ALan, why not I've been playing with a set now going on 15 ears. I mean hell I think that 35% of all putters on the market oday are Be/Copper. I used to have a set oif NB's Ping LOOK -Alikes that were Be/Copper. Remember "Where's there's a Will, There's Relative's
RK ----- Original Message ----- From: "Alan Brooks" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, January 05, 2005 10:55 PM Subject: [Norton AntiSpam] Re: RE: ShopTalk: Re: [SpinetalkersForum] Single length irons : Hey Richard, when was the last time you tried to get someone to fab : something out of Beryllium for you? It's wonderful stuff, but it's sure : not PC. : : Alan : : At 02:38 PM 1/5/2005 -0500, you wrote: : >Hey, Tedd How about this 2 - 3 & 4 irons mage from Forging stock, the 5 - 6 : >& 7 irons made as Investment Castings and the 8 - 9 & PW irons made from Ti. : >The 4140 / 4340 Forging stock weights in at somewheres very close to .29 : >Pounds per Cubic Inch The IC should weight in at around .254 Pounds per : >c/i and the TI weights in at .17 PPCI. or how about Be for the 8 - 9 7 PW. : > : >RK : > : >----- Original Message ----- : >From: "Childers, Tedd A" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> : >To: <[email protected]> : >Sent: Wednesday, January 05, 2005 12:18 PM : >Subject: [Norton AntiSpam] RE: ShopTalk: Re: [SpinetalkersForum] Single : >length irons : > : > : >: Alan, : >: : >: The only problem I see with a single length complete set is that the : >length : >: of the clubs would have to be closer to 38-40" to accommodate a 240g head : >: weight (as you suggest below), IF you want to obtain a somewhat : >traditional : >: swingweight (C8-D2 range). At that length, you are starting to get into : >the : >: range where most people seem to struggle with their traditional sets. The : >: question is, do they struggle with traditional long irons because of the : >: length, the lower loft, the smaller head size, or a combination of these. : >: The success of hybrids seems to indicate that the length factor can be at : >: least partially offset by larger, more forgiving hybrid head designs. In : >: reality, I believe that it is the combination of these three factors that : >: make long irons hard to hit well. A single length concept can address two : >: of these factors easily (length and head size/forgiveness) as long as the : >: heads are designed properly. If this concept takes off, I can foresee : >that : >: future sets could include hybrid type heads for the lower lofted irons, : >: cavity back designs for the mid-irons, and blades for the highest lofted : >: clubs, all built to the same weight and lie angle to allow single length : >: clubs. Whether or not the complete set, including "woods" could be : >included : >: at a single length remains to be seen. At worst, I think it is easily : >: achievable to only have 2 lengths of clubs, 1 for irons and 1 for woods. : >: : >: Tedd : >: : >: -----Original Message----- : >: From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] : >: [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Alan Brooks : >: Sent: Wednesday, January 05, 2005 11:19 AM : >: To: [email protected] : >: Subject: RE: ShopTalk: Re: [SpinetalkersForum] Single length irons : >: : >: : >: Hi Tedd, : >: : >: Dave's right about Max's program, the input variables are head speed, head : >: mass, and loft (along with some global parameters such as coefficient of : >: restitution, spin coefficient, etc.). Club length is not an input. After : >: my last post I played around with lower loft values and got the same sort : >: of numbers and distances that Dave did for the constant length clubs. : >: : >: Why is it that you think we need to apply the concept separately for woods : >: and irons? I have had this same conversation on Wishon's forum over MOI : >: matching. If we are trying to make a 'set' of clubs easier to get : >: repeatable results from, shouldn't they all be matched? I suspect if we : >: play around with the numbers a bit we can design a constant length set of : >: clubs that will get 200-yards on one end and 100-yards on the other. A : >lot : >: of the guys I play with would be