Does anyone have experiance with the Fujikura Ventus 4t Core shaft included with the new Tour Edge Exotics EXS 220

[collins_xander]

I cannot find any information about this, from Fujikura and I want to know the specs, they aren't on the Tour Edge website so I don't know how to find them, I emailed the Sales rep for Tour Edge but I haven't gotten a response yet

[RickyBobby_PR]

The specs are right on tour edge’s page. It’s possible it’s a made for tour edge shaft.

 

[zrumble]

Here is the link to the Ventus site, which has the specs at the bottom. https://fujikuragolf.com/woods/ventus

I was lucky enough to hit the new Ventus Blue and Ventus Black at a PGA Super Store in Palm Springs, CA. There was no one else in the store so I hit maybe 10 shafts on 3 different driver heads while chatting to various sales people.

The Ventus Black VeloCore was my favorite shaft of the bunch. It has a very stiff tip, similar to the HZRDUS line, but is softer feeling in the mid- and butt-sections. Subjectively, it really feels like I could load this shaft, and that it gave an extra whip through the ball. Even at my moderate swing speed of 106mph it didn't feel to "board-y", and produced spin numbers in the low 2000s with a 13.5* launch angle. 

For comparison, I also hit the HRZDUS Smoke and Smoke Green shafts. While the numbers were good, they felt like they had no action to them and were not right for my swing.

Edited March 29, 2020 by zrumble
Correction

[RickyBobby_PR]

58 minutes ago, zrumble said:

Here is the link to the Ventus site, which has the specs at the bottom. https://fujikuragolf.com/woods/ventus

I was lucky enough to hit the new Ventus Blue and Ventus Black at a PGA Super Store in Palm Springs, CA. There was no one else in the store so I hit maybe 10 shafts on 3 different driver heads while chatting to various sales people.

The Ventus Black 4T was my favorite shaft of the bunch. It has a very stiff tip, similar to the HZRDUS line, but is softer feeling in the mid- and butt-sections. Subjectively, it really feels like I could load this shaft, and that it gave an extra whip through the ball. Even at my moderate swing speed of 106mph it didn't feel to "board-y", and produced spin numbers in the low 2000s with a 13.5* launch angle. 

For comparison, I also hit the HRZDUS Smoke and Smoke Green shafts. While the numbers were good, they felt like they had no action to them and were not right for my swing.

Unless you are seeing something I’m not seeing the 4t specs aren’t on fujikura’s site. 

[zrumble]

4 hours ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

Unless you are seeing something I’m not seeing the 4t specs aren’t on fujikura’s site. 

You’re right, I did more research on the topic. Both Taylormade and Tour Edge have a “made for” version of the shaft. 

Fujikura quote (from GolfWRX)

"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."

 

Not confusing at all...

[Stinky Putt]

I recently picked up a grey Ventus with 4Tcore in a stiff flex.  I spined it and have been using it in my Ping driver.  My shaft that I have used with this head has been a Kuro Kage TiNi stiff.  Been using that shaft for 2 years.  I believe that Ventus to be stiffer and a bit lower in ball flight.  Will be switching back to the KK in the near future as I like the feel of that shaft and probably know it better.

 

That said, I have also been demoing the real Ventus blue with velocore  stiff in a Mavrik lately.  Probably played 2 rounds and had some range time with it.  My very limited observation is that the real Ventus feels better to me.  Can't really make a head to head comparison as I am using  Ping vs Callaway.  Must say the Mavrik and Ventus is probably longer but it seems I really have to go after the ball hard.  I think the Ventus is a bit to stiff for my 95 - 100 mph swing.  Would like to try ther Ventus in a regular flex but regrettably my club does not carry that shaft in the fitting cart.

 

Am currently playing to a 6 hndcp just for background.

[PlaidJacket]

This is probably an apple to orange comparison....

I bought last years model EXS that came with a MCA Tensei CK 60-S. I didn't go through a fitting per se' as I usually perform - work it out myself. I did hit the club at the shop a little before buying and decided to give it a try anyway. Initially the indoor LM data was ok but not great. Then, outdoors I went. My observations all around were awful. I hated everything about the feel, shot patterns, and flight. I tinkered around with the settings but the EXS was looking like a non-starter. The next day I decided to try the shaft that I'd been playing successfully in my SLDR. I happen to have a spare so I installed the EXS adapter onto the Fujikura Speeder 57-S and it was an amazing change. All of a sudden the EXS came alive. I didn't bother spine'ng the shaft. I did make a few more adjustments with the settings. The EXS is now a fairway machine and I'm sure I'll play it for many years. Moral of the story is - don't rely on LM data for anything more than perhaps a starting point - go no go. If that. I think finding the proper shaft and ideal adjustment of the head for your swing and preferred ball flight is critical. And do all this outdoors. With a little time and patience you can fit yourself easily. 

