IB_Golfin'

Gaa, I've seen better bags at the local muni lost & found. I will take a shot here and say the ERC non-conforming is non-too-surprising. In all honestly I think I'd rather see him use a bat of a tall tee though than an ERC. Looking at his set-up what's he really got to lose

Last time... Expectations from posting this, nothing. FYSA. If MGS pursued t further and did a comparative research story on the 2 ventus shafts, great. If not, . I won’t game either. As a data scientist and analyst my major peeve is being presented something that is purposely skewed or misrepresented. Believe it or not, people lie with data and advertisements all the time. Shocker. If a story like these ventus shafts doesn’t bother you, so be it. If you’re a ‘use what fits you’, great. If you’re a ‘that’s how it’s always been’, you logic is dangerous from a consumer standpoint and paves the way for s***** busiess practices from OEMs the rest of us count on. Me, I hate falsifications and try to point out and call out irregularities as I see them. The Callaway golf ball story was a marvelous find for MGS, I applaud that. Fuji and TM co-engineered (hopefully) a shaft but slapped the high profile Ventus name on it, despite it NOT having the vencore interior or having any of the Ventus design or materials. It closely resembles the after-market model and withot a doubt was meant to make consumers believe they’re buying a ‘near Ventus’ shaft. Even as Fuji has acknowledged, these two shafts are not even closely similar. While this may not upset any of you, accepting it as a norm does more damage than good. Aldila, Px, MCA all at least represent their products and stocks options as either different lines or lesser tolerances. Not entirely different versions with identical paint schemes as the after-market version. This, to me, is a deceptive sham that I hate seeing in my golf products. There’s nothing wrong in using that stock option, however, it should’ve been promoted as a different line and advertised accordingly. The hope here, is golfers don’t care and the Ventus name gets widespread visibility. The precedant that has already been set is this is a usual and acceptable practice. I hope to see that reversed. The more that know this shaft is an illegitimate Ventus, the better it is for the companies that want a respectable image. Aldila’s offering a premium Rogue 130, after-market, shaft as the Maverick stock option. Px claims no material differences in their HZRDUS stock options. MCA list the differences between their models dispelling any confusion as to what is what. As of right now, the materials and profile of the TM ventus is relatively unknown, as it lacks both the materials and technology as the Ventus line. Again, if it works for you or got fitted for you, great. If you picked it off tbe rack and thought this is a great shaft cause you read the shaft university thread on it, or caught a few advertisements, you were sold an illegitimate item that simple knowledge through sites like this could have corrected. I expect more from the vendors, even as a recreational golfer. I hope most of you do too.

Yes, and no. But MCA explains all the differences on their site here. https://www.mca-golf.com/brands/tensei™ There’s no guessing games as to the make and properties of those three lines.

From True Temper (Project X) Rep: "We do not give out CPM information but the 6.0 will be our stiff and the 6.5 our xtra stiff so it will be one flex and about 10 CPM difference. The TM version and our Small Batch version are the same materials and specs, just our Small Batch version is made with tighter QA and to a tighter spec". "Project X maintains that its OEM offerings are identical to the namesake Small Batch versions sold through premium fitters. The only difference is that Small Batch shafts are manufactured to tighter tolerances". Unless you're Tiger you're likely not going to feel a difference between the Hand-Crafted / Small Batch vs Stock Project X shafts. I highly doubt QC at Px is an issue on even their worst line, let alone their marque products. The Aldila stock shaft on the Maverick, again courtesy of Chris's review: "Typically, when you see a $350 shaft in a $500 driver it’s a red flag. According to Callaway, it’s not a made for shaft, and Aldila confirms the shaft (Aldila Rogue White 130 M.S.I. (60/70g) is not exclusive to Callaway. It’s available in the aftermarket, one was in play at the Sony last week (Aldila hopes it will get more tour play), and there’s no reason why it couldn’t find its way into other OEM lineups. There’s an inherent risk with putting a premium shaft in an OEM lineup, but Aldila is willing to roll the dice as it works to reestablish itself both in the US and overseas (where the brand’s footprint is minimal)." Finally, don't care what your numbers are or how either felt to you. It's a matter of whether the design and sale of 'non-velacore' Ventus shafts is somehow a product of known deception and poor ethics. Other companies apparently get it, and I have more respect for them and their products.

