Jump to content

Welcome. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest which does not give you access to all the great features at GolfWRX such as viewing all the images, interacting with members, access to all forums and eligiblility to win free giveaways. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free. Create a FREE GolfWRX account here.

* * * - - 1 votes

Flighted vs Ascending Mass shafts


  • Please log in to reply
28 replies to this topic

#1 Beeez

Beeez

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 18 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 477566
  • Joined: 08/04/2017
GolfWRX Likes : 3

Posted 12 September 2017 - 12:10 PM

It's my understanding that both are designed to get the long irons up and keep the shorter irons down. When is one method preferred over the other? It seems a lot of clubs are coming with options for ascending mass shafts now...has this emerged as the preferred method of controlling iron trajectory over moving the kickpoint of the shaft? I'm in the market for new clubs after 12 years with my current set. Just trying to find what's best

Edited by Beeez, 12 September 2017 - 12:10 PM.


Remove This Advertisement Viewing As Guest

    GolfWRX Forums

    Advertisement


1

#2 DaveMac

DaveMac

    Major Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,731 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 27975
  • Joined: 04/17/2007
  • Location:Scotland
  • Handicap:8
GolfWRX Likes : 501

Posted 13 September 2017 - 02:19 AM

My understanding is Flighted shafts manipulate the bend profile of the shafts throughout the set, to change launch (a little). Ascending weight shafts increase weight progressively through the set, to better balance swing MOI (how hard a club is to put into motion), providing a more balanced swing feel (I know it is just another personal preference) , any flighting is by coincidence (change in set stiffness range) rather than design.

So, one is not better than the other.

What is best (and this is likely to be a small group of different models) is simply the weight, bend profile and flex that matches your swing type. Testing for flighted or ascending weight is not part of the basic fittings because three test clubs are required to test each shaft.

Edited by DaveMac, 13 September 2017 - 02:25 AM.


2

#3 Stuart G.

Stuart G.

    Legend

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,840 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 174728
  • Joined: 04/12/2012
  • Location:New Hampshire
GolfWRX Likes : 4734

Posted 13 September 2017 - 03:07 AM

Good summary.

A couple other points.  

Different individuals will respond differently to the way the shaft changes in the set (for either case).  So for some, one of those methods could potentially be more effective then the other.  For some others, neither might be all that effective at all.

One of the other proposed benefits of the AMT/ascending weight shafts is that the more uniform feel for though out the set DaveMac mentioned, in theory, might lead to a little more consistency through the set.   And as I understand it, the higher fighting is really from the player being to gain a little extra club head speed with the longer irons (due to the relatively lighter weight shafts) and has mostly been seen with the better players.

The downside to the AMT's is that they only are available in a very limited weight range (for now).   If that base shaft weight range is not a good fit for someone, it's going to do more harm than good.

If you really want to adjust the flight of the longer irons, the most effective way will always be adjusting the actual head lofts.

Edited by Stuart G., 13 September 2017 - 06:04 AM.


3

#4 games

games

    Argue for your limitations, and sure enough, they are yours.

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,037 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 248161
  • Joined: 04/30/2013
  • Location:Wisconsin
GolfWRX Likes : 388

Posted 13 September 2017 - 08:29 AM

Great replies, Stuart G. and DaveMac! Very timely, too.

A Trackman fitting put me into some TT DG AMT S300s, so I did some research on them.  The AMT do have "groupings" of long irons (1-4), medium (5-7), and short (8-W).  However, True Temper states the AMT is essentially the DG S300 in the short irons, and lighter weight than the DG S300 in the mid- and long-irons. Further, TT states the AMT is still considered a low trajectory shaft.

The current TT DG Pro is a "cousin" to the AMTs with a smaller weight progression through the set, but strives for higher ball flight in the long irons through changes in shaft geometry within the set. I think this makes the DG Pro more of a flighted set than the AMT.
They who are enamoured of practice
without knowledge are like the mariner
going to sea without a rudder or compass
and who navigates without a course.

4

#5 rsballer10

rsballer10

    Advanced

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 422 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 102321
  • Joined: 01/21/2010
  • Location:Maryland
  • Ebay ID:rsballer10
GolfWRX Likes : 17

Posted 13 September 2017 - 08:53 AM

View Postgames, on 13 September 2017 - 08:29 AM, said:

Great replies, Stuart G. and DaveMac! Very timely, too.