thrilled if they could get 200-yards down : >: the middle consistently. I would design the set with hybrids for the low : >: lofted irons (to take advantage of the forgiveness properties of hollow : >: heads) progressing to a cavity back for the high lofted irons. They would : >: be comparable to a progressive length set from PW to 5-wood, which is what : >: most high handicappers should be playing with anyway. Of course, then : >they : >: might become mid-handicappers and want more Pro-like clubs. This could be : >: a godsend for the occasional golfer. : >: : >: I just went back into Max's program and ran 240-g head weight at 85-mph : >and : >: got 202-yards for an 18* loft and 98-yards for 50* loft. I believe there : >: is a lot of room for tweaking here. : >: : >: Regards, : >: : >: Alan Brooks : >: : >: : >: : >: At 08:21 AM 1/5/2005 -0500, you wrote: : >: >Alan, : >: > : >: >I think that the concept for single length would apply separately for : >irons : >: >and woods. Can you re-run the numbers using say a 42" club length for : >: woods : >: >with a 100 MPH swingspeed (I guess head weight would be around 220 : >grams). : >: >I think the target weight is closer to 266 grams for these heads, with : >the : >: >length at 36.6-37.5", depending on the golfer and the shaft used. Can : >: Max's : >: >program predict how much difference in swingspeed and/or distance one : >would : >: >get between a 38" club with a 253g head and a 37" club with a 266g head, : >: >assuming the same loft? : >: > : >: >Tedd : >: > : >: >-----Original Message----- : >: >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] : >: >[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Alan Brooks : >: >Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2005 7:46 PM : >: >To: [email protected] : >: >Subject: Re: ShopTalk: Re: [SpinetalkersForum] Single length irons : >: > : >: > : >: >Since it was easy to do I just ran Max Dupilka's Trajectory program for : >an : >: >80-mph, 250-g club head at various lofts. The distances I got are as : >: >follows: : >: > : >: >Loft Distance (yards) : >: >12 175 : >: >24 178 : >: >36 138 : >: >48 100 : >: > : >: >Reasonable numbers for lofts above 24*. It looks like it would take : >: >lighter heads (hence higher club head velocities) to get the distance : >back : >: >up with woods. The trajectory for the the 24*, 36*, and 48* lofts were : >: >comparably high. The 12* trajectory was about half the height. I did : >not : >: >play with the other parameters in Max's software (such as spin) that will : >: >influence true results. : >: > : >: >Interesting, though. : >: > : >: >Alan Brooks : >: > : >: > : >: > : >: > : >: >At 04:37 PM 1/4/2005 -0500, you wrote: : >: > >>Dave T. has done the math : >: > >>comparing single length iron distances vs. traditional irons, and : >there : >: > >>really is a minimal affect on distance by going to single length (at : >say : >: > >>37"). : >: > > : >: > >Sometime, I'll have to re-do it with a different set of assumptions. : >The : >: > >graph in the Club Design Notes assumes you couldn't get a set with : >: > >constant head weight. I assumed a skilled golfer that could still hit : >the : >: > >ball with wildly different swingweights, and who in fact got some : >: clubhead : >: > >speed advantage with the lighter clubs. (I used data from Cochran & : >: Stobbs : >: > >to estimate the speed advantage.) : >: > > : >: > >To evaluate the concept that Tim (or David Lake of 1IronGolf) is : >pushing, : >: > >I'd re-do the simulations for constant head weight and constant speed. : >I : >: > >don't know if it would make single-length look better or worse. Longer : >: > >irons would have lower clubhead speed but higher mass; don't know if : >the : >: > >resulting momentum and energy transferred comes out higher or lower. : >Just : >: > >gotta go ahead and crank through the numbers. : >: > > : >: > >Very interesting, though! : >: > >DaveT : >: > > : >: > > : >: > >-- : >: > >No virus found in this outgoing message. : >: > >Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. : >: > >Version: 7.0.296 / Virus Database: 265.6.8 - Release Date: 1/3/05 : >: > > : >: : >: : :
