RickyBobby_PR
-
Posts
11,159 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
8
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Articles
FAQ
Tests
Classifieds
Store
Group Buys
Posts posted by RickyBobby_PR
-
-
Just finished reading Bradley Hughes second ebook.
-
19 minutes ago, brockcdavison said:
Currently and have been loaded with the EvenFlow Hzrd Black on my M6 driver for the past two years and absolutely love it.. I haven't experienced that much of a variety in Driver shafts over my years as I was always comfortable with the stock ones that came with them, however the performance is and was noticeable the minute i got fitted and took it to the course.
Is the bolded part supposed to be evenflow and Hzrdus?
-
This is the first I’ve seen anyone mention any “sound” issues with the sm8
-
53 minutes ago, jaybeemaestro said:
The No Putts Given Podcast said PXG were discounting up to 50% during April to boost online sales during the Coronavirus Pandemic. Would this not really annoy someone who forked out full price for an iron set pre-discount? They hiked the prices and created this niche market. It's a more exclusive brand. The problem I see is that this move will dilute that exclusivity and the people who bought these irons because they could afford them may not continue to buy them if everyone can afford them (at discounted prices). Have PXG removed the "U" in their "USP"?
I'd be interested to hear others' thoughts on this.
Not at all. I bought Gen2 before they were out on the heroes program and wasn’t bothered by it at all.
Most people who are buying them aren’t concerned with the price they have to pay. This discount is no different than active duty, military vet or first responders getting better pricing than those without that status.
- jaybeemaestro and JohnSmalls
-
2
-
3 hours ago, TimoTe said:
I actually laugh at people who use the line on a ball to putt as they miss a lot. Plus, the time it takes to set the ball up perfectly in line with your imaginary start line is downright annoying to watch.
In a tournament or on tour it matters more than when I play with my friends; I will grant you that. My point is that leaning how to aim correctly over the putter, making a good stroke, and judging the distance/break is what makes putts. The line on a ball won't solve all of it.
It seems to distract from what matters, especially as the ball keeps moving when you set it down, adjust it, check it, adjust it... Forever
Sounds kind of childish to laugh at people for missing a putt. Must be nice to never miss a putt.
A line, 3 lines or whatever a person uses to mark a ball is all preference. It doesn’t guarantee that they have the right line and/or speed for the putt to go in.
-
Putting the hybrid at home workout stuff to the side for now and going back to supporting a local strongman coach who put out phase 2 of his Coronavirus at home workout. This one has bodyweight or barbell options so throws who have some basic equipment can train with the barbell or if not then follow the boardy weight training.
Hes designed it to be a transition back into gymlife with the hopes we will all be in the gym before the 9 weeks of the program finishes.
-
-
-
On 3/31/2020 at 11:40 PM, remste17 said:
I want all of the big shops selling $150 fittings to fail so hard. I urge anyone reading this to do some research and go try some fitters out, don't take their word as the gospel. Two out of my three fitters I would call up in a heart beat to help me re-fit or make other changes. And in another year I'd go check out the third again. Find someone trustworthy, whose business model isn't to suck an extra $500 out of you. Golftec and Club Champion have the business models that just make my stomach turn. There is so much better out there and that's why I'm here at MGS.
Here's to those fitters out there that care about actually improving your game.
everyone is welcome to their It’s on the consumer to determine what works for them. The business that don’t adapt to the market will close up shop on their own but wishing any failure is counterproductive.
I know several fitter that I would pay $150 to and they are smaller businesses. I would also pay the fees for the TXG process and even willing to pay the extra to have Ian do the fitting if it met my schedule.
CC, Tourspec offer a number of services it’s on the consumer to let them know what your goal is, what your budget is and have them work within that. That’s not different than hiring a contractor to build a house or do a renovation job, etc.
It sux you had a bad experience but it’s not the norm, although we see others who were disappointed but those tend more to be they didn’t know the business model before going in
-
8 hours ago, storm319 said:
Here is the quote from Fujikura from WRX for the 3rd time in this thread with the segment on the TEE version bolded. If you still can’t accept this I’d recommend that you reach out to Fujikura directly for further clarification.
https://forums.golfwrx.com/discussion/1789613/the-new-ventus-black/p14
“The STOCK shafts used in the new TaylorMade products is a Ventus part without VeloCore Technology (no Pitch 70 ton or 40 ton in the bias core) that we worked in conjunction with TM to optimize the performance for a wide range of golfers. Please refer to TaylorMade for specs.note: TaylorMade is the ONLY company offering ventus without VeloCore as their stock shaft. And their custom upgrade shafts are the aftermarket versions, hence the upcharge. So if you see a ventus part at another OEM it is our aftermarket part with VeloCore and carries a $350 MSRP. the only exception is Tour Edge has a Ventus with "4T Core" which is same construction as VeloCore, but without the $$$ Pitch 70T material. 4T core is all high-mod 40 Ton in the full length bias core."
