Dave, You pretty much know all that can be done to raise the swingweight; lighter grips, longer shafts, lead tip pins, heavier heads. The problem I have always seen with a change from steel to graphite is swingweight. I switched once and lost my timing all together. I did not gain more height in my trajectory. I don't agree with the Jeffs on their statement. However I used high point shafts just to be safe ;-) I suggest you look at the Paragon low torque shafts. They are between 77 and 82g and I have had the best luck with them in irons, of any I have used/made/sold, for those switching from steel to graphite. They are advertised as Mid to Low BP but I've found them to be closer to High.
I'm glad to hear you are trying the Near-Net. I put my Near-net Blades on a higher point lighter weight steel shaft, cut them 1/2" longer, swingweighted to D4 and ended up with a lower trajectory with a little more distance. Good Luck, Cub ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dave Tutelman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, February 05, 2003 1:08 PM Subject: ShopTalk: Questions about graphite shafts for irons > In the past, I have used or recommended graphite shafts only if they were > needed to keep the swingweight down. I'm now considering another use, and > would like to tap the vast experience out there on ShopTalk for advice. > > I'm considering making myself a new set of irons, with graphite shafts. The > objective is to lighten my bag a little, since I'm carrying more now that > my bag has a double strap. (Until the last few months, I pulled a trolley > almost all the time.) The thing is, I'm happy with the way I hit my irons > now, and I don't want to screw it up. If graphite shafts don't work just as > well, I'm better off lugging (or pulling) my current irons. > > Here are the issues/questions: > > (1) Swingweight: The graphite shafted clubs will be lighter. I'm going from > Balistiks (probably 110-115g cut to length) to about 80-83g graphites. If I > have to go much heavier than that, I wouldn't bother; the objective is > lighter overall weight. But without any other design change that means a > significant loss of swingweight, probably more than a half-inch worth. I'm > willing to live with clubs that are 1/4" longer than now, but not more than > that. How do y'all deal with that? I can think of several approaches, but > I'm not sure of their feasibility: > - Tip-weighted graphite shafts. I know these were available 3-5 years ago. > Are they still around? Are they any good? > - Separate lead tip weights. I have seen these for graphites, but nothing > more than 4 grams. It'll help, but not a lot. > - Lead tape. I know how to apply it. But I don't like to start a project > KNOWING that I'll have to use tape; that should be a last resort. It should > be for tuning specific clubs, not for a blanket treatment for the set, IMHO. > > (2) Trajectory: I hit my irons plenty high as it is. Perhaps a shade too > high, but it's not a priority to lower the trajectory. (It would be nice, > but I'm getting plenty of distance now.) But I certainly don't want to hit > them any higher. > I have seen the Dynacraft Jeffs (Summitt & Jackson) say that lowering a > club's balance point with the same swingweight (i.e.- lighter shaft) will > lead to a higher trajectory. Wishon's book does not suggest this effect, > and I certainly can't see what would cause it. So I don't know. > What have y'all seen by way of trajectory changes when a golfer goes from > steel to graphite. Are some graphite shafts lower-trajectory than others? > > BTW, my current choice of components for this experiment are: > * Raven Near-Net cavity backs (my current irons are Golfsmith Jetstreams). > * MCC shafts (I'm thinking the MFS-30, or the -40 if the 30 will hit it > too high; I'm not sure I hit hard enough for the -40). The SK shafts that I > usually like have a high balance point, and will only make the swingweight > problem worse. > > I've made up a Near-Net 5-iron with the same Balistik shaft (same > swingweight, length, and frequency) as my current irons; the performance is > fairly similar to my current 5-iron. I like the feel of the Near-Net a > little better (probably the sound -- less treble and more bass), and didn't > suffer a noticeable loss of forgiveness. > > Any comments? > > advTHANKSance! > DaveT > >
