Geez, twice in a row I agree with Dr. T! I'm older'n Dave Tutelman. I think Bernie B and I are about the same age. My pitiful lunge from age 65 to well, the 7th decade has deteriorated to the point that if not for a pretty good short game I'd consider giving it up entirely. I'd go back to my failed gigolo business, but that's for another message. Now, longer is better and longer? Not for me. Nobody has mentioned this: if you have a "Doug Sanders" hockey stick swing rather than something like Ernie Els fluid swing, a 47" drive doesn't work well. That is, if you're a "hitter" rather than a "swinger" you'd be better served with something shorter. Lighter? Sure thing. But longer, well. Some of you may recall my efforts with a Cleveland 12 deg, 40 gram, 47" Launcher driver. I got zero better results with that club than I was getting with a 10.5" Maltby head on a 50 gram UST shaft. So, a couple weeks ago we had a Cleveland Golf demo day here. The featured "old man" driver is, again, a 190 gram, 12 deg Launcher head, closed, square or open face, 460 cc, on a 39 gram shaft, light grip, 47 1/4" long. Our pro ordered a few for demos. I borrowed one, as did one of the guys I play with. He's my age or a little older. His swing is full and "sweeping." He killed the club - hit it on some holes 235 - 245. I on the other hand, hit the very same club, maximum on my best drives, about 210, 220. The problem with my friend was a lot of high rights and lefts. We both hit the 2 deg closed heads. I hit it pretty straight/fade, decent shot shape. Now that's just two guys of the same age but with different swing shapes, hitting the same club on the same day in same conditions. He hit it a long way. I, with my "in a phone booth" swing, did not hit it any better than my 10.5 deg driver. Conclusion? As I said, a golfer with a "classic" swing will benefit more than a golfer with a sorry lunge using a long driver. Just my opinion. I could be wrong. TFlan
. At 07:31 AM 5/5/2011, [email protected] wrote: I think the lighter drivers (I'm in the 190g head/55g shaft/25g grip/46-46/5" crowd) are easier to hit for many golfers (especially seniors). More distance,too, but shaving 50-60g just feels easier to hit for me and I don't have to swing as hard to keep control and distance (and the testimonials that are starting to roll in confirm). Standard weight drivers start to feel like a sledge hammer on the 17th tee. This is mostly a plug (IMHO) for getting the weight out of shafts. I definitely believe in that. But getting the weight out of the clubhead? It may do for some people and some design approaches. Definitely not all. Hey, I turn 70 next month, and have been losing distance since I was 65. But my #1 driver has a very light shaft (49g) and a heavier than average head (206g). (Those are from David Dugally's Golf Coast: a Vector TourSpec head and Fierce FullForce shaft. Outstanding components.) It all boils down to whether you believe Bernie Baymiller or Tom Wishon. I believe that either one might be right for any given golfer. But I have done better with the Wishon philosophy: Off-the-shelf brand-name drivers are too long. BTW, nobody seems to think off-the-shelf brand-name drivers are the right length; Bernie thinks they're too short. :) Anyway, until the past year or so, the shaft has been the "coarse tuning dial" for club weight. Shafts were available over a 70g range, while heads maybe 15g at most. If I wanted light weight, I would get a light shaft. In order to maintain the club's heft, I'd need to either build it longer or get extra weight. I do better with the Wishon philosophy, so the heavy Vector TourSpec head is called for. Now lightweight heads are also available. As for whether I could be helped by a lightweight head... The driver's heft (swingweight/MOI) would be too small. Actually, I just tried that very exercise two days ago, swinging a 5-iron that was 6-8 swingweight points lighter than my own. Sure, it swung very easy. But I HAD TO SWING EASY. If I turned it loose, there was no hint of control; the ball went all over the lot. And the easy swing didn't give me enough distance, even with the lighter club -- and very little increase in control. BOTTOM LINE: * Lightweight shafts make sense. * Lightweight heads only make sense if you want to build the club longer, or if you're dealing with someone who has almost no swing speed at all. But it does make sense in those cases. One bad thing I noticed yesterday on the range. After flailing away with my lightweight driver for 1/2 hour, my steel shafted iron felt really heavy. Jumping back and forth from superlight to heavy might cause problems. Excellent point! That comes back to my point about club heft. Much of the problem is the lack of HEFT (not overall weight), unless you built the club long enough to make up for the ultralight components. If you just went ultralight and lived with the reduced heft, then it DEFINITELY swings differently. "Jumping back and forth" would be a real problem. And if you did make it long enough to keep the heft up, then re-read Bernie's "instruction manual" for long drivers. It does take a different swing. That means "jumping back and forth" requires switching swings each time you jump. Cheers! DaveT -- By the way, I send out weekly information on new golf equipment called The Clubmaker Report and a new golf equipment clearance supplement called The Cheapo Depot, would you like me to add your email address to it? Send me a quick note if yes. Thanks! John Muir skype: jhmuir AIM: [email protected] 810.923.7396 http://clubmaker-online.com http://gripscience.com http://clubmaker.mobi http://thedriverstudio.com Golf equipment updates at http://twitter.com/golfcast Facebook-- http://www.facebook.com/pages/Clubmaker-Online/181867993392?v=wall&mid=20b6914G6046d421G0G66 sponsored by Aldila Voodoo http://aldilavoodoo.com