A Trackman fitting put me into some TT DG AMT S300s, so I did some research on them.  The AMT do have "groupings" of long irons (1-4), medium (5-7), and short (8-W).  However, True Temper states the AMT is essentially the DG S300 in the short irons, and lighter weight than the DG S300 in the mid- and long-irons. Further, TT states the AMT is still considered a low trajectory shaft.

The current TT DG Pro is a "cousin" to the AMTs with a smaller weight progression through the set, but strives for higher ball flight in the long irons through changes in shaft geometry within the set. I think this makes the DG Pro more of a flighted set than the AMT.
I think when it comes to actual, on course performance, shaft changes have little effect on trajectory.

AMT and flighted shafts are hard to test because they have different properties throughout the set, so see if you can demo ones in the 3,6,9 iron.

The problem with flighted shafts is that they will be tip flexible in the long irons, which makes a lot of players say they feel loose.

I've never played an AWT style shaft (maybe one day!) But the idea makes total sense with graphite woods being in the 50-70g range and wedges in the ~120-130 range. And the fact that it theoretically optimizes distance vs accuracy throughout the set.

Let me know if you demo the AWT and what you thought! I'm an s300 player as well.


5

#6 games

games

    Argue for your limitations, and sure enough, they are yours.

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,037 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 248161
  • Joined: 04/30/2013
  • Location:Wisconsin
GolfWRX Likes : 388

Posted 13 September 2017 - 12:50 PM

View Postrsballer10, on 13 September 2017 - 08:53 AM, said:

View Postgames, on 13 September 2017 - 08:29 AM, said:

Great replies, Stuart G. and DaveMac! Very timely, too.

A Trackman fitting put me into some TT DG AMT S300s, so I did some research on them.  The AMT do have "groupings" of long irons (1-4), medium (5-7), and short (8-W).  However, True Temper states the AMT is essentially the DG S300 in the short irons, and lighter weight than the DG S300 in the mid- and long-irons. Further, TT states the AMT is still considered a low trajectory shaft.

The current TT DG Pro is a "cousin" to the AMTs with a smaller weight progression through the set, but strives for higher ball flight in the long irons through changes in shaft geometry within the set. I think this makes the DG Pro more of a flighted set than the AMT.
I think when it comes to actual, on course performance, shaft changes have little effect on trajectory.

AMT and flighted shafts are hard to test because they have different properties throughout the set, so see if you can demo ones in the 3,6,9 iron.

The problem with flighted shafts is that they will be tip flexible in the long irons, which makes a lot of players say they feel loose.

I've never played an AWT style shaft (maybe one day!) But the idea makes total sense with graphite woods being in the 50-70g range and wedges in the ~120-130 range. And the fact that it theoretically optimizes distance vs accuracy throughout the set.

Let me know if you demo the AWT and what you thought! I'm an s300 player as well.

Sorry if I misled you.  I am actually coming out of a set of KBS Tour R and have gone into a set of Tri-Gold shafts (more in a sec).  My 6-iron clubspeed is only 80mph and I probably can't play DGS300s.  That said, in my fitting, the AMT S300 beat my old KBS Tour R like a red-headed stepkid in both distance and dispersion!

Since the fitting, I bought a set of muscleback blades (Maltby MMB 17 Black). I took a chance on this set because it came with stiff, soft-stepped Tri-Golds, an early forerunner (circa 2000) of the DG Pro and AMT.  The Tri-Gold had the same 3g progression as the AMT and I think would be considered a flighted shaft.  BUT, the long irons are heavier and tips much shorter than either the AMT or DG Pro.  Frankly, I can't get the 4- and 5-iron off the ground, but the rest of the set plays very nicely.

Anyway, I did demo a full set of AMT in some Titleist MB16s.  I had ZERO problem getting the 3 iron in that set off the ground.  But, if you're in DGS300s, based on what you said about long irons in flighted shafts playing "loose," my guess is the AMTs will be too light and/or tip flexible for you in the long irons.  Maybe shaft up a 3- or 4-iron to see how you like it.

My dilemma right now is whether to go "all in" and reshaft the whole set with AMT or simply change out the 4- and 5-irons.

Edited by games, 13 September 2017 - 01:09 PM.

They who are enamoured of practice
without knowledge are like the mariner
going to sea without a rudder or compass
and who navigates without a course.

