Jump to content

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


Recommended Posts

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

 

 

 

  • Like 2

 

 

 

What is in my Bag Boy Revolver

Driver:    PXG Gen2 0811x 10.5* set to small + with a VA Composites Nemesys 55s @ 44.75"

Fairway:  :srixon-small: F85 5 wood with a UST Elements Chrome 7F5 @ 41.5"

Irons: Testing the Titleist T200 irons 4-W2 with Project X LZ 5.5 shaft -1/2" and 1* Up

Wedge: Titleist SM7 56* with Project X LZ 5.0 shaft

Putter:  :scotty-cameron-1: Custom Futura X5 flow neck with a UST Frequency Filtered shaft -1" with a SS wristlock grip

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 55
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Enjoy your time here 😀

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 t

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 l

Posted Images

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). 

:titelist-small:  915D3

:titelist-small:  909F2

:titelist-small:  690.CB

:titelist-small:  Vokey SM5

:ping-small:  iWi D66

Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

 

 

Driver: PXG 0811 X+ Proto w/UST Helium 5F4

Wood: TaylorMade M5 5W w/Accra TZ5 +1/2”, TaylorMade Sim 3W w/Aldila rogue white

Hybrid: PXG Gen2 22* w/AD hybrid

Irons: PXG Gen3 0311T w/Nippon modus 120

Wedges: TaylorMade MG2 50*, Tiger grind 56/60

Putter: Scotty Caemeron Super Rat1

Ball: Titleist Prov1

Link to post
Share on other sites
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

:titelist-small:  915D3

:titelist-small:  909F2

:titelist-small:  690.CB

:titelist-small:  Vokey SM5

:ping-small:  iWi D66

Link to post
Share on other sites
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. 

Driver: PXG 0811 X+ Proto w/UST Helium 5F4

Wood: TaylorMade M5 5W w/Accra TZ5 +1/2”, TaylorMade Sim 3W w/Aldila rogue white

Hybrid: PXG Gen2 22* w/AD hybrid

Irons: PXG Gen3 0311T w/Nippon modus 120

Wedges: TaylorMade MG2 50*, Tiger grind 56/60

Putter: Scotty Caemeron Super Rat1

Ball: Titleist Prov1

Link to post
Share on other sites
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. 

:titelist-small:  915D3

:titelist-small:  909F2

:titelist-small:  690.CB

:titelist-small:  Vokey SM5

:ping-small:  iWi D66

Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

  • Like 1

Driver: PXG 0811 X+ Proto w/UST Helium 5F4

Wood: TaylorMade M5 5W w/Accra TZ5 +1/2”, TaylorMade Sim 3W w/Aldila rogue white

Hybrid: PXG Gen2 22* w/AD hybrid

Irons: PXG Gen3 0311T w/Nippon modus 120

Wedges: TaylorMade MG2 50*, Tiger grind 56/60

Putter: Scotty Caemeron Super Rat1

Ball: Titleist Prov1

Link to post
Share on other sites
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. 

:titelist-small:  915D3

:titelist-small:  909F2

:titelist-small:  690.CB

:titelist-small:  Vokey SM5

:ping-small:  iWi D66

Link to post
Share on other sites
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. 

  • Like 1

Driver: PXG 0811 X+ Proto w/UST Helium 5F4

Wood: TaylorMade M5 5W w/Accra TZ5 +1/2”, TaylorMade Sim 3W w/Aldila rogue white

Hybrid: PXG Gen2 22* w/AD hybrid

Irons: PXG Gen3 0311T w/Nippon modus 120

Wedges: TaylorMade MG2 50*, Tiger grind 56/60

Putter: Scotty Caemeron Super Rat1

Ball: Titleist Prov1

Link to post
Share on other sites

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

  • Like 1

 

 

 

What is in my Bag Boy Revolver

Driver:    PXG Gen2 0811x 10.5* set to small + with a VA Composites Nemesys 55s @ 44.75"

Fairway:  :srixon-small: F85 5 wood with a UST Elements Chrome 7F5 @ 41.5"

