Robin Arthur - XCalibers

[RobinArthur]

Hey Folks -

Just wanted to say that I'm out of the hospital and all my health challenges are OVER!  I've had quite an out-pouring of concern and well wishes that i'm truly thankful for...

 

So now let's get on to some FUN!!!  Let me know how I can help...

Robin

[Undershooter]

Glad you are doing well!

[HighFade]

Glad to hear it!

 

Now get out there and PLAY.  and then POST about it on MyGolfSpy.

[GolfSpy Barbajo]

Welcome back Robin! Gotta say, I LOVE my Caliber HY hybrid shaft.  Put it in an old Hogan #1 hybrid and it's as good as anything I've played.  

 

What's new in the XCaliber line?

[revkev]

You certainly have been in my thoughts and prayers, great news!

[BK in TEXAS]

Health issues are no fun.  Glad you're doing well.

[wbealsd]

Glad you're "up & running!"

[Kenny B]

Welcome back! Looking forward to your posts.

[RobinArthur]

First of all, thank you all SO MUCH for your kind words.  It's been a tough couple/few years but the worst is behind me, and the horizon is nothing but smooth sailing and positivity going forward!

 

So what's new I was asked.  Well, a bunch.  And i hope i'm not over-stepping my bounds as a member and not yet a sponsor (which is in-work) but here goes some info - on irons.

 

There has been a lot of questions posed to me re: heavy iron shafts.  And I'm glad those question have been asked.  I can answer those questions specifically how they relate to my own conceptual, design and testing philosophies; and how that it further relates to all the XCaliber irons and esp. the new Tour X Series.

 

So here's "primer" if you will on how I come to my initial concepts, then design, testing and of course final selection of a new product.

 

The first thing I've done for you (all) is to provide a spec sheet showing the nominal specs on all the XCaliber irons including the zone frequencies which gives me/us an idea on the distribution of stiffness.  If you'd like, i can also provide comparisons to all the other shafts for your review, but honestly should check w/ MGS mgt. before doing so...

 

Anyway, BIG note here:

There are those who think zone frequencies serve NO purpose for design and shaft-shaft comparisons...an assumption by folks who do NOT design shafts, nor have over 300 Tour wins with their designs. I'm one of the 2 people who in the mid-90s started using another approach called EI curves - a basic mechanical engineering beam theory concept - and its application for distribution of mechanical properties. Perhaps some/most have heard EIs as touted as the end-all approach. Not true. That methodology though more accurate, is also more costly, timely and I (and folks like Tom W., GeraldH, +++) can get the same relative data using zone frequencies for relative comparisons, and of course design iterations, fitting, etc.

 

Let's start w/ conceptualization. For the original XCaliber irons, I wanted a unique performing iron that would allow average golfers to achieve proper launch and spin characteristics for their game but was also different than anything out there. I eval'd my older designs, what was in the mkt., and decided I wanted something w/ a VERY low balance point (an often, very over-looked aspect of design but is a component of launch and spin...) but also a bottom section w/ enough stiffness to not allow too much spin (see the attached spec sheet). After countless hours of personally over-seeing player testing w/ different designs, THEN sending out the ‘finalists” for "blind” testing all over the country w/ “golf nuts”… … and supporters - avoiding me as a "tester influence/bias” which is REAL - a final design was selected and marketed.

 

Now, for the Tour X (heavier) irons this approach needed a lot more consideration because of the inherent dampening properties of carbon fiber (graphite as some think it's incorrectly named...but we'll go w/ that...). My thoughts were that practically ALL heavy, 100% graphite shafts never really made it on Tour UNLESS the Tour player was paid handsomely very low balance point shafts> and/or due to the extra weight of the shafts resulted in very inconsistent shaft-shaft specs from the factories.   But the real major negative feature was that when one uses 105, 125 or more grams of all graphite, the material dampens out SO much  energy that the subjective feel is SO different than steel, that that aspect in itself caused the better gofers to avoid using all-graphite shafts as they were NOT getting the feedback they were used to.

 

So my ultimate goal was to provide golfers used to steel products an alternative that was not 100% graphite - obviously a home-run would be for Tour players, but also for golfers of all abilities (thus the weight categories).

 

So.....what to do? Taking a lesson from an older design I did w/ Art Chou and Titleist for their origin Starship program, I simply thought i needed a new material that could bring up the weight, add structural benefits (stiffness, torsional properties, balance point control to a degree...) w/o having to use so much carbon fiber. After looking at a bunch of different options, i found a material that I could use as a single wrap, or ply around the graphite base structure. Further and to take a page out of Eli Callaway's book...I also REALLY wanted something that was "pleasing different, and demonstrably superior...". T he material (patented) I settled on to design around is a high-strain, woven, structural glass coated with a metallic material (basically an structural aluminum compound), that met those requirements.

 

Truthfully, the initial reactions to my first designs esp. on the 95 gram were not as I would have hoped. I had "the look", but not shafts' performance that I'd put my name on. Using zone frequencies and balance point iterations, the next go-around was astounding and unexpected. I started w/ scratch or better golfers and to a man, all would hit a couple shots, turn-around and say..."what the hell is this...?". The shafts had a "tweener" feel - not really steel, definitely not graphite AND they had the launch characteristics of steel. Honestly, I was flabbergasted...but not swayed until after almost a year was I convinced and released the 95 and 105 gram versions.