I'll tell you what, go ahead and contact Chris Nickel here at the bottom of his review and ask him the same mundane questions. He at least gets paid for it. https://mygolfspy.com/taylormade-sim-driver-review/ "Notice the asterisks on both Ventus shafts? I added them. While manufacturers like to use words like co-engineered, golfers are more familiar with made for, so let’s go with that. It’s exactly what we’re talking about there. This isn’t a real-deal Ventus (that one’s for you, JB). Unlike the aftermarket version, the TaylorMade version lacks full-length Pitch 70 fiber in the bias layer. It lacks VeloCore (Ventus’ signature technology) and will play softer in the tip section because of it. That may not be a bad thing for the middle of the bell curve off-the-rack buyer, but guys, nearly 100% of the Ventus story revolved around VeloCore With no VeloCore, what you’re left with is a golf shaft that’s decidedly not a Ventus. As some of the traditional shenanigans have been exposed, manufactures have found new and creative ways to transform premium aftermarket shaft offerings into lower-cost OEM stock products. I suppose you can argue there’s an art to it, but when you consider that except for the small VeloCore logo near the tip, the cosmetics of the Ventus* and aftermarket Ventus shafts are otherwise identical, it’s hard to argue that there isn’t a conscious effort to deceive golfers here. The stock shaft game involves a good bit of back and forth between the club OEM and the shaft guys, and there are legitimate financial constraints in play, so rather than assign blame, I’ll just politely ask that everyone stop playing these kinds of games with golfers. Be Better." P.S.: I'm posting references that further explain the questions you're expecting me to answer. If the shafts make no difference to you, AM or MF, than so be it. I side with Chris's review 100%. It baffles me that one would argue this point, especially in the MGS forum.

Ironically the culprit is also the teacher. Damned shame really, but gotta sell those unused overstocked prior model shafts somehow... https://mygolfspy.com/shaft-university-design-101-part-1/ https://mygolfspy.com/shaft-university-design-101-part-ii/

Your listed Ventus Black's, are they 'Velocore'? I'm not wholly sure if the Epic Flash series had Ventus available as an option, correct me if I'm wrong though. Did you 'upgrade' to Ventus Velocore shafts, or just the Ventus shafts? You're paying $500+ for new equipment, it does matter if it's after-market, stock, or generic. If golfers weren't paying for the name-sake every year there's very little reason why most couldn't play just as well, if not better, with driver heads that are 5-10yrs old. Save some time and money and just order from Diamondtour.com

FFS, yes! You change the materials, it's not the same shaft. You didn't see MCA market the PRO model as a stock shaft or 'inadequately' leave off labeling to make it suspect of a PRO shaft., instead they labelled STOCK versions of the Tensei series as AV and CK, NO BORON in the tip, and different materials used. HENCE, 3 different Tensei Blue shafts, of 3 different grades. Or are all these the same to you?? Would you call the HZRDUS T800 the same shaft as the HZRDUS T1100? Project X sure the hell won't. Project X at least, according to a True Temper rep, loosens the tolerances of HZRDUS series 'stock' shafts vs the high QA and tolerances of the small batch versions. So, yes, all Px HZRDUS Smoke Black shafts are the same, the stock version has slightly more variation than the 'tour' quality ones. Being the same materials and profile, I can live with that and I would say what you see is what you get. 'Small Batch' does not mean TX or indicative of tour only, it's simply a tighter toleranced shaft of the SAME material and design. The Ventus, IAW Fuji, is NOT the same material, and lacks the design entirely of the AM Ventus, it's NOT even remotely the same thing. Call it a Ventus model B or something, but don't offer it as a mirror image of the AM shaft and simply leave off a little stamp at the tip that says 'Velocore'. For all you know, the Ventus Black, Blue, Red 'made for TM', are nothing more than repainted Fuji Atmos shafts from last year, ya know, the NON 'Tour Spec' versions, which may very well be excess from the models the year earlier. See the problem here, or just going to avoid the argument that there is one? I shouldn't have to look all over a shaft for an asterisk * that lets me know it's a knock-off of the real thing, especially when it's coming from the same high-profile OEMs.