Irons: Testing the Titleist T200 irons 4-W2 with Project X LZ 5.5 shaft -1/2" and 1* Up

Wedge: Titleist SM7 56* with Project X LZ 5.0 shaft

Putter:  :scotty-cameron-1: Custom Futura X5 flow neck with a UST Frequency Filtered shaft -1" with a SS wristlock grip

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, blackngold_blood said:

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
 

You are now adding variables. All things equal (human swing included), two shafts with the same stiffness profile should have the same end result as long as there is not a drastic difference in torque (several degrees difference, below 5 degrees is not going to really impact club head delivery with exception to maybe extreme cases). Now, differences in feel may impact the way the human loads/delivers the club but now we are talking about a change in human performance, not the performance of the shaft. Also, two shafts that have an identical stiffness profile but only differ in torque (higher modulus/strength material in bias layer = lower torque) are more similar than not regardless of how they feel to the human swinging. 

Also, what I took exception to that started this back and forth was the comment that the two shafts were nothing alike and the only thing that they had in common was the name. That comment was based on feel perception which is very subjective and comments like these continue to perpetuate the myth that high dollar aftermarket shafts are universally better in some way or another than the company's OEM program shafts. 

:titelist-small:  915D3

:titelist-small:  909F2

:titelist-small:  690.CB

:titelist-small:  Vokey SM5

:ping-small:  iWi D66

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, storm319 said:

You are now adding variables. All things equal (human swing included), two shafts with the same stiffness profile should have the same end result as long as there is not a drastic difference in torque (several degrees difference, below 5 degrees is not going to really impact club head delivery with exception to maybe extreme cases). Now, differences in feel may impact the way the human loads/delivers the club but now we are talking about a change in human performance, not the performance of the shaft. Also, two shafts that have an identical stiffness profile but only differ in torque (higher modulus/strength material in bias layer = lower torque) are more similar than not regardless of how they feel to the human swinging. 

Also, what I took exception to that started this back and forth was the comment that the two shafts were nothing alike and the only thing that they had in common was the name. That comment was based on feel perception which is very subjective and comments like these continue to perpetuate the myth that high dollar aftermarket shafts are universally better in some way or another than the company's OEM program shafts. 

No two people swing clubs so yes human factor is a variable.

nobody said they two shafts were based on feel perception. They are different shafts because they use different material. That’s a fact because as you have said they don’t use the 70t prepreg. They all shaft the ventus names and that’s the the commonality like it or not.

A shaft with a 3.8 torque is going to feel different from a 3.1 torque. Depending on the EI profile two shafts with a  3.1 torque will feel different for some. There’s plenty of shafts in the market that share similar specs with torque, weight and even relatively close EI profiles that play different for different swings. 
 

Whether you like it or not there are shafts that share a name from the same company that are built with different materials. 

  • Like 1

Driver: PXG 0811 X+ Proto w/UST Helium 5F4

Wood: TaylorMade M5 5W w/Accra TZ5 +1/2”, TaylorMade Sim 3W w/Aldila rogue white

Hybrid: PXG Gen2 22* w/AD hybrid

Irons: PXG Gen3 0311T w/Nippon modus 120

Wedges: TaylorMade MG2 50*, Tiger grind 56/60

Putter: Scotty Caemeron Super Rat1

Ball: Titleist Prov1

Link to post
Share on other sites
You are now adding variables. All things equal (human swing included), two shafts with the same stiffness profile should have the same end result as long as there is not a drastic difference in torque (several degrees difference, below 5 degrees is not going to really impact club head delivery with exception to maybe extreme cases). Now, differences in feel may impact the way the human loads/delivers the club but now we are talking about a change in human performance, not the performance of the shaft. Also, two shafts that have an identical stiffness profile but only differ in torque (higher modulus/strength material in bias layer = lower torque) are more similar than not regardless of how they feel to the human swinging. 