6

#7 Beeez

Beeez

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 18 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 477566
  • Joined: 08/04/2017
GolfWRX Likes : 3

Posted 13 September 2017 - 04:24 PM

I'm currently trying to decide between Nippon 950 and Nippon 880 AMT offered by Titleist. I didn't know much about AMT style shafts and haven't read any comments on the 880 amt ( plenty of info on the 950) just trying to get information. It's hard to gauge when all I tested was the 7 iron shaft in PGA Tour Superstore

7

#8 dlygrisse

dlygrisse

    Legend

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,643 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 16702
  • Joined: 07/21/2006
  • Location:Kansas
GolfWRX Likes : 4639

Posted 13 September 2017 - 05:20 PM

I really like the Ping AWT shafts, both the 1st and 2nd gen.  It's not something I really think about or is really dramatic, but they work.
Callaway GBB 10.5
Callaway GBB 3w, HW
Callaway X Hot2 9 wood
Ping G 4-U
Ping Glide SS 54
Ping Glide 2 SS 58
Odyssey Pro #1
Ping Hoofer
ECCO

8

#9 rsballer10

rsballer10

    Advanced

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 422 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 102321
  • Joined: 01/21/2010
  • Location:Maryland
  • Ebay ID:rsballer10
GolfWRX Likes : 17

Posted 13 September 2017 - 06:30 PM

View Postgames, on 13 September 2017 - 12:50 PM, said:

View Postrsballer10, on 13 September 2017 - 08:53 AM, said:

View Postgames, on 13 September 2017 - 08:29 AM, said:

Great replies, Stuart G. and DaveMac! Very timely, too.

A Trackman fitting put me into some TT DG AMT S300s, so I did some research on them.  The AMT do have "groupings" of long irons (1-4), medium (5-7), and short (8-W).  However, True Temper states the AMT is essentially the DG S300 in the short irons, and lighter weight than the DG S300 in the mid- and long-irons. Further, TT states the AMT is still considered a low trajectory shaft.

The current TT DG Pro is a "cousin" to the AMTs with a smaller weight progression through the set, but strives for higher ball flight in the long irons through changes in shaft geometry within the set. I think this makes the DG Pro more of a flighted set than the AMT.
I think when it comes to actual, on course performance, shaft changes have little effect on trajectory.

AMT and flighted shafts are hard to test because they have different properties throughout the set, so see if you can demo ones in the 3,6,9 iron.

The problem with flighted shafts is that they will be tip flexible in the long irons, which makes a lot of players say they feel loose.

I've never played an AWT style shaft (maybe one day!) But the idea makes total sense with graphite woods being in the 50-70g range and wedges in the ~120-130 range. And the fact that it theoretically optimizes distance vs accuracy throughout the set.

Let me know if you demo the AWT and what you thought! I'm an s300 player as well.

Sorry if I misled you.  I am actually coming out of a set of KBS Tour R and have gone into a set of Tri-Gold shafts (more in a sec).  My 6-iron clubspeed is only 80mph and I probably can't play DGS300s.  That said, in my fitting, the AMT S300 beat my old KBS Tour R like a red-headed stepkid in both distance and dispersion!

Since the fitting, I bought a set of muscleback blades (Maltby MMB 17 Black). I took a chance on this set because it came with stiff, soft-stepped Tri-Golds, an early forerunner (circa 2000) of the DG Pro and AMT.  The Tri-Gold had the same 3g progression as the AMT and I think would be considered a flighted shaft.  BUT, the long irons are heavier and tips much shorter than either the AMT or DG Pro.  Frankly, I can't get the 4- and 5-iron off the ground, but the rest of the set plays very nicely.

Anyway, I did demo a full set of AMT in some Titleist MB16s.  I had ZERO problem getting the 3 iron in that set off the ground.  But, if you're in DGS300s, based on what you said about long irons in flighted shafts playing "loose," my guess is the AMTs will be too light and/or tip flexible for you in the long irons.  Maybe shaft up a 3- or 4-iron to see how you like it.

My dilemma right now is whether to go "all in" and reshaft the whole set with AMT or simply change out the 4- and 5-irons.

Hey! thanks for the clarification! and I appreciate the honest feedback. I was kinda hoping the AMT's still had respectable tip stiffness in the lighter shafts, even in the long irons. Basically, years ago I played s400 in the 3-PW and I had a Titleist DCI 2 iron with the stock tri-spec gold stiff shaft in it, and I was amazed how easy it was to hit. I don't think it was a tip stiff shaft, it apparently weighted in the ~115 gram range. Figured the AMT might provide a similar performance (no 2-iron anymore, but wouldn't mind a little help in the 3,4,5 irons).

