Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I have never seen a Maltby club in real life. I did see a Matlby headcover the other day in a bag on a cart that drove by. I seriously considered chasing him down just to look at the club but decided it really did not make that much difference. From what I surmise, Maltby is all about game improvement clubs. However, I did click the links and they look good.

 

 

 

I am a huge fan of the MPF or Matlby Playablitiy Factor. While I believe it is self serving of him, and Ralph Maltby builds clubs that have a higher rating using his system. It is the only place that compares all irons to each other not just this years model.

 

Driver:      :ping-small:  G425MAX 10.5° -1° Flat on Project X HZRDUS Yellow Handcrafted 65g

Fairway:   :ping-small:  G410 3 wood LST & 5  Wood Flat on :ping-small: Alta CB 65R

                     :ping-small:  G425MAX  7 & 9  Flat on :ping-small: Alta CB 65R

Irons:     :ping-small:  i 500 6-P on True Temper Dynamic Gold

Wedges: :vokey-small: SM8 50°, 54° & 60° on True Temper Dynamic Gold Wedge

Putter:    :cameron-small: Studio Style Newport 1.5

Balls:      :titelist-small: Pro V1X :taylormade-small: TP5 

Shoes:     :footjoy-small:  

Range Finder: :918457628_PrecisionPro: Precision Pro  NX7 Pro

All grips are BestGrips Micro-Perforated

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry to steal your thunder! I honestly never noticed the Xcaliber shafts, but I'll have to look into them. At quick glance, the torque numbers look really nice for those shaft weights.

 

If the numbers between my fairway and the RBZ don't turn out to be significant, I was looking into getting a True Ace Cadence Blue Ultralight 60 since it's a higher flight than my current 3w shaft. Have you tried the True Ace Deathstick? It plays very stiff, which is why I have the R version. I hit my drives about 270 for reference.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have never seen a Maltby club in real life. I did see a Matlby headcover the other day in a bag on a cart that drove by. I seriously considered chasing him down just to look at the club but decided it really did not make that much difference. From what I surmise, Maltby is all about game improvement clubs. However, I did click the links and they look good.

 

 

 

I am a huge fan of the MPF or Matlby Playablitiy Factor. While I believe it is self serving of him, and Ralph Maltby builds clubs that have a higher rating using his system. It is the only place that compares all irons to each other not just this years model.

 

The MPF is pretty seriously contested by other builders like Tom Wishon. That debate was one of the reasons I ended up with Hireko clubs. I have noticed that golfworks doesn't prominently display the MPF anymore. Personally, I've been using Hireko's DSFI for shaft fitting: http://support.hirekogolf.com/customer-support/dynamic-shaft-fitting-addendum-download-free/

 

Here's the 2011 version: http://support.hirekogolf.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/2011SFAchapter5.pdf

 

I will say that if I were to build a new set now though, I would probably go with the KE4 driver/fairway/hybrid over the Acer purely on looks :D. Plus now that I've gotten more comfortable with building clubs, I can really see the benefit of the weight ports.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I honestly never noticed the Xcaliber shafts, but I'll have to look into them. At quick glance, the torque numbers look really nice for those shaft weights.

 

If the numbers between my fairway and the RBZ don't turn out to be significant, I was looking into getting a True Ace Cadence Blue Ultralight 60 since it's a higher flight than my current 3w shaft. Have you tried the True Ace Deathstick? It plays very stiff, which is why I have the R version. I hit my drives about 270 for reference.

 

Those torque numbers are what have me so intrigued; they are designed by Robin Arthur, who designed the ProLite for Grafalloy.

 

I have not tried any True Ace products. Honestly I had never heard of them, until I saw them in your signature.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is the MPF quote from Tom Wishon:

 

Tom Wishon's Opinion on Maltby Playability Factor ( MPF ):

 

Just back from the PCS Show and this was one of the topics of discussion among the clubmakers since GolfWorks does push this on clubmakers. I've stayed pretty low key about this in forums and other public commentary places, but because of your question on our forum and because of some of the total mis information that I heard from clubmakers about this at the PCS Show, it's probably time for me to offer more direct comments.

 

It is certainly a noble venture to attempt to create a ranking method of playability for clubheads, but it must be done on the basis of 1) proper application of ALL Of the possible scientific aspects of a head design which can contribute to playability, and 2) it has to be backed by real performance testing to verify the rankings derived from static measurements of the design parameters of each head.

 

NEITHER are done even close to properly in the MPF.

