Stock vs Premium shafts, from the same OEM

[cnosil]

30 minutes ago, IB_Golfin' said:

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.  

Okay,  Fujikura and TaylorMade are bad and are deceiving customers and have poor ethics.  There have been articles that indicate that manufacturers have done this for a while.  Pretty much every response has indicated that the shafts are different.  What kind of response are you trying to get in this thread?  

[GolfSpy_BNG]

Maybe I haven’t looked close enough but don’t the MCA Tensei CK and CK Pro shafts look almost identical except for the boron tip writing near the tip of the shaft? I did read that the carbon weave extends higher up the shaft but can that be seen without removing the grip?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using MyGolfSpy

 

[IB_Golfin']

14 minutes ago, blackngold_blood said:

Maybe I haven’t looked close enough but don’t the MCA Tensei CK and CK Pro shafts look almost identical except for the boron tip writing near the tip of the shaft? I did read that the carbon weave extends higher up the shaft but can that be seen without removing the grip?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using MyGolfSpy

 

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. 

 

[GolfSpy_BNG]

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. 
 

Ok I get that MCA lists all three on the website but where do you see them listing how the shafts LOOK different?


Sent from my iPhone using MyGolfSpy

[IB_Golfin']

2 hours ago, cnosil said:

Okay,  Fujikura and TaylorMade are bad and are deceiving customers and have poor ethics.  There have been articles that indicate that manufacturers have done this for a while.  Pretty much every response has indicated that the shafts are different.  What kind of response are you trying to get in this thread?  

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.

[NM01]

As stated earlier the larger golfing public has no knowledge about what shafts are after market, what shaft is made for or even what the shaft designs are from low launch low spin to high/high. These golfer also don’t pay attention to iron what’s, buy off the rack base on some combo of brand, loft, looks, golf digest hot list. 
 

The educated golfer knows that there are differences in made for and real deal and can most can tell the difference by paint scheme, logo/identifiers used, and looking at the specs. They tend to get fit and play what works. They have more knowledge and some don’t want stock regardless of its deal deal or not they are going to re-tip a current aftermarket shaft or buy one of the aftermarket shafts. Others are going to choose based on fitting or reviews from others.

As for comparing shafts why would mgs do it specifically for the ventus? Should they do it for each flex in each color? Should they do it for Diamana shafts, the speeder shafts, Tensei ck and pro shafts?

the easiest way to see if there is a difference is to go hit them side by side and see what works for you.

With all that said what if TM told Fujikura they wanted a shaft that had a profile of a,b,c and we want to cal it ventus and will give you X dollars for he name Ventus. Now you have two shafts with the same name and different profiles and since TM owns the name and whatever else Fujikura doesn’t have any of the information on their site for it as a result

[cnosil]

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.

I agree with your post, this is how marketing and the consumer world work. Best answer: as a consumer educate yourself. You asked fujikura and they gave you the straight answer. Most golfers don’t care and just pick up off the shaft clubs. Glad you want to know more. If it seems like too good if a deal it probably is.

[chisag]

1 hour ago, cnosil said:

I agree with your post, this is how marketing and the consumer world work. Best answer: as a consumer educate yourself. Most golfers don’t care and just pick up off the shaft clubs. 

 

... cnosil, I'll take it a step farther. The vast majority of average golfers have no idea what shaft is in their driver and as you stated really don't care. I play as a single and have been paired up with 1000's of strangers and it is extremely rare that any of them posses any equipment knowledge, even really good players. The flip side is most forum golfers, even though a very small percentage of buyers, know many made for shafts have different profiles and sometimes even different materials than the aftermarket shaft. Very few are confused by the TM Ventus thinking it is the same as he aftermarket Ventus since just about every new driver with an aftermarket named shaft has multiple threads on ALL golf forums like "Is the Ventus a real deal shaft?" and are directed to look at the Fuji site and compare specs, if they haven't already. 

[NM01]

Was on TMs website earlier and they are only offering with non velocore the blue 6 and red 5 shafts. In the velocore models they are offering the blue and black 6 and 7 bit no red. Checked TGW to see if it was an option there and no red with velocore.

In case anyone is interested in the specs here is what TM has for the blue with and without velocore and the red

 

[IB_Golfin']

[revkev]

I will say that anytime I’ve called an OEM they have answered what ever question I’ve asked. They almost always get excited that a consumer cares enough about their product to ask.

They aren’t Satan - they care about golf - they are going to make crazy marketing claims to sell product but all of them make crazy good equipment.