9

#10 games

games

    Argue for your limitations, and sure enough, they are yours.

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,037 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 248161
  • Joined: 04/30/2013
  • Location:Wisconsin
GolfWRX Likes : 388

Posted 13 September 2017 - 06:39 PM

@rsballer10:  Consider DG Pro in longer irons based on that shaft geometry. AMT probably too light for you, but just right for me.

Edited by games, 13 September 2017 - 06:39 PM.

They who are enamoured of practice
without knowledge are like the mariner
going to sea without a rudder or compass
and who navigates without a course.

Remove This Advertisement Viewing As Guest

    GolfWRX Forums

    Advertisement


10

#11 Noodler

Noodler

    Tour Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 529 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 344441
  • Joined: 10/13/2014
  • Location:Denver, CO
GolfWRX Likes : 201

Posted 13 September 2017 - 09:49 PM

DG Pro and flighted shafts descend in weight (longer iron shafts are heavier).

11

#12 games

games

    Argue for your limitations, and sure enough, they are yours.

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,037 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 248161
  • Joined: 04/30/2013
  • Location:Wisconsin
GolfWRX Likes : 388

Posted 14 September 2017 - 07:07 AM

 Noodler, on 13 September 2017 - 09:49 PM, said:

DG Pro and flighted shafts descend in weight (longer iron shafts are heavier).

Thanks for the clarification! I thought the DG Pro weight was like the AMT (lighter in the long irons, heavier in the short irons).
They who are enamoured of practice
without knowledge are like the mariner
going to sea without a rudder or compass
and who navigates without a course.

12

#13 Beeez

Beeez

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 18 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 477566
  • Joined: 08/04/2017
GolfWRX Likes : 3

Posted 14 September 2017 - 11:34 AM

So ultimately ascending mass shafts have more to do with swing feel than flight characteristics?

13

#14 Stuart G.

Stuart G.

    Legend

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,840 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 174728
  • Joined: 04/12/2012
  • Location:New Hampshire
GolfWRX Likes : 4734

Posted 14 September 2017 - 11:46 AM

 Beeez, on 14 September 2017 - 11:34 AM, said:

So ultimately ascending mass shafts have more to do with swing feel than flight characteristics?

Well, some might look at it that way (as a simplified view) but the two aren't necessarily exclusive.   Anything that can effect the feel can also effect the ball flight.

Edited by Stuart G., 14 September 2017 - 11:46 AM.


14

#15 arnaud_33golflab

arnaud_33golflab

    Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 42 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 481770
  • Joined: 09/13/2017
  • Location:france
  • Handicap:3.8
GolfWRX Likes : 32

Posted 14 September 2017 - 04:50 PM

I'm a huge fan of AEROTECH and I've always wondered why they have discontinued the "players" AMT that they had released in 2006.
https://aerotechgolf...ass-technology/

Anybody knows ?

Independent Clubfitter & Clubmaker
Bordeaux, France
www.33golflab.com

15

#16 Stuart G.

Stuart G.

    Legend

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,840 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 174728
  • Joined: 04/12/2012
  • Location:New Hampshire
GolfWRX Likes : 4734

Posted 15 September 2017 - 03:22 AM

 arnaud_33golflab, on 14 September 2017 - 04:50 PM, said:

I'm a huge fan of AEROTECH and I've always wondered why they have discontinued the "players" AMT that they had released in 2006.
https://aerotechgolf...ass-technology/

Anybody knows ?

I don't know but I suspect it was poor sales due to the much higher price when compared to the CW steelfibers.  If memory serves, they were charging about $200 more per set for those.

16

#17 Cwebb

Cwebb

    Major Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,999 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 21353
  • Joined: 11/04/2006
GolfWRX Likes : 903

Posted 15 September 2017 - 11:48 AM

 arnaud_33golflab, on 14 September 2017 - 04:50 PM, said:

I'm a huge fan of AEROTECH and I've always wondered why they have discontinued the "players" AMT that they had released in 2006.
https://aerotechgolf...ass-technology/

Anybody knows ?

