Do crappy range balls damage clubs?

[Greg]

its kinda funny sometimes when you get a cracked ball and it sounds like a whiffle ball when you hit it. I have broken a couple of irons but I think that was because they were cheap clubs and both snapped off right where the head goes into the shaft, I just threw them away and used some other mismatched clubs for a while until i got a new set of irons a couple months ago and like them much better. I guess the old irons had taken so much pounding from me being new and bad that they couldnt take any more, though it is one reason Ill probably never get graphite shafted irons. I think graphite is great for driver, hybrids and fairway woods, but I prefer steel irons.

[Cesar]

That's the first I've ever heard of that......and certainly none of the manufacturers mentions any issue with range balls or recommends their non-use.

I was told this by the guys at Nakashima when I went and got fitted for my driver. They said with the thin faces in many of the new woods today, swinging at high speeds with low compression golf balls will make the face work harder, which could lead to cracking. Some people confuse it with thinking that range balls are too hard, but it's actually the opposite.

It made sense to me, but I was still a little skeptical. Then I went ahead and shattered my clubface on a 1 week old R9 TP 3 Wood I had just bought while hitting rangeballs. Left a hole the size of a golf ball right on the sweet spot. A week later, I cracked my Naka clubface hitting rangeballs. That's all I needed to see.

[David in FL]

I was told this by the guys at Nakashima when I went and got fitted for my driver. They said with the thin faces in many of the new woods today, swinging at high speeds with low compression golf balls will make the face work harder, which could lead to cracking. Some people confuse it with thinking that range balls are too hard, but it's actually the opposite.

So no reference other than the "guy at Nakashima"? Sorry, just doesn't make any sense......and I guarantee that if there was an issue, the manufacturers would be the first to be talking about it. I'm sure you cracked the face of your club. I highly doubt that the fact that you were hitting lower compression range balls had anything to do with it.

[Cesar]

So no reference other than the "guy at Nakashima"?

Then don't believe it. I couldn't care less. Did you expect me to pull out a thesis or something? As for the manufacturers, you're right. I'm sure they'd all be lining up to tell people not to hit range balls with their clubs. Now THAT makes sense. You must be in marketing. LOL!!!

Again, it is a COMBINATION of high swing speeds, thinner clubfaces, and low compression balls. If you're not swinging 115 + MPH, then you probably have little to worry about. But perhaps you'd be willing to set me straight. WHY exactly do you "highly doubt that the fact that I was hitting lower compression range balls had anything to do with it"? What reference do you have better than the guys that manufacture my golf club?

[Cesar]

To clarify what I was told, the way it was explained to me is this:

Higher compression golf balls compress less at impact. Which means less area of of the clubface comes in contact with the golf ball before the club launches it. If you watch the pros hit it on TV on their super slow motion cameras, maybe 10% of the ball is being compressed. That will leave an impact area roughly the size of a nickle.

Now when you start dealing with rangeballs, which are probably around 60 or less compression brand new and can get extremely low with wear and tear over time, a signifigantly larger area of the ball is coming into contact with the club face at the moment of impact since the ball is compressing that much more. If you can compress 50% of the ball, then in theory, the area that comes into to contact with the face goes from the size of a nickle to the size of a golf ball.

That fact combined with high swing speeds and new thin faces on golf clubs can often lead to cracking of the club face. More area of the clubface is being put under stress, thus being made to "work harder".

[deronsizemore]

I'm sure there are those out there who have damaged their clubs using range balls (like the one guy in this thread) but you really don't have anything to worry about if you ask me.

I've played for 23 years and have hit thousands of range balls in that time and have never damaged a club.

[tatertot]

I've banged balls on driving ranges for almost 30 years and never damaged a club.

Sounds like clubmakers trying to cover their rear ends in case their heads break.

[Cesar]

I'm sure there are those out there who have damaged their clubs using range balls (like the one guy in this thread) but you really don't have anything to worry about if you ask me.

I was in your same boat until it happened to me. Been playing for 23 years, have hit thousands and thousands of range balls without ever having any problem excempt for a clubhead flying off once, which had nothing to do with the rangeballs.

But technology has changed, clubfaces are thinner now and not as strong as the used to be. I went from never having anything happen in 20+ years to two damaged clubfaces in a 7 day span. I know of at least 5 other guys this summer alone at my club that have cracked their drivers (multiple brands/models). That NEVER used to happen.