Also, what I took exception to that started this back and forth was the comment that the two shafts were nothing alike and the only thing that they had in common was the name. That comment was based on feel perception which is very subjective and comments like these continue to perpetuate the myth that high dollar aftermarket shafts are universally better in some way or another than the company's OEM program shafts. 

2 things before I bow out of this one.

 

1. Performance should be solely based on a human swing and not robots. Robots are not swinging the club for you so why do you include them in performance? Why do shafts with the same stiffness profile HAVE to perform the same? The human swing is the main basis of golf and you can't eliminate that because of human error. A shaft's performance is different for everybody and there is nothing wrong with that. The Human variable can not be eliminated when discussing performance, which is why MGS Most Wanted and forum testing include a wide range of golfers of all skill levels.

 

2. You are upset about the comment about them having nothing but name in common but are arguing that they MAY have a similar stiffness profile. Where is the ei chart proving this? Can you post it for us? If it doesn't exist yet then everything you are arguing about the Ventus shaft is opinion based off a completely different shaft, Aldila Rogue since that is the one you named.

 

Sent from my Moto Z3 Play using MyGolfSpy mobile app

 

 

 

  • Like 1

 

 

 

What is in my Bag Boy Revolver

Driver:    PXG Gen2 0811x 10.5* set to small + with a VA Composites Nemesys 55s @ 44.75"

Fairway:  :srixon-small: F85 5 wood with a UST Elements Chrome 7F5 @ 41.5"

Irons: Testing the Titleist T200 irons 4-W2 with Project X LZ 5.5 shaft -1/2" and 1* Up

Wedge: Titleist SM7 56* with Project X LZ 5.0 shaft

Putter:  :scotty-cameron-1: Custom Futura X5 flow neck with a UST Frequency Filtered shaft -1" with a SS wristlock grip

Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

No two people swing clubs so yes human factor is a variable.

nobody said they two shafts were based on feel perception. They are different shafts because they use different material. That’s a fact because as you have said they don’t use the 70t prepreg. They all shaft the ventus names and that’s the the commonality like it or not.

A shaft with a 3.8 torque is going to feel different from a 3.1 torque. Depending on the EI profile two shafts with a  3.1 torque will feel different for some. There’s plenty of shafts in the market that share similar specs with torque, weight and even relatively close EI profiles that play different for different swings. 
 

Whether you like it or not there are shafts that share a name from the same company that are built with different materials. 

By that logic the aftermarket Ventus in X flex is different than the S or R flex because they use different modulus/strength material in certain areas. Many times that is how the shaft OEMs view it but that is not always how it is marketed. 

If two shafts have the same weight, weight distribution, stiffness profile, and relatively similar torque but still end up with a different result, it isn't the shaft that is playing different, it is the human swinging it. You do realize that the materials are a means to an end to hit these target measurables (amongst others), don't you?

:titelist-small:  915D3

:titelist-small:  909F2

:titelist-small:  690.CB

:titelist-small:  Vokey SM5

:ping-small:  iWi D66

Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, storm319 said:

By that logic the aftermarket Ventus in X flex is different than the S or R flex because they use different modulus/strength material in certain areas. Many times that is how the shaft OEMs view it but that is not always how it is marketed. 

If two shafts have the same weight, weight distribution, stiffness profile, and relatively similar torque but still end up with a different result, it isn't the shaft that is playing different, it is the human swinging it. You do realize that the materials are a means to an end to hit these target measurables (amongst others), don't you?

Technically yes they would be different shafts but they all use the same technology of the velocore aka 70t so they have more than the name in common. It’s the underlying prepregs that determine the flex and weight but they use they normally use the same mandrell and overall design. It doesn’t take much to make a stiff an x stiff.

i do realize that the materials are a means to an end. I’ve need to UST Mamiya and saw how they go about their design and shaft making. I’ve been to PX and saw their process to include what they use to design a shaft and how changing materials, flag length, flag orientation and such change the EI profile and other design aspects to include having an even flow blue shaft redesigned based on my feedback of testing the shaft for several weeks prior to going to their facility. I got to watch their main design guy create one off shafts for other guys based on their feedback and what they would like to see in ball flight and feel to include one guy saying he likes the design of a shaft from another brand and that he would like certain aspects of that included in his custom shaft. While there we got to hand roll the shafts ourselves so I have made a shaft using the build spec sheet and laying the flags on the mandrel. 
 

