Jump to content
Check out the Spin Axis Podcast! ×

Recommended Posts

Posted

Hello all,

I was recently fit into the Ping G440 LST, I currently game the Nike Vapor Fly Pro with a 55-gram stiff shaft (still love it). However, it's about time for an upgrade, I got fit into either the Ping Alta Blue CB 55-S or the Ventus Blue 5-S TR. My swing speed is about 110 Mph and tempo is relatively smooth. I really enjoyed how smooth the TR was with spin being more consistent between 2000-2400; while the Alta was 1700-2600, the spin being the only major difference I noticed. Are upgrade shafts (specifically the TR line) worth the cost difference? Thanks for any help.

TL;DR Are upgrade shafts worth it?

Average everyday D III golfer.

WITB:
Driver: Nike Vapor Fly Pro 5W: TM Stealth 4HY: Miz. CLK 4-P: TM '23 P7MC 52, 56, 60: TM MG3 Putter: H.F.M. 001


Posted

Is the Ventus TR the Velocore model?  It will say velocore on the shaft down by the adapter.

  • Thumbs Up 1
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
2 minutes ago, Typhoon92 said:

Is the Ventus TR the Velocore model?

Yes, it is the Velocore, not the new Velocore+ however, not sure of those differences.

Average everyday D III golfer.

WITB:
Driver: Nike Vapor Fly Pro 5W: TM Stealth 4HY: Miz. CLK 4-P: TM '23 P7MC 52, 56, 60: TM MG3 Putter: H.F.M. 001


Posted

The short answer is "It depends on the shaft you are upgrading from".

The best way to see if it makes sense is to hit your current gamer and the new fit club side by side and analyse the difference.  Distance and dispersion ought to be better with the new shaft but if all you gain is 2 yards for example not worth upgrading.  But if you are gaining 25 yards and better dispersion, by all means spend the money

  • Thumbs Up 1

What's in the bag

  • Taylor Made r5 dual Draw 9.5* (stiff)
  • Cobra Baffler 4H (stiff)
  • Taylor Made RAC OS 6-9,P,S (regular)
  • Golden Bear LD5.0 60* (regular)
  • Aidia Z-009 Putter
  • Inesis Tour 900 golf ball
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted

The Velocore is a $350 upgrade…. Around that dollar figure anyway.  Not all upgrade shafts are better for your game.  The Velocore may have more consistent spin numbers but how were the other numbers?  Were they $350 better?  You might be rich and money means nothing, who knows.  There are also other “upgrade shafts “ that are less money that may give you close to Velocore numbers at a fraction of the cost.  For some of us, the stock shaft works good enough.  a lot of the stock shafts are actually pretty good.

 

Only you can be final judge.  I would look at more price points vs performance before I pull the trigger.

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
41 minutes ago, Typhoon92 said:

Only you can be final judge.

Right, I get a discount through the college I attend so it would be about $650 with the upgrade ($400 w/o), which is the only reason I would consider it, I would not even think about it at $950 for the driver.

Average everyday D III golfer.

WITB:
Driver: Nike Vapor Fly Pro 5W: TM Stealth 4HY: Miz. CLK 4-P: TM '23 P7MC 52, 56, 60: TM MG3 Putter: H.F.M. 001


Posted

I think they are worth it if they help improve your game significantly. I also agree that if you can afford it and you like it you should get it.

  • Thumbs Up 1

Posted

If the base golf shaft is like 95% optimal for you, I don’t see it worth it going for the 300 dollar up-charge.

go get fit and do a comparison.

  • Thumbs Up 1

Matt Dougherty, P.E.
 fasdfa dfdsaf 

What's in My Bag
Driver; :pxg: 0311 Gen 5,  3-Wood: 
:titleist: 917h3 ,  Hybrid:  :titleist: 915 2-Hybrid,  Irons: Sub 70 TAIII Fordged
Wedges: :edel: (52, 56, 60),  Putter: :edel:,  Ball: :snell: MTB,  Shoe: :true_linkswear:,  Rangfinder: :leupold:
Bag: :ping:

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted

FWIW you can find used Ventus shafts online (ebay, other forums classified, etc) for a fraction of the cost of new. It's not uncommon for used Ventus shafts to go for like $150 shipped. Plus they hold their value relatively well, so you could always order the stock setup for now, try that and if you don't like it just buy a used Ventus and then direct compare that way. 

