Jump to content
Check out the Spin Axis Podcast! ×
Note: This thread is 4825 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

Posted

Depends on the Maker

Tom Wishon "The Search for the Perfect Golf Club"  page 97

'...what a circus that is! Because there are no standards for shaft flex in the golf industry, an R flex equals and R flex except if it is made by another maker of R's in which case it might not equal R at all."

-------------------------------------------------------

Tom Wishon is a golf club designer and researcher. Tom Wishon is a former member of the PGA of America who chose to pursue a career in golf equipment design and clubfitting research. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Wishon

http://wishongolf.com/twgt-books/


Posted
Originally Posted by nyhass

Question: Are Uniflex Graphite Shafts 80g stiff or regular? I prefer regular flex. Would these be close?

Thanks.

Uniflex shafts are often on the stiff side of regular.  In other words if 4.5 is reg and 5.5 is stiff than a uniflex might be around 4.8.  If you post whose uniflex shaft your asking about someone might have a better answer.


Posted

Thanks, I was afraid of that.

Are Callaway System 75's 75 grams? If so, 80 grams would be OK for me.

Thanks again.


Posted

Really the grams are only a issue of weight not flex. You can get a heavy steel shaft that is the same measured flex as a light graphite.  I like heavy someone else who is weak or slow swinging and trying to milk and extra mph out of their limitations might try lighter as a way to do that.

If it is already in your hands then just try it out. If you are buying it then you need to measure your mph and aggressiveness etc to make an educated guess. In the absence of any firm data and earned opinions from your own experience a uni-flex will probably work just fine.

The only real answer is to find the makers chart for 80g uniflex shafts.


Posted

They are Grafalloy Hy I'll get them. brid 80g on Adams A2 irons. If they're close to regular, I don't like stiff graphite.


Posted

Early marketing blurbs on Uniflex said the shaft supposedly adjusts its flex depending on how hard you swing the club.

It's more a matter of being on the line between R and S flex. Uniflex was designed to be an OK shaft for most under-50 male golfers, but not necessarily an ideal shaft. Using Uniflex as the stock shaft for SGI irons cuts down on both manufacturing and inventory costs.

I played Callaway Uniflex for two years in X20 irons, and it was an acceptable, medium-weight shaft for those who prefer consistency over feel. Some people like Uniflex, others don't. And, not all Uniflex shafts would have the same FCM rating (uniform flex measure).

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 OS 4H at 22°  ||  Irons:  :callaway: Mavrik MAX 5i-PW
Wedges:  :callaway: MD3: 48°, 54°... MD4: 58° ||  Putter:image.png.b6c3447dddf0df25e482bf21abf775ae.pngInertial NM SL-583F, 34"  
Ball:  image.png.f0ca9194546a61407ba38502672e5ecf.png QStar Tour - Divide  ||  Bag: :sunmountain: Three 5 stand bag

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • 2 months later...
Posted

imho...Uniflex are defintely not for everyone.  I would recommend getting fitted for shaft and picking that with your preferred irons.

My opinion is based on buying about 5 different single irons before buying deciding on an iron set.

RAZRBlack came with the Uniflex shaft and I could never hit it consistently, even after a good warm up period on the range.

One day I passed it to my friend on the range and he took several swings and was inconsistent and he handed it back and said :

“That’ll screw up your swing”.


Note: This thread is 4825 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


  • 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

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