Sometimes we forget that.


Sent from my iPhone using MyGolfSpy

[JDHolmes]

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.
 
 

Golfshaftreviews does testing on many different shafts. EI profiles, bend profiles, etc. You do have to pay $10 a year to view all the info. It's been very valuable to me when deciding which shafts I want to play and which ones I need to stay away from.

They do both made for and top of the line shafts.

Sent from my SM-G950U using MyGolfSpy mobile app

[Rickp]

I will say that anytime I’ve called an OEM they have answered what ever question I’ve asked. They almost always get excited that a consumer cares enough about their product to ask.

They aren’t Satan - they care about golf - they are going to make crazy marketing claims to sell product but all of them make crazy good equipment.

Sometimes we forget that.


Sent from my iPhone using MyGolfSpy

Sent from my iPhone using MyGolfSpy

[bens197]

I will say that anytime I’ve called an OEM they have answered what ever question I’ve asked. They almost always get excited that a consumer cares enough about their product to ask.

They aren’t Satan - they care about golf - they are going to make crazy marketing claims to sell product but all of them make crazy good equipment.

Sometimes we forget that.


Sent from my iPhone using MyGolfSpy

This is so true it hurts. Whether it’s to chat or to settle an out of warranty return or repair, they’re in the business of creating promoters.

They don’t want your business, they want to keep it!

[fixyurdivot]

On 2/3/2020 at 10:43 AM, chisag said:

... The short and very general answer is for the majority of average golfers, not only is there a difference between Made For and aftermarket shafts, most MF shafts fit them better than the aftermarket shafts. I use the Matrix Red as an example that Cobra had as stock in their driver several years ago. The Matrix Red profile was what the engineers identified as perfect for their head when hit by the majority of golfers. In testing shafts they found the AF Red's tip was a little too stiff causing a slightly lower trajectory and tended to leak a little right. They tested several prototypes and found that if they softened the flex a little and added more torque for feel and a slightly softer tip, they kept the mid launch mid spin profile but average golfers hit it much better than the stronger aftermarket Matrix Red. I would add most engineers know better players will almost always order a different shaft than stock, so in the case I just mentioned, the better player would not buy the Cobra with the after market Matrix Red anyway but install a shaft they know works for their swing. 

... Obviously not true for every single made for shaft, but the OEMs are in the business of selling drivers. Most golfers know very little, if anything at all concerning shafts, so the OEMs want the average golfer to demo a driver and hit it mid to high, straight and far. Again, most will struggle with an aftermarket shaft that has a stiffer tip and stouter over all profile.  I think the most successful driver ever proves this point. Ely Callaway knew ego's were involved with average male golfers that tended to chose too little loft and a shaft too stiff, so he did something absolutely brilliant. His Big Bertha's had higher lofts than were stamped on the club head, usually 2-3* higher and he took a Regular flex shaft and labeled it a Stiff flex. All of a sudden average golfers were hitting g their driver higher, straighter and farther and there was a waiting list of up to 6 months.  

... And to answer your specific question I play the Tensei CK Orange. As a + index with a smooth transition and a swing speed around 100, the softer overall profile of the CK Orange fits me better than the Pro Orange which is designed for more aggressive hitters/swingers and/or more club head speed. CK Orange's mid launch and low spin is much better for most golfers compared to the low launch and very low spin of the Pro Orange. 

Good input.  When I was getting fitted for the G410 driver there was a part of me that felt I would be getting less of a club if not opting for the optional shafts. The fact was that of the options tested, the Alta CB produced the best numbers and ball flight.  Having purchased both my G400 3w and 5w with the stock shaft, I don't know if another shaft would be better - but I hit these so well I really doubt it.  I don't think it's a reach to say the stock shafts fit the meat of the bell curve, and to the extent they can match that population's needs while carving out a little more profit (through volume), makes sense.  As to "watered down" optional shafts, this is the first I've heard of it.  In any case, only those of you in those extreme ends of the curve would probably notice the difference.

[dlow206]

I had a Ventus Red 5S made for that I sold and I bought a real Ventus Red 5S with Velocore shaft. The real one is much stiffer and helps take the left side out of play for me. Its a significantly better shaft that the made for (at least for my game).