You obviously don’t know how shafts are made. Shafts don’t have just 1 piece of material and for each layer of material they use it’s not all the same type. The stiffer the shaft is the more brittle it becomes. If a shaft was made with 5 layers of 70t it would be really expensive and it would be really brittle and possibly not even playable for more than one swing.
so yes fujikura replaces their 70t with 40t, but unless you know what TEE requested the design of the 4t shaft to be you don’t know if they had to change the other pieces of prepreg that make up the shaft to account for going from 70t to 40t if they had to use more than 1 layer of 40t. The ventus has a very stiff tip maybe TEE wanted that to be softer which would change the prepeg used for the tip flag or flags.
so again unless you know the design for the TEe shaft compared to how the ventus w/velocore is designed your thoughts on the stiffness profile is just a guess. The only way to know if they have the same profile is to get the EI profile for each shaft and compare them.
and again when the you like the opinion or not fujikura designs and is marketing the ventus shaft based on velocore. they list 3 profiles on their site red, blue and black. This is what led to a discussion in the ventus thread about TM using the red and blue name in their stock shaft and that anyone buying that isn’t getting a true ventus shaft because it’s missing the key element of what ventus is about. They also don’t list the 4t and there is no color for the 4t so it makes it hard to know what of the 3 profiles it was designed off. And again since it’s not using velocore the person is buying a shaft that isn’t what a ventus is about.
from their website
The exceptionally engineered Ventus is designed to significantly tighten shot dispersion and maximize ball speed especially on off-center shots. Ventus is a Tour-inspired profile and the first to include Fujikura’s all-new VeloCore Technology in an accelerated taper, ultra-stiff tip profile. Maximum energy transfer from the tip section boosts the clubhead’s performance and a straight taper design enhances loading and feel.
-
2 hours ago, storm319 said:
With all due respect...
With all due respect you are missing information in your claims about what fujikura is saying and assuming that stiffness profiles should be the same. What other materials are used in the ventus version other than the 70t prepreg, how many flags do the use, how many run the full length of the shaft, are they all oriented the same? When they removed the 70t for the 40t did they do a one for one swap, did they change any other flags or their orientation, did they soften or stiffen the tip or butt sections, are the other materials from the ventus version kept in the 4t design?
-
7 minutes ago, storm319 said:
One last time then I am out:
Reference to VeloCore: https://mygolfspy.com/shaft-review-fujikura-ventus/
"The summary version of which is that Ventus features full-length, pitch 70-ton fiber in the bias layer."
Reference to primary orientations: https://mygolfspy.com/shaft-university-design-101-part-ii/
"+/- 45 degree orientations (known as the bias layer, fibers across the length of the shaft that affect twisting)" - aka torque
"0 degree (fibers along the length of the shaft that affect bending)" - aka stiffness
Fujikura's reference to the differences between the different Ventus shafts: GolfWRX (not sure about the MGS forum rules on posting links to a competing forum) & reposted by @zrumble to this thread
"The STOCK shafts used in the new TaylorMade products is a Ventus part without VeloCore Technology (no Pitch 70 ton or 40 ton in the bias core) that we worked in conjunction with TM to optimize the performance for a wide range of golfers. Please refer to TaylorMade for specs.
note: TaylorMade is the ONLY company offering ventus without VeloCore as their stock shaft. And their custom upgrade shafts are the aftermarket versions, hence the upcharge. So if you see a ventus part at another OEM it is our aftermarket part with VeloCore and carries a $350 MSRP. the only exception is Tour Edge has a Ventus with "4T Core" which is same construction as VeloCore, but without the $$$ Pitch 70T material. 4T core is all high-mod 40 Ton in the full length bias core."
So no need to continually post about generic differences in materials, flags, and orientations because a representative for Fujikura already disclosed the difference between these versions (and if that comment is accurate, the 0 degree orientation that effects stiffness is the same between both versions therefore the stiffness profile should be the same within respective tolerances).
Should be and are the same are two different things. Until you have the EI profiles you are guessing.