[Skulled Birdies]

I hit this up on a business trip to Seattle. It's the next driver I'm going to get. I already play their XCG5 3 wood which is super hot. I put it up against the Mavrik and the Sim Driver with the Ventus 4T shaft and my misses were so much tighter and my bombs were easily 8-15 yards longer. Nice load feeling at the top. For me I also feel it was a low spinning shaft. I was averaging a 107-108 SS averaging 1890 rpm. Hitting BOMBS. I want to try it with their HZRDUS Yellow shaft as it is a lighter shaft, not that the Ventus. I tend to do better with lighter driver shafts at my 5'8" 160 lbs frame. 

[null]

As Ian Fraser from TXG says, the only thing these shafts have in common with the real deal Ventus is pain and the the Ventus name. 

Profile and material quality are very different. 

It's a shame fujikura would sell out their flagship product like that 

[storm319]

2 hours ago, jlukes said:

As Ian Fraser from TXG says, the only thing these shafts have in common with the real deal Ventus is pain and the the Ventus name. 

Profile and material quality are very different. 

It's a shame fujikura would sell out their flagship product like that 

According to a rep for Fujikura (quote posted above), the differences in the made for versions are lower modulus prepreg in the bias layup (impacts torque) otherwise the remaining layups are the same. TXG stating that the only commonality is the name is a bit disingenuous (that may be more relevant to Matt’s 120+ mph swing speed but the regular Ventus Blue also isn’t a good fit for him).

What we really need for a true comparison is for someone to profile each shaft at multiple points.

[RickyBobby_PR]

59 minutes ago, storm319 said:

According to a rep for Fujikura (quote posted above), the differences in the made for versions are lower modulus prepreg in the bias layup (impacts torque) otherwise the remaining layups are the same. TXG stating that the only commonality is the name is a bit disingenuous (that may be more relevant to Matt’s 120+ mph swing speed but the regular Ventus Blue also isn’t a good fit for him).

What we really need for a true comparison is for someone to profile each shaft at multiple points.

There’s a significant difference in torque so they will feel different and the biggest difference is there is no velocore technology in the axe for which is the whole purpose and design of the ventus shafts. Without the velocore it’s just another shaft.

@yungkory has provided feedback of both versions.

[storm319]

9 hours ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

There’s a significant difference in torque so they will feel different and the biggest difference is there is no velocore technology in the axe for which is the whole purpose and design of the ventus shafts. Without the velocore it’s just another shaft.

@yungkory has provided feedback of both versions.

Granted the different companies could be measuring torque differently, all 3 are listed between 3 and 4 degrees in stiff flex which is not significant. 

This hype reminds me of the Aldila Rogue launch 5 years ago. So many people claimed that the Rogue Solver 125 MSI was significantly different than the 110 MSI. The reality was that the exotic material was only used in a small section of a single layup that ultimately had no impact on the stiffness profile (Wishon’s profile measurements confirmed that the 125 vs 110 were basically identical from a stiffness standpoint). 

Again, until we see quantitative measurements comparing each model, comparisons are pure conjecture based on perception which is not always accurate (isn’t quantifiable data the foundation of this site?).

[RickyBobby_PR]

1 hour ago, storm319 said:

Granted the different companies could be measuring torque differently, all 3 are listed between 3 and 4 degrees in stiff flex which is not significant. 

This hype reminds me of the Aldila Rogue launch 5 years ago. So many people claimed that the Rogue Solver 125 MSI was significantly different than the 110 MSI. The reality was that the exotic material was only used in a small section of a single layup that ultimately had no impact on the stiffness profile (Wishon’s profile measurements confirmed that the 125 vs 110 were basically identical from a stiffness standpoint). 

Again, until we see quantitative measurements comparing each model, comparisons are pure conjecture based on perception which is not always accurate (isn’t quantifiable data the foundation of this site?).

The Taylormade version of the ventus has a torque of 3.8 for the blue 6s and the velocore version has a torque if 3.1. Those will feel significantly different.  A .5 difference in torque will change the feel and I am speaking form experience of have a ef blue and a one of of that shaft with a higher .5 higher torque. 
 

