Jump to content

Why the RBZ fairway is long


Recommended Posts

Our Sponsors

But here is my take on this whole gaining 17 yards on a fairway wood. Taking nothing else into account other than loft and length. If I hit a 52* 35.5" wedge 100 yards, then with the same hand speed, I would hit a 9.5* 45" driver 251 yards. A 15* 43" 3 wood would be 225 a 19* 41" Hybrid is 202 and the 4 iron is 184. Let us assume that we have a12 yard increase with each club. This leaves the 5-p the following, 172, 160, 148, 136, 124, 112.

 

I'm with you on the overall theory of your post but I did just want to touch on this bit. Gaps like this don't actually apply to most amateurs. When you talk to a number of custom builders (and even some OEM guys) the distance gaps for an average player start growing smaller for anything larger then a 5 iron. That's pretty much the magic length where diminishing returns kick in. It's also why you see a lot of fitters recommending things like going from a 18/19 hybrid right to a 24 and leaving out the 21 altogether (and also why someone can go from a 5 iron to a 3/4 hybrid despite the increased length, head size and COG change). The better the ball striker the less this applies but I've seen some impressively good ball striking players pull out clubs from the set since they serve no gapping purpose.

 

More on topic I'm partially with JBones in that I think higher speed players are going to see a large difference. However I also disagree with the off the rack comment. My experience with them so far is that your once a monther who pulls it off the rack is seeing more distance gains then the fitted player regardless of how good the fitted player is. The slot and shaft pairing on both the RBZ and F12 seem to work as a fairly good combo for anyone looking for an off the rack distance gain.

My personal experience is that it's not longer then various other FW's when fitted. I was getting just as much from a fitted F12 and signifigantly more then both of them with a fitted i20.

I laught at your claims to fight a zombie apocalypse when most of you can't stand up to a Spider

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 52
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I'm with you on the overall theory of your post but I did just want to touch on this bit. Gaps like this don't actually apply to most amateurs. When you talk to a number of custom builders (and even some OEM guys) the distance gaps for an average player start growing smaller for anything larger then a 5 iron. That's pretty much the magic length where diminishing returns kick in. It's also why you see a lot of fitters recommending things like going from a 18/19 hybrid right to a 24 and leaving out the 21 altogether (and also why someone can go from a 5 iron to a 3/4 hybrid despite the increased length, head size and COG change). The better the ball striker the less this applies but I've seen some impressively good ball striking players pull out clubs from the set since they serve no gapping purpose.

 

More on topic I'm partially with JBones in that I think higher speed players are going to see a large difference. However I also disagree with the off the rack comment. My experience with them so far is that your once a monther who pulls it off the rack is seeing more distance gains then the fitted player regardless of how good the fitted player is. The slot and shaft pairing on both the RBZ and F12 seem to work as a fairly good combo for anyone looking for an off the rack distance gain.

My personal experience is that it's not longer then various other FW's when fitted. I was getting just as much from a fitted F12 and signifigantly more then both of them with a fitted i20.

 

True the reason I have this information in the first place is because while I was striking my 3 and 4 irons beautifully, I really did not get a consistant distance with them. I would see a well stuck 3 iron travel 220 and then hit is just as well and it would go 180. They were so subject to wind and weather and me that is was rediculous. It was too frustrating when you do nothing wrong, well, I did do somethings wrong. I have been playing around with different shaft lengths and lofts trying to get the gaps filled. And have come up with a 24* and a 19* hybrid and 15.5* 3 wood. I will still put the 3 and 4 back in the bag when it is dry and windy but on a regular basis it is these hybrids. It took a bit go get over ego wise but while I have heard, "Great shot." I have never heard any one say, "Great shot but that was a hybrid." I am sure that most of it is mental. I have seem to want to overswing with long irons, and fairwaymetals more so than hybrids so I do not make as consistant contact.