  • Thumbs Up 2

Driver: :titleist:  GT3
Woods:  :cobra: Darkspeed LS 3Wood
Irons: :titleist: U505 (3)  :tmade: P770 (4-PW)
Wedges: :callaway: MD3 50   :titleist: SM9 54/58  
Putter: :tmade: Spider X

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
On 5/6/2025 at 12:27 PM, klineka said:

FWIW you can find used Ventus shafts online (ebay, other forums classified, etc) for a fraction of the cost of new. It's not uncommon for used Ventus shafts to go for like $150 shipped. Plus they hold their value relatively well, so you could always order the stock setup for now, try that and if you don't like it just buy a used Ventus and then direct compare that way. 

Be careful buying Ventus shafts online. The Ventus Velocore is a great shaft IMO. I've had 3. Currently have one in my FW. If it's not a Velocore it's not nearly the same shaft. 

Here's an older but very interesting video: 

 

  • Like 1

My bag is an ever-changing combination of clubs. 

A mix I am forever tinkering with. 

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • 8 months later...
Posted (edited)

For someone with a very consistent swing speed and ball strike, upgrades may improve performance.

For everyday golfers, probably not.

I'm a rather odd player. I usually get best performance from basic pro or tour heads, but with lighter stock shaft from the model's standard driver set up. (Yes, current EXS is an exception.) When I get a full driver fitting, I usually try a couple of modest upgrade  (not super magic) shafts. Most of the time upgrade gives a couple of extra yards, or 10 yards less.

Remember this about stock shafts: They are matched to a particular driver model to fit the type of player likely to adopt that model.

Also, most OEMs offer a variety of stock shafts in their drivers. Test for which one works best.

And, the final decider...

On 5/5/2025 at 6:46 PM, Typhoon92 said:

The Velocore is a $350 upgrade…. Around that dollar figure anyway.  Not all upgrade shafts are better for your game.  The Velocore may have more consistent spin numbers but how were the other numbers?  Were they $350 better?

 

Edited by WUTiger
Correct typo.
  • Like 1

Focus, connect and follow through!

  • Completed KBS Education Seminar (online, 2015)
  • GolfWorks Clubmaking AcademyFitting, Assembly & Repair School (2012)

Driver:  :touredge: EXS 10.5°, weights neutral   ||  FWs:  :callaway: Rogue 4W + 7W
Hybrid:  :callaway: Big Bertha B16 OS 4H at 22°  ||  Irons:  :callaway: Mavrik MAX 5i-PW
Wedges:  :callaway: MD3: 48°, 54°... MD4: 58° ||  Putter:  image.png.0d90925b4c768ce7c125b16f98313e0d.png Inertial NM SL-583F, 34"  
Ball:  :srixon: QStar Tour - Divide  ||  Bag: :sunmountain: Three 5 stand bag

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


  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • TST Partners

    Carl's Place
    PlayBetter
    Golfer's Journal
    ShotScope
    The Stack System
    FitForGolf
    FlightScope Mevo

    Coupon Codes (save 10-20%): "IACAS" for Mevo/Stack/FitForGolf, "IACASPLUS" for Mevo+/Pro Package, and "THESANDTRAP" for ShotScope. 15% off TourStriker (no code).
  • Posts

