Thanks RK... I meant "ream" and was frivalously using the word "drill".
:-) Richard Kennedy wrote:
Ream "NEVER" drill One day your going to get hurt drilling out a hole
or hosel bore. plus there is no such thing as a .370 drill, .370 reamer yes, .370 drill no
RK
Manufacturer's of World Class Golf Club Repair Equipment
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
-------Original Message-------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Friday, February 07, 2003 11:47:25 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: ShopTalk: Taper or parallel
Tom - thanks for that idea. I'd heard of that once before, yet
forgotten about it. It does seem a viable solution, if I don't want to
"mess with" the hosel diameters. I'll have to look at them again, but
as I recall, the hosel walls are fairly thick and could stand a drilling
out to .370, if all else fails.
jgk
tflan wrote:
>This is often opposed by the purists here but it works. Use either taper or
>parallel tip shafts and roughen the tips. Important, do this before you do
>the following; then, using a metal cutting disc with your Dremel type tool,
>cut a couple of slits into the tips of the shafts. Then assemble in the
>usual manner. If its good enough for Callaway, its good enough for me.
>Callaway slits every one of their shaft tips and inserts a tip plug.
>
>I've used this method reshafting taper tips when I couldn't get a shaft to
>match the existing quick enough. Never had a problem.
>
>TFlan
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "jgk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>>
>To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>>
>Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 3:52 PM
>Subject: Re: ShopTalk: Taper or parallel
>
>
>
>
>>Since we're discussing taper vs. parallel... maybe you guys could help
>>me on this one.
>>
>>I came across a set of 1957 Wilson Staff Dyna-Powered (2nd year) heads
>>which are BRAND NEW, never been shafted (at least I'm told they are ...
>>someone else told me they were probably re-finished). And... I know
>>they were .343 (old, smaller taper), rather than .355, so I cannot even
>>use the more recent .355 taper shafts in them. I've toyed with the
>>idea of :
>>
>>1. keeping them the way they are, and just looking at them occasionally
>>2. reaming them out a bit to accept .355, which are still widely
>>available.
>>3. really reaming them out (if they'll go that far), to accept .370
>>parallel
>>
>>I've had a few "collectors" want to buy them from me, as is...no telling
>>what they want to do with them.
>>
>>I suppose my ideal solution would be to find a set of "vintage" shafts
>>around somewhere, and build them up as close to what they were, as
>>possible, hang 'em on a wall and look at 'em.
>>
>>Any suggestions as to how I find shafts that'll work, without drilling
>>out the hosels??
>>
>>Thanks!!
>>
>>
>>
>>[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:gt;[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>In a message dated 2/6/03 5:57:24 PM Eastern Standard Time,
>>>[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:gt;[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>I was told that the taper offers more feeling in the head whereas the
>>>>parallel offers feeling throughout the whole club.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>Feeling in the clubhead is a function of swingweight. Parallel tip
>>>shafts can be swingweighted as can taper tipped shafts. Swingweight is
>>>a function of raw head weight, shaft length, shaft weight and grip
>>>weight. The shape of the shaft tip has nothing to do with swingweight.
>>>What do you mean by "feeling throughout the whole club"? Are you
>>>trying to determine which type of shaft to use? Why? Are you going to
>>>ream a taper tip hosel? Are you going to reshaft any particular club?
>>>Are you plannning to manufacture a set of clubs (how many sets)?
>>>Please ask the complete question. Is this a quiz? Throw all the cards
>>>on the table and I am sure you everyone here will help you "read your
>>>hand" with an answer or two.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
.
