Alan, I have shafts that have had many different heads installed (my current driver shaft is now on it's fifth or sixth) and if done carefully, there normally isn't any problem. However, having a backup shaft is probably a good plan.
-----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Alan Brooks Sent: Saturday, April 12, 2003 5:32 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: ShopTalk: Request for comments on spine test plan Dave and all, this brings up a question I have been toying with in my mind. What is the risk of damaging the tip of a shaft in the process of removing and reinstalling it in a different alignment? How would we know whether it has been damaged enough to alter its performance? Would it be worthwhile to have a second set of shafts (as nearly identical as we can make them) as a backup in case we do damage a shaft? In my limited experience I have had very mixed success with removing and reusing graphite shafts. Regards, Alan At 10:21 AM 4/12/03 -0400, you wrote: >At 07:53 PM 4/11/03 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >>Dave >> Read the parameters of the test and as expectd are quite complete, >> however I would make one addition as experience has proven that >> identical club when measured do not always perform the same. I would >> like to see a test using the same shaft and head combo with the shaft >> being removed and re orientated in each of the different location. I >> understand the costraints you are under but I believe this method along >> with impact locations on the face would be a good insight what is really >> happening while keeping all variables to a minimum. >> Charlie B > >Thanks, Charlie. >That is indeed what the current test plan says. > >I have received a few comments on this issue. Most agree with you. In >order to assure that the only thing that changes is the alignment, use the >same shaft in different alignments. It would be too dicey to be certain >that everything was the same except alignment if we used two different >shafts, even if we chose them to be "identical". What parameters would we >have to measure to assure "identical"? > >But at least one comment said that we could do better testing to isolate >factors if we arrived on-scene with all the clubs we needed already >constructed. He is correct, of course, but that doesn't help me answer the >"what is identical?" question. > >Thanks again, >DaveT >
