171 replies to this topic

[DaveMac]

Mschumacher, on 16 November 2012 - 04:59 PM, said:

79 6-4-6-9

• Dynalite Gold XP S300 soft step
  
• Nippon NS Pro 1150 Stiff
  
• KBS Tour Stiff soft flex

[DaveMac]

AndyH99, on 16 November 2012 - 04:29 PM, said:

Mine was 83 5 3 5 4.  Thanks you.

• Dynamic Gold S300
  
• Project X 5.5
  
• KBS Tour Stiff

[AndyH99]

Thanks Dave!

[squarre]

Another question for those in the know. How about 90, 4, 1, 8, 2?

[DaveMac]

squarre, on 17 November 2012 - 01:13 PM, said:

Another question for those in the know. How about 90, 4, 1, 8, 2?

• Dynamic Gold X100 Soft step
  
• Project X 6.0

[squarre]

Thanks Dave!

[gslinares05]

Hi,
Can somebody help me with the recommendations for these numbers?
94
5435
Much appreciated!

[DaveMac]

gslinares05, on 19 November 2012 - 04:03 PM, said:

Hi, DNA 94 5435

No real surprises with these numbers! Be aware my software is the European version so no CTaper but I would guess they would be a recommendation as well. Perhaps someone state side might run the numbers to confirm.

• Dynamic Gold X100
  
• Project X 6.5
  
• KBS Tour X

[gslinares05]

DaveMac, on 19 November 2012 - 06:34 PM, said:

gslinares05, on 19 November 2012 - 04:03 PM, said:

Hi, DNA 94 5435

No real surprises with these numbers! Be aware my software is the European version so no CTaper but I would guess they would be a recommendation as well. Perhaps someone state side might run the numbers to confirm.

• Dynamic Gold X100
  
• Project X 6.5
  
• KBS Tour X

Thanks a lot. I am totally surprised by the recommendations as I currently have TT Dynalite S300's in my mp53's. I knew they were flying too high. I am curious if C-Tapers would be recommended. Thanks again for you help.

[gslinares05]

Can someone let me know what recommendation I would get for the flex in C-Tapers with these numbers: 94 5435.
Thanks

[DaveMac]

gslinares05, on 19 November 2012 - 11:42 PM, said:

Can someone let me know what recommendation I would get for the flex in C-Tapers with these numbers: 94 5435.

As I mentioned the C Taper is not on the European DNA software so, I sourced the Hireko shaft data for your current shaft, plus the optimiser recommendations. The information shows the C Taper as a valid option, with data similar to the KBS Tour.

I know this might spark a debate as C Tapers have a stronger than flex reputation but that is a debate for existing threads.

Shaft   Raw   Trim  F   T   B  SS
Dynalite Gold Taper   S300 113.0 107.6 309 80 58 79
Dynamic Gold Taper  X100 129.6 119.8 330 90 69 89
Project X 6.5 123.8 112.5 332 92 67 89
KBS Tour    X 127.0 118.0 336 81 58 84
KBS C Taper   X 127.5 118.1 332 77 56 84

Raw weight, trimmed weight, frequency, butt strength, tip strength, 5 Iron swing speed

Tom Wishon helpfully posted the bend profiles for a large range of steel shafts this post has the X Flex models.

[driverwedge]

gslinares05, on 19 November 2012 - 07:07 PM, said:

DaveMac, on 19 November 2012 - 06:34 PM, said:

gslinares05, on 19 November 2012 - 04:03 PM, said:

Hi, DNA 94 5435

No real surprises with these numbers! Be aware my software is the European version so no CTaper but I would guess they would be a recommendation as well. Perhaps someone state side might run the numbers to confirm.

• Dynamic Gold X100
  
• Project X 6.5
  
• KBS Tour X

Thanks a lot. I am totally surprised by the recommendations as I currently have TT Dynalite S300's in my mp53's. I knew they were flying too high. I am curious if C-Tapers would be recommended. Thanks again for you help.

The recs are the same using the US software.  The C-Taper usually shows up for people with more aggressive transitions.  Yours at 5 is pretty smooth.  I played with the numbers and the C Taper only showed up at 7 and higher.  Also, at 94, it would figure you're hitting the s300 high, especially in the 53 that hits high for an MP anyway.  My #s are 95 6374.  I got new 64s with the CTaper X for giggles.  They're fine but certainly hit higher than my DGs.  Don't think the CTaper is a low hitting shaft.  It's just designed to be lower than the PX.  They're a different feeling shaft.  Not a bad thing, but just make sure you hit it first.

Good luck!

[gslinares05]

Thank you guys very much for all the info, recommendations, and help. I started looking at the different shaft options and am a little overwhelmed. I want to hit it high but don't want them ballooning. I am assuming I will hit the x100's high but wonder if the KBS options or PX options will help me with not losing distance when playing in the wind. If those shafts can help me handle the wind, I can see the worth in spending so much more than the x100's.