 

Driver:      :mizuno-small:  ST190G on Fujikura ATMOS Black

Fairway:   :mizuno-small:  ST190TS 15° on Fujikura ATMOS Black

Hybrids     :mizuno-small:  CLK 22 & 25 (set to 20° & 23°) on Fujikura SPEEDER

Irons:     :mizuno-small:  MP5 5-P on True Temper Dynamic Gold

Wedges: :mizuno-small: MP-T5 52*, 56* & 60* on True Temper Dynamic Gold Wedge

Putter:    :cameron-small: 2018 Select Newport 2

Balls:      :titelist-small: Pro V1X

Shoes:     :footjoy-small:

Range Finder: Precision Pro  NX7 Pro

All grips are BestGrips Micro-Perforated

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

hey guys,

 

so im back from the golf shop and i hit it side by with my g15 and i noticed a 15 yard gain actually(off the rack mind u) but the thing abt the RBZ is that its longer by abt 1/4-1/2 inches and i was finding it hard to get good contact consistently. when i hit it well it went longer but when i was missing i missed left of the centre line by quite a bit(10-15 yards offline) .

 

Im sure if i get fitted with the right shaft and length ill be gaining good distance with some practice but for the price right now im not sure the gains are so huge that it warrants an equipment change.

 

Also i compared the Rbz standard model in the stiff flex against my Vr pro, all i can say is that i wasnt impressed because i lost some distance. i tried the Rbz in the 10.5 stiff and the ball was ballooning, so we took it the setting to lower and i was hitting it much straighter launching 13-14 degrees but the spin was too much. i guess the Tp version might be better but even the guy at the shop said the Vr is a good driver and there really isnt any reason to change to the RBZ.

Taylormade RBZ2 TP 9.5 Fuel 60

Ping i20 3 wood Aldila Nv

Adams Dhy 18*

Mizuno Mp59 4-p KBS Tour S

Vokey 50* 55* 60*

Scotty Cameron Select Newport 1.5

Ball - Z star XV

Oakley Stand Bag

Link to post
Share on other sites

hey guys,

 

so im back from the golf shop and i hit it side by with my g15 and i noticed a 15 yard gain actually(off the rack mind u) but the thing abt the RBZ is that its longer by abt 1/4-1/2 inches and i was finding it hard to get good contact consistently. when i hit it well it went longer but when i was missing i missed left of the centre line by quite a bit(10-15 yards offline) .

 

Im sure if i get fitted with the right shaft and length ill be gaining good distance with some practice but for the price right now im not sure the gains are so huge that it warrants an equipment change.

 

Also i compared the Rbz standard model in the stiff flex against my Vr pro, all i can say is that i wasnt impressed because i lost some distance. i tried the Rbz in the 10.5 stiff and the ball was ballooning, so we took it the setting to lower and i was hitting it much straighter launching 13-14 degrees but the spin was too much. i guess the Tp version might be better but even the guy at the shop said the Vr is a good driver and there really isnt any reason to change to the RBZ.

 

I definitely agree that the RBZ driver was nothing to write home about.

 

I'd say 15 yards gain for the fairway wood can't be attributed only to the .5" increase in length since I only notice about 5mph SS gain per inch when I choke down on my driver. Thanks for adding your results.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I definitely agree that the RBZ driver was nothing to write home about.

 

I'd say 15 yards gain for the fairway wood can't be attributed only to the .5" increase in length since I only notice about 5mph SS gain per inch when I choke down on my driver. Thanks for adding your results.