 

Driver: PXG 0811 X+ Proto w/UST Helium 5F4

Wood: TaylorMade M5 5W w/Accra TZ5 +1/2”, TaylorMade Sim 3W w/Aldila rogue white

Hybrid: PXG Gen2 22* w/AD hybrid

Irons: PXG Gen3 0311T w/Nippon modus 120

Wedges: TaylorMade MG2 50*, Tiger grind 56/60

Putter: Scotty Caemeron Super Rat1

Ball: Titleist Prov1

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, blackngold_blood said:

2 things before I bow out of this one.

 

1. Performance should be solely based on a human swing and not robots. Robots are not swinging the club for you so why do you include them in performance? Why do shafts with the same stiffness profile HAVE to perform the same? The human swing is the main basis of golf and you can't eliminate that because of human error. A shaft's performance is different for everybody and there is nothing wrong with that. The Human variable can not be eliminated when discussing performance, which is why MGS Most Wanted and forum testing include a wide range of golfers of all skill levels.

 

2. You are upset about the comment about them having nothing but name in common but are arguing that they MAY have a similar stiffness profile. Where is the ei chart proving this? Can you post it for us? If it doesn't exist yet then everything you are arguing about the Ventus shaft is opinion based off a completely different shaft, Aldila Rogue since that is the one you named.

 

Sent from my Moto Z3 Play using MyGolfSpy mobile app

 

 

 

1) Are you trying to compare the performance difference of the shafts in isolation or also adding in the human variable? When MGS performs their most wanted test they are not isolating the comparison down to a single variable (nor do they claim to be), so that is not an apples to apples comparison. My point is that a human cannot deduce the stiffness profile based on how a shaft feels which is what people were implying (you illustrated this point with your comments on the Aldila Rogue)


"If we use your example of the Aldila Rogue 125MSI and the 110MSI and them have basically the same stiffness profile, they should play the same. I tried them both and they were night and day different for me. The same length and weight 110 felt harsh while the 125 felt significantly smoother and easier to load. So to me I would have guessed that the 110 was stiffer."

In this case it was you the human that were the cause of any difference in performance, not the shaft's stiffness profile. Also, bringing up the Rogue was an example of people jumping to the wrong conclusion based on hype when in reality there was very little difference (especially with the fairly extreme price disparity). But please keep telling yourself whatever you want to justify the added cost as the market needs people to adopt early and often to give the OEMs incentive to release new product every year 🙂

 

2) Have you read anything from Fujikura? This is not my opinion but based on Fuji's comments that the only difference was in the material used in the bias layup which effects torque not stiffness (from there you can deduce that the stiffness profile should be the same if there were no changes to those layups assuming that Fuji's comment is accurate). If you want to say that the shafts felt significantly different to you, that is fine, but stop perpetuating the idea that aftermarket shafts > OEM shafts without objective data. 

:titelist-small:  915D3

:titelist-small:  909F2

:titelist-small:  690.CB

:titelist-small:  Vokey SM5

:ping-small:  iWi D66

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, storm319 said:

1) Are you trying to compare the performance difference of the shafts in isolation or also adding in the human variable? When MGS performs their most wanted test they are not isolating the comparison down to a single variable (nor do they claim to be), so that is not an apples to apples comparison. My point is that a human cannot deduce the stiffness profile based on how a shaft feels which is what people were implying (you illustrated this point with your comments on the Aldila Rogue)


"If we use your example of the Aldila Rogue 125MSI and the 110MSI and them have basically the same stiffness profile, they should play the same. I tried them both and they were night and day different for me. The same length and weight 110 felt harsh while the 125 felt significantly smoother and easier to load. So to me I would have guessed that the 110 was stiffer."