[DaveMac]

gslinares05, on 21 November 2012 - 02:14 AM, said:

Thank you guys very much for all the info, recommendations, and help. I started looking at the different shaft options and am a little overwhelmed. I want to hit it high but don't want them ballooning. I am assuming I will hit the x100's high but wonder if the KBS options or PX options will help me with not losing distance when playing in the wind. If those shafts can help me handle the wind, I can see the worth in spending so much more than the x100's.

Good to see some feedback on where Ctaper's fit into the matrix, (thanks @Driverwedge).

Here is my best guess on launch; you really need to try the shafts on a trackman/flightscope to get an accurate comparison.

• Lowest will be the Dynamic Gold X100
  
• The Project X will be a little higher but should have least spin
  
• The KBS Tour X will be Project X height, perhaps a little higher but with more spin.

While they are all recommendations you will have a strong feel preference for one of the three shafts. As @Driverwedge mentioned the MP 53 head will be contributing to the high launch, so if your preference is the KBS or Project X it might be more cost effective to upgrade to something like the MP64. (KBS and Project X are no upcharge here in the UK)

Hope you get sorted out.

[EricZ116]

Awesome thread here.

84 5 3 1 4 please? And what would the speed have to be in order to have the x100s come up with these numbers?

[DaveMac]

EricZ116, on 21 November 2012 - 09:43 AM, said:

84 5 3 1 4 please? And what would the speed have to be in order to have the x100s come up with these numbers?

• Dynamic Gold S300
  
• Project X 5.5
  
• KBS Stiff

You would need significantly higher clubhead speed (+10mph) to get straight in X100’s as a recommendation.  Your current swing tempo is in the middle but a more aggressive tempo would make X100’s a recommendation at a slightly lower clubhead speed (+6mph)

[EricZ116]

Ok, that makes sense. I've been fighting a high ball flight and have always only played S300s, currently on my AP1s. I'm considering making the move to MP 53s or 59s - I love both, not sure which to go with; hit them both about the same in to the monitor. Thinking I can grow more with the 59s.

[driverwedge]

DaveMac, on 21 November 2012 - 09:18 AM, said:

gslinares05, on 21 November 2012 - 02:14 AM, said:

Thank you guys very much for all the info, recommendations, and help. I started looking at the different shaft options and am a little overwhelmed. I want to hit it high but don't want them ballooning. I am assuming I will hit the x100's high but wonder if the KBS options or PX options will help me with not losing distance when playing in the wind. If those shafts can help me handle the wind, I can see the worth in spending so much more than the x100's.

Good to see some feedback on where Ctaper's fit into the matrix, (thanks @Driverwedge).

Here is my best guess on launch; you really need to try the shafts on a trackman/flightscope to get an accurate comparison.

• Lowest will be the Dynamic Gold X100
  
• The Project X will be a little higher but should have least spin
  
• The KBS Tour X will be Project X height, perhaps a little higher but with more spin.

While they are all recommendations you will have a strong feel preference for one of the three shafts. As @Driverwedge mentioned the MP 53 head will be contributing to the high launch, so if your preference is the KBS or Project X it might be more cost effective to upgrade to something like the MP64. (KBS and Project X are no upcharge here in the UK)

Hope you get sorted out.

It's a pleasure to help out.  Dave's assessment on launch between the x100, PX and KBS Tour is spot on.  The C Taper will launch and spin slightly less/lower than the PX.  The KBS Tour is highest of all 4 with launch and spin.

I made a set of 53/x100 for a friend and they're just a pleasure to hit.  Not too high at all and absolutely no ballooning.  Great control.  BUT, that's me swinging the club.  Everyone's swing is a bit different.  You really need to find a fitting cart where you can hit them all in the same head, back to back.  As Dave said, there's no doubt you'll form a strong opinion as to what you like the best.

[driverwedge]

EricZ116, on 21 November 2012 - 10:40 AM, said:

Ok, that makes sense. I've been fighting a high ball flight and have always only played S300s, currently on my AP1s. I'm considering making the move to MP 53s or 59s - I love both, not sure which to go with; hit them both about the same in to the monitor. Thinking I can grow more with the 59s.

No matter what shaft you put in AP1s you'll hit them high.  That's what they're made for.  High and straight.  Nothing wrong with it, unless you don't want the "high" part.  The 53s will hit lower than the AP1 but will be more demanding.  Remember, while the 53 is the most forgiving head in the MP line-up, it's still an MP and won't let you get away with murder.  You still need to put a good swing on it.  You can grow plenty with both the 53 and 59.  Both are player heads.

Good luck!