 

i agree the Rbz is a good head especially with the compression channel in there. but perhaps of the shaft length i wasnt able to gain consistent contact and that made me hook some shots left. with the right shaft im sure i can hit it long like the G15 but theres nothing really wrong with the g15 right now so ill wait for them to say u can hit the 5 green from the parking lot and then ill go try it again

Taylormade RBZ2 TP 9.5 Fuel 60

Ping i20 3 wood Aldila Nv

Adams Dhy 18*

Mizuno Mp59 4-p KBS Tour S

Vokey 50* 55* 60*

Scotty Cameron Select Newport 1.5

Ball - Z star XV

Oakley Stand Bag

Link to post
Share on other sites

hey guys,

 

so im back from the golf shop and i hit it side by with my g15 and i noticed a 15 yard gain actually(off the rack mind u) but the thing abt the RBZ is that its longer by abt 1/4-1/2 inches and i was finding it hard to get good contact consistently. when i hit it well it went longer but when i was missing i missed left of the centre line by quite a bit(10-15 yards offline) .

 

Im sure if i get fitted with the right shaft and length ill be gaining good distance with some practice but for the price right now im not sure the gains are so huge that it warrants an equipment change.

 

Also i compared the Rbz standard model in the stiff flex against my Vr pro, all i can say is that i wasnt impressed because i lost some distance. i tried the Rbz in the 10.5 stiff and the ball was ballooning, so we took it the setting to lower and i was hitting it much straighter launching 13-14 degrees but the spin was too much. i guess the Tp version might be better but even the guy at the shop said the Vr is a good driver and there really isnt any reason to change to the RBZ.

 

 

We have been discussing the metalurgy C455 vs 17-4 of the face of the fairway woods, The Ping is 17-4. Pehaps the face metalurgy does make a significant difference compared to a non Carpenter Steel face. In my test of the RBZ I found it to out preform the Ping and Nike and some others non Carpenter Steel, but not the Titleist and Callaway which are both Carpenter Steel..

 

Driver:      :mizuno-small:  ST190G on Fujikura ATMOS Black

Fairway:   :mizuno-small:  ST190TS 15° on Fujikura ATMOS Black

Hybrids     :mizuno-small:  CLK 22 & 25 (set to 20° & 23°) on Fujikura SPEEDER

Irons:     :mizuno-small:  MP5 5-P on True Temper Dynamic Gold

Wedges: :mizuno-small: MP-T5 52*, 56* & 60* on True Temper Dynamic Gold Wedge

Putter:    :cameron-small: 2018 Select Newport 2

Balls:      :titelist-small: Pro V1X

Shoes:     :footjoy-small:

Range Finder: Precision Pro  NX7 Pro

All grips are BestGrips Micro-Perforated

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

We have been discussing the metalurgy C455 vs 17-4 of the face of the fairway woods, The Ping is 17-4. Pehaps the face metalurgy does make a significant difference compared to a non Carpenter Steel face. In my test of the RBZ I found it to out preform the Ping and Nike and some others non Carpenter Steel, but not the Titleist and Callaway which are both Carpenter Steel..

 

discussing only bout the head itself i definitely find that the Ping and the RBZ felt diff, there was more pop and the mishits on the rbz went equally far as my Ping flush shot- the only problem was it was goin 15 yards offline so i might end up in deeper trouble if im not careful. that being said i wld attribute my problems with control to the shaft firstly because the stock shaft is kinda rubbish and it is also longer which i wld take some time to get used to.

 

all in all my conclusion for the day was , "how the hell is it goin so far when im missing the sweet spot by this much?"

 

ill defo think abt trying the Rbz tour maybe w the better shaft i might be able to control it better

Taylormade RBZ2 TP 9.5 Fuel 60

Ping i20 3 wood Aldila Nv

Adams Dhy 18*

Mizuno Mp59 4-p KBS Tour S

Vokey 50* 55* 60*

Scotty Cameron Select Newport 1.5

Ball - Z star XV

Oakley Stand Bag

Link to post
Share on other sites

discussing only bout the head itself i definitely find that the Ping and the RBZ felt diff, there was more pop and the mishits on the rbz went equally far as my Ping flush shot- the only problem was it was goin 15 yards offline so i might end up in deeper trouble if im not careful. that being said i wld attribute my problems with control to the shaft firstly because the stock shaft is kinda rubbish and it is also longer which i wld take some time to get used to.