The bottom line is fujikura markets the ventus based on velocore technology. When the 70t prepreg is remover any shaft without it is just a ventus in name. It doesn’t matter if the shafts play the same, have the same EI profile or not they are just a shaft using the name ventus. It’s why tm distinguished between ventus red or ventus blue for the no upcharge shaft and have the Ventura red, blue, and black with velocore in the name plus $250 upgrade charge on their site. This is to distinguish they are different. The TEE ventus 4t is also just a ventus name minus the 70t .
Club manufacturers talk with shaft manufacturers to find out what shaft or shafts they will be pushing for the upcoming year and then work with them to on how they can get that line in their club release. They work out price points and then the club manufacturer determines if it will be a stock offering similar to hzrdus smoke green in Callaway and TM or an upcharge shaft. At times like with the ventus, Atmos, pro 2.0 they request a made for shaft. This has been going on for years.
With all that said I’m joining blackngoold and I’m out.
-
Just now, storm319 said:
1) Are you trying to compare the performance difference of the shafts in isolation or also adding in the human variable? When MGS performs their most wanted test they are not isolating the comparison down to a single variable (nor do they claim to be), so that is not an apples to apples comparison. My point is that a human cannot deduce the stiffness profile based on how a shaft feels which is what people were implying (you illustrated this point with your comments on the Aldila Rogue)
"If we use your example of the Aldila Rogue 125MSI and the 110MSI and them have basically the same stiffness profile, they should play the same. I tried them both and they were night and day different for me. The same length and weight 110 felt harsh while the 125 felt significantly smoother and easier to load. So to me I would have guessed that the 110 was stiffer."In this case it was you the human that were the cause of any difference in performance, not the shaft's stiffness profile. Also, bringing up the Rogue was an example of people jumping to the wrong conclusion based on hype when in reality there was very little difference (especially with the fairly extreme price disparity). But please keep telling yourself whatever you want to justify the added cost as the market needs people to adopt early and often to give the OEMs incentive to release new product every year
2) Have you read anything from Fujikura? This is not my opinion but based on Fuji's comments that the only difference was in the material used in the bias layup which effects torque not stiffness (from there you can deduce that the stiffness profile should be the same if there were no changes to those layups assuming that Fuji's comment is accurate). If you want to say that the shafts felt significantly different to you, that is fine, but stop perpetuating the idea that aftermarket shafts > OEM shafts without objective data.
Materials used will affect stiffness T1100 has a different stiffness than 40t which has a different stiffness than 70t. Changing materials can affect one or the other. It boils down to the number of flags used, the material used in each layer, the length of each flag and the orientation of each layer. I’ve seen a shaft made with 12 layers that played to the same stiffness as one with 7 and they used different materials in the build.
-
28 minutes ago, storm319 said:
By that logic the aftermarket Ventus in X flex is different than the S or R flex because they use different modulus/strength material in certain areas. Many times that is how the shaft OEMs view it but that is not always how it is marketed.
If two shafts have the same weight, weight distribution, stiffness profile, and relatively similar torque but still end up with a different result, it isn't the shaft that is playing different, it is the human swinging it. You do realize that the materials are a means to an end to hit these target measurables (amongst others), don't you?
Technically yes they would be different shafts but they all use the same technology of the velocore aka 70t so they have more than the name in common. It’s the underlying prepregs that determine the flex and weight but they use they normally use the same mandrell and overall design. It doesn’t take much to make a stiff an x stiff.
i do realize that the materials are a means to an end. I’ve need to UST Mamiya and saw how they go about their design and shaft making. I’ve been to PX and saw their process to include what they use to design a shaft and how changing materials, flag length, flag orientation and such change the EI profile and other design aspects to include having an even flow blue shaft redesigned based on my feedback of testing the shaft for several weeks prior to going to their facility. I got to watch their main design guy create one off shafts for other guys based on their feedback and what they would like to see in ball flight and feel to include one guy saying he likes the design of a shaft from another brand and that he would like certain aspects of that included in his custom shaft. While there we got to hand roll the shafts ourselves so I have made a shaft using the build spec sheet and laying the flags on the mandrel.
-
5 minutes ago, storm319 said:
You are now adding variables. All things equal (human swing included), two shafts with the same stiffness profile should have the same end result as long as there is not a drastic difference in torque (several degrees difference, below 5 degrees is not going to really impact club head delivery with exception to maybe extreme cases). Now, differences in feel may impact the way the human loads/delivers the club but now we are talking about a change in human performance, not the performance of the shaft. Also, two shafts that have an identical stiffness profile but only differ in torque (higher modulus/strength material in bias layer = lower torque) are more similar than not regardless of how they feel to the human swinging.
