The Physics of Golf: What's the Ideal Loft to Hit the Ball Farthest? (Forbes Magazine)

[nevets88]

TL;DR - optimal launch for a driver is 16 degrees according to the paper referenced in the article, but it was written in 1983.

Never took physics in university, so don't have any clue as to how accurate the article is.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/stevensalzberg/2013/04/29/the-physics-of-golf-whats-the-ideal-loft-to-hit-the-ball-farthest/

Edit: The graph on the second page that shows various launch angles is interesting.

[purple drank]

I hit a 9° Mac V foil..stiff....46" and it's custom fit....16° is a hybrid or 5w.

[iacas]

I hit a 9° Mac V foil..stiff....46" and it's custom fit....16° is a hybrid or 5w.

Loft is not launch, Micah.

---

TaylorMade is saying 17°/1700 RPM for their Tour players, so 16° is pretty close. I could see the numbers changing slightly with some changes to the aerodynamic improvements to dimple patterns, etc. but not shifting a LOT.

[purple drank]

Loft is not launch, Micah. [rule] TaylorMade is saying 17°/1700 RPM for their Tour players, so 16° is pretty close. I could see the numbers changing slightly with some changes to the aerodynamic improvements to dimple patterns, etc. but not shifting a LOT.

It actually makes sense given Newtons 3rd law and all. What goes up must come down. lol

[Phil McGleno]

Whats that got to do with anything?[quote name="purple drank" url="/t/71222/the-physics-of-golf-whats-the-ideal-loft-to-hit-the-ball-farthest-forbes-magazine#post_923041"] It actually makes sense given Newtons 3rd law and all. What goes up must come down. lol[/quote]

[purple drank]

Whats that got to do with anything?

It makes sense when taking gravity into the equation. I'm no mathematician but if Taylor Made says 17° then I don't doubt them.

[jamo]

It makes sense when taking gravity into the equation. I'm no mathematician but if Taylor Made says 17° then I don't doubt them.

Okay, but what do either of those have to do with 16º vs. 17º vs. whateverº?

[purple drank]

Okay, but what do either of those have to do with 16º vs. 17º vs. whateverº?

What does gravity have to do with launch angle and loft?? It plays a huge role.....what Taylor mad is essentially saying is that 17° is the launch angle where you woild achieve th greatest distance using the same amount of force....what they didn't take into consideration is role....they're referring to carry.

[saevel25]

Doesn't matter for gravity. Gravity is constant. What matters the most is backspin + ball speed + launch angle + Face angle. If you want to take out face angle, like Taylormade can do when they test equipment with their "Iron Byron" maching, You only need 3 things to determine shot distance. Gravity is the same for every shot. It doesn't magically change because you hit it at 17 degrees of launch angle.

The reason launch angle has increased, it used to be 12 degrees optimal, is because drivers are low spin now. So you need higher launch to increase distance.

[purple drank]

So in 1983 it was 16° then it went back down to 12° before TM magically bumped it back up to 17°. When was it 12°??? before 1983??

[jamo]

What does gravity have to do with launch angle and loft?? It plays a huge role.....what Taylor mad is essentially saying is that 17° is the launch angle where you woild achieve th greatest distance using the same amount of force....what they didn't take into consideration is role....they're referring to carry.

Yeah, we all know what gravity is. :doh: Just ... just forget I said anything.

[purple drank]

BuI I do get your point about no spin drivers. You hit UP on the ball when driving and down when using an iron. if anything spin would decrease distance IMO.

[purple drank]

Yeah, we all know what gravity is. :doh: Just ... just forget I said anything.

Since I'm new and enjoy this web site I'll just shut up.

[saevel25]

So in 1983 it was 16° then it went back down to 12° before TM magically bumped it back up to 17°. When was it 12°??? before 1983??

This wasn't published in a golf journal, or known by golf companies.

12 degrees was what majority of the golf community thought the optimal launch angle was. It was due to high spin drivers. You had to have a lower launch angle because backspin was so high. If you hit a mid to late 1990's driver with a 17 degrees of loft, for one it would be nearly impossible because most people hit down on the ball, and with high spin golf balls and drivers you would balloon the shot and loose distance. It has been the past 10-12 years that drivers have become low spin, and a higher launch angle is more optimal. Also finding out that people should hit up on the ball.

No TM didn't bump it up to 17 degrees. Technological advancement + swing changes + knowing physics changed that. Stop making it seem like TM is a golf physic GOD.

[purple drank]

I love TM equipment personally and own several of their drivers but I was referring to the post made by iacus.

[iacas]

BuI I do get your point about no spin drivers. You hit UP on the ball when driving and down when using an iron. if anything spin would decrease distance IMO.

A ball with no spin goes nowhere. You need spin to help keep the ball in the air.

http://thesandtrap.com/b/balls/caesar_featherie_dimpleless_golf_ball_review

[purple drank]

A ball with no spin goes nowhere. You need spin to help keep the ball in the air. [URL=http://thesandtrap.com/b/balls/caesar_featherie_dimpleless_golf_ball_review]http://thesandtrap.com/b/balls/caesar_featherie_dimpleless_golf_ball_review[/URL]

I agree. Not sure why you guys are jumping me though....is this new guy initiation time????lolll

[purple drank]

A ball with minimal spin will travel further than a ball with a lot of spin.