 

But hold on...note when looking at the specs and esp. the zone frequencies you'll see a progression of lower end stiffness. BUT, when I was designing the 85 gram version from the 105, to the 95, etc. I made what I thought was maybe a nutty decision to really soften up the shaft at both the upper and lower sections (esp. since the target mkt. was for average to better players perhaps moving from steel and wanted a lighter shaft w/ steel launch characteristics...and looked WAY kule... ... Truthfully again, I got lucky...the very first design on the 85 gram version was freakin' stellar. It's never happened to me before. And truthfully part 3, I'm going to be looking at iterations of the 95 and 105 gram versions to see if that approach might give me other options for different players , and/or improve what I think are already solid designs. Time and your help will tell eh?

 

Finally, in looking at the XCaliber Tour SL (super lite) irons at 65 grams, I decided to use another approach - filament winding instead of sheet wrapped (probably 90%+ of all graphite shafts are sheet-wrapped - imagine making a cigar by wrapping individual leaves around a skinny mandrel; vs. continuously winding around a spinning mandrel). Anyway, all the competitor super lite weight shafts I tested had 2 things in common:

1-   They FELT light, and;

2-   They typically hit the ball way high with a lot of spin even on the stiffer flexes. To "fix" both I coupled a slightly weaker upper, w/ low balance point and a dang stiff lower section unlike any 65 or less gram shafts out there. Note the low balance point etc. on the attached. They work and simply do not feel light....i got lucky again... ...

 

Hope all this helps a bit re: iron designs... Thoughts?

RobinThere has been a lot of questions posed to me re: heavy iron shafts.  And I'm glad those question have been asked.  I can answer those questions specifically how they relate to my own conceptual, design and testing philosophies; and how that rlates to all the XCaliber irons and esp. the new Tour X Series.

 

So here's "primer" if you will on how I come to my initial concepts, then design, testing and of course final selection of a new product.

 

The first thing I've done for you (all) is to provide a spec sheet showing the nominal specs on all the XCaliber irons including the zone frequencies which gives me/us an idea on the distribution of stiffness.

 

BIG note here: There are those who think zone frequencies serve NO purpose for design and shaft-shaft comparisons...an assumption by folks who do NOT design shafts, nor have over 300 Tour wins with their designs. I'm one of the 2 people who in the mid-90s started using another approach called EI curves - a basic mechanical engineering beam theory concept - and its application for distribution of mechanical properties. Perhaps some/most have heard EIs as touted as the end-all approach. Not true. That methodology though more accurate, is also more costly, timely and I (and folks like Tom W., GeraldH, +++) can get the same relative data using zone frequencies for relative comparisons, and of course design iterations, fitting, etc.

 

Let's start w/ conceptualization. For the original XCaliber irons, I wanted a unique performing iron that would allow average golfers to achieve proper launch and spin characteristics for their game but was also different than anything out there. I eval'd my older designs, what was in the mkt., and decided I wanted something w/ a VERY low balance point (an often, very over-looked aspect of design but is a component of launch and spin...) but also a bottom section w/ enough stiffness to not allow too much spin (see the attached spec sheet). After countless hours of personally over-seeing player testing w/ different designs, THEN sending out the ‘finalists” for "blind” testing all over the country w/ “golf nuts”… … and supporters - avoiding me as a "tester influence/bias” which is REAL - a final design was selected and marketed.

 

Now, for the Tour X (heavier) irons this approach needed a lot more consideration because of the inherent dampening properties of carbon fiber (graphite as some think it's incorrectly named...but we'll go w/ that...). My thoughts were that practically ALL heavy, 100% graphite shafts never really made it on Tour UNLESS the Tour player was paid handsomely very low balance point shafts> and/or due to the extra weight of the shafts resulted in very inconsistent shaft-shaft specs from the factories.   But the real major negative feature was that when one uses 105, 125 or more grams of all graphite, the material dampens out SO much  energy that the subjective feel is SO different than steel, that that aspect in itself caused the better gofers to avoid using all-graphite shafts as they were NOT getting the feedback they were used to.

 

So my ultimate goal was to provide golfers used to steel products an alternative that was not 100% graphite - obviously a home-run would be for Tour players, but also for golfers of all abilities (thus the weight categories).

 

So.....what to do? Taking a lesson from an older design I did w/ Art Chou and Titleist for their origin Starship program, I simply thought i needed a new material that could bring up the weight, add structural benefits (stiffness, torsional properties, balance point control to a degree...) w/o having to use so much carbon fiber. After looking at a bunch of different options, i found a material that I could use as a single wrap, or ply around the graphite base structure. Further and to take a page out of Eli Callaway's book...I also REALLY wanted something that was "pleasing different, and demonstrably superior...". T he material (patented) I settled on to design around is a high-strain, woven, structural glass coated with a metallic material (basically an structural aluminum compound), that met those requirements.