[Sparkee]

Like I b golfin was saying at the start of this thread . All a guy wants to know is , is the shaft I am buying the real deal or not . Never mind getting fit for a brand new driver at a cost of over $1000 after tax , lots of golfers can’t afford to blow the budget on  a driver worth twice the price of the rest of his bag . I have never bought a brand new fitted club or clubs off a fitter . Rather I go to the used golf market where it is quite a bit more economical for some golf budgets. Yes you can get fit into used equipment. Like , does every body buy brand new cars , not really , when you think that as soon as you drive it off the lot you lost 33% of your investment. So a little brand identification is all he is asking for . Ease up boys ! That’s all I have , the only good thing is when you purchase the way I do you learn to do your research , which can be quite tedious sometimes .

[NM01]

9 hours ago, Sparkee said:

Like I b golfin was saying at the start of this thread . All a guy wants to know is , is the shaft I am buying the real deal or not .

Very rarely will one find a made for shaft that has the same paint scheme and markings of the aftermarket version. The first ventus shafts made for tm were an example but this year they changed it however Callaway has kept it. The real deal vs the made for us easy to distinguish because on the manufacturers website the non velocore states that and there no upcharge. Also when looking at pictures of the shaft the aftermarket version has veolocore marked on the tip section.

Lastly all one has to do is not be lazy and do some basic searching on the shaft manufacturers website and compare the pictures there with what’s posted online.

9 hours ago, Sparkee said:

Never mind getting fit for a brand new driver at a cost of over $1000 after tax , lots of golfers can’t afford to blow the budget on  a driver worth twice the price of the rest of his bag .

Nobody is making anyone buy an expensive new driver with an aftermarket shaft. Not to mention just because a shaft is aftermarket doesn’t mean it’s better for everyone or anyone. There are several members here who were fit into the non velocore version of the ventus shaft and the fitter had them hit the aftermarket version and it performed worse. 
 

There are numerous real deal no upcharge shafts that will work for the vast majority of golfers. Other than 1 or 2 PX shafts that are made for all the no upcharge Px shafts offered by club companies are the real deal.

There are a couple aftermarket shafts being offered at no upcharge like the Aldila rogue white 130 and now the tensei 1k black.

The cost of the shaft doenst determine if it’s quality or not. It’s whether the shaft and head it’s placed in are a fit for the golfer swinging it

[GolfSpy_APH]

TXG did a video on this with the Sim and Ventus lines. The one which is a made for and the other which was the velcore lines. Maybe already discussed in this thread, however they made a good point. Yes one is way more expensive then another and they look similar, however it doesn't mean that the made for version isn't going to work better for some than the velcore lines. In the end each golfer is different and for some a stock option will work just as well or maybe better than an upcharged expensive golf shaft. 

[funkyjudge]

6 hours ago, GolfSpy_APH said:

TXG did a video on this with the Sim and Ventus lines. The one which is a made for and the other which was the velcore lines. Maybe already discussed in this thread, however they made a good point. Yes one is way more expensive then another and they look similar, however it doesn't mean that the made for version isn't going to work better for some than the velcore lines. In the end each golfer is different and for some a stock option will work just as well or maybe better than an upcharged expensive golf shaft. 

I have posted exactly this many times when the subject (repeatedly) comes up.  I am both a golf club fitter/dealer, and a shaft fitter/dealer (Fujikura Charter Dealer, Mitsubishi Dealer, UST Mamiya TourSPX Dealer, KBS Certified Fitter, etc.), and I am often privy to "inside information" from these manufacturers.  There is absolutely nothing inherently "wrong" with the "made-for" or co-engineered shafts, and a significant amount of work is done by the shaft manufacturers to make sure that they are providing a good quality shaft for the club manufacturers that fits both the clubhead design parameters and the majority of "average" golfers (the wide middle of the "bell curve").

I've said it before, and I will say it again -- GET PROFESSIONALLY FIT FOR YOUR GOLF EQUIPMENT, INCLUDING THE SHAFTS THAT WILL BE INSTALLED IN THOSE CLUBS!  Many times, the "made for" shaft will work better for you than the vastly more expensive aftermarket shaft that looks similar. When it doesn't, and your budget, ego, etc. say that you just MUST have that expensive aftermarket shaft, go for it!  This being said, I get a lot of golfers who insist before ever beginning a clubfitting session that they need the "real deal" aftermarket shaft model, particularly the Ventus VeloCore or Speeder/Speeder Evolution shafts from Fujikura.  If that is what they already believe that they need, nothing that happens in the fitting session is going to convince them that the stock "made for" shaft is ever going to work well for them. In these instances, I just make sure that I am fitting them to the aftermarket shaft that works best for their swing.

Edited November 15, 2022 by funkyjudge