Jump to content
Check out the Spin Axis Podcast! ×
Check out the Spin Axis Podcast!
IGNORED

Fujikura speeder 586 vs Grafalloy prolaunch red plz help

JSwiney10
 Share
Note: This thread is 5981 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

Recommended Posts

JSwiney10 Established Member

JSwiney10

Posted
Posted
Im about to purchase an ft-i driver and am deciding between the 2 shafts mentioned above. I tend to sky the ball pretty often so i would like a lower trajectory and i also am prone to slicing occasionally so a little less spin might be nice also. Any comments on which shaft would be better will be greatly appreciated
Driver: Walter Hagen T3 Square
3 wood: Walter Hagen T3
Hybrids: Walter Hagen T3
Irons: Walter Hagen T3
Putter: Walter Hagen MalletChipper: EZ RollShoes: GreenJoyGlove: ReactBall: E5+ or HX Hot Bite16 years old

EZ Swinger Established Member

EZ Swinger

Posted
Posted
Im pretty sure the red grafalloy is made to make the ball go higher but im not completely sure. What i do know is i had the Speeder shaft on my last 3 wood and i could not get the ball in the air even if i hit it good so it would probably work out good for you. I vote for the speeder 586.

In my Ping bag:
Driver: Titleist 909 D2 9.5*

3 Wood: Nickent Pro
Irons: Titleist AP2 Project x 5.5Wedges: Titleist Vokey 200 Series Vokey 52*, 56*, 60*Putter: Scotty Cameron Detour 1 (just ordered it)


out_in_30 Well Established Member

out_in_30

Posted
Posted
Im pretty sure the red grafalloy is made to make the ball go higher but im not completely sure

the grafalloy red is in fact a lower launching shaft. I read up on it before i decided to go with it in my 3 wood.

JSwiney, whenyou say sky the ball, do you mean pop it up or just hit it high?.. because if you mean pop it up, the shaft will do nothing for that. I assume you mean you hit it high tho. anyways i use the grafalloy red and its a solid shaft. fuji makes good shafts as well but i dont think ive hit the one you name.

Putter first 
:titleist: newport 2 oil can
:titleist: 58* SM4
:titleist: 54* SM4
:titleist: 50* SM4
:titleist: 4-pw AP2 project X 6.0
:ping: i20 9.5 TFC Stiff


Kingfisher Well Established Member

Kingfisher

Posted
Posted
Im about to purchase an ft-i driver and am deciding between the 2 shafts mentioned above. I tend to sky the ball pretty often so i would like a lower trajectory and i also am prone to slicing occasionally so a little less spin might be nice also. Any comments on which shaft would be better will be greatly appreciated

If you're about to spend serious money on a driver, why not get a proper fitting rather than just buy one off the rack based on other folks' recommendations?

A launch monitor will give you the information you need?
In the bag...

G10 9° Driver
G10 17° 4 Wood
G10 21° Hybrid i15 4-PW Tour-W Wedges 50/12 & 56/10 Scotty Cameron Studio Select Newport 2 (35")Balls - Bridgestone B330-RX

JSwiney10 Established Member

JSwiney10

Posted
  • Author
Posted
yes by sky it i mean hitting it very high with lots of spin. The reason i am forced to buy off the shelf is that the nearest swing monitor and well stocked golf shop is around 2 hours away and none of the local clubs will let buyers demo clubs.
Driver: Walter Hagen T3 Square
3 wood: Walter Hagen T3
Hybrids: Walter Hagen T3
Irons: Walter Hagen T3
Putter: Walter Hagen MalletChipper: EZ RollShoes: GreenJoyGlove: ReactBall: E5+ or HX Hot Bite16 years old

Note: This thread is 5981 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

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
 Share
Go to topic listing


  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up

  • TST Partners

    PlayBetter
    Golfer's Journal
    ShotScope
    The Stack System
    FitForGolf
    FlightScope Mevo
    Direct: Mevo, Mevo+, and Pro Package.