 

Truthfully, the initial reactions to my first designs esp. on the 95 gram were not as I would have hoped. I had "the look", but not shafts' performance that I'd put my name on. Using zone frequencies and balance point iterations, the next go-around was astounding and unexpected. I started w/ scratch or better golfers and to a man, all would hit a couple shots, turn-around and say..."what the hell is this...?". The shafts had a "tweener" feel - not really steel, definitely not graphite AND they had the launch characteristics of steel. Honestly, I was flabbergasted...but not swayed until after almost a year was I convinced and released the 95 and 105 gram versions.

 

But hold on...note when looking at the specs and esp. the zone frequencies you'll see a progression of lower end stiffness. BUT, when I was designing the 85 gram version from the 105, to the 95, etc. I made what I thought was maybe a nutty decision to really soften up the shaft at both the upper and lower sections (esp. since the target mkt. was for average to better players perhaps moving from steel and wanted a lighter shaft w/ steel launch characteristics...and looked WAY kule... ... Truthfully again, I got lucky...the very first design on the 85 gram version was freakin' stellar. It's never happened to me before. And truthfully part 3, I'm going to be looking at iterations of the 95 and 105 gram versions to see if that approach might give me other options for different players , and/or improve what I think are already solid designs. Time and your help will tell eh?

 

Finally, in looking at the XCaliber Tour SL (super lite) irons at 65 grams, I decided to use another approach - filament winding instead of sheet wrapped (probably 90%+ of all graphite shafts are sheet-wrapped - imagine making a cigar by wrapping individual leaves around a skinny mandrel; vs. continuously winding around a spinning mandrel). Anyway, all the competitor super lite weight shafts I tested had 2 things in common:

1-   They FELT light, and;

2-   They typically hit the ball way high with a lot of spin even on the stiffer flexes. To "fix" both I coupled a slightly weaker upper, w/ low balance point and a dang stiff lower section unlike any 65 or less gram shafts out there. Note the low balance point etc. on the attached. They work and simply do not feel light....i got lucky again... ...

 

Hope all this helps a bit re: iron designs... Thoughts?

Robin

 

>

[GolfSpy Barbajo]

Wow, you are feeling better!

 

There's a ton to absorb - I know I'll have some questions for you -- gotta digest some of this info. Another brick in the wall of my education 

[superduper]

Wish you a good health Robin,

 

I'm an Xcaliber user (the standard red wood version).   My experience with this shaft is pretty good.  Nothing to complain about.   But I checked golfworks website, there is no new version of the Tour Fairway wood version (the last year model was black).  And I hope you are releasing a new model for the tour version.   I use the fairway tour version and it has lowered my spin a lot.  No more ballooning on my 3 wood.  

 

Also any chance to release an iron steel shaft in the 90g weight range?  

 

Thanks!   

[RobinArthur]

Hey Barbajo...n SuperDuper!

Thx for the kind words...

 

Right now I am not planning on releasing any new Tour FWs as we've had quite a bit of success with the current design.  What changes to the current design did you have in mind?  Higher flight, even lower, etc., etc?.

 

As I was speaking above, my answer to the steel 90-95 gram category is the XCaliber Tour X shafts in the 95 gram version (also available in 85 and 105 gm. versions).  These are really solid performers but again I'm always looking for incremental improvements  in performance over the existing design OR even a new look at completely new offerings in that weight category.  So stay tuned for that...

 

R

[revkev]

Robin - so great to read the technical stuff even though I'm more into theology/philosophy than physics.  The 85 gram iron shaft sounds like a dream!  I also love the pic with your alma mater's hat on.  I was born at Yale New Haven Hospital so now I feel at home.

[RobinArthur]

Hi Father!

Truth be told....i'm a lot more spiritual than technical too......  And I spent a LOT of time at the DUH - Dept. of Undergraduate health w/ basketball and football injuries and w/ me comrades in arms.  I tell ya the campus and NH has changes SO much for the better.  It's such a pleasure visiting there (and trying to remember little things like...."what an amazing room...hey, didn't we have a class in here...?...."

 

Keep in touch.  And if i can help in any way let me know.

 

Blessings to all!!!

Robin 

[MattF]

Robin, just wanted to pop in and say that I'm going to be building a Trouble Out 5 wood and will be using one of your fairway shafts. I'm also toying with the idea of reshafting my 5 hybrid from the FST 90 to your hybrid shaft.

 

Happy to hear you're on the mend.

[RobinArthur]

Hey Matt -

Very kule!  Keep me posted on your results.  Have a great weekend!

R

[That Bob Guy]

Hey Robin,

Wow! It's been 5 months since the above post, and I hope you're feeling that much better.

Wasn't aware you were ill. Good luck going forward. Take care.

[That Bob Guy]

Oops, sorry!

I never thought to pose this question to you on the last post...

My insatiable appetite for all things golf, has taken me to counterbalanced clubs, and therefore, shafts themselves. I've recently ordered a set of Srixon z355 irons, that are counterbalanced. In both graphite and steel, they possess a .362 tip, and a higher balance point shaft. Also, heavier heads. Your thoughts on counterbalancing in general, and these shafts, would be appreciated.