I'm thinking drivers and in that case, I'll definitely stand by my opinion.:) -Don M
--- On Tue, 6/28/11, Davy Hoffman <[email protected]> wrote: From: Davy Hoffman <[email protected]> Subject: RE: ShopTalk: More Critical, head or shaft? To: [email protected] Date: Tuesday, June 28, 2011, 7:02 AM Sorry to sound unyielding but you could not be more wrong. I can put any head on a shaft that is correct for you and you can play golf, but I can put whatever head you deem best on a shaft that is not correct for you and you will play h***. Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2011 04:43:58 -0700 From: [email protected] Subject: Re: ShopTalk: More Critical, head or shaft? To: [email protected] I'll go with Harry... Both are very important but head trumps shaft within reasonable parameters. -Don --- On Tue, 6/28/11, Allen Humphrey <[email protected]> wrote: From: Allen Humphrey <[email protected]> Subject: Re: ShopTalk: More Critical, head or shaft? To: [email protected] Date: Tuesday, June 28, 2011, 5:42 AM #yiv1997773526 .yiv1997773526ExternalClass #yiv1997773526ecxyiv1066616377 DIV {} shaft.....then head.... From: Harry F. Schiestel <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Tue, June 28, 2011 1:12:47 AM Subject: ShopTalk: More Critical, head or shaft? #yiv1997773526 .yiv1997773526ExternalClass #yiv1997773526ecxyiv1066616377 ecxfiltered {font-family:Tahoma;panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;} #yiv1997773526 .yiv1997773526ExternalClass #yiv1997773526ecxyiv1066616377 ecxfiltered {font-family:Verdana;panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;} #yiv1997773526 .yiv1997773526ExternalClass #yiv1997773526ecxyiv1066616377 ecxfiltered {font-family:'Freestyle Script';panose-1:3 8 4 2 3 2 5 11 4 4;} #yiv1997773526 .yiv1997773526ExternalClass #yiv1997773526ecxyiv1066616377 p.yiv1997773526ecxyiv1066616377MsoNormal, #yiv1997773526 .yiv1997773526ExternalClass #yiv1997773526ecxyiv1066616377 li.yiv1997773526ecxyiv1066616377MsoNormal, #yiv1997773526 .yiv1997773526ExternalClass #yiv1997773526ecxyiv1066616377 div.yiv1997773526ecxyiv1066616377MsoNormal {margin-bottom:.0001pt;font-size:12.0pt;font-family:'Times New Roman';} #yiv1997773526 .yiv1997773526ExternalClass #yiv1997773526ecxyiv1066616377 a:link, #yiv1997773526 .yiv1997773526ExternalClass #yiv1997773526ecxyiv1066616377 span.yiv1997773526ecxyiv1066616377MsoHyperlink {color:blue;text-decoration:underline;} #yiv1997773526 .yiv1997773526ExternalClass #yiv1997773526ecxyiv1066616377 a:visited, #yiv1997773526 .yiv1997773526ExternalClass #yiv1997773526ecxyiv1066616377 span.yiv1997773526ecxyiv1066616377MsoHyperlinkFollowed {color:blue;text-decoration:underline;} #yiv1997773526 .yiv1997773526ExternalClass #yiv1997773526ecxyiv1066616377 pre {margin-bottom:.0001pt;font-size:10.0pt;font-family:'Courier New';} #yiv1997773526 .yiv1997773526ExternalClass #yiv1997773526ecxyiv1066616377 p.yiv1997773526ecxyiv1066616377avgcert, #yiv1997773526 .yiv1997773526ExternalClass #yiv1997773526ecxyiv1066616377 li.yiv1997773526ecxyiv1066616377avgcert, #yiv1997773526 .yiv1997773526ExternalClass #yiv1997773526ecxyiv1066616377 div.yiv1997773526ecxyiv1066616377avgcert {margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12.0pt;font-family:'Times New Roman';} #yiv1997773526 .yiv1997773526ExternalClass #yiv1997773526ecxyiv1066616377 span.yiv1997773526ecxyiv1066616377EmailStyle19 {font-family:Arial;color:navy;} #yiv1997773526 .yiv1997773526ExternalClass #yiv1997773526ecxyiv1066616377 ecxfiltered {} #yiv1997773526 .yiv1997773526ExternalClass #yiv1997773526ecxyiv1066616377 div.yiv1997773526ecxyiv1066616377Section1 {} There is always an advantage to be gained unless as a player his equipment is already optimized and this is rarely the case. Even if a new club fits your eye better it generally instils extra confidence. A lot of limits placed on a driver head or they fall within a narrow band from a design standpoint. Factors like COR, Volume, MOI, Loft, Face Height, etc. BUT they perform quite different when shafted (accuracy, distance, trajectory). I do not think swing speed (116 vs. 86 or 136 mph) limits a person’s ability with today’s golf equipment to get closer to an optimized fit. At 116, mph they might be a stronger candidate to use what is played on tour. I am not suggesting they can benefit from GI irons. Some players do not benefit from using game improvement irons, as they have to hit it thin to hit it low, but with shallow cavity back irons they can hit high or low on command. My son fits your profile more or less. Never been on a launch monitor and hasn’t had his mph swing speed check with dropper radar in over 10 years. He wasn’t interested in what the numbers had to say. Self fits based on ball flight. When he gets a new club he always fields tests it with range and then game balls side by side against his baseline, the current club in his bag. When he gains an advantage it becomes his new standard and the previous club is then sold. Clubs always shafted with identical shaft, grips and spec’s. Standing 5’ 10 