37 replies to this topic

[bladestriker]

kellygreen, on 03 November 2012 - 06:51 AM, said:

BrianL99, on 03 November 2012 - 04:30 AM, said:

GolfMonster09, on 02 November 2012 - 09:33 PM, said:

Would like to see a robotic test of different shafts. Get the robot to swing the club - same head, swing speed, contact, smash factors, etc. - with shafts of different flexes. A comprehensive comparative scientific test of the effects of different shafts on ball flight, distance, dispersion, spin rates, etc.

Anybody have access to that kind of stuff? Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm...

PING does, from years of testing with "PINGMan".  

For many years, PING only offered what was essentially a "uniflex" shaft, that would probably be characterized as an "XStiff".  Karsten was convinced, based on the results from PINGMan, that everyone should be playing a very stiff shaft for optimum results.  At least as I understand it, the only reason PING began to offer different flex shafts, was that it was a losing battle to convince players that his analysis was flawed, while every other manufacturer was offering choices.

Some more data:

A visual inspection of body kinematics data revealed
differences in shaft stiffness had no observable effect within a given subject, although obvious and expected differences were noted between subjects. While statistically significant differences were noted among shaft types for clubhead speed, solid hit factor and ball/ clubhead impact location, the actual magnitudes of these differences were considered negligible.   (http://iweb.tms.org/ED/01-5085-23.pdf)

Or here:  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22900403

There are 100's of other supposedly scientific studies out there, offering various conclusions.  Most studies however, do conclude that shaft stiffness is irrelevant to ball speed/distance/launch angle.  On the other hand, most analysis of "dispersion" seem to offer inconsistent conclusions.

A few problems.

1. Robots dont' swing golf clubs like humans do...even though they are able to swing the club exactly the same each time.

2. Humans---even tour pros---are not able to swing a golf club consistently enough from swing to swing to identifiy small differences...unless you measure a LOT of swings. But then day to day variations and fatigue also act to confound any attempts to standardize.

3. Unless your swing is pretty consistent, you just aren't going to see much difference between one shaft and another.  Because the inconsistencies in the golf swing itself will overwhelm any contribution from the shaft.

4. The more consistent your swing is, the more you will notice the effects that shafts have on ballflight, distance, dispersion and spin rates.   Even if you blind tested me with a KBS tour x, a DGX100, a PX 6.5 and a KBS C-taper X...I would not only be able to tell the difference in terms of feel...I'd also be able to tell the difference in terms of ball flight.

But I can to that today, because my swing has enough repeatability to be able see the effects.  Fifteen years ago, I wouldn't have been able to do that, because of the inconsistency in my swing.

If I recall correctly, Karsten developed his Pingman to mimic forearm roll and wrist hinge like a human would swing...

[Sean2]

The gentleman in the video may have a point. I hit a bunch of demo irons today without looking at the shafts. The one the felt the best and produced the best results was one I'd never consider: Dynamic Gold S300. Really liked it.

[hoganfan924]

I've seen some pretty large differences in spin and launch angle trying different shafts on Trackman.  As much as 2 deg. launch and 1000 rpm with a mid iron and that's all the same flex shafts, just different designs/makes.  But sure, if you don't really load the shaft, you can pretty much make any flex work.  An 82 mph CH speed with a 6 iron is pretty low for swinging an DG X-100 and it definitely doesn't look like he loads the shaft much in his swing so no surprise.  Interesting that he didn't show spin though.

[kk2golf1]

The video is flawed for all the reasons mentioned, most notably that Mark doesn't load the shaft enough on the x100. I personally loved the feel of the KBS tour, but the launch angle and spin was much higher than other shafts. I tried the DGR300 and my launch was too low with one head and fine with another. I finally found the PXi 5.0 launched properly with less spin and the feel is great. So I went with that....

[Tough]

Great video. This has got me thinkin about all the $$ I've put into shafts lately...

[ej002]

Back9, on 02 November 2012 - 09:36 PM, said:

The problem with this particular "experiment" is that he is not swinging hard enough to flex the shaft significantly on his hard swing.  He is below the dynamic range of that shaft and so it performs essentially the same for both swings.  If he would swing at say 100mph, he would be more into the range where an extra stiff shaft would be expected to exhibit different performance characteristcs than a less stiff shaft. Of course those performance differences would be manifested by more than just launch angle.  one would expect to see differences in spin, dispersion, ballspeed, etc. as well.

Obviously flex is only one component of a shaft.  Torque, flexpoint, subsection stiffness all contribute to significant differences in actual, measurable performance, not just feel.

You are right.  Basically this is what Tom Wishon said.  At a certain point, shafts don't matter.

[dunn]

I hit everyflex of shaft out there last year as part of a testing experiment...... Within a month or less I adapted to shaft and hit it fine and consistently no matter the flex

I am a 5 hdcp and only feel and a Lil trajectory was difference

Unless your tour pro or really really skilled
player, all the computer stats don't mean squat

And I know most on here don't fall into these categories so yeah all the puring, floing subflexes, cpm numbers, SS, or HS is pointless....

Find a head you like get a shaft you like feel of and go play........practice, practice, practice is the only way !!!!once again it is proven

Edited by dunn, 07 November 2012 - 03:46 PM.

[kk2golf1]

dunn, on 07 November 2012 - 03:41 PM, said:

I hit everyflex of shaft out there last year as part of a testing experiment...... Within a month or less I adapted to shaft and hit it fine and consistently no matter the flex

I am a 5 hdcp and only feel and a Lil trajectory was difference

Unless your tour pro or really really skilled
player, all the computer stats don't mean squat

And I know most on here don't fall into these categories so yeah all the puring, floing subflexes, cpm numbers, SS, or HS is pointless....

Find a head you like get a shaft you like feel of and go play........practice, practice, practice is the only way !!!!once again it is proven

So if the ball is launching way too high and you are losing 20yds of distance that is OK? If it feels good that is fine, right? Just practice and it will be fine? I agree puring, flowing etc is not that important, but I personally loved the "feel" of the NS Pro 950 and KBS Tour R shaft, but I was launching them way to high and losing distance with massive amounts of spin. You consider that OK? I don't.... get fitted properly...don't agonize over the numbers, but at least make sure you aren't taking a step backward in your equipment.