Also, what I took exception to that started this back and forth was the comment that the two shafts were nothing alike and the only thing that they had in common was the name. That comment was based on feel perception which is very subjective and comments like these continue to perpetuate the myth that high dollar aftermarket shafts are universally better in some way or another than the company's OEM program shafts.
No two people swing clubs so yes human factor is a variable.
nobody said they two shafts were based on feel perception. They are different shafts because they use different material. That’s a fact because as you have said they don’t use the 70t prepreg. They all shaft the ventus names and that’s the the commonality like it or not.
A shaft with a 3.8 torque is going to feel different from a 3.1 torque. Depending on the EI profile two shafts with a 3.1 torque will feel different for some. There’s plenty of shafts in the market that share similar specs with torque, weight and even relatively close EI profiles that play different for different swings.
Whether you like it or not there are shafts that share a name from the same company that are built with different materials.
-
7 minutes ago, storm319 said:
And a lot of people mistake feel for performance. Here is a quote from Fuji in that link I posted:
"Then there’s the subjective world of feel. Let’s be clear, feel, and performance aren’t directly related. One doesn’t necessarily dictate the other."
I would assume that people that purchase based on "want" are doing so because they perceive the aftermarket to have some kind of benefit over the OEM option regardless of if that benefit actually exists in reality. Where this becomes a problem is when people make the assumption that aftermarket = better which is not always the case (not to mention that people have a different definition of "better"). Ultimately I feel that one of the primary missions of this site has been to equip consumers to be able to make informed purchasing decisions and to better understand what you are getting vs the traditional marketing model that has historically exaggerated the benefits of new products.
I don’t know anyone who equates feel to performance. Everyone I see who talks performance refers to things such as distance, launch characteristics or dispersion and feel is left to the the meaning of feel. Usually words like boardy, harsh, stout, too soft, noodle, and so on.
Like with any product there’s going to be a segment that equates aftermarket with quality and to an extent that’s true. Shafts that are made in fewer quantities are going to have better QC process and tighter specs as an example. Sometimes products that cost more use higher quality material again leading to a higher quality product and/or perception.
Then there’s the segment that wants to have things that others can’t have and the number of after market shafts one will see at a golf course is rather small.
Some based on experience go the aftermarket route because the designs used in stock offerings don’t work for their swing so they don’t bother with the stock options regardless what they are.
Things like value, better, and so on are all personal decisions and won’t mean the same for everyone.
-
39 minutes ago, Rickp said:
I’ve seen 2 right hand sets in the wild and they are really good looking clubs.
Putters were on sale last week for $125 then $175 but I didn’t pull the trigger.
Sent from my iPhone using MyGolfSpyI think lots of people were taking advantage of the heroes program and flipping for a small profit. They had Somme good deals on putters too including free ones with 0211 iron purchase iirc. It’s nice they are a brand that offers everything in LH but like most there aren’t many in the wild
- JohnSmalls and fozcycle
-
2
-
10 minutes ago, Rickp said:
The PXG offerings are intriguing to me. I’d like to get my hands on LH demos to see if they are better for me than what I’m playing now.
I think it’s a great looking club thru the lineup.
As far as making money I believe they are.
Sent from my iPhone using MyGolfSpyThe heroes program crushed the second had market prices for gen1 and gen2 after they were released. You could probably find a single club on eBay for a decent price and last time I checked $1200 was max price for a like new set. When I sold my Gen2 last year I squeaked our $1k locally for them and they only had maybe 7-8 rounds on them.
- JohnSmalls and Rickp
-
2
-
5 minutes ago, storm319 said:
Actually, Fuji has said that in multiple forums. Again, VeloCore = 70T pitch fiber the FULL length of the shaft in the bias layer (aka + or - 45 degree orientation, although Fuji did not specify which one or if it was used in both). The TEE 4T version replaced the 70T material with 40T material in the same application according to Fuji's post. If this is accurate, the stiffness profile should be the same between the two with the only differences being slightly higher torque (1/2 a degree is negligible from a head delivery standpoint) and maybe a slight difference in weight depending on the type of 40T material that was used. Again, the +/= 45 degree orientation impacts torque (0 degree orientation impacts stiffness). Lastly, you are correct that the shafts are not the same, but the real question is how different are they and is it worth the cost for a negligible difference? Saying that they are nothing alike and that they are only similar in name is disingenuous.