 

For one, the MPF completely ignores a handful of very important design parameters that have a definite effect on the performance of a clubhead. For one, they ignore the rear CG location of the head, another one they ignore the MOI of the head about the axis of rotation about the shaft, and they also completely ignore the contribution of the face design for off center hit forgiveness, instead putting all of their emphasis for off center hit forgiveness on the MOI of the head about its CG axis. That is just plain poor science on their part and if the industry were to want substatiation of that from other expert engineering sources, Tom Stites who is Nike's designer and Clay Long who is an independent designer currently doing all of the Nicklaus designs have both gone "public" with the same statements of poor application of the wrong scientific principles. Prior to doing NIcklaus' designs, Clay did all of MacGregor's models in the early to mid 90s and all of the Cobra designs in the mid 90s to late 90s.

 

Second is the fact that once the MPF was created on paper, no real hit testing was ever done by GW to verify their on paper premise for playability. Therefore, this system exists strictly in theory, and poor scientific theory at that because of the design parameters which are ignored.

 

So in the most simple terms, the MPF is defintely a worthy project to try to tackle for what it intends to do, but in no way can it be trusted to ever guide clubmakers or golfers into what really would or could be the best clubhead design.

 

TOM

Link to post
Share on other sites

At times, every club in my bag might be a Maltby. My KE4 SSF1 driver has the Xcalibur as does the KE4 fairway wood. I have had a number of people try my driver and they have all been amazed at its feel. On the other hand, I seem to be the only one that likes my Tricept wedges with KBS black nickel wedge shafts. I also play the KE4 hybrid, but that needs to change, I havent liked that club for over a year now and my irons are the Tricept F1s and my backups are C2s.

Nothing helps you find a lost ball better than a provisional hit straight down the middle.

Link to post
Share on other sites

At times, every club in my bag might be a Maltby. My KE4 SSF1 driver has the Xcalibur as does the KE4 fairway wood. I have had a number of people try my driver and they have all been amazed at its feel. On the other hand, I seem to be the only one that likes my Tricept wedges with KBS black nickel wedge shafts. I also play the KE4 hybrid, but that needs to change, I havent liked that club for over a year now and my irons are the Tricept F1s and my backups are C2s.

Which model of Xcaliber do you have and how does it feel? I LOVE my Tricep wedges (this years model). You should try out a Swing Science S800 hybrid. I put it up against a RBZ hybrid yesterday and my S800 killed it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I am a huge fan of the MPF or Matlby Playablitiy Factor. While I believe it is self serving of him, and Ralph Maltby builds clubs that have a higher rating using his system. It is the only place that compares all irons to each other not just this years model.

 

That is what I meant by saying his system was self serving, but at least he bases it on something besides the GD Hot List and advertising dollars.

 

Driver:      :ping-small:  G425MAX 10.5° -1° Flat on Project X HZRDUS Yellow Handcrafted 65g

Fairway:   :ping-small:  G410 3 wood LST & 5  Wood Flat on :ping-small: Alta CB 65R

                     :ping-small:  G425MAX  7 & 9  Flat on :ping-small: Alta CB 65R

Irons:     :ping-small:  i 500 6-P on True Temper Dynamic Gold

Wedges: :vokey-small: SM8 50°, 54° & 60° on True Temper Dynamic Gold Wedge

Putter:    :cameron-small: Studio Style Newport 1.5

Balls:      :titelist-small: Pro V1X :taylormade-small: TP5 

Shoes:     :footjoy-small:  

Range Finder: :918457628_PrecisionPro: Precision Pro  NX7 Pro

All grips are BestGrips Micro-Perforated

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Which model of Xcaliber do you have and how does it feel? I LOVE my Tricep wedges (this years model). You should try out a Swing Science S800 hybrid. I put it up against a RBZ hybrid yesterday and my S800 killed it.

I have the 7 in my driver and the FW in my FW, Ive had them for a couple years. I love the feel especially combined the SSF1 head. I switch back and forth between that and an Adams 9064LS with the RIP shaft. I dont prefer one or the other, I just use whichever is performing better on the range before I play

My tricepts are about a year and a half old (non-comforming).

Nothing helps you find a lost ball better than a provisional hit straight down the middle.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Your comparison of the Swing Science to RBZ hybrids has got my attention. Where did you get yours? They look like they'll only ship to certified fitters.

I got mine from a Swing Science dealer here in southern Indiana. I found a online shop that sold them online about a year ago, but I'd have to look again to find it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The AXE shafts are top notch. I put in more than my fairshare last year.

The SL is a great shaft that will hang with an agressive swing.

If you have a smoother swing an are looking for a bit more distances say for older golfers. The Model 5 is fantastic!

The tour shaft is another truly under rated shafts. this was a great suprise to me in combination with the CT256.

I tested this combination with stronger golfers of varying age and every time the combination produced a better ball flight lower spin and control. For those that have trouble with the hooks, this is it.