The shafts by using different prepregs also makes the shafts different. It’s no different than the pro 2.0 and the pro 2.0 tour spec as well as atmos blue and atmos blue tour spec from fujikura. Once the velocore is removed from the shaft then it is no longer a Ventus other than name. From what I’ve heard fujikura sold the name name to TM. Usually what happens with made for shafts is the club manufacturer reaches out to a shaft manufacturer and tells the what they want a shaft to do, the shaft manufacturer then uses their design sheets to plug in a bunch of different values and materials until they get the specs they are looking for. Would be surprised if something different happened here and for the Tour edge version.

i have a ventus blue 6s and it plays firm and very tip stiff. That is not the type of play that a club manufacturer would put in a stock shaft. The purpose of a stock shaft is something that will match a wide variety of golfers and the stock shafts play soft and tend to promote high launch and spin which is what most average golfers need.  
 

Not to promote other sites but there is data on wrx for the tm made for and the real deal. Most of the higher swing speed players have said that the made for is soft and high spin compared to the real deal. 

Edit: also the 4t core doesn’t use the red,blue, black name of the real deal and tm made for, which is an indication it’s a different shaft from the tm and real deal shafts

[storm319]

10 hours ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

The Taylormade version of the ventus has a torque of 3.8 for the blue 6s and the velocore version has a torque if 3.1. Those will feel significantly different.  A .5 difference in torque will change the feel and I am speaking form experience of have a ef blue and a one of of that shaft with a higher .5 higher torque. 
 

The shafts by using different prepregs also makes the shafts different. It’s no different than the pro 2.0 and the pro 2.0 tour spec as well as atmos blue and atmos blue tour spec from fujikura. Once the velocore is removed from the shaft then it is no longer a Ventus other than name. From what I’ve heard fujikura sold the name name to TM. Usually what happens with made for shafts is the club manufacturer reaches out to a shaft manufacturer and tells the what they want a shaft to do, the shaft manufacturer then uses their design sheets to plug in a bunch of different values and materials until they get the specs they are looking for. Would be surprised if something different happened here and for the Tour edge version.

i have a ventus blue 6s and it plays firm and very tip stiff. That is not the type of play that a club manufacturer would put in a stock shaft. The purpose of a stock shaft is something that will match a wide variety of golfers and the stock shafts play soft and tend to promote high launch and spin which is what most average golfers need.  
 

Not to promote other sites but there is data on wrx for the tm made for and the real deal. Most of the higher swing speed players have said that the made for is soft and high spin compared to the real deal. 

Edit: also the 4t core doesn’t use the red,blue, black name of the real deal and tm made for, which is an indication it’s a different shaft from the tm and real deal shafts

Again, subjective perception is not a useful comparison. Without consistent objective measurements comparison is pure conjecture.

As for the Fuji tour spec comparison, do you know for a fact that the difference between the two is down to a single bias layup with everything else being the same? Also keep in mind that Fuji has actually released past tour spec models that were in fact softer than the regular version (that is based on the butt and top measurements on their actual site). 

As for stock shafts with stiff tips, there have been several of examples from the big OEMs in recent years (Matrix HD6/PX HZRDS Yellow for TM, Aldila Rogue Silver 110 MSI/Rogue MAX for Titleist, etc). The days of offering a single universal stock shaft in an attempt to cover a wide range of swings is all but dead, most big OEMs have adopted a model of offering multiple options targeted at different demographics to provide more choices which is good for everyone. 

Next on the Ventus color usage, none of the versions have the color listed on the actual shaft graphics. TEE likely doesn’t list “blue” on the website because that is the only version they offer (TM has a lighter weight red option). 

Lastly, if you have a link or reference to consistent profile measurements of these shafts so that we can see the objective differences it would be greatly appreciated.

[RickyBobby_PR]

19 minutes ago, storm319 said:

Again, subjective perception is not a useful comparison. Without consistent objective measurements comparison is pure conjecture.

As for the Fuji tour spec comparison, do you know for a fact that the difference between the two is down to a single bias layup with everything else being the same? Also keep in mind that Fuji has actually released past tour spec models that were in fact softer than the regular version (that is based on the butt and top measurements on their actual site). 

As for stock shafts with stiff tips, there have been several of examples from the big OEMs in recent years (Matrix HD6/PX HZRDS Yellow for TM, Aldila Rogue Silver 110 MSI/Rogue MAX for Titleist, etc). The days of offering a single universal stock shaft in an attempt to cover a wide range of swings is all but dead, most big OEMs have adopted a model of offering multiple options targeted at different demographics to provide more choices which is good for everyone. 