In this case it was you the human that were the cause of any difference in performance, not the shaft's stiffness profile. Also, bringing up the Rogue was an example of people jumping to the wrong conclusion based on hype when in reality there was very little difference (especially with the fairly extreme price disparity). But please keep telling yourself whatever you want to justify the added cost as the market needs people to adopt early and often to give the OEMs incentive to release new product every year 🙂

 

2) Have you read anything from Fujikura? This is not my opinion but based on Fuji's comments that the only difference was in the material used in the bias layup which effects torque not stiffness (from there you can deduce that the stiffness profile should be the same if there were no changes to those layups assuming that Fuji's comment is accurate). If you want to say that the shafts felt significantly different to you, that is fine, but stop perpetuating the idea that aftermarket shafts > OEM shafts without objective data. 

Materials used will affect stiffness T1100 has a different stiffness than 40t which has a different stiffness than 70t. Changing materials can affect one or the other. It boils down to the number of flags used, the material used in each layer, the length of each flag and the orientation of each layer. I’ve seen a shaft made with 12 layers that played to the same stiffness as one with 7 and they used different materials in the build. 

Driver: PXG 0811 X+ Proto w/UST Helium 5F4

Wood: TaylorMade M5 5W w/Accra TZ5 +1/2”, TaylorMade Sim 3W w/Aldila rogue white

Hybrid: PXG Gen2 22* w/AD hybrid

Irons: PXG Gen3 0311T w/Nippon modus 120

Wedges: TaylorMade MG2 50*, Tiger grind 56/60

Putter: Scotty Caemeron Super Rat1

Ball: Titleist Prov1

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I'm done here. OP sorry to hijack your thread. I have no experience with the Ventus 4T and so far the only thing we know is it may or may not be the same "stiffness" as the velocore version while at the same time using different materials. Hope this helps!

Sent from my Moto Z3 Play using MyGolfSpy mobile app

  • Like 1

 

 

 

What is in my Bag Boy Revolver

Driver:    PXG Gen2 0811x 10.5* set to small + with a VA Composites Nemesys 55s @ 44.75"

Fairway:  :srixon-small: F85 5 wood with a UST Elements Chrome 7F5 @ 41.5"

Irons: Testing the Titleist T200 irons 4-W2 with Project X LZ 5.5 shaft -1/2" and 1* Up

Wedge: Titleist SM7 56* with Project X LZ 5.0 shaft

Putter:  :scotty-cameron-1: Custom Futura X5 flow neck with a UST Frequency Filtered shaft -1" with a SS wristlock grip

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

Materials used will affect stiffness T1100 has a different stiffness than 40t which has a different stiffness than 70t. Changing materials can affect one or the other. It boils down to the number of flags used, the material used in each layer, the length of each flag and the orientation of each layer. I’ve seen a shaft made with 12 layers that played to the same stiffness as one with 7 and they used different materials in the build. 

One last time then I am out:

Reference to VeloCore: https://mygolfspy.com/shaft-review-fujikura-ventus/

     "The summary version of which is that Ventus features full-length, pitch 70-ton fiber in the bias layer."

Reference to primary orientations: https://mygolfspy.com/shaft-university-design-101-part-ii/

     "+/- 45 degree orientations (known as the bias layer, fibers across the length of the shaft that affect twisting)" - aka torque

     "0 degree (fibers along the length of the shaft that affect bending)" - aka stiffness

Fujikura's reference to the differences between the different Ventus shafts: GolfWRX (not sure about the MGS forum rules on posting links to a competing forum) & reposted by @zrumble to this thread

     "The STOCK shafts used in the new TaylorMade products is a Ventus part without VeloCore Technology (no Pitch 70 ton or 40 ton in the bias core) that we worked in conjunction with         TM to optimize the performance for a wide range of golfers. Please refer to TaylorMade for specs.

     note: TaylorMade is the ONLY company offering ventus without VeloCore as their stock shaft. And their custom upgrade shafts are the aftermarket versions, hence the upcharge. So if       you see a ventus part at another OEM it is our aftermarket part with VeloCore and carries a $350 MSRP. the only exception is Tour Edge has a Ventus with "4T Core" which is same             construction as VeloCore, but without the $$$ Pitch 70T material. 4T core is all high-mod 40 Ton in the full length bias core."