    • Let's continue on… Cool. The thing is, nobody's claiming par is "reliable" and par's inclusion piggy-backs in the course rating, which is awfully close to par and, thus, brings par in to make it make sense. Once again, for those in the back… (CR - Par) just makes it really easy to know what kind of score you need to shoot to best, match, or play worse than your handicap index. Yes, when par is different, the players from the higher par tees get an extra stroke (72 vs. 71, the 72s get an extra stroke. That makes sense and is a small complication (more info at https://www.usga.org/content/usga/home-page/handicapping/roh/Content/rules/Committee%20Content/USGA/LG_R6d.htm). However, most of the time, this adjustment will not be needed, as many courses play to the same par for the same genders from all sets of tees. And, the rare times it is needed, par (measured in whole numbers, integers) and strokes (also whole numbers/integers) map easily and the idea is easily grasped. Dean seems to be unaware of the fact that most every golfer carries something orders of magnitude more powerful than the highest end desktop computers available the last time he consulted with the USGA in their pockets. While it is quaint that his club puts printouts by the first tee… get with the times, Dean. Look up your handicap index and course handicap in the GHIN app and get on with it. It's a better system than the one that didn't account — at all — for a difference in the playing conditions (via an algorithm, not a judgment). Dean's assertions about the "less precise system because of par" continues to make absolutely zero sense. Right, it still changed tee to tee. Now it just changes differently… and in a way that more accurately reflects the score you need to shoot to play to your handicap. Previously, a 1.1 index would get 1 stroke on a 66.7/122 par-72 course. Now they give four strokes back to the course and must shoot 68 to play to their handicap. This makes way more sense. The 18-shot difference is a pretty extreme example. Maybe a long course that also offers a par-three set of tees could play that long, but… man, that's not going to be super common. Sensationalistic much, Dean? Also, once those unhappy (complete assumption) golfers realize a) what the change shows them (playing to net par = playing to your index) and b) realizes that their differential is going to be the same… I think they'll get over their initial questions. No. And yet… if he shoots the same scores, he'll get the same handicap index he has now. But he'll know on each course what score he needs to shoot to "play to his handicap." Sheesh, Dean. This stuff isn't that hard to figure out. Enough with the sensationalistic stuff. I don't find it "unacceptable" at all. Then again, I'm not nearly 80 and seemingly incapable of doing basic math these days. No. This literally makes no sense, as that part of the differential calculation and the course handicap calculation remains identical. Good! No. Categorically wrong. They should have been adjusting their handicaps all along. Previously it was by subtracting the course ratings. Which… is still basically what's done, with the addition of the course rating being "baked in" to the course handicap calculation. Dean is wrong here, or doing some math heretofore unknown by the world. When par is the same, what determines the difference in handicaps? The course rating, which Dean loves! Sheesh! You had to things when players were in situations like this before, too. This is getting exhausting. He keeps using words like "less precise" and "unfair" but does not seem to understand what they mean. This is like the Princess Bride meme: "you keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means." The caps reduce upward movement. Committees have reign to reduce a player's handicap, and there's still an automatic Exceptional Score Reduction. I'm going through these more quickly now because… well, it's silly how badly Dean misses the mark with this blog post. Dean is literally confusing the upward movement (with the soft and hard caps) here with the exceptional score reduction which is used when lowering handicaps due to an exceptionally good score. The creators of the WHS are handicap experts. They know more about the current state of handicaps/handicapping than the Pope Emeritus. It's been shown to have almost no effect across all handicaps. Yes, some 36s under the old system are now 35s under the new system. Yawn. He should have stopped there. It's easier to apply and makes more sense. This makes no sense. It's "not complex" but players will have to guess? And, for men or women, the stroke index of each hole doesn't change because they play a different set of tees. They get a different number of strokes, but it's always been true that when you get 14 strokes you apply a stroke to stroke index holes 1-14, and when you get 11, to just holes with a SI of 1-11. Objection, your honor. Assumes facts not in evidence. Dean's just out here continuing to make shit up about "the inaccuracy of par" and ignoring that with Par (an integer) came the Course Rating, which he agrees is precise and accurate. No. No, this is inaccurate. Also, as noted, you can randomly assign stroke indexes, and so long as all the low numbers or all the high numbers are not clumped together at the beginning or ends of the 18 holes, matches generally work out the same. This is inaccurate. It is an algorithm that looks at scores. That's it. Also, this is better than a system like the prior one where no such thing existed at all. Wildly inaccurate and off-base. Did they do actual testing? No need. They have millions and millions of rounds and ran many, many, many simulations. That's testing. Dean seems to continue to be unaware of the fact that computers are more powerful now than they were in 2002. But, he's nearly 80, so we can understand if not going so far as to give him a pass on how much he gets wrong. Cool. Noted. For the most part that was because many countries haven't been able to rate enough of their courses. :sigh:
    • Day 3 (3 Jun 26) - More work on keeping arms connected today - hard foam balls with 7i and 5w…..
    • Day 274 6-3 flow drill getting chest through, arms in front. Arms get a little pinned to the side, not as much in front as I want them when I add speed. 
    • Shot 48 yesterday.  For me bogey golf is good.  I was 10 over through 7 and figured with a Par 3 and 4 coming on all I needed was birdie / par to get my 45. I had a great tee shot on #8 and sunk  a 5 footer for birdie, game was coming together, now just needed par on #9. Had a great tee drive and the green was within range for a hoped GIR or nGIR.  But I pulled the shot left into tall weeds and needed to take a drop.  So much for par, but a bogey for 46 is still good for me. I hit my lob wedge to get over a small tree and saw the ball riding nicely  on line to the pin when my club hit the ball a 2nd time on my follow through causing the ball to change directions and ended up @ pin high but along the same tall weeds I just took an unplayable out of.  had no room for a backswing, Just hacked at it and it shot across the green to the rough on the far side.  Needed a chip & 1 putt got a triple bogey. you can see the hole fall apart in the screenshot below.  
    • Day 68: Quick work with some foam balls. Trying to combine not making my right leg into a pole with slightly earlier weight forward. 
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Welcome to TST! Signing up is free, and you'll see fewer ads and can talk with fellow golf enthusiasts! By using TST, you agree to our Terms of Use, our Privacy Policy, and our Guidelines.