 

all in all my conclusion for the day was , "how the hell is it goin so far when im missing the sweet spot by this much?"

 

ill defo think abt trying the Rbz tour maybe w the better shaft i might be able to control it better

 

It's definitely interesting that even though you didn't like the feel of the club, you saw distance gains. I wonder how much better you would hit a club that felt right to you.

 

I am convinced at this point that I should factor in the type of metal a club face is made from when picking out clubs, especially fairways and hybrids (since COR is a wash on all drivers at this point). It's honestly something I hadn't thought much about other than forged vs cast. I'll need to try out the Diablo irons sometime since they have a carpenter steel face.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The rule is the COR or coefficient of restitution or measurement of the springlike effect of the ball off of the club face. It includes all club faces, drivers, woods, hybrids, irons, wedges, putters. Of course the driver was the one that ran afoul of the rule. Specifically the Callaway ERC II and Taylormade made the R500 shortly after, thinking the USGA would raise the limit. The technology availible at the time could only make drivers that way but to keep these manufactures from finding a loop hole they simply said club face and did not limit it to drivers.

 

I am not even sure if they had hybrids then as we know them. You certainly did not have a couple in your bag in 2001 or 2002. You may have had a driving iron or an Adams Tight Lies fairway wood.

 

I had the Adams. You did not want to hit that out of a fluffy lie. I damned near lost my right ear one time when the Adams went under it. I never hit that club again. It broke took the ear piece off my glasses, knocked my cap off, acually took some hair off the side of my head, and I never saw it. It scared the crap out of me.

 

Driver:      :mizuno-small:  ST190G on Fujikura ATMOS Black

Fairway:   :mizuno-small:  ST190TS 15° on Fujikura ATMOS Black

Hybrids     :mizuno-small:  CLK 22 & 25 (set to 20° & 23°) on Fujikura SPEEDER

Irons:     :mizuno-small:  MP5 5-P on True Temper Dynamic Gold

Wedges: :mizuno-small: MP-T5 52*, 56* & 60* on True Temper Dynamic Gold Wedge

Putter:    :cameron-small: 2018 Select Newport 2

Balls:      :titelist-small: Pro V1X

Shoes:     :footjoy-small:

Range Finder: Precision Pro  NX7 Pro

All grips are BestGrips Micro-Perforated

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's definitely interesting that even though you didn't like the feel of the club, you saw distance gains. I wonder how much better you would hit a club that felt right to you.

 

I am convinced at this point that I should factor in the type of metal a club face is made from when picking out clubs, especially fairways and hybrids (since COR is a wash on all drivers at this point). It's honestly something I hadn't thought much about other than forged vs cast. I'll need to try out the Diablo irons sometime since they have a carpenter steel face.

 

yeh mate, i really hated how the ball felt off the face when i knew it was off centre n i pulled it 20yards left. but it was really amazing that it went the same distance as what i was hitting my g15 with. the problem is jst i am not able to replicate a flush strike on the RBZ.

i myself am curious if i have a week or so to spend wth the rbz wld i be able to hit it as far as my driver. some ppl gain up to 47 yards with it. if it does it basically means i have another club to hit from 270 yards out, i wld definitely be able to hit long par 5s in 2. but it gets to the stage i wld need another hybrid to fill in the 220 gap and throw my trusty 50 degree wedge out of the bag . so it begs the question is it really necessary to hit a 3 wood as long as ur driver, if ur game requires u to hit over 250 frm the fairway all the time , go ahead and bag the Rbz.