inches, he can hit 290 yards into the wind all day. His longest on the flats no wind on a good hot summer day is a few in the 365 to 375 range. Don’t laugh but during driver testing his launch monitor is a row of 150 year old mature maples. If he can’t clear the tops to cut off the dogleg he claims a driver is not worth sh*t. He used this method for driver testing since he was 15. His last year of university he got his game to a + handicap level with a course record ‘64’ to a club 55 years old, and his personal best under tournament conditions is a respectable ‘66’. His clubs are all ‘balanced & blueprinted’. My guess he is in the 116 miles an hour category like John’s friend. He just changed his 45” driver from a Callaway Ti 454 to an Adams 9064LS using the same 62 gram 7 year old graphite XX flex shaft. Retail on shaft was $85. I bought a few at $25. Regarding lofts of irons old vs. new it is pointless to compare a 39* 9-iron to an older 44* iron with the same number designation. This is akin to comparing a 10* driver to a fairway metal marked 15*’s, both built to 45 inch playing length. I accept the theory that woods are meant to be hit long with no loss of dispersion, while irons and wedges need to have pin point accuracy as they are the scoring clubs and their distance is a function of loft not what is marked on the sole. Even my MX-23’s with their cheated lofts, I bent them back to a more traditional loft of 40* for the 9 iron, followed by 44 (9), 49 (PW) and wedges at 54 (SW) and 59 (LW) with no GW. All wedges made identical frequency and length as 9-iron. As I continue to get older I will accept the fact that I will begin to hit slightly less distance for a given loft, as a function of having less swing speed. I will not cheat my lofts to hit my 5-iron the same distance as before with less swing speed. Let me ask this of the members. What do you feel is more critical, the head or the shaft and why? I am not suggesting a 15* high loft driver when a player needs 8*’s or L flex when he needs an XX flex shaft. What factor head or shaft should you pick first to begin to optimize performance? Thanks, Harry Golf Clubs: www.myGolfDNA.com Improvement-4-Elite Players ™ From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Allen Humphrey Sent: June-27-11 10:40 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: ShopTalk: Equipment question at that swing speed....total club weight and location of impact on the face plus optimum shaft flex selection as well as length....will dictate optimized distance. High spin rate [ above 3200 ] will limit potential distance; too light or too long may inhibit ability to maintain constant swing path and optimum release point. Probably will need a firmer tip.....something in the ACCRA S2 ST range....... Swing technique is paramount to a proper fit. Dana Upshaw is a proponent of 2.5 X driver SS = max potential CARRY distance. At 116...that relates to about 290 CARRY....when everything is optimum.....swing path; angle of attack; impact above horiz C/L of face, etc. I work with 2 guys in that ss range...one 115-117 and one a steady 120. The 120 hits a 75g XS shaft; the 115-117 hits a 65g S.....the 65S profile looks like an XS....both are at 46"....and both carry the ball close to 300....and with proper roll out...up to 325-330...sometimes more. The correct ball selection helps....but .....matching the shaft to the correct loft is critical. From: Bradley Smith <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Mon, June 27, 2011 10:04:12 AM Subject: Re: ShopTalk: Equipment question Today's golf equipment helps nearly everyone. All drivers today are maxed out at the highest allowable coefficient of restitution. Higher moment of inertia in drivers make them more forgiving on off center hits. Some drivers are being offered with higher lofts to help low ball and slower swinging golfers to achieve more distance. Graphite shafts are lighter allowing slightly higher swing speeds at "normal" swingweights. Golf balls stay in the air much longer with a flatter (= longer), less ballooning trajectory than they used to. Multi layer balls and cover materials have reduced spin that helps higher swing speed golfers. As far as irons are concerned, I personally think that Ping 's implementation over 30 years ago of cavity back, perimeter weighting in irons was the last really big improvment in irons. Whether or not there are proportionately larger improvements for higher swing speeds such as you mentioned is probably just a function of how the ball reacts to the impact and how it then handles the aerodynamics of flight as opposed to how the clubs influence these factors. my two cents Brad From: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Mon, June 27, 2011 7:43:59 AM Subject: ShopTalk: Equipment question A friend of mine sent me this question and I thought I'd pass it along to the group, any ideas? John Is there any evidence that a player achieving a certain swing speed (say 116 miles an hour or more) can gain an advantage with today's golf equipment?
