• Announcements

    • iacas

      Visit FlagstickRule.com   03/13/2017

      Visit the site flagstickrule.com to read about and sign a petition for the USGA/R&A regarding the one terrible rule in the proposed "modernized" rules for 2019.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Strike One

Head weight versus distance

10 posts in this topic

When I recently took up golf again following a lengthly hiatus, I was generously given a couple of slightly used Burner drivers. The thing I noticed most of all was how light the heads were. I had trouble adjusting to the feel of these clubs.

It was explained to me that the manufacturers design drivers primarily for distance, which means head speed. I assume the thinking is that the average golfer can increase the head speed of his driver if there is less mass to accelerate.

I can't argue with the marketing, but for me it didn't work. The obvious fix was to add a little weight to the head, which I did.

I took both drivers out to the range yesterday to see which one hit longer. I was curious to see how the added weight effected my distance. It was close, but the added weight increased my distance by about 10-20 yards.

This got me thinking about the physics involved. A heavier mass traveling at the same speed is going to impart more energy to the ball than a lighter mass. My swing speed is primarily governed by my ability to rotate my body and generate torque. A few extra grams on the end of the shaft isn't going to slow things down much, but it will impart more energy..

Therefore, it only makes sense to use the heaviest head I can swing comfortably. I just wonder how it effects the dynamics of the shaft.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sign up (or log in) today! It's free (and you won't see this ad anymore)!

Sign up (or log in) today! It's free (and you won't see this ad anymore)!

Most likely you were able to connect closer to the sweet spot more often with the heavier head.  With a lighter swingweight some people can have issues delivering the clubhead to the ball accurately - I think basically the brain has trouble perceiving where the club head is.  I find I can't hit my driver well without a swingweight of at least D0.  Some people like it around C5 (very light), some people like it really heavy like a wedge (my brother likes D6 for his driver, to me it feels like a piece of concrete on a stick).

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That may be so. The swing is all about timing, so maybe that's part of it too.

Kinetic energy is calculated using the formula: KE = 1/2 mass x velocity squared. Momentum (P) is calculated with P = Mass x Velocity.

A small change in velocity creates a large increase in Kinetic energy. A small increase in mass has little effect with respect to KE.

However, a small change in mass has much more effect with regards to momentum.

The question is: which has more effect imparting energy to the ball, kinetic energy or momentum?

My guess, from a purely physics perspective, would be KE. A higher club head speed would impart far more energy to the ball. Nevertheless, we have to think about what is happening to the ball at the point of impact. It's getting squished and accelerated.

At the point of contact, a lighter head will decelerate at a faster rate than a heavier head. The heavier head maintains greater velocity until the ball leaves the face. This means the ball probably spends a little more time on the face of the heavier club, where it develops a greater amount of deformity and has more time to gain energy and accelerate.

Then again, the amount of increased KE from the lighter head may do the same thing.

Interesting to think about anyway.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats where you have to ask yourself what is better: higher clubhead speed or the added force that a heavier clubhead adds to the ball.  In the case of some drivers, the headweight is the same but the weight savings come in the shaft and grip.  I know that in the instance of Cleveland's 290 and 270 drivers, that is the case.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The basic equation is

 
  m1
	v2 = ----------------  (1 + e)   u1
		m1 + m 2
 

where m1 is mass of club, m2 is the ball, e is cofficient of restitution, and u1 is the velocity of the club. A golf ball is ~45 grams. The difference between a 200 gm clubhead and a 400gm would be about 10%.  Now the tricky part is that no one can tell you how the club head speed will differ between those clubs. Some guys can swing lighter clubs faster. Other guys struggle to swing confidently with them because they can't feel the clubhead.

Originally Posted by GaijinGolfer

Thats where you have to ask yourself what is better: higher clubhead speed or the added force that a heavier clubhead adds to the ball.  In the case of some drivers, the headweight is the same but the weight savings come in the shaft and grip.  I know that in the instance of Cleveland's 290 and 270 drivers, that is the case.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally Posted by x129

The basic equation is

m1v2 = ---------------- (1 + e) u1m1 + m 2

where m1 is mass of club, m2 is the ball, e is cofficient of restitution, and u1 is the velocity of the club. A golf ball is ~45 grams. The difference between a 200 gm clubhead and a 400gm would be about 10%.  Now the tricky part is that no one can tell you how the club head speed will differ between those clubs. Some guys can swing lighter clubs faster. Other guys struggle to swing confidently with them because they can't feel the clubhead.


Be careful when you start talking about feel though because for the most part, feel isnt real.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm dredging up this topic because I have a unique issue...

I have a Callaway Diablo 9.5 driver with a ProjX Stiff shaft.  I hit it well averaging about 230-240.

However, My fairway is a Titleist 909F3 13* w/ a Adila VooDoo Stiff that I can drive almost as far as the driver!  It has a heavier feel at the head and a better tempo - I perceive the timing with the heavier head coming through the ball with more force at release.