 

On the otherhand, i think i might also give the Adams Fastline 12 or whats it name next as its basically got the same technology except on the crown. Kenny perry hits it 300 yards. pretty impressive for an old Pro off the deck

Taylormade RBZ2 TP 9.5 Fuel 60

Ping i20 3 wood Aldila Nv

Adams Dhy 18*

Mizuno Mp59 4-p KBS Tour S

Vokey 50* 55* 60*

Scotty Cameron Select Newport 1.5

Ball - Z star XV

Oakley Stand Bag

Link to post
Share on other sites

The rule is the COR or coefficient of restitution or measurement of the springlike effect of the ball off of the club face. It includes all club faces, drivers, woods, hybrids, irons, wedges, putters. Of course the driver was the one that ran afoul of the rule. Specifically the Callaway ERC II and Taylormade made the R500 shortly after, thinking the USGA would raise the limit. The technology availible at the time could only make drivers that way but to keep these manufactures from finding a loop hole they simply said club face and did not limit it to drivers.

 

I am not even sure if they had hybrids then as we know them. You certainly did not have a couple in your bag in 2001 or 2002. You may have had a driving iron or an Adams Tight Lies fairway wood.

 

I had the Adams. You did not want to hit that out of a fluffy lie. I damned near lost my right ear one time when the Adams went under it. I never hit that club again. It broke took the ear piece off my glasses, knocked my cap off, acually took some hair off the side of my head, and I never saw it. It scared the crap out of me.

 

what actually happend to the adams? how did shrapnel fly all over the place?

Taylormade RBZ2 TP 9.5 Fuel 60

Ping i20 3 wood Aldila Nv

Adams Dhy 18*

Mizuno Mp59 4-p KBS Tour S

Vokey 50* 55* 60*

Scotty Cameron Select Newport 1.5

Ball - Z star XV

Oakley Stand Bag

Link to post
Share on other sites

yeh mate, i really hated how the ball felt off the face when i knew it was off centre n i pulled it 20yards left. but it was really amazing that it went the same distance as what i was hitting my g15 with. the problem is jst i am not able to replicate a flush strike on the RBZ.

i myself am curious if i have a week or so to spend wth the rbz wld i be able to hit it as far as my driver. some ppl gain up to 47 yards with it. if it does it basically means i have another club to hit from 270 yards out, i wld definitely be able to hit long par 5s in 2. but it gets to the stage i wld need another hybrid to fill in the 220 gap and throw my trusty 50 degree wedge out of the bag . so it begs the question is it really necessary to hit a 3 wood as long as ur driver, if ur game requires u to hit over 250 frm the fairway all the time , go ahead and bag the Rbz.

 

On the otherhand, i think i might also give the Adams Fastline 12 or whats it name next as its basically got the same technology except on the crown. Kenny perry hits it 300 yards. pretty impressive for an old Pro off the deck

 

If you like Adams, check out the Speedline Super XTD when it's released. It's supposed to be a beast.

Link to post
Share on other sites

what actually happend to the adams? how did shrapnel fly all over the place?

 

 

Now that I think about it this happened long before the COR debate. Maybe 5 years. It was in 1997. The original Adams Tight Lies was basically an inverted fairway wood, cut in half. To get the center of gravity low they made the thing very thin. It truly was great for hitting off tight lies. But it was not the Adams Normal Lie or Adams Fluffy Lie. You needed the hard ground under the club to keep it from passing under the ball. You had to be very careful of the lie because it would pop up off of the crown. Always before this simply resulted in a pop up that went out 50 or 75 yards and left a mark on the club.

 

However on this occassion, I had hit my drive on a par 5 into the first cut. (This was back at a time when I swung with everything that I had. And rarely had good results. I was at least a 25 handicaper, but I could knock the ball much further than I do now. I had a Wilson Jumbo metal driver, not Titanium, and still used a steel shafted Adams. My 5 wood was still wood. and I had, still have, a set of Ping Eye 2's) So the ball was sitting about an inch above the ground. This club was only about an inch and a half thick. So I passed under the ball and hit the top of the club, the ball still was probably traveling 100 mph when it came straight up past my head, close enough to break sunglasses, remove my cap, leave a scrapemark in my hairline about a 1/2 inch in front of my right ear. And a few seconds later hit the ground 50 yards behind me.

