I read this article on spines and nbp i think i get what you are saying now.
I will let you know the results of my first test. Thanks -
Jimhttp://www.clubmaker-online.com/spines.html
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Mark A Patton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, October 05, 2003 3:32 PM
Subject: RE: ShopTalk: NBP-COG


> This presumes a particular type shaft. What we feel as Spine and NBP are
not
> always 180*.
> Actually, John K has proved that spines are planes and always exist 180*
> When a spine is felt 180* opposite of a NBP, check that there is not
> residual bend in the shaft.
>
>
>
> Mark A Patton
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Jim & Ivette
> Sent: Tuesday, October 14, 2003 2:57 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: ShopTalk: NBP-COG
>
>
> Hi Bernie, I agree with Doug but i strive to understand it, NBP-COG makes
> sense to me and I am going to try it out on a set I am putting together
this
> week. I am still not sure about NBP, I am assuming that the spine is the
> section of the shaft that rolls away from the bend when a load is put on
it
> from my spine finder, then the natural bend point will be 180 degrees out
> from that point? Then when you put the shaft into the housel and lay it
off
> the end of the table the spine will point up and the NBP will point down
> towards the COG of the head? Does this sound right? Thanks - Jim
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Bernie Baymiller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Sunday, October 05, 2003 10:34 AM
> Subject: Re: ShopTalk: NBP-COG
>
>
> > Doug,
> >
> > > The more I mess with spines and scratch my head
> > > about how to orient the shafts, the more I appreciate shafts that
don't
> > have
> > > spines.
> >
> > Me, too.
> >
> > > I suppose a strong spine properly aligned, whatever that means,
> > > might be better than anything.
> >
> > According to those who hit the ball harder and farther than I, aligning
a
> > shaft's large spine (over 5 cpm?) at 12 o'clock makes a big difference
in
> > reducing the size of the impact area on the face. The more center hits,
> the
> > more longer, accurate drives. Thus, it's called a "supershaft
alignment."
> > Actually, though the USGA has made small deviations in stiffness around
> the
> > circumference of a shaft acceptable, large spines essentially make a
shaft
> > non-conforming to the rules of golf...at least, that's my opinion on the
> > subject.
> >
> > > But it's hard to get bad results with no
> > > spine.  I just wish I could find more shafts like that.
> >
> > That's true. The SK Fiber shafts which I've been using almost always
have
> > less than .006" deflection (about 1 cpm) and play very well. Though I
> > haven't used any Accuflex shafts because of their high price, those who
> have
> > used them report they are as good as the SK Fiber shafts. And, most
> filament
> > wound shafts have very little spine. If these manufacturers can do it,
so
> > could Penley, UST, Grafalloy, etc. IMO, the USGA should put a limit on
> spine
> > magnitude of 2 cpm.
> >
> > Bernie
> > Writeto: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> >
>
> ---
> Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.520 / Virus Database: 318 - Release Date: 9/18/2003
>
> ---
> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.520 / Virus Database: 318 - Release Date: 9/18/2003
>

Reply via email to