They were expensive and they were well ahead of the industry, in terms of really understanding MOI....and then the further benefit of balancing it with ascending weight shafts.  I think they would have done better if they had released this shaft design 8 or so years later than they did

17

#18 Oldboy

Oldboy

    Major Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,239 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 30613
  • Joined: 06/03/2007
GolfWRX Likes : 482

Posted 15 September 2017 - 12:11 PM

Anyone try this on their own?  100gr long irons. 110gr mid irons and 120 short irons is what I'm contemplating. For me, KBS Tour v varying flexes to get the weights right and then hard and soft stepping to get the flex profiles in line?  I know they have the FLT line now which is the same concept but it's not the V series which is what I've grown used to so I was gonna try it on my own. I think going lighter in the long irons is a no brainer for my mortal swingspeed

Edited by Oldboy, 15 September 2017 - 12:20 PM.


18

#19 rsballer10

rsballer10

    Advanced

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 422 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 102321
  • Joined: 01/21/2010
  • Location:Maryland
  • Ebay ID:rsballer10
GolfWRX Likes : 17

Posted 15 September 2017 - 12:22 PM

 Oldboy, on 15 September 2017 - 12:11 PM, said:

Anyone try this on their own?  100gr long irons. 110gr mid irons and 120 short irons is what I'm contemplating. For me, KBS Tour v varying flexes to get the weights right and then hard and soft stepping to get the flex profiles in line?  I know they have the FLT line now which is the same concept but it's not the V series which is what I've grown used to so I was gonna try it on my own. I think going lighter in the long irons is a no brainer for my mortal swingspeed
As long as you swingweight them to account for the changes, it could work

19

#20 Stuart G.

Stuart G.

    Legend

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,840 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 174728
  • Joined: 04/12/2012
  • Location:New Hampshire
GolfWRX Likes : 4734

Posted 16 September 2017 - 03:21 AM

 Oldboy, on 15 September 2017 - 12:11 PM, said:

Anyone try this on their own?  100gr long irons. 110gr mid irons and 120 short irons is what I'm contemplating. For me, KBS Tour v varying flexes to get the weights right and then hard and soft stepping to get the flex profiles in line?  I know they have the FLT line now which is the same concept but it's not the V series which is what I've grown used to so I was gonna try it on my own. I think going lighter in the long irons is a no brainer for my mortal swingspeed

Can't speak to that specific combination, but there have been posts of people trying to get an ascending weight set by mixing different shaft models/weights  (e.g.  maybe something like the TT xp95, xp105, xp115).   Sometimes they work out great for the individual, sometimes the different and profiles in the different models can be problematic.  Depends on the swing and the sensitivity of the individuals.

If you do give it a try, ideally don't try to blindly match swing weight across the different weights.  You want to fit the SW's separately for each of the different shaft types used.


Remove This Advertisement Viewing As Guest

    GolfWRX Forums

    Advertisement


Wanna get rid of this ugly yellow box? And remove other annoying "stuff" in between posts? Create a FREE GolfWRX account here.

20

#21 cxx

cxx

    Major Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,518 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 142023
  • Joined: 10/10/2011
GolfWRX Likes : 619

Posted 16 September 2017 - 11:34 AM

View Postrsballer10, on 13 September 2017 - 08:53 AM, said:


I think when it comes to actual, on course performance, shaft changes have little effect on trajectory.



I hear that a lot but have to disagree. After switching from dynamic gold to dynalite gold xp my ball flight was significantly higher, especially on longer irons.  Maybe if a person hit long irons high already there would be no difference, but those people wouldn't be looking at flighted or progressive weighted shafts.

21

#22 Noodler

Noodler

    Tour Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 529 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 344441
  • Joined: 10/13/2014
  • Location:Denver, CO
GolfWRX Likes : 201

Posted 16 September 2017 - 10:22 PM

View Postcxx, on 16 September 2017 - 11:34 AM, said:

View Postrsballer10, on 13 September 2017 - 08:53 AM, said:

I think when it comes to actual, on course performance, shaft changes have little effect on trajectory.



I hear that a lot but have to disagree. After switching from dynamic gold to dynalite gold xp my ball flight was significantly higher, especially on longer irons.  Maybe if a person hit long irons high already there would be no difference, but those people wouldn't be looking at flighted or progressive weighted shafts.

Far too many variables were changed along with shafts for you to conclude that it was solely the flex change that created the higher ball flight.

22

#23 cxx

cxx

    Major Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,518 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 142023
  • Joined: 10/10/2011
GolfWRX Likes : 619

Posted 17 September 2017 - 10:22 AM

View PostNoodler, on 16 September 2017 - 10:22 PM, said:

View Postcxx, on 16 September 2017 - 11:34 AM, said:

View Postrsballer10, on 13 September 2017 - 08:53 AM, said:

I think when it comes to actual, on course performance, shaft changes have little effect on trajectory.