 

I could have easily lost an eye or worse. The woosh was incredibly loud that close to the ear. It was so scary that I never hit that club or one like it again. I put it in the garage and carried a persimmon 3 wood for two more years.

 

 

It was a couple of years later when I saw my first Taylormade Rescue, which I still have.

 

Driver:      :mizuno-small:  ST190G on Fujikura ATMOS Black

Fairway:   :mizuno-small:  ST190TS 15° on Fujikura ATMOS Black

Hybrids     :mizuno-small:  CLK 22 & 25 (set to 20° & 23°) on Fujikura SPEEDER

Irons:     :mizuno-small:  MP5 5-P on True Temper Dynamic Gold

Wedges: :mizuno-small: MP-T5 52*, 56* & 60* on True Temper Dynamic Gold Wedge

Putter:    :cameron-small: 2018 Select Newport 2

Balls:      :titelist-small: Pro V1X

Shoes:     :footjoy-small:

Range Finder: Precision Pro  NX7 Pro

All grips are BestGrips Micro-Perforated

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you like Adams, check out the Speedline Super XTD when it's released. It's supposed to be a beast.

 

I had really high hopes for it, but I was unimpressed when I hit it recently on Trackman. Maybe it was fatigue, maybe it was the shaft, but I just didn't like it and I didn't see huge ball speed. Doesn't mean I won't be trying it again though. B)

Follow me on Twitter: @MattSaternus

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have tried several 3 woods, Cobra, Callaway & Powerbilt.

 

None have given me the distance and accuracy that the Powerbilt AFO has.

 

Last week, I flubbed my drive on the first hole, going about 100 yds and leaving me at the beginning of the fairway but 205 yards from the green. Normally, I would lay up & try for 3 on the green. I took my 3 wood and nailed it to the front of the green, 2 putted for a par.

 

I can't argue with my Powerbilt 3 wood.

Driver: Tour Edge Exotics EXS w/Mitsubishi ck Blue regular shaft BACKUP DRIVER: Cobra F8 w/Mitsubishi ck Blue regular shaft  Fairways:  Cobra King F8 3W(14.5*) & 5W(18.5*) w/Mitsubishi ck Blue regular shaft Hybrids: Tour Edge CBX 119 4H(22*)  with Project X Evenflo regular shaft Irons: Wilson Staff D7 5 - PW w/Recoil 460 regular shafts Wedges: Wilson D7 GW(50*) & SW(54*) w/Recoil 460 regular shafts; Cleveland RTX Zipcore(58*) w/True Temper Spinner Wedge steel shaft  Putter: 33" Slotline SSi 693 mid mallet Bag: Cobra Ultralite Cart Bag(Peacoat Blue).

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have tried several 3 woods, Cobra, Callaway & Powerbilt.

 

None have given me the distance and accuracy that the Powerbilt AFO has.

 

Last week, I flubbed my drive on the first hole, going about 100 yds and leaving me at the beginning of the fairway but 205 yards from the green. Normally, I would lay up & try for 3 on the green. I took my 3 wood and nailed it to the front of the green, 2 putted for a par.

 

I can't argue with my Powerbilt 3 wood.

 

Goes to show there is more than one way to get max COR. It sounds like the purpose of filling the club with nitrogen is to help get to max COR, though I'm guessing the "face flex technology" is a fancy term for carpenter steel. The nitrogen is Powerbilt's equivalent to RBZ's compression slot.

 

Description:

 

PowerBilt has charged the club heads of the new Air Force One Air Foil 2 Fairway Woods with pressurized nitrogen – up to 150 PSI for maximum C.O.R. and Smash Factor. Clubs feature a 17-4 Stainless Steel head with Nitrogen Pressurized FFT - Face Flex Technology.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm guessing the "face flex technology" is a fancy term for carpenter steel. The nitrogen is Powerbilt's equivalent to RBZ's compression slot.