Now the TM version could be very different as Fuji's posts have implied that they have little knowledge on that actual shaft which could mean that they simply licensed the Ventus name and had no involvement with the actual design/production, however that is still unclear. However, you cannot make the assumption of how similar or different it is based on feel alone.
The cost and performance are going to be player dependent. That goes for any stock shaft vs an aftermarket whether it’s the atmos blue or the the tour spec version or the pro 2.0 vs the pro 2.0 tour spec or any other after market shaft that has similar profile to a stock shaft.
Someone with a fast swing and transition probably has better results from the real deal vs the made for and vice versa for a slower smoother swinger that will probably not load the ventus. But that’s not a guarantee either. Some may not notice any difference in performance and then it would be preference on whether to spend money on the upgrade or not.
Some just want to have an after market shaft solely for the purpose of want over performance benefits. And as others have said in this thread and others it’s on the person to test both and see what works for them.
-
15 minutes ago, storm319 said:
Bias layup/layer refers to any flags oriented at +/- 45 degrees (this is a fairly industry standard term). This layer primarily effects torque (amount in degrees that the shaft twists when under load). Fujikura reps have said that the VeloCore = 70T pitch fiber the full length of the shaft in a single bias layup (which again impacts torque). In the quote from WRX, Fuji mentioned that the only difference in the TEE version is the use of lower modulus material in that layup (at least for S flex as R flex appears to be a lower weight class). So if that statement is correct, the TEE version should have the same stiffness profile with the main difference being feel from the theoretically higher torque (also meaning that the shafts are actually more similar than they are different).
If you haven’t already, you should read this as it provides a high level overview of the different layup orientations and their impact on the final result:
What they aren’t saying is how many pieces of tWhat prepreg is used or the orientation of the flags or their length. All of those details go into the design an determine torque, stiffness, counterbalanced, straight taper or other shaft designs.
While they may potential have the same stiffness profile they are different shafts because that shaft and the TM one lack the velocore technology which is the what the ventus is about. Even if they have the same stiffness profile they aren’t the same shaft on that fact alone. They share a name.
-
9 hours ago, storm319 said:
Too many people try to make assumptions about a shaft’s stiffness based on feel and many times they are wrong. The point is that posts above claimed the different versions of this shaft were nothing alike with feel and marketing babble as the supporting reasoning. Based on Fujikura’s response that the difference lies in the material used in the bias layup, we can deduce that the stiffness profiles should be similar given that the bias layup effects torque not stiffness (this assumes that Fuji was actually involved with the development and production of the TM version as their response was a little ambiguous.
What is a bias layup? You keep using this term and in visits with two different shaft manufacturers and watching numerous videos or reading answers to questions I have never hear this term.
Torque is about feel and that has come from several shaft brands.
Stiffness profiles are what is commonly referred to as the EI profile and depending on where place what materials and how on the shaft that will affect the EI profile. It’s why some shafts are stiffer in the butt or the midsection or tip compared to others.
when you use 40t prepeg compared to 70t you are going to get a different build of a shaft and it’s going to be softer and more torque. They can use other types of prepegs and place them at different angles and lengths to achieve a design based on requirements.
what we can deduce is that fujikura isn’t going to tell anyone what materials are used throughout the shaft, how they are placed on the mandrel or even what mandrel is used. They won’t tell anyone what velocore technology uses to achieve its purpose.
The fact that TM uses made for shafts we can deduce they aren’t making the shaft just like Tour Edge isn’t making the 4t core. We don’t know of either brand has shaft engineers who are doing the design then give it to Fujikura to produce, which is what Ping does for their tour shaft and the Alta.
Based on price we can deduce that the materials used in the TM and Tour Edga shafts are both using cheaper prepregs than the made for. While torque doesn’t equate to what type of swing speed or golfer will fit a shaft since there are tour pros using the UST Lin-Q purple shaft that has a higher torque the use of higher torque in a shaft is to make it feel better and when trying to sell to the general public the preference is for a softer feeling shaft over something that feels boardy or stout or any other word for lower torque shafts. Something that doesn’t feel good to a player will get pushed away by the average golfer who for the most part doesn’t swing fast and can’t load a stiffer shaft properly. this is why when a golf club company releases their drivers they have numerous shafts in the same flex with different profiles, allowing for different swing speeds and players to find a non upcharges shaft and thus increasing sales because many golfers including those on forums aren’t poking to drop $700+ on a driver.