[sean_miller]

To clarify what I was told, the way it was explained to me is this:

A rock doesn't compress at all so that should be really easy on my driver face. I'm not a math major, but assuming this explanation of lower ball compression leading to the ball covering more surface area of the driver face is correct (which I think it is), the force should have the same wider distribution. I would think a low compression ball is easier on your driver.

I suspect the new thin faced drivers and one piece balls used on the course are the problem.

[Cesar]

A rock doesn't compress at all so that should be really easy on my driver face. I'm not a math major, but assuming this explanation of lower ball compression leading to the ball covering more surface area of the driver face is correct (which I think it is), the force should have the same wider distribution. I would think a low compression ball is easier on your driver.

Golf clubs are not designed to hit rocks, or ball bearings, or any other hard non golf ball objects you can think of. Obviously, a rock would probably damage your club where say a tennis ball wouldn't.

But we're talking golf balls here. I'm not a physics major either, but I'd be interested to hear why you think the force would have the same wider distribution on a 50 compression ball vs a 100 compression ball. It would seem to me the act of a compression and de-compression would vary depending on the ball you hit and how hard you hit it, thus creating different levels of stress on a golf club. Are you saying all golf balls are created equal?

[David in FL]

But perhaps you'd be willing to set me straight. WHY exactly do you "highly doubt that the fact that I was hitting lower compression range balls had anything to do with it"?

The "explanation" you were provided ignores simple principles of engineering and physics. When a force is spread out over a larger area.....in this case, the clubface, that force is better supported and less damaging to the surface. As an example, a force of 200lbs per square foot is much less damaging as the same 200lbs concentrated into one square inch . I wasn't taking a shot at you, it simply didn't make sense to me and I was curious whether you could cite something other than anecdotal evidence of a theory that appears contrary to the basic physical laws.

[sean_miller]

Quote:

Originally Posted by sean_miller A rock doesn't compress at all so that should be really easy on my driver face. I'm not a math major, but assuming this explanation of lower ball compression leading to the ball covering more surface area of the driver face is correct (which I think it is), the force should have the same wider distribution . I would think a low compression ball is easier on your driver. I suspect the new thin faced drivers and one piece balls used on the course are the problem.

Golf clubs are not designed to hit rocks, or ball bearings, or any other hard non golf ball objects you can think of. Obviously, a rock would probably damage your club where say a tennis ball wouldn't.

On the contrary, I suggested a low compression ball would cover more surface area of the clubface and therefore, with the same force applied as with a high compression ball, it would be easier on the clubface.

To use another ball sport as an example, let's say you're playing basketball and your teammate has surprised you with a hard chest pass. The ball hits you in the face. Visualize which ball would be harder on your face - an under inflated (ie. low compression) ball or an overinflated ball (i.e. high compression). All other things being equal, I think the high compression ball breaks more bones.

[Cesar]

no message. duplicate

[Cesar]

I understand the analogy you're using, but as it was explained to me it was the amount of of the clubface being exposed to the golf ball that was the problem. Maybe the material used in clubfaces can take smaller more concentrated impact vs a more dissapated impact covering a larger area. I don't know.

I'm a simpleton when it comes to this stuff. Maybe they were just covering their ass in case I broke their club. All I know is, based on personal experience, I have broken two clubs hitting range balls in a one week period. I personlly know of 5 other people who have done the same this summer alone. I have yet to meet or hear about anyone doing it on the course hitting a ProV or similar ball. Then again, maybe that's all just blind luck. Who knows? When I crack my first club on the course hitting a real golf ball, I'll probably sing a different tune. Until then, I'm sticking with my belief and will try to avoid rangeballs with my woods.

The "explanation" you were provided ignores simple principles of engineering and physics. When a force is spread out over a larger area.....in this case, the clubface, that force is better supported and less damaging to the surface. As an example, a force of 200lbs per square

Sorry, for the sarcastic reply. I took your "so all you have is a 'guy at Nakashima'" comment as a dismissive wisecrack.

In any case, sorry. All I have is what I was told and personal experience. It has led to me taking a more conservative approach in practicing with my woods and have now gone 2 months without breaking one. So, whether it defies the basic laws of physics or not, my newfound paranoid method is working for me and I'm sticking to it. Nothing worse than having to scramble for a replacement club days before a tournament.

[Doctorfro]

The answer to the original question is YES. Don't need science for this one. I've seen the marks they leave on newer clubs versus "fresh" range balls.

[lobsterzilla]

just make sure you clean the balls or atleast dont poor them out in sand... I've got 2 sweet scratches on my driver and my hybrid from crushing a range ball that had some sand on the back. It's always super exciting.