Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
delav

Project X Flighted Shafts - Player Input

8 posts in this topic

Currently playing a set of 6.5 flighted project X shafts. Although distance, shot shape and trajectory is very good, the feel is quite different from previous shafts played.

My old irons have s300's, which are obviously quite a bit softer and kick differently. With that said, I feel like I am missing a bit of feel with the Project X, perhaps 5-10 yards difference as well on well-struck balls.

With that said, accuracy is awesome with the Project X. Much more consistent misses, fewer big draw shots, solid shots are 2-3 yard draws.

Should I be concerned about playing a 6.5? I know that this is pretty darn stiff in comparison to other rifle shafts and s and x true temper flex shafts.

For reference:

Driver Carry - 275 (105-110 mph)
7-Iron Carry - 175 (95-100 mph)

Any Input from others playing these shafts? Thanks!
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Want to get rid of this advertisement? Sign up (or log in) today! It's free!

IMO the 6.5 PX shafts may be a bit too stiff; (thats what it sounds like with increase in accuracy, decrease in distance and lack of feel). As a rule of thumb the PX's will play approximately a half flex stiffer than rated. The flighted shafts are a little softer than the non flighted.

To me the DG shafts are a loose kicking shaft and PX's are a tight kicking shaft. I've played DG 300
R & S's and now both my play'n set of irons have PX shafts. My Missy's have 5.0 non flighted and my 78 Wilson Staff's (1-pw) have 5.5 non flighted. My driver ss is 107 mph with carry 260+ and 6i ss 86 mph with carry ~170. And as weird as this sounds, I'm a swinger and perfer the PX shaft to any other shaft that I've tired.

The KBS shaft is also very good, not my favorite, but none the less still a very good shaft.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the input. Sounds like I need to talk to a club fitter. Although I'm not unhappy with the distance or accuracy, the feel leaves a great deal to be desired when hitting my s300's back to back.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I used to play DG X200 Parallel shafts and the PX shafts I have now are more or less about the same. However, working at the golf course and having a golf pro and having many tools and technology at my disposal helps. Don't get discouraged about the PX shafts, maybe you just need something less stiff, you said you had S300's so try out some 5.5 PX's.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks again!

Went and saw a great club fitter at Golf USA today. The guy was very knowledgeable about KBS, Rifle, TT, Proj X, etc... He helped clarify what the flighted (& other) shafts do, measured my swing speed, ball speed and spin rates. As a high ball hitter, I'm not sure I love the flighted shafts in my long irons, but we will see.

With a 6 iron I was hitting the ball fairly high (21 degree launch angle), swing speed ranging between 88 and 95 or so. Its likely this will creep up in the next few weeks as I continue to stretch and transition into the new workout routine for golf season. Side spin (right to left) was around 300-400 rpm for a slight draw, but backspin was well above 10,000 rpm.

Based on my swing speed, calculations land me around a 6.3 for Project X shafts, and he said the 6.5 will play a bit softer due to the fact that they are flighted. If I were very concerned about feel right now, he recommended soft-stepping using a new set of 6.5's so that they would play more like a 6.3, but felt that 6.0's would be too soft.

All in all, it was a good experience. I think I'll sick with a 6.5 for the next while as I iron out some new swing changes, and I'll let you know how things feel!
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just ordered a new set of the AP2 714 irons with PX 6.5. Current Muzuno MP59 with S300 and all of my shafts in my woods showed up in super slow motion as being to weak and prone to hook.

Changed to better shaft in driver and and my teacher, who teaches three PGA player, said the numbers were perfect.

PX shafts are consistant and a bit stiffer but not as stiff as X100. I have found these shasts to produce better flighting and very straight shots.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The world of golf has started using FCM (frequency cycle matching) ratings as a way to compare flexes across different shaft manufacturers. Also, shaft weight will influence the amount of clubhead speed a club will generate.

It's not clear to me the details on your irons. Did you reshaft the TM TP (2009) irons from S300 to PX 6.5?

Comparison:

  • S300... FCM = 5.8, weight = 130 gr.
  • PX 6.5 Rifle Flighted (2012 and earlier) ..FCM = 7.0, weight = 130 grams or
  • PX95 6.5 Flighted (2013).......................FCM = 7.0, weight = 106 grams.