 

So no need to continually post about generic differences in materials, flags, and orientations because a representative for Fujikura already disclosed the difference between these versions (and if that comment is accurate, the 0 degree orientation that effects stiffness is the same between both versions therefore the stiffness profile should be the same within respective tolerances).

:titelist-small:  915D3

:titelist-small:  909F2

:titelist-small:  690.CB

:titelist-small:  Vokey SM5

:ping-small:  iWi D66

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, storm319 said:

One last time then I am out:

Reference to VeloCore: https://mygolfspy.com/shaft-review-fujikura-ventus/

     "The summary version of which is that Ventus features full-length, pitch 70-ton fiber in the bias layer."

Reference to primary orientations: https://mygolfspy.com/shaft-university-design-101-part-ii/

     "+/- 45 degree orientations (known as the bias layer, fibers across the length of the shaft that affect twisting)" - aka torque

     "0 degree (fibers along the length of the shaft that affect bending)" - aka stiffness

Fujikura's reference to the differences between the different Ventus shafts: GolfWRX (not sure about the MGS forum rules on posting links to a competing forum) & reposted by @zrumble to this thread

     "The STOCK shafts used in the new TaylorMade products is a Ventus part without VeloCore Technology (no Pitch 70 ton or 40 ton in the bias core) that we worked in conjunction with         TM to optimize the performance for a wide range of golfers. Please refer to TaylorMade for specs.

     note: TaylorMade is the ONLY company offering ventus without VeloCore as their stock shaft. And their custom upgrade shafts are the aftermarket versions, hence the upcharge. So if       you see a ventus part at another OEM it is our aftermarket part with VeloCore and carries a $350 MSRP. the only exception is Tour Edge has a Ventus with "4T Core" which is same             construction as VeloCore, but without the $$$ Pitch 70T material. 4T core is all high-mod 40 Ton in the full length bias core."

 

So no need to continually post about generic differences in materials, flags, and orientations because a representative for Fujikura already disclosed the difference between these versions (and if that comment is accurate, the 0 degree orientation that effects stiffness is the same between both versions therefore the stiffness profile should be the same within respective tolerances).

Should be and are the same are two different things. Until you have the EI profiles you are guessing. 
 

The bottom line is fujikura markets the ventus based on velocore technology. When the 70t prepreg is remover any shaft without it is just a ventus in name. It doesn’t matter if the shafts play the same, have the same EI profile or not they are just a shaft using the name ventus. It’s why tm distinguished between ventus red or ventus blue for the no upcharge shaft and have the Ventura red, blue, and black with velocore in the name plus $250 upgrade charge on their site. This is to distinguish they are different. The TEE ventus 4t is also just a ventus name minus the 70t .

Club manufacturers talk with shaft manufacturers to find out what shaft or shafts they will be pushing for the upcoming year and then work with them to on how they can get that line in their club release. They work out price points and then the club manufacturer determines if it will be a stock offering similar to hzrdus smoke green in Callaway and TM or an upcharge shaft. At times like with the ventus, Atmos, pro 2.0 they request a made for shaft. This has been going on for years.

With all that said I’m joining blackngoold and I’m out. 

Driver: PXG 0811 X+ Proto w/UST Helium 5F4

Wood: TaylorMade M5 5W w/Accra TZ5 +1/2”, TaylorMade Sim 3W w/Aldila rogue white

Hybrid: PXG Gen2 22* w/AD hybrid

Irons: PXG Gen3 0311T w/Nippon modus 120

Wedges: TaylorMade MG2 50*, Tiger grind 56/60

Putter: Scotty Caemeron Super Rat1

Ball: Titleist Prov1

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...