So I'm wondering if I'm leaving yardage off the driver because it is so light?  Can a driver be modded to a heavier head-weight or is this a function of the shaft?

TIA

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It could also be that your launch conditions are better with a bit more loft. I'd see a fitter if I were you.
0

Share this post


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

Thanks Erik - went to the fitter and he checked the clubs: Driver is a D5 and Fairway is a D0.  He said to demo a loftier driver as you suspected...

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Erik - went to the fitter and he checked the clubs: Driver is a D5 and Fairway is a D0.  He said to demo a loftier driver as you suspected...

Sweet. Glad you were able to get some good information (from the fitter - my post was just a hunch).

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
  • 2017 TST Partners

    PING Golf
    Leupold Golf
    Snell Golf
    Talamore Golf Resort
    Lowest Score Wins
  • Posts

    • To those who constantly repeat that the jeans shouldn't be worn because they are uncomfortable:  They may not be comfortable for YOU (although I really don't get this unless it's a climate issue), but your comfort and mine or another's are not equal.  I've worn jeans as my leg-wear of choice my entire life, both for work and play.  The same is true of 95% of the people I've worked and played with.   I don't wear them when it's 95° out (I usually wear neat cargo shorts), but I do play a LOT of golf in 50° and 60° weather, and they are perfect for that.  They are tough and take a lot of punishment, but are easy to clean.  They offer many different fits, so comfort and freedom of movement is only compromised if you choose the wrong style.  They have a wide range of prices from Rustler, to Wrangler to Levis to designer styles.   I wear Wranglers mostly, relaxed fit, and I can't imagine anything better for all around wear.  I wear them to work in the yard.  I wear them camping and fishing.  I wear them when we go out in the evening.  I wear them until the summer heat dictates shorts, but even then I will sometimes change back to jeans on cool summer nights here on the high plains or in the mountains. League this evening will probably be jeans, as the high today is forecast to be only 60°.  I'll wait and see if it's cargo shorts or denim, but those are really the only choices I'll have to make.  I choose not to play at venues where my preferences are under a decree of prohibition.  There are plenty of really good golf courses which adhere to a more unfettered point of view.
    • Possibly will be going to Barcelona Spain, middle of January.  My wife has her annual meeting over there this year.  Weather doesn't look like it will be great for golf though.  High's typically in the mid-50's.  But any recommendations for golf if we can get in a couple of rounds?
    • Frankly, I'm starting to think that dress codes have become necessary since people refuse to dress appropriately on their own.  Defendants showing up to court in shorts and shirts with the sleeves cut off is indicative of a problem.  A golf course doesn't need to be quite so formal, though. I have pretty minimal views of what is "respectful" on a golf course.  I personally generally wear long pants (sometimes shorts) and a collared shirt, but that's probably due to advances in textiles.  When I was younger, I wore jeans shorts and tee shirts to the local muni because that's what I had that would be remotely comfortable.   Since my friends and I were pretty much the only ones on the course one particular day when our school was the only one not having classes, we decided to take our shirts off and get a tan while golfing.  We were reprimanded by an employee and told to put them back I.  Looking back, I think this was the correct thing to do.  We were just trying to get tans, not be disrespectful, but I think the correction was warranted. I think a Course has the right to apply and enforce a dress code.  I'd hope that they relax it a bit if a visitor were unaware of it when first playing.  If a course does not want a dress code, good for them.  If you think the clientele at your local course is dressed in appropriately, speak with an employee about how you think people should be dressed, state that you will not patronize a place that allows such horrible cretins to breathe the same air as you, and then do not return.  The free market will decide if your business was important enough for them to force your opinions on others.
    • Thanks for sharing.   This is some great information.
    • Fascinating thread, shows how the generations view the world among other factors? And many of the views use extremes to make their point, e.g. cut off jeans, ratty T-shirts. I'm still baffled with the objection to cargo shorts, not the huge baggy ones, but the ones that are the same cut as "golf shorts" with extra pockets on the front. I also don't see how tucking in your shirt or having a collar have much to do with golf. I guess back when players wore plus fours and ties they were outraged at what's acceptable golf attire to much of today's older generation. Again, the Boomers and older generations are keeping younger generations away in droves by clinging to old norms IMHO. The sport will decline further/faster if that persists? Golf is more expensive and takes longer than many competing pastimes, is it really necessary to exacerbate the problem because someone otherwise neatly dressed doesn't have their shirt tucked in with a belt on?
  • TST Blog Entries

  • Blog Entries

  • Today's Birthdays

    1. Just trying
      Just trying
      (33 years old)
    2. Peter_b
      Peter_b
      (45 years old)
    3. SACgolf
      SACgolf
      (51 years old)
    4. Weluvgolf
      Weluvgolf
      (53 years old)
  • Get Great Gear with Amazon