[ck25]

Don't want to thread jack but I think this may be useful for some. I went to a Mizuno fitting and made sure they had the newest optimizer + software. Here was my recommendation:
81, 5, 4, 6, 4

1) DG XP S300
2) PXi 5.0 (yes it's PXi)
3) KBS Tour S, ssx1

Now I'm a bit surprised at the result; especially I see someone on here with nearly the same DNA as me but smidgen more ss and got recommended DGS3 and PX 5.5. So with just a bit less ss I need a light weight shaft with more flexible tip? Now I'm confused.

[DaveMac]

ck25, on 21 November 2012 - 07:27 PM, said:

Don't want to thread jack but I think this may be useful for some. I went to a Mizuno fitting and made sure they had the newest optimizer + software. Here was my recommendation:
81, 5, 4, 6, 4

1) DG XP S300
2) PXi 5.0 (yes it's PXi)
3) KBS Tour S, ssx1

Now I'm a bit surprised at the result; especially I see someone on here with nearly the same DNA as me but smidgen more ss and got recommended DGS3 and PX 5.5. So with just a bit less ss I need a light weight shaft with more flexible tip? Now I'm confused.

CK you posted a different DNA earlier in this thread 77-4-5-6-5 and said you had a preference for playing Dynamic Gold R300.

Your latest DNA 81, 5, 4, 6, 4 has resulted in the Dynalite Gold XP and KBS tour in your original recommendation, changing flex from regular too stiff. So it is not unreasonable for a similar increase in swing speed (81 to 84) to cause the change from Dynalite Gold XP S300 to Dynamic Gold S300.

As I mentioned before with the middle ranking tempo the software is looking for mid weight shafts so it will avoid the Dynamic Gold if possible (swing speed increases or a very late release). Mizuno must consider the PXi 5.0 and PX 5.0 to be equivalent because the PX 5.0 is your recommendation from the European version of the software.  

The recommendations are only the starting point; they need to be tested and compared, preferably using a launch monitor. It is perfectly possible that you won’t agree with the recommendations and prefer to continue playing dynamic gold’s.

[ck25]

DaveMac, on 21 November 2012 - 08:17 PM, said:

CK you posted a different DNA earlier in this thread 77-4-5-6-5 and said you had a preference for playing Dynamic Gold R300.

Your latest DNA 81, 5, 4, 6, 4 has resulted in the Dynalite Gold XP and KBS tour in your original recommendation, changing flex from regular too stiff. So it is not unreasonable for a similar increase in swing speed (81 to 84) to cause the change from Dynalite Gold XP S300 to Dynamic Gold S300.

As I mentioned before with the middle ranking tempo the software is looking for mid weight shafts so it will avoid the Dynamic Gold if possible (swing speed increases or a very late release). Mizuno must consider the PXi 5.0 and PX 5.0 to be equivalent because the PX 5.0 is your recommendation from the European version of the software.  

The recommendations are only the starting point; they need to be tested and compared, preferably using a launch monitor. It is perfectly possible that you won’t agree with the recommendations and prefer to continue playing dynamic gold’s.

Thanks Dave. Yes I've made some swing changes since I last posted after I visited my coach, so the numbers are a bit different. I was just a bit surprised that just a 2mph increase in SS (referring to AndyH99's number) would make the optimizer suggest DGS3 and PX 5.5, whch I think is a pretty drastic change.

[DaveMac]

ck25, on 21 November 2012 - 08:28 PM, said:

Thanks Dave. Yes I've made some swing changes since I last posted after I visited my coach, so the numbers are a bit different. I was just a bit surprised that just a 2mph increase in SS (referring to AndyH99's number) would make the optimizer suggest DGS3 and PX 5.5, whch I think is a pretty drastic change.

Congratulations on a significant improvement in your swing in a short period of time. Personally I don’t think the differences in the two sets of recommendations are as large as you feel they are. The factors that drive a change in recommendations are always pretty subtle. This has probably become even more subtle with the addition of two more shafts to the available options.

Tom Wishon has added the bend profiles of the majority of steel shafts, if you check them out I think you will see there is some degree of cross over between models and flexes.

[ck25]

DaveMac, on 21 November 2012 - 08:52 PM, said:

Congratulations on a significant improvement in your swing in a short period of time. Personally I don’t think the differences in the two sets of recommendations are as large as you feel they are. The factors that drive a change in recommendations are always pretty subtle. This has probably become even more subtle with the addition of two more shafts to the available options.

Tom Wishon has added the bend profiles of the majority of steel shafts, if you check them out I think you will see there is some degree of cross over between models and flexes.

Hoping you can help me with something Dave.

Yesterday during the fitting I spent the better part of the hour trying the DGXPS3 shaft (no PXi in the fitting cart). I can never get used to the light weight shaft as I've probably grown up to the heft of DG's. I don't really notice any performance gains as well. Heck I even like the feel of DGS3 much more than the light weight version.

