KBS Tour vs. Dynamic Gold

[THException]

I just hit a 7i in both the Taylormade Cb and the Titleist Cb. The feel was incredibly different. I'm already familiar with the differences in the club heads but not with the shafts.

The Taylormades had KBS tours and the Titleists had Dynamic Golds.

What is the difference, technically, between these shafts?

I'm trying to pin point what it was about the KBS's that I liked so much so I can continue to shop for shafts in the same vein as the KBS Tours (i.e. with the same spec's and properties).

[WUTiger]

Here are specifications on the two shaft models.

Shaft	FCM	Wt.Para	Wt.Tpr	Bend/Kick	Launch*	Tip
DG R300	4.8	127 gr.	127 gr.	High	Low	Firm
DG S300	5.8	130 gr.	130 gr.	High	Low	Firm
DG X100	6.8	130 gr.	130 gr.	High	Low	Firm
KBS Tour R	5.0	120 gr.	110 gr.	Mid	High	Med
KBS Tour S	6.0	130 gr.	120 gr.	Mid-High	Mid	Med.Stiff
KBS Tour X	7.0	133 gr.	130 gr.	High	Mid	Stiff
Notes	* Launch :  For KBS Tour, taper tip may launch slightly lower than the parallel tips. Weights are for uncut shafts. Above specifications (excluding FCM) are from GolfWorks 2014 Master Clubmaker’s Catalog, Edition 2.

Compared to like shafts in Dynamic Golf, the KBS Tours tend to launch the ball a bit higher.

I have hit both R300 and KBS Tour R.flex here and there, and the KBS feels livelier.

If you get a fitting and both are in your shaft band, go with the one that feels best. Talk to the fitter about your swing tempo, that may be the deciding factor.

[Pretzel]

I personally found the KBS Tour shafts to give me a lower dispersion than their Dynamic Gold counterparts. I like them quite a bit. There is another difference that isn't mentioned above though.

KBS shafts are all sorted based on frequency. They have a small range of frequencies that are considered "within tolerance" and all other shafts are tossed and recycled to be made into new shafts. This means all shafts will have the same relative stiffness, but their weights may vary.

True Temper shafts (the Dynamic Gold's included) are sorted by weight. They have a small weight range that is "within tolerance" and they toss those that don't meet their standards to be recycled. This means that your shafts will all be the same weight, but their relative stiffness may be slightly different.

These differences, due to the quality of manufacturing in both cases, are something that you never will really notice but for me sorting by frequency makes more sense than by weight. It seems like the more important of the two specs to me, not that I'd ever notice the difference in ones that were a little high or a little low of the same model shaft.

[THException]

Any idea if Project X's are sorted by weight or frequency?

[Pretzel]

Any idea if Project X's are sorted by weight or frequency?

Project X are frequency sorted if I remember correctly.

[WUTiger]

Project X are frequency sorted if I remember correctly.

This is correct. A company called Royal Precision developed both the original Rifles and the Project X models in the early 2000s. RP encountered financial problems, and was bought out by True Temper in 2006.

Since then, former Royal Precision design meister Kim Braley found a new home with KBS Golf Shafts, where he is now director of R&D; and Tour Operations.

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

As for Dynamic Gold shafts, clubfitters are aware of the weight vs. frequency sorting. So, clubfitters will often test a batch of shafts for the FCM, and try to match sets of eight on FCM. That way, a set of irons will have fairly close frequency match from club to club.

[WUTiger]

This is correct. A company called Royal Precision developed both the original Rifles and the Project X models in the early 2000s. ...

Oops, I omitted a key point: Royal Precision developed the Frequency Coefficient Matching (FCM) system to get tighter controls on shaft set frequencies.

A second role for FCM involves using the figures to compare shaft flexes from manufacturer to manufacturer; the comparisons make up for a lack of industry standard for Regular and Stiff shafts.

Shafts companies call Stiff, and their FCMs:

• DG S300: FCM = 5.8
• KBS Tour Stiff: FCM = 6.0
• Project X 6.0: FCM = 6.5

(This PX metric confuses a lot of people; it's the Rifle 6.0 that has FCM = 6.0)

[saevel25]

I just hit a 7i in both the Taylormade Cb and the Titleist Cb. The feel was incredibly different. I'm already familiar with the differences in the club heads but not with the shafts.

The Taylormades had KBS tours and the Titleists had Dynamic Golds.

What is the difference, technically, between these shafts?

I'm trying to pin point what it was about the KBS's that I liked so much so I can continue to shop for shafts in the same vein as the KBS Tours (i.e. with the same spec's and properties).

In more technical terms on how the two shafts are different.

There are a few design methods for golf shafts. One is to have the same bend profile for the same model, but just decrease the weight (amount of material) to adjust the frequency (stiffness). KBS does this with all of their shafts.

The other method is to actually vary the bend profile depending on flex. Dynamic Gold will do this. Their Stiff and X-stiff might have the same bend profile, but just different frequency, but once you hit regular you now have a completely different shaft bend profile.

One this might be Dynamic Gold's way of adjusting for the customers. They might be assuming regular shafts are used by certain players who might benefit from that bend profile. I prefer the KBS method because I know I will get consistent results through out all the flexes with in a model. In the end, that bend profile might not even suit me anyways.

I believe KBS tends to use less stiff tip profiles. They then tend to feel softer, while Dynamic Gold tend to feel stiffer at impact.

I personally prefer KBS Shafts. I think they are just a step above Dynamic Gold. If I had to rate the shaft brands.

KBS

Nippon

Project X

Dynamic Gold

[vangator]

I've only used TT DG S300 shafts for the last 30+ years. I obviously like them. I like a shaft with a high kick point.