Dave, > Have you tried this alignment on woods, > too?
Yes. I've used it on a 45" 2W which I use from the tee or fairway, depending on the ball's lie, or length and tightness of the hole, and a couple of long drivers. Works OK on the 2W with a shaft which has a fairly large spine. So far, NBP-target felt a little more solid on that club, while NBP-COG seems to give me a few more draws. Distance about the same for me. I can't see any difference in NBP-COG and NBP-target on my long drivers. But, since I'm using SK Fiber Pure Energy A-flex shafts on my drivers, and this shaft has almost no spine, I wouldn't expect to find much difference in any alignment. > Can you give any insight into the physics behind this alignment? Nope. Last physics that I had was in 1953 at Penn State. > Spine alignment is a funny thing, I think. When I first signed up to > these lists and was doing my research, it seemed that Spine at 12 o'clock > was the way to go. Then not too long ago, NBP at the target was the way > to go (and certainly felt better in the clubs I've tried it on. Well, spine at 12 o'clock and NBP to target are the same alignment on most graphite shafts. > I wonder what's going to follow NBP-COG... ;-) Hopefully, some good research on the subject. :-) Bernie Writeto: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
