Jim, Anecdotal info, as was mine, but did you notice any differences in the way the irons played? I haven't tried the S1-COG alignment yet, but with NBP-COG, as I noted in my previous post, found the short irons in particular to be much more in the direction I aimed them.
Bernie Writeto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ----- Original Message ----- From: "Thomson, Jim" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2003 4:12 PM Subject: RE: ShopTalk: NBP-COG > I have reshafted my three drivers using the NBP-COG alignment (975J/Graphite > Design YS-6; 975J-VS/Graphite Design Purple Ice; 983K/Aldila NV) and was > very pleased with the results of all three. I reshafted one of my Titleist > 962 sets with the new Balistik shaft using the S1-COG alignment and really > like these as well. Anecdotal info for what it's worth. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Letourneau, Henry J AM1(AW) (VAW120) > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: October 8, 2003 2:23 PM > To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' > Subject: RE: ShopTalk: NBP-COG > > > Richard, there seems do be as many different views on spine allignment as > there are positions to allign to! In the end I will have to do some testing > to see for myself, I will mention however that when i started spine > alligning about a year ago i was doing all of the clubs spined to the 1200 > position because it felt better. My question to you is have you tried the > nbp-cog allignment and what were your results. Would S1-COG make more sense > than simply alligning a set of irons to 1200? My experience is limited to > building 10 to 12 sets a year over the past three years and am always > looking for the best possible method af set matching available for my > customers as well as myself. Thanks - Jim Letourneau > > -----Original Message----- > From: Richard Kennedy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2003 10:46 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: ShopTalk: NBP-COG > > > > Scott, to put it very simply , ALIEN THE HARD SPINE AT 12:00. 12:00 keeps > the clubhead toe from drooping. Forget what ever anybody else says, > especially Mr. David T.whom is not a clubmaker per se & who knows very > little about making/fitting of golfclubs. By his own admission he only > makes , at the very most, one set of clubs per year and those are strictly > for his own personal use, Mr. David T. made that statement not I. In fact > Mr. David T. fought us "SPINER'S" tooth and nail that the position off the > spine had no effect on the playability or the flex of the golfclub. It was > not until several People outside of ShopTalk or SpineTalk got into the fray, > with lots of money backing them,that he got into the discussion. I'm not > to sure but I think that Ed J., the host of SplineTalk, asked, I feel is a > better word to use then lets say kicked off of SpileTalk, because of his > disruptive and know it all air that he tried to use in his posts. I do not > subscribe to SpineTalk not because I do not believe in their views, which > by the way I helped to put into use, but because I'm am presently engaged in > other web sites that will have some, I hope, effecting with my health. I > am not the clubmaker that has been spining the longest but i have been > "SPINEING" golfclubs since 1984 long before it became popular. > > RK > > KENNEDY > golf equipment > manufacturer's of world class golfclub repair equipment > -------Original Message------- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Wednesday, October 08, 2003 1:02:35 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: ShopTalk: NBP-COG > > Let me preface this by saying my introduction to this subject is at most > a week old, and if my statements seem out to lunch, they very well may > be. I'm trying to think this through with my own limited understanding. > I'm certainly not trying to pass this off as if I know something that > the rest of you don't. > > If I remember my physics correctly (and I probably don't), I expect any > system like this to have some natural vibration; the twang you induce > for FLO would cause this particular system to vibrate at its natural > frequency. If the system is FLO aligned correctly this vibration is > along the target line at impact, i.e 3-9 o'clock. Otherwise this > vibration has a 12-6 o'clock component to it, which would help take the > clubface out of the line with the ball. Please note that I have no idea > how large this component would be. Are we talking fractions of > millimeters here? If the NBP is aligned to COG, the local minima for > shaft rigidity, then the vibration should be at a minimum because this > is the most inherently stable shaft orientation for the force applied (I > used the term damping to describe this ... I shouldn't have, it isn't > the correct term). If the spine were aligned at COG, then when force is > applied from the downsing, the shaft wants to rotate away (as in a spine > finder), because this is the most inherently unstable shaft orientation > and you would get the most vibration. > > Again, I have no idea if the deflection due to this oscillation could > cause a toe or heel hit. When I started reading up on this, I was > suprised aligning the spine would have any noticable affect on your shot > at all. > > Thank you for your patience. > > Scott > > Dave Tutelman wrote: > > > At 08:40 PM 10/7/03 -0600, Scott Stephens wrote: > > > >> It makes sense to me to align a NBP to the COG, since this should > >> contribute the least amount of oscillation of the club head/shaft. I > >> was originally thinking that the spine should be here so that the > >> least amount of bending of the shaft would happen at the bottom of > >> the downswing, but that would result in the most amount of oscillation. > > > > > > Scott, > > I'm sorry, but you lost me. Why would there be more oscillation with > > the spine aligned with the CG than NBP-CG? Here's my take on it; > > please tell me where I'm wrong: > > > > If you align either the NBP or the spine with the CG, then any force > > arising from bending at the bottom of the swing will be in the plane > > of the shaft and the CG. Any other alignment will have forces outside > > that plane, which could cause bending (and perhaps oscillation) in > > other planes as well. > > > >> Then I read about FLO alignment where it is stated that alignment > >> should be along the target line (see "SPINE FINDING AND WHAT TO DO > >> WITH THEM AFTER YOU FIND THEM"). Am I correct that these orientations > >> would be close to 90° out of phase in a 3 iron (but not nearly that > >> much for a driver or sand wedge)? It seems to me that aligning the > >> NBP(s) along the target line would not maximally dampen the > >> oscillations, but would keep whatever oscillations are present going > >> parallel to the target line (so you should hit closest to the sweet > >> spot). Is that the essence of FLO alignment? > > > > > > Again, I'm confused by your statement. In particular, I don't have a > > clue what would cause damping of oscillations to be different in the > > different planes. I can see a difference in the creation of > > oscillations and their size, but I see no difference in how the > > oscillations would be damped. > > > > Thanks in advance, > > DaveT > > > > > > > > > > > >