Next on the Ventus color usage, none of the versions have the color listed on the actual shaft graphics. TEE likely doesn’t list “blue” on the website because that is the only version they offer (TM has a lighter weight red option). 

Lastly, if you have a link or reference to consistent profile measurements of these shafts so that we can see the objective differences it would be greatly appreciated.

Nobody other than the designers and people making the shafts will now why the difference are in how many flags layers are different or how the are placed on the mandrel, that’s proprietary information. A place like golfshaftreviews might have the EI profile for the real deal and the made for versions of various shafts. What I do know is that the TM made for shaft is using lower end prepreg and doesn’t have the velocore technology which is why when you go on TMs site and customize the driver you ba the choice of the velocore shaft for $250 upgrade of the made for with out that for no upcharge. Also the real deal has velocore printed near the tip and the made for doesn’t. As for the 4t core the fact you can buy it new for $120 on eBay indicates it lacks the the velocore technology.

grpahite allows shaft brands to do a lot of things with how shafts play from feel, laugh, spin thru the use of the materials used how they are placed on the mandrel and the length and angle of the cut. So fujikura could get  4t core to play similar to the real deal without using higher end materials. I watched one brand design a one off shaft play like a shaft from another another brand. 

Not even sure what you are trying to say in your second paragrpah. 
 

for the color the color doesn’t have to be listed on the shaft each shaft is actually colored the same as the name this goes for both the real deal and tm made for and the tour edge is a different color completely.

I don’t care about shaft EI profiles so I haven’t spent the $10 on golfshaftreviews but if you want to see if they have the differences you can do so. 

[storm319]

8 minutes ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

Nobody other than the designers and people making the shafts will now why the difference are in how many flags layers are different or how the are placed on the mandrel, that’s proprietary information. A place like golfshaftreviews might have the EI profile for the real deal and the made for versions of various shafts. What I do know is that the TM made for shaft is using lower end prepreg and doesn’t have the velocore technology which is why when you go on TMs site and customize the driver you ba the choice of the velocore shaft for $250 upgrade of the made for with out that for no upcharge. Also the real deal has velocore printed near the tip and the made for doesn’t. As for the 4t core the fact you can buy it new for $120 on eBay indicates it lacks the the velocore technology.

grpahite allows shaft brands to do a lot of things with how shafts play from feel, laugh, spin thru the use of the materials used how they are placed on the mandrel and the length and angle of the cut. So fujikura could get  4t core to play similar to the real deal without using higher end materials. I watched one brand design a one off shaft play like a shaft from another another brand. 

Not even sure what you are trying to say in your second paragrpah. 
 

for the color the color doesn’t have to be listed on the shaft each shaft is actually colored the same as the name this goes for both the real deal and tm made for and the tour edge is a different color completely.

I don’t care about shaft EI profiles so I haven’t spent the $10 on golfshaftreviews but if you want to see if they have the differences you can do so. 

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).

[GolfSpy_BNG]

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).

I think you are getting too hung up on stiffness similarities. 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. Thus creating much better launch, spin, and dispersion with the 125. Again this is just my experience with them. Yours could be completely different.

Also the materials can create a different feel which can lead to a golfer deliver the club slightly different this creating different launch, spin, etc. Some golfers are very sensitive to how a shaft feels and others aren't. Machines are great for finding equipment that MAY be similar but the only way to know whether the made for Ventus ™, Ventus 4T (Tour Edge), and the Ventus Velocore is to try them yourself.

 

Everybody seems to get so caught up with numbers for everything they forget that the numbers are only a starting point.

 

Sent from my Moto Z3 Play using MyGolfSpy mobile app

 

 

 

[RickyBobby_PR]

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. 

 

[RickyBobby_PR]

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.

 

[storm319]

2 hours ago, blackngold_blood said:

I think you are getting too hung up on stiffness similarities. 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. Thus creating much better launch, spin, and dispersion with the 125. Again this is just my experience with them. Yours could be completely different.

Also the materials can create a different feel which can lead to a golfer deliver the club slightly different this creating different launch, spin, etc. Some golfers are very sensitive to how a shaft feels and others aren't. Machines are great for finding equipment that MAY be similar but the only way to know whether the made for Ventus , Ventus 4T (Tour Edge), and the Ventus Velocore is to try them yourself.

 

Everybody seems to get so caught up with numbers for everything they forget that the numbers are only a starting point.