I hear that a lot but have to disagree. After switching from dynamic gold to dynalite gold xp my ball flight was significantly higher, especially on longer irons.  Maybe if a person hit long irons high already there would be no difference, but those people wouldn't be looking at flighted or progressive weighted shafts.

Far too many variables were changed along with shafts for you to conclude that it was solely the flex change that created the higher ball flight.

What other variables? Identical heads/lofts/lies/lengths/grips across two sets one with the old shafts one with the new.  Can't get much closer than that. I do this specifically to isolate the effect of changes.  Seems to work for me.

Edited by cxx, 17 September 2017 - 10:24 AM.


23

#24 Noodler

Noodler

    Tour Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 529 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 344441
  • Joined: 10/13/2014
  • Location:Denver, CO
GolfWRX Likes : 201

Posted 17 September 2017 - 11:44 AM

View Postcxx, on 17 September 2017 - 10:22 AM, said:

View PostNoodler, on 16 September 2017 - 10:22 PM, said:

View Postcxx, on 16 September 2017 - 11:34 AM, said:

View Postrsballer10, on 13 September 2017 - 08:53 AM, said:

I think when it comes to actual, on course performance, shaft changes have little effect on trajectory.



I hear that a lot but have to disagree. After switching from dynamic gold to dynalite gold xp my ball flight was significantly higher, especially on longer irons.  Maybe if a person hit long irons high already there would be no difference, but those people wouldn't be looking at flighted or progressive weighted shafts.

Far too many variables were changed along with shafts for you to conclude that it was solely the flex change that created the higher ball flight.

What other variables? Identical heads/lofts/lies/lengths/grips across two sets one with the old shafts one with the new.  Can't get much closer than that. I do this specifically to isolate the effect of changes.  Seems to work for me.

You changed the MOI, MBI, and static weight with the introduction of a completely different shaft.  Those are all major factors that will influence your swing mechanics and resulting impact.  Flex was the least impacting change.

My point was that you cannot definitively reach your conclusion; that the result was solely based on the flex change.

24

#25 cxx

cxx

    Major Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,518 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 142023
  • Joined: 10/10/2011
GolfWRX Likes : 619

Posted 17 September 2017 - 12:25 PM

View PostNoodler, on 17 September 2017 - 11:44 AM, said:

View Postcxx, on 17 September 2017 - 10:22 AM, said:

View PostNoodler, on 16 September 2017 - 10:22 PM, said:

View Postcxx, on 16 September 2017 - 11:34 AM, said:

View Postrsballer10, on 13 September 2017 - 08:53 AM, said:

I think when it comes to actual, on course performance, shaft changes have little effect on trajectory.



I hear that a lot but have to disagree. After switching from dynamic gold to dynalite gold xp my ball flight was significantly higher, especially on longer irons.  Maybe if a person hit long irons high already there would be no difference, but those people wouldn't be looking at flighted or progressive weighted shafts.

Far too many variables were changed along with shafts for you to conclude that it was solely the flex change that created the higher ball flight.

What other variables? Identical heads/lofts/lies/lengths/grips across two sets one with the old shafts one with the new.  Can't get much closer than that. I do this specifically to isolate the effect of changes.  Seems to work for me.

You changed the MOI, MBI, and static weight with the introduction of a completely different shaft.  Those are all major factors that will influence your swing mechanics and resulting impact.  Flex was the least impacting change.

My point was that you cannot definitively reach your conclusion; that the result was solely based on the flex change.

Nonsense, I didn't say flex change I'm talking about comparing different shafts and their effect on ball flight.


25

#26 Golfrnut

Golfrnut

    Hall of Fame

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,109 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 132818
  • Joined: 07/12/2011
  • Location:Eastern NC
GolfWRX Likes : 1731

Posted 17 September 2017 - 06:28 PM

cxx, on 17 September 2017 - 12:25 PM, said:

Nonsense, I didn't say flex change I'm talking about comparing different shafts and their effect on ball flight.

It's honestly far from nonsense. You did make a huge weight change as well as one in the bend profile.  There's a lot variables in that equation, as well as a huge variable to that...yourself. One person's result very often does not equal another. Chances are, there were swing delivery changes between the two as well. We are only human after all, and will all react differently to different variables.