 

I have the SL fairway and hybrid coming for the fitting cart and expect great things. I may even put it in one of those adam FW's

 

The Golfworks stuff does play to the golfer in need of improvement BUT there are some truly players stuff in there too. The KE4, forged product is all suprisingly good.

Driver - 44.5" 5.0 flex 10.5 deg ACCRA tour Z GP MCC4+ 1 deg closed

Irons - 5-pw, GW stnd length 5.0 flex same grip 1 deg flat. Type low medium offset cavity back, no diggers

Wedges - 56 and 60 tour grind wedge spinner and mcc4+ grip 2 flat 10 and 8 in bounce

Putter - 33" 3 deg loft 70 lie, lrg slight line slightly toe hang

Ball - truvis

Carried in a Sun Mountain C-130 USA bag - BE PROUD.

HC - LH but 85 is a good number, playing in Ohio.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry to steal your thunder! I honestly never noticed the Xcaliber shafts, but I'll have to look into them. At quick glance, the torque numbers look really nice for those shaft weights.

 

If the numbers between my fairway and the RBZ don't turn out to be significant, I was looking into getting a True Ace Cadence Blue Ultralight 60 since it's a higher flight than my current 3w shaft. Have you tried the True Ace Deathstick? It plays very stiff, which is why I have the R version. I hit my drives about 270 for reference.

 

 

Hey Folks -

I'm a "newbie" to this site but am already enjoying the experience of speaking w/ purists and encouraged that there's some interest in my XCalibers, (and possibly even the "message" I'm trying to convey). If you ever have any questions at all re: mine or reall any shafts, shaft designs, fitting suggestions, heck anything, please let me know and I'll answer asap. And if I cannot, I'll find the answer and eliminate the mktg. drivel. I'm also always available for phone conversations, etc. I really do enjoy this "underdog" role but more importantly, simply trying to help out golfers and club maker sift through all the BS that's out there is fun for me. hell and even as important, I learn just as much from you, no more, than you learn from me and that's very KULE!

Robin

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Folks -

I'm a "newbie" to this site but am already enjoying the experience of speaking w/ purists and encouraged that there's some interest in my XCalibers, (and possibly even the "message" I'm trying to convey). If you ever have any questions at all re: mine or reall any shafts, shaft designs, fitting suggestions, heck anything, please let me know and I'll answer asap. And if I cannot, I'll find the answer and eliminate the mktg. drivel. I'm also always available for phone conversations, etc. I really do enjoy this "underdog" role but more importantly, simply trying to help out golfers and club maker sift through all the BS that's out there is fun for me. hell and even as important, I learn just as much from you, no more, than you learn from me and that's very KULE!

Robin

 

Hi Robin,

 

I have a question: How do you know how much torque you should have in a given shaft (specifically for a 100-105mpb SS)?

 

Thanks,

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

Hi Robin,

 

I have a question: How do you know how much torque you should have in a given shaft (specifically for a 100-105mpb SS)?

 

Thanks,

 

 

Hi -

Sorry for the tardiness of my reply. I've been back east taking care of my Mom (who just turned 80 but is doing GREAT now!!).

 

Torque has been an over-used, and mis-understood mechanical property of a golf shafts since the 90s. Right now, again, it has become a major fitting criteria for a shaft co. and sorry, but the logic surrounding the mktg. is suspect. Folks really get hung up on on the torque values as reported by shaft manufacturers and OEMs and there's two problems w/ that:

 

1. There are NO standards of measurement. This means that company A's shaft may be reported as 3.5 degree, but when measured by company B's methodology, it may be 5 degree.

 

2. The torque values reported are the sum total of the distributed shaft's resistance to twisting along the entire length of the shaft. Let me explain. I assume you're aware that most companies and shaft designers look at say stiffness (and weight) along the entire length of the shaft to help determine performance characteristics (ex. - EI Curves, Zone Frequencies, etc.). Well from a designer's standpoint, from MY design philosophy, torque needs to be considered in the SAME way. So having some reported torque value as the definitive fitting variable w/o considering it from it's distributed properties is not the entire, nor correct picture. To say different....is marketing.

 

SO, answering your question is a bit difficult w/o knowing more about your swing characteristics but here's a couple general guidelines (given one can be confident in the reported torque values):

 

a. Players w/ higher swing speeds (105+) typically require lower torque shafts (3.5 or less).

b. Players w/ higher swing speeds and smooth tempos can use higher torqued shafts but the bottom 20" should not be too soft both flexurally and torsionally.

c. Players w/ higher swing speeds and quick/aggressive tempos should use both a lower overall torqued shaft which also has a stiff lower section and ALSO has more torsional resistance in the lower section.

 

I hope this helps a bit. Thanks for the post.

Robin

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...