 

Sent from my Moto Z3 Play using MyGolfSpy mobile app

 

 

 

On the other hand, many people get over obsessed with a certain feel and end up with a less than optimal end result. If you weigh feel higher in importance than other measurable parameters that is fine but you will be hard pressed to find a good club fitter that will place feel above stiffness profile, weight, and weight distribution in the hierarchy of importance.

[GolfSpy_BNG]

On the other hand, many people get over obsessed with a certain feel and end up with a less than optimal end result. If you weigh feel higher in importance than other measurable parameters that is fine but you will be hard pressed to find a good club fitter that will place feel above stiffness profile, weight, and weight distribution in the hierarchy of importance.

You can't quantify feel like the other parameters you mention. It is extremely personal. Some people try to use torque values to help but that isn't exactly the end all be all of feel.

If you are looking for an optimal end result, YOU need to try/demo the shafts personally for yourself instead of looking at ei profiles. When you go to a fitting, the fitter doesn't break out his Wishon software and say you need to only try these shafts since they are similar in profile. You try everything because each will have a slightly different feel (due to different materials, etc) and can greatly influence how you deliver the club to the ball.

 

Again all these numbers are starting points, that is it. You still have to try them yourself to see the differences for you.

 

Also if you are using the ei profiles to try to save money by getting a shaft that is cheaper but similar to what you were fitted for, you arent going for optimal numbers anyways.

 

Sent from my Moto Z3 Play using MyGolfSpy mobile app

 

 

 

[storm319]

On 4/26/2020 at 1:21 PM, blackngold_blood said:

You can't quantify feel like the other parameters you mention. It is extremely personal. Some people try to use torque values to help but that isn't exactly the end all be all of feel.

If you are looking for an optimal end result, YOU need to try/demo the shafts personally for yourself instead of looking at ei profiles. When you go to a fitting, the fitter doesn't break out his Wishon software and say you need to only try these shafts since they are similar in profile. You try everything because each will have a slightly different feel (due to different materials, etc) and can greatly influence how you deliver the club to the ball.

 

Again all these numbers are starting points, that is it. You still have to try them yourself to see the differences for you.

 

Also if you are using the ei profiles to try to save money by getting a shaft that is cheaper but similar to what you were fitted for, you arent going for optimal numbers anyways.

 

Sent from my Moto Z3 Play using MyGolfSpy mobile app

 

 

 

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. 

Now when it comes to fitting, comparison of stiffness profiles is incredibly important from an efficiency standpoint. How many people are really going to walk into Club Champion and try every shaft model they have? Ain’t no one got time for that! Let’s say you find combo that works for ball speed and relative launch but want to try and reduce spin by a couple hundred rpms. You could try a bunch of shafts across multiple companies hoping for a similar shaft with a bit stiffer tip, but you could waste a lot of time testing (not to mention getting fatigued) based on OEM qualitative descriptors for the shafts stiffness profile. Having a tool that provides a quantitative comparison of can identify and narrow the alternatives (even Titleist’s online tool limited to undisclosed butt and tip frequency is better than nothing). 

[RickyBobby_PR]

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.

 

 

[storm319]

1 hour ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

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.

 

 

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:

https://fujikuragolf.com/education/design-101-part-ii

[RickyBobby_PR]

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:

https://fujikuragolf.com/education/design-101-part-ii

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. 

[storm319]

25 minutes ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

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. 

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. 

[RickyBobby_PR]

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.

[storm319]

Just now, RickyBobby_PR said:

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.

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. 

[RickyBobby_PR]

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. 

[GolfSpy_BNG]

It isn't mistaking feel for performance. Just because a shaft feels good to a person doesn't mean it is the right fit performance wise. I stated that the difference in feel between shafts can lead to a difference in how a person delivers the club to the ball. If you feel a shaft is too stiff when you swing you may try to swing too hard and vise versa. If a shaft feels to whippy you may try to hang back a little to help close or open the face. The two shafts could be very close on the ei chart but still drastically different due to materials used. You hear it all the time in reviews. It is the reason there are so many different shafts on the market as well as in each category of shafts.
Now as far as if the TM Ventus, Ventus 4T, and Ventus Velocore are the same, how is anybody wrong saying they aren't the same shaft? They use different materials, 70 ton vs 40 ton vs whatever TM uses. Some of the materials are the same but not all of them therefore they are different. Stiffness profiles could be similar but that doesn't make them the same or even mean they will perform similarly.

Sent from my Moto Z3 Play using MyGolfSpy mobile app