 

Description:

 

PowerBilt has charged the club heads of the new Air Force One Air Foil 2 Fairway Woods with pressurized nitrogen – up to 150 PSI for maximum C.O.R. and Smash Factor. Clubs feature a 17-4 Stainless Steel head with Nitrogen Pressurized FFT - Face Flex Technology.

 

Warning, I design mechanical systems and equipment not golf clubs so I may know as much about this as I do about picking winners in the match play tournament. For the record, I watched it last night, knowing the scores and still got one wrong.

:D

 

 

Carpenter steel is actually a steel manufacturer and maker of a particular alloy of steel originally designed for the aircraft industry. There are many alloys out there that offer the impact resistance that they get from "Carpenter" steel but when one golf club OEM used it the first time, we had to have a bunch of ME2 manufacturers use it. That is not to say that you can only achieve the desired results by using carpenter steel and anything that is not is inferior. There are many ways to do things. Carpenter makes many alloys but the specific steel is C455 Carpenter steel is typically used in some golf club faces. It is very espensive and only used in the face. That means the face has to be welded in. This is a technology all on its own. The Powerbuilt, Ping, previous Taylormades, Cleveland and many others are made from 17-4 stainless steel. While, Titleist, Callaway, Hogan, those I stated earlier used Carpenter Steel, almost all of them use 17-4 stainless bodies but Carpenter steel faces welded in them.

 

 

While some manufacturers have gone to the aircraft industry to find a way to improve clubs, Powerbuilt went to the auto racing industry. Powerbuilt uses nitrogen charged heads, why? Because by replacing the air normally inside they make the head slightly lighter since nitrogen is lighter than air. Just as Ferrari "aired up" their tires with nitrogen so that they were lighter. IF Callaway did this they would say that they use the same nitrogen as Lambrogini. Powerbuilt further add the nitrogen to 150 pounds per sq in. This has the same effect of as tightening the head on a drum. By adding presure inside the thin face they get more rebound off of the ball. I would bet that if they put in 180 psi then they could make an illegal club.

 

 

I think that the compression slot is a little different in that they use a face of very thin material and it flexes but close to the edge where the body meets the face it can not flex. But by allowing the body to flex, via a compression slot, on the bottom for TM or on the top for Adams, or around the perimeter of the bottom like Nike compression slot, you get more of a "trampoline effect" by allowing the body to add some pop. This is really quite clever because you add pop but since it is on the face you do not change the COR of the face.

 

Driver:      :mizuno-small:  ST190G on Fujikura ATMOS Black

Fairway:   :mizuno-small:  ST190TS 15° on Fujikura ATMOS Black

Hybrids     :mizuno-small:  CLK 22 & 25 (set to 20° & 23°) on Fujikura SPEEDER

Irons:     :mizuno-small:  MP5 5-P on True Temper Dynamic Gold

Wedges: :mizuno-small: MP-T5 52*, 56* & 60* on True Temper Dynamic Gold Wedge

Putter:    :cameron-small: 2018 Select Newport 2

Balls:      :titelist-small: Pro V1X

Shoes:     :footjoy-small:

Range Finder: Precision Pro  NX7 Pro

All grips are BestGrips Micro-Perforated

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

As you said, a 17-4 stainless steel head is not the same thing as a 17-4 stainless steel face. Most companies don't advertise what they do to the face, but code words, such as "maraging steel" essentially means Carpenter alloy. I assumed Powerbilt uses a Carpenter face, but Powerbilt does not publish this information, or at least I couldn't find it.

 

http://www.hirekogolf.com/hireko/webpages/tech_articles/maraging_steel/what_is_maraging_steel.html

 

 

Wishon has a great FAQ about different metals used in clubs:

 

What makes a goof face material for a driver?