Edited by Golfrnut, 17 September 2017 - 06:28 PM.

TM Supertri V2 w/ AD DI
Callaway 3Deep w/ 73 BB
TM Aerburner TP 3HL w/ BB 70 S+  
Callaway Apex UT 21* w/ i80 Steelfiber or R9 19* Rescue w/ Aldila RIP
Callaway RAZR MBs 4-PW w/ i95 Steelfiber
Callaway MD3 52* & 58* PM grind
Odyssey MXM 1W

26

#27 cxx

cxx

    Major Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,518 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 142023
  • Joined: 10/10/2011
GolfWRX Likes : 619

Posted 17 September 2017 - 07:03 PM

View PostGolfrnut, on 17 September 2017 - 06:28 PM, said:

cxx, on 17 September 2017 - 12:25 PM, said:

Nonsense, I didn't say flex change I'm talking about comparing different shafts and their effect on ball flight.

It's honestly far from nonsense. You did make a huge weight change as well as one in the bend profile.  There's a lot variables in that equation, as well as a huge variable to that...yourself. One person's result very often does not equal another. Chances are, there were swing delivery changes between the two as well. We are only human after all, and will all react differently to different variables.


There would be no point in testing if they were exactly the same. Of course they are lighter, thats the point, along with the other characteristics of the shaft. The shafts are the thing that is being tested. Yes I only care about how they work for me.

I'm sure you are not saying that different shafts all perform the same, or are you?

27

#28 Golfrnut

Golfrnut

    Hall of Fame

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,109 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 132818
  • Joined: 07/12/2011
  • Location:Eastern NC
GolfWRX Likes : 1731

Posted 17 September 2017 - 07:59 PM

View Postcxx, on 17 September 2017 - 07:03 PM, said:

View PostGolfrnut, on 17 September 2017 - 06:28 PM, said:

cxx, on 17 September 2017 - 12:25 PM, said:

Nonsense, I didn't say flex change I'm talking about comparing different shafts and their effect on ball flight.

It's honestly far from nonsense. You did make a huge weight change as well as one in the bend profile.  There's a lot variables in that equation, as well as a huge variable to that...yourself. One person's result very often does not equal another. Chances are, there were swing delivery changes between the two as well. We are only human after all, and will all react differently to different variables.


There would be no point in testing if they were exactly the same. Of course they are lighter, thats the point, along with the other characteristics of the shaft. The shafts are the thing that is being tested. Yes I only care about how they work for me.

I'm sure you are not saying that different shafts all perform the same, or are you?

No, I'm just saying that the shafts by themselves aren't going to vary things all that much. This is of course omitting the human part of it and how the player is reacting to the different parts of it.  If you take away the human element of it, the differences are a lot closer together.
TM Supertri V2 w/ AD DI
Callaway 3Deep w/ 73 BB
TM Aerburner TP 3HL w/ BB 70 S+  
Callaway Apex UT 21* w/ i80 Steelfiber or R9 19* Rescue w/ Aldila RIP
Callaway RAZR MBs 4-PW w/ i95 Steelfiber
Callaway MD3 52* & 58* PM grind
Odyssey MXM 1W

28

#29 rsballer10

rsballer10

    Advanced

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 422 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 102321
  • Joined: 01/21/2010
  • Location:Maryland
  • Ebay ID:rsballer10
GolfWRX Likes : 17

Posted 17 September 2017 - 08:06 PM

View Postcxx, on 17 September 2017 - 07:03 PM, said:

View PostGolfrnut, on 17 September 2017 - 06:28 PM, said:

cxx, on 17 September 2017 - 12:25 PM, said:

Nonsense, I didn't say flex change I'm talking about comparing different shafts and their effect on ball flight.

It's honestly far from nonsense. You did make a huge weight change as well as one in the bend profile.  There's a lot variables in that equation, as well as a huge variable to that...yourself. One person's result very often does not equal another. Chances are, there were swing delivery changes between the two as well. We are only human after all, and will all react differently to different variables.


There would be no point in testing if they were exactly the same. Of course they are lighter, thats the point, along with the other characteristics of the shaft. The shafts are the thing that is being tested. Yes I only care about how they work for me.

I'm sure you are not saying that different shafts all perform the same, or are you?
Nobody says they work the same, it's about the magnitude of the change.

Glad they work for you, TT shafts are all quality and are all more affordable than their counterparts.

29



0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

GolfWRX Sponsors