of one being better than the other because a shaft will perform differently for every golfer. For some it may work better than an older shaft, for others is may not.

They wouldn’t be knockoffs they would be counterfeit and yes counterfeit is illegal. This happens to lots of products and golf is known to have several products that have been counterfeited. There’s a thread about a guy playing fold with someone who purposely bought a counterfeit driver on purpose. Scotty Cameron putters, scotty Cameron golf bags and headcovers get counterfeited all the time. TaylorMade stealth drivers had counterfeits made within a week of product release. Correct PX is a division of true temper. Px also makes products for several different sports. Still likely chance they are counterfeit

Balled labels X out are blemishes and failed some aspect of QC. When something is way out of whack the chances are it’s not a 2nd or blemish it’s an all out fake. Only way to know if it’s a fake or something else wrong is to contact the manufacturer

Because the ruling bodies decided that on the course rules will be different for rules applying to not on the course. Another example of not understanding the rules and how and why they are applied and why they aren’t inconsistent. But rather you and others not wanting to suffer the consequences for a mistake on the course.

Hazards also knows as penalty areas are part of the course OB is not part of the course.

They aren’t inconsistent because they are two different situations. Just like the teeing area is different from the rest of the course.

Practice more than last year play as much as last year Golf is one of three hobbies I have and it isn’t the main priority so just need to make some more time for it

How would anyone here know that? Nobody here sold them to your buddy and you didn’t say where your buddy got them from. Your best bet is to contact PX and find out.

Sim2 driver to get g425 max. Looking at having a Ping dominant bag setup in one of my bags.

Seems to be what many on here who complain about the rules also don’t want to accept.

I was going to quote the above post about the downside of the avx and that form what you posted you weren’t trying to lower ball flight which is what the avx would do along with reducing spin. So yes that would knock the avx out for you. Remember for the most part while it will vary between golfer we aren’t talking a lot of spin difference between balls. Most iirc from the ball study is 200-500rpm

Poor form doesn’t always lead to inconsistencies or even lack of distance. If our bodies can compensate properly and time up the swing we can see good results. As to what’s causing it it could be how you are gripping the club, how your wrist and hands are working in the swing. Could also be from weak or tight forearms. Could also be that you are at the point where how you swing, grip, move your hands has finally got to the point of being a problem. Things to consider. Stretch and strengthen your forearm, have someone look at your swing to make sure it’s not the cause.

This is going to vary for every golfer. Nobody swings alike and we all have different sensitivity levels to feel, weight of the club and how that impacts our swing. Just because a shaft is labeled as low launch/low spin doesn’t actually mean that’s the results one will see. Some who releases early will have different launch characteristics than someone who releases late. only way to know what the ball flight will be for you with each of those shafts is to hit them in the same club.

Well the tour vans are completely different ball games than retail. They also don’t remove the hot melt once it’s in. The amount of hot melt used is very specific to achieve a specific result for a golfer. If that golfer changes anything they use a different. Sorry but comparing your situation and their stance against what their tour vans do is kind of a big stretch

No he shouldn’t. There’s no standard for flex so how can one have a flex based on flex. Shafts provide weight and feel for the club and golfer. Finding the right shaft weight and the right profile for the golfer is more important.