I'd like to thank the mod that forwarded me this, was a great article then, perhaps even better now. https://mygolfspy.com/made-for-shafts-a-closer-look/

Straight from a Fuji rep discussing the Ventus TM Offering vs the Ventus w/Vencore: "They are different in every way. Good shafts in their own right but no material nor internal technology that comes in the aftermarket version." You decide if it's different. I was simply bringing to light a considerable difference in 2 similarly labelled shafts TM is offering. Enjoy whatever model you like and looks good.

I think many are missing the point I'm making between stock and after-market shafts from the same OEM. Being 'fit' for, or having the stock version work 'best' for is one thing, having a shaft with 99% of the same paint scheme and name, WITHOUT BEING ANYTHING NEAR THE AFTER MARKET VERSION IS ANOTHER.

Never will disagree that one should be fit or use a shaft with a profile they prefer, but where are the specs, numbers, and reviews for the MF Ventus shafts, since they are likely dramatically different than the real deal. And I'm pretty sure the 'Small Batch' Px logo can be found on non-TX flex shafts also (Small Batch in a R-flex?). I'm not concerned with the different lines of shafts per OEM, but the Ventus stock option is much different than the AF version. How MUCH different is what I'd like to know. Is the tip torque doubled? Bend points lower? Spin rates 1,ooo RPMs higher? I don't care that they differ, or offer stock options, I DO care that I want to know what I'm getting in a stock version. Why not review them and compare them to see. THOSE shafts should be reviewed also is what I'm saying. How does the Px 'Small Batch' compare to the NON-small batch?

Apologies for a new post on this topic, I perused swiftly through MGS but didn't see anything quite on this. When/Where can us normal golfers find relevant information on the actual stock offerings of OEM shaft makers. A current case in point is the Fujikura Ventus shafts; the PREMIUM version has the pitch 70-ton carbon fibers and 'Velocore' technology, the STOCK version does not. From the MGS SIM Driver review: "Notice the asterisks on both Ventus shafts? I added them. While manufacturers like to use words like co-engineered, golfers are more familiar with made for, so let’s go with that. It’s exactly what we’re talking about there. This isn’t a real-deal Ventus (that one’s for you, JB). Unlike the aftermarket version, the TaylorMade version lacks full-length Pitch 70 fiber in the bias layer. It lacks VeloCore (Ventus’ signature technology) and will play softer in the tip section because of it. That may not be a bad thing for the middle of the bell curve off-the-rack buyer, but guys, nearly 100% of the Ventus story revolved around VeloCore With no VeloCore, what you’re left with is a golf shaft that’s decidedly not a Ventus. As some of the traditional shenanigans have been exposed, manufactures have found new and creative ways to transform premium aftermarket shaft offerings into lower-cost OEM stock products. I suppose you can argue there’s an art to it, but when you consider that except for the small VeloCore logo near the tip, the cosmetics of the Ventus* and aftermarket Ventus shafts are otherwise identical, it’s hard to argue that there isn’t a conscious effort to deceive golfers here. The stock shaft game involves a good bit of back and forth between the club OEM and the shaft guys, and there are legitimate financial constraints in play, so rather than assign blame, I’ll just politely ask that everyone stop playing these kinds of games with golfers." So Project X has the 'Small Batch' and shafts w/o that stamp, same shaft? Doubt it. From the same SIM review "It should go without saying that the Smoke Green offering is not the tighter tolerance Small Batch version.". So what kind of review will the STOCK version receive? (MGS, can you answer this?!) MCA has their Tensei CK, AV, and Pro series (at least they differentiated the differences to some degree). All different materials though, same look. How does the Orange compare between the 2 (ck/pro)? Can we get MGS to call out and do independent reviews on the watered down versions given away on 'off the rack' drivers that the majority of golfers end up with?