But is this simply because I can't get used to the light weight shaft due to me playing DG for so long? Perhaps an hour is not enough? I probably need 3+ month of constant playing to get used to and then realize the benefit of the shaft optimizer's recommendations? Any insight is appreciated. Thanks!

Edited by ck25, 21 November 2012 - 10:17 PM.

[DaveMac]

ck25, on 21 November 2012 - 10:15 PM, said:

Hoping you can help me with something Dave.

Yesterday during the fitting I spent the better part of the hour trying the DGXPS3 shaft (no PXi in the fitting cart). I can never get used to the light weight shaft as I've probably grown up to the heft of DG's. I don't really notice any performance gains as well. Heck I even like the feel of DGS3 much more than the light weight version.

But is this simply because I can't get used to the light weight shaft due to me playing DG for so long? Perhaps an hour is not enough? I probably need 3+ month of constant playing to get used to and then realize the benefit of the shaft optimizer's recommendations? Any insight is appreciated. Thanks!

IMO there should be no requirement to get used to the recommendation, the shaft should simply feel 'right', if it doesn’t, dismiss the option completely and move on to one of the others. If none of the recommendations match the performance/feel of the Dynamic Gold, then go with the Dynamic Gold's.

We can sometimes get distracted by the science and the vast array of options available, the DNA system is only attempting to reduce the large amount of possible options down to a manageable set, for you to test. The 'right' shaft is the one which produces the best consistent launch conditions but more importantly has the correct swing feel, for you!

Fitting is still part art and always will be.

[EROtero]

Hello all,

I got some DNA numbers from a local shop but was unable to get the shaft recommendations as their computer was down. I am interested in irons and woods. Here are the numbers:

85-5-4-5-5
85-5-4-4-5
87-5-4-4-5

Many thanks in advance!!!

[DaveMac]

EROtero, on 22 November 2012 - 04:59 PM, said:

I got some DNA numbers from a local shop but was unable to get the shaft recommendations as their computer was down. I am interested in irons and woods. Here are the numbers:  86-5-4-4-5

The optimiser currently only gives iron shaft recommendations, your suggested steel shaft options are:

• Dynamic Gold S300
  
• Project X 5.5
  
• KBS Tour S

Edited by DaveMac, 22 November 2012 - 05:50 PM.

[EROtero]

DaveMac, on 22 November 2012 - 05:49 PM, said:

EROtero, on 22 November 2012 - 04:59 PM, said:

I got some DNA numbers from a local shop but was unable to get the shaft recommendations as their computer was down. I am interested in irons and woods. Here are the numbers:  86-5-4-4-5

The optimiser currently only gives iron shaft recommendations, your suggested steel shaft options are:

• Dynamic Gold S300
  
• Project X 5.5
  
• KBS Tour S

Thanks DaveMac! I'm currently using KBS Tour S and ball flight is very high and with loads of spin (ball literally comes down and stops with no roll). Looking at C-Tapers Stiff ss x1, do you think this will work better given my ball flight issues? I tried the c-taper stiff (not ss) on MP-64 and felt really good, but I'm afraid it will be a little too stiff hence the ss.

[DaveMac]

EROtero, on 22 November 2012 - 06:06 PM, said:

Thanks DaveMac! I'm currently using KBS Tour S and ball flight is very high and with loads of spin (ball literally comes down and stops with no roll). Looking at C-Tapers Stiff ss x1, do you think this will work better given my ball flight issues? I tried the c-taper stiff (not ss) on MP-64 and felt really good, but I'm afraid it will be a little too stiff hence the ss.

If you have tried the C-Taper and found that you like them, I see no reason not to go with them. Soft stepping make only a subtle difference but if this will add confidence in the selection then you should go with this option. The C-Taper should provide a stronger flight with lower spin than the KBS tour.

[ck25]

DaveMac, on 22 November 2012 - 07:25 AM, said:

IMO there should be no requirement to get used to the recommendation, the shaft should simply feel 'right', if it doesn’t, dismiss the option completely and move on to one of the others. If none of the recommendations match the performance/feel of the Dynamic Gold, then go with the Dynamic Gold's.

We can sometimes get distracted by the science and the vast array of options available, the DNA system is only attempting to reduce the large amount of possible options down to a manageable set, for you to test. The 'right' shaft is the one which produces the best consistent launch conditions but more importantly has the correct swing feel, for you!

Fitting is still part art and always will be.

Thanks Dave!

Yes with all these science and technology, sometimes I do doubt my current equipment and setup -- "will I shoot X lower if I use the optimizer's recommendation?" I guess I just need to trust my feel and play whatever that feels the best to me.