IF you reshafted with PX95, you would have a lighter but stiffer shaft (about 1.2 flexes stiffer).

If you reshafted/switched to irons with the older PX 6.5, would have a same-weight shaft that is about 1.2 flexes stiffer. Also, the Dynamic Gold S300 is a low-launch shaft, while either of the PX versions would be mid-launch. Also, the flighting would give the long irons a bit of boost on launch, while keeping the short irons from ballooning.

With what the fitter said, if you softstepped the PX shaft, it would bring it down to PX 6.2 (1 x softstep reduces stiffness about 0.3 flexes). But, if your stretch routine will increase flexibility and power --> clubhead speed, then you might wait until spring to see if you still need to softstep.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

The world of golf has started using FCM (frequency cycle matching) ratings...

A terminology error... FCM = frequency coefficient matching :8)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0



  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • 2016 TST Partners

    GAME Golf
    PING Golf
    Lowest Score Wins
  • Posts

    • 2016 BMW PGA Championship at Wentworth
      Nice to see Chris Wood win this,well done.He tends to play well in the British Open with a best T3 at Turnberry maybe this win will spur him on. Surely another Ryder cup player.
    • Your best golfing bargain
      I got two: Played Orange County National (Orlando) for 50 dollar. Including lunch and both Crooked cat and Panther lake. And got vouchers to play the course next time for half the normal price. Played a three day tourney in Sauerland (Germany) including a pré tourney round for 220 dollar. During the three days ALL drinks for free, food for free, last day dinner for free. Not just a hamburger, but full fetched all you can eat top meal (and again all drinks for free). Will be back next year 
    • GPS, WHY ?
      It comes down to how big are your shot zones. It's usually better to try to line up the shot zone center to the center of the green.
    • Are you a Better Golfer than a Year Ago?
      And confirmation. Last year I played a three day tournament in Germany and scored 82, 86 and 91. Same tourney this year 80, 83 and 86. Happy 
    • What would a PGA Tour player shoot at your home course?
      Here's some more below about the lowest you might expect - even on an easy course. I think this is largely true, but pros don't tend to play a lot on 'easy' courses so there doesn't seem to be even much anecdotal stuff. The quote below describes what's considered the 'perfect round'. I guess you could also consider a 'go-for-green' perfect round where you also hit all the par 5's in two and one-putted those for eagle for a 'go-for-green perfect' score of 50. Obviously the likelihood of doing this in a single round defies the essence of golf, but it's a good a hard theoretical lower limit that probably depends more on the par than the course rating. Likely the odds grow exponentially as the percentage of birdied / eagled holes rises. I think we can discount albatrosses as a 'perfect round' option. Most tournament pro scores don't get below 56 and 59 with about an 80/20 rule separating the more frequent 59s from the 58's. That's 4-5 strokes (assuming par 72) over the 'perfect round' and 8-9 over the 'go-for-green perfect round', each of which represent grabbing about 75% and 61% respectively of the potential shots under par realistically available. I suppose a short par-4 would add another potential eagle opportunity, but we'll discount that as I'm not sure how universal they are. The lowest tournament round was 55 (par of 71) by one single golfer out of how many total tournament rounds by pros and plus HCP amateurs over the years? So while 55 is humanly achievable it's super rare and likely represents the lower limit of any possible likelihood. That would put the absolute lowest threshold around 17.8 below the course rating (72.8) and 16 below par. So there's a lot of room to go below even a low course rating or par of 70. I don't think the expected scores would get too squished and the distribution would still likely be normal in shape. The thing that is probably unrealistic is how narrow the range of expected scores is. The field is extremely consistent, but I think a single individual player (whose average score is the same as the field) will have a score variance significantly larger than the field. I think the mode likely stays the same while the distribution flattens / spreads out more into the tails with a little more probability to both go low and high and less certainty of shooting within a stroke or two of the mode / most likely score.  
  • TST Blog Entries

  • Images

  • Today's Birthdays

    No users celebrating today
  • Blog Entries