 

The goal of most drivers is to create a head that has the maximum amount of face deflection from impact with the ball. The more the face deflects, the less the ball deforms against the face and the less energy the ball will lose. That translates into a higher ball velocity for any given swing speed, and it is ball velocity that chiefly determines the distance of the shot (proper launch angle for the golfer's swing speed and angle of attack is key, but it is second to ball velocity).

 

The best materials for maximizing face deflection are those that have what is called a high STRENGTH-TO-MODULUS RATIO. The strength of a material can be rated in many different types of tests, but the most important strength measurement related to driver faces is the yield strength. Yield strength is a measurement of how much force is required before the material permanently bends or deforms. But what has to come with a high yield strength to make a good driver face material is a low modulus of elasticity along with high toughness.

 

Modulus is the measurement of a material's ability to resist stretching, so the lower the modulus measurement, the more the material can be stretched. In graphite shafts you want higher modulus materials to ensure stiffness, but for a driver face you want to have a low modulus material. If you have high strength and low modulus together in the same material, you have a good candidate for a face design that will deflect inward a lot before it reaches a point of permanent deformation.

 

Toughness is the ability of a metal to rapidly distribute within itself both the stress and strain caused by a suddenly applied load, or more simply expressed, the ability of a material to withstand shock loading. It is the exact opposite of “brittleness” which carries the implication of sudden failure. A brittle material has little resistance to failure once the elastic limit has been reached. There are many materials that have a higher yield strength than titanium, most notably high strength steel alloys like Carpenter AerMet, Carpenter 475, 465, 455 and T275 to name a few. But steel alloys always have a much higher modulus of elasticity than do titanium alloys, often being as much as two times less elastic than titanium alloys.

 

Therefore, a titanium alloy can be as much as 30-40% lower in yield strength than a high strength steel but makes up for that with its modulus being over twice as elastic as the modulus of the high strength steels. However, there are some high strength steels that can make driver faces with as high of a COR as any titanium alloy. This happens because if the strength of the steel is VERY high and the toughness is good, the very high strength allows the face to be made much thinner than ever possible with any titanium alloy, which in turn allows the ball to deflect the face inward the same or even a little more as the titanium alloy. It is the amount of face deflection that makes the COR high and the swing speed to ball speed ratio high as well for more distance.

 

What makes a good face material for a fairway wood or an iron?

 

As with driver heads, titanium alloys would be the best candidate. However, most companies do not choose to design fairway woods and irons with a titanium face because of its much higher cost. Golf companies have learned over the years that golfers will pay the higher cost for a titanium driver, but not for fairway woods or irons. The reason is chiefly because with a driver, the golfer is buying ONE higher cost club but with the fairway woods and irons, the golfer knows he has to buy 2 or 3 woods and 7 or 8 irons so the total cost is much higher.

 

As such, when a company wishes to design a high COR fairway wood or iron, they look for high strength steel alloys which all carry a lower cost than titanium alloys. As mentioned in the previous Q&A about titanium driver faces, it is possible to make a clubhead with a high COR using a high strength steel alloy for the face. Steel alloys are available which have a yield strength double that of titanium. Therefore, even though the modulus of elasticity of all steel alloys is not as “stretchable” as for titanium alloys, with the yield strength of some steel alloys being double or more than titanium alloys, it is then possible to make the steel face very thin to allow the face to flex inward to the point of achieving a high COR without fear of the face caving in.

 

However, it is true that in a perfect world in which golfers did not balk at the price of golf clubs, using high strength/low modulus titanium alloys for the faces of fairway woods and irons would definitely push their performance to the maximum level possible

 

http://wishongolf.com/technology/tech-faqs/

 

 

The key is the strength of the alloy, which allows for a thinner face. Here are measurements of strength between 17-4 steel and carpenter 455 and 465 steel:

 

http://www.cartech.com/techarticles.aspx?id=1472

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...