    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

    • iacas
      Mizuno Jpx One Driver & Fairway Woods

      By iacas · Posted

      Nah, man. People have been testing clubs like this for decades at this point. Even 35 years. @M2R, are you AskGolfNut? If you're not, you seem to have fully bought into the cult or something. So many links to so many videos… Here's an issue, too: - A drop of 0.06 is a drop with a 90 MPH 7I having a ball speed of 117 and dropping it to 111.6, which is going to be nearly 15 yards, which is far more than what a "3% distance loss" indicates (and is even more than a 4.6% distance loss). - You're okay using a percentage with small numbers and saying "they're close" and "1.3 to 1.24 is only 4.6%," but then you excuse the massive 53% difference that going from 3% to 4.6% represents. That's a hell of an error! - That guy in the Elite video is swinging his 7I at 70 MPH. C'mon. My 5' tall daughter swings hers faster than that.
    • M2R
      Mizuno Jpx One Driver & Fairway Woods

      By M2R · Posted

      Yea but that is sort of my quandary, I sometimes see posts where people causally say this club is more forgiving, a little more forgiving, less forgiving, ad nauseum. But what the heck are they really quantifying? The proclamation of something as fact is not authoritative, even less so as I don't know what the basis for that statement is. For my entire golfing experience, I thought of forgiveness as how much distance front to back is lost hitting the face in non-optimal locations. Anything right or left is on me and delivery issues. But I also have to clarify that my experience is only with irons, I never got to the point of having any confidence or consistency with anything longer. I feel that is rather the point, as much as possible, to quantify the losses by trying to eliminate all the variables except the one you want to investigate. Or, I feel like we agree. Compared to the variables introduced by a golfer's delivery and the variables introduced by lie conditions, the losses from missing the optimal strike location might be so small as to almost be noise over a larger area than a pea.  In which case it seems that your objection is that the 0-3% area is being depicted as too large. Which I will address below. For statements that is absurd and true 100% sweet spot is tiny for all clubs. You will need to provide some objective data to back that up and also define what true 100% sweet spot is. If you mean the area where there are 0 losses, then yes. While true, I do not feel like a not practical or useful definition for what I would like to know. For strikes on irons away from the optimal location "in measurable and quantifiable results how many yards, or feet, does that translate into?"   In my opinion it ok to be dubious but I feel like we need people attempting this sort of data driven investigation. Even if they are wrong in some things at least they are moving the discussion forward. And he has been changing the maps and the way data is interpreted along the way. So, he admits to some of the ideas he started with as being wrong. It is not like we all have not been in that situation 😄 And in any case to proceed forward I feel will require supporting or refuting data. To which as I stated above, I do not have any experience in drivers so I cannot comment on that. But I would like to comment on irons as far as these heat maps. In a video by Elite Performance Golf Studios - The TRUTH About Forgiveness! Game Improvement vs Blade vs Players Distance SLOW SWING SPEED! and going back to ~12:50 will show the reference data for the Pro 241. I can use that to check AskGolfNut's heat map for the Pro 241: a 16mm heel, 5mm low produced a loss of efficiency from 1.3 down to 1.24 or ~4.6%. Looking at AskGolfNut's heatmap it predicts a loss of 3%. Is that good or bad? I do not know but given the possible variations I am going to say it is ok. That location is very close to where the head map goes to 4%, these are very small numbers, and rounding could be playing some part. But for sure I am going to say it is not absurd. Looking at one data point is absurd, but I am not going to spend time on more because IME people who are interested will do their own research and those not interested cannot be persuaded by any amount of data. However, the overall conclusion that I got from that video was that between the three clubs there is a difference in distance forgiveness, but it is not very much. Without some robot testing or something similar the human element in the testing makes it difficult to say is it 1 yard, or 2, or 3?  
    • coachjimsc
      Wordle Daily Puzzle

      By coachjimsc · Posted

      Wordle 1,668 3/6 🟨🟨🟩⬜⬜ ⬜🟨⬜⬜🟨 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
    • boogielicious
      Wordle Daily Puzzle

      By boogielicious · Posted

      Wordle 1,668 3/6 🟨🟩🟨🟨⬜ 🟩🟩🟩🟩⬜ 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩 Should have got it in two, but I have music on my brain.
    • iacas
      Wordle Daily Puzzle

      By iacas · Posted

      Wordle 1,668 2/6* 🟨🟨🟩⬛⬛ 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
×
×
  • 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.

  I accept