-
2 hours ago, tjyorke said:
They have been out long enough. Anyone if they are making money ? Tough market at their price point.
They are making money and have been rated by inc 500 as one of the fastest growing businesses.
They are in the high end niche market and there is always a market for that. Despite that they have a comparable or better market share in irons as some well know mainstream brands. Theres been a market for Miura and other high end jdm. Most don’t see it at their everyday muni and most public courses but it’s there.
As jlukes mentioned they brought enough attention with their sales that other brands have jumped on it some with some success and others maybe not as much. Titleist did it with TMB and Concpt irons. The tmb were a good driving iron and didn’t sell much in the full set and titleist moved into and went with the u500/510. The cncpt irons they make in a small batch of about 1000 sets at a premium price and sell out. Callaway tried with the epic forged rons and to my knowledge it wasn’t that successful. We will see if they do another release for those as a replacement set or if they move on
-
As for objective data and comparisons it’s going to be hard to find any number of people that have tried or play the 4t core and the real deal shaft. People interested in the tour edge drivers aren’t very high and those who are tend to look for cost effective options that perform well. Those same people aren’t going to spend more on a shaft than a full driver. And those who are looking to spend $300+ on a shaft aren’t interested in stock shafts or tour edge drivers.
-
1 hour ago, storm319 said:
It baffles me when people are more concerned with the material story than the end result.
Wishon’s profile software has shown countless examples of a high cost, overhyped shaft touting a compelling material story having a nearly identical stiffness profile, weight, and balance point as a number of different shafts at a fraction of the cost (to the point where many of the big shaft OEMs stopped cooperating due to fear of a drop in sales). Now if you place a very high value on feel, that is fine but it does not result in a night and day difference in terms of the actual end result.
If some exotic material in a specific section of a single layup doesn’t result in a material difference in stiffness, then what is the point of the added cost? Now, I am not saying that these different versions of the Ventus are identical, but what we don’t know objectively is how different are they in reality. Fujikura’s response on the differences have probably caused more confusion than provided clarity (TEE version is the same minus a lower modulus marterial in the bias layer which has little impact on the actual stiffness profile and basically that they don’t know on the TM version since they had little to no involvement).
They are completely different materials 40t prepeg is much different from 70t as is the cost.
we don’t know and will never know what materials are placed where in the shafts or how they are placed on the mandrel or in what length or angle. All of those go into how stiff a shaft is, the weight and the torque. Fujikura and any other shaft company won’t share that with the public because it’s their company proprietary information. The shaft of the mandrel also plays a roll in how the shaft is done and companies has numerous mandrels for different type of shafts. When you take the velocore technology out of the shaft it no longer is the same shaft but rather a shaft with the same name. They aren’t going to give away the goods for free so to get the cost down from the upcharge price to a free shaft offering they have to use cheaper materials. This doesn’t mean a shaft is of lesser quality it’s just not as expensive to make.
The only specs I could find for the 4t core shaft was what was in the description on an eBay site. Based on that it looks like tour edge wanted a shaft that had similar characteristics to the real deal shaft but at a price range that they could offer as stock without changing the price of their driver. So fujikura removes the velocore technology and changes the material used to make the shaft. Based on that material they place the prepreg on the mandrel in a layout that provides the same specs. With the TM version it looks like TM wanted to keep similar launch characteristics but with a higher torque to make the shaft feel better for the average golfer. So fujikura again removes the velocore technology and uses lower cost materials and changes the design to go from torque of 3.1 to 3.8.
I have had the opportunity to visit two shaft companies and see how shafts are made and at one of them had the chance to design my own based on my personal feedback of a test shaft. The test shaft happens to be the even flow blue. The performance of the shaft was fine from a launch and spin perspective and offered improved dispersion over the rogue shaft I was fit into by the titleist reps. The only issue I had was the feel. I felt like I had to go after it sometimes. The design engineer for PX changed the material used and the length of the flags in the middle of the shaft to add more torque while maintaining the performance characteristics.
there’s a lot that goes into shaft design and the numbers are going to vary from person to person.
Pxg are they making money?
in General Equipment Talk
Posted
Noticeably is a subjective aspect like when people talk about significant differences or gains between models years. What is noticeably for one may not for the other.
In my experience with the gen1 and gen2 irons they have been longer and more consistent dispersion than some other brands with similar designs. The feel for me in the pxg is better than ping, Taylormade and Callaway irons. The overall performance was better as well. Only reason I dumped my gen2 was I put Miuras back in the bag and the pxg weren’t going to see much course time