Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Mike Boatright

Super-Lightweight Drivers That Don't Hit the Ball as Far

Note: This thread is 1626 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!

102 posts / 13395 viewsLast Reply

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, Mike Boatright said:

Any way that's kinda harsh again! I have made a video showing my results enjoy.

I don't see a video, and your tests hardly qualify as conclusive proof.

Share this post


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

Just now, iacas said:

I don't see a video, and your tests hardly qualify as conclusive proof.

It's in the process of formatting will be about 15 minutes give or take. I used a scale the callaway cut head weighs 155.92 grams and the cobra in the 200 gram range with the same length shaft and about the same weight plus or minus 10 grams.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is very un scientific, but will show to some extent the difference between swinging a standard 200 gram driver head vs a 155 gram version of the same shaft length. Iv'e seen these results over and over again and would assume the same results with different users over hundreds of trials.

Please forgive the poor quality I used windows movie maker and a cheap 12 megapixel camera.

 

specs: Cobra s speed 200 gram head 70 gram s fujikura shaft 44.5 inches

Prototype Callaway 5.5 ounces 155.922 grams head with a 60 gram shaft 44.5 inches

Callaway razr x reg flex motore 50 gram shaft +1/2 inch or 45 inches

Edited by Mike Boatright

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i wonder if new material such as nanotubes of carbon will enter the market and reduce weight. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, bubble said:

i wonder if new material such as nanotubes of carbon will enter the market and reduce weight. 

Perhaps check out the video and see the results:-D I'm thinking more centered mass less wasted weight and about 155.922 grams if applicable to hitting the golf ball with the same force as a 200 gram driver.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 4/11/2016 at 4:23 PM, saevel25 said:

 I forgot this little gem. Let the video speak for itself. 

Mizuno JPX-850 - Hollow
Taylormade R15 - Hollow
Cobra King LTD - Hollow
Ping G30 - Hollow
Nike Vapor Pro - Hollow 
Callaway Double Black - Hollow
Wilson Staff - Hollow

 

 

Irrelevance Why nit pick on the hollow thing it's irrelevant the the topic and isn't what I meant cool video though :)

 

 

 

Edited by Mike Boatright

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Mike Boatright said:

I forgot this little gem. Let the video speak for itself. 

 

 

 

 

 

I think another cool thing about that video is how it shows so much wasted material is used. The face it literally very small in relation the the rest of the club which of course is designed to be stable and flex at impact. I think it works very well in stability but is slowing you down in terms of 12 to 15 mph. How can mass that far and wide away from the ball have an effect on smash factor ask your self this? Reduce the total grams to 155.922 as I have tested and get that 460 cc down to 300 cc of more compacted,yet lighter material and you could have the same hit factor if not more and be perfectly legal. There has to be about 25 to 50 grams of just waste in the modern driver as far as I can see. A wide open face at impact will slice no matter how stable that tin can is. Reduce the weight increase the smash factor on center hits legally and increase your clubhead speed by 12 mph in the process be it hollow or a traditional solid pear shaped driver. It wont matter as long as the 155.922 grams is directed to impact vs stability which is needed for such a huge tin can of a club. Modern drivers are kind of a self fulfilling prophecy all that material is harnessed for stability which only serves to support it's size in the first place. In other words less mass =less needed stability. more directed weight will result in the same hit with increased velocity. Take a large water tanker with no water in it weighing 1000 pounds crashing into a brick wall going 100 mph vs a cement truck weighing 600 pounds full of cement going 100 mph. I would bet the more centered mass of the cement truck would do the same damage.If you increase the speed it would do even more so. Both would be the case but it's obviously easier to move a lighter object to higher speed.

Edited by Mike Boatright

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With the best will in the world, what is the point of this thread? We know the golf club manufacturers have all been playing around with weight for ages and are at the level of moving weights back and forward or side to side to maximise speed. Do you really think they haven't tried a lighter driver?

Let's say, for argument's sake, that you can swing it faster and that the mass isn't having an effect. You still wouldn't hit the centre of the face anywhere near as often and mishits would be far more penal. Why else do you think the tour pros choose a shorter shaft (most are playing near 44.5 inches) over the stock 46 inch shaft that the manufacturers put out to sell speed and distance to the consumers? Along that lines, why are the tour players not all playing the 'better player' versions of each driver, which has a smaller head. Answer: less forgiveness is a bad thing, which means you need a bigger head.

I know I've written about head size, but they've made the 460cc heads as light as they can, so I can only imagine you're encouraging smaller size heads with longer shaft. If that's the case, just bag a three wood. I really don't get what point you are trying to make...

Share this post


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

5 minutes ago, b101 said:

With the best will in the world, what is the point of this thread? We know the golf club manufacturers have all been playing around with weight for ages and are at the level of moving weights back and forward or side to side to maximise speed. Do you really think they haven't tried a lighter driver?

Let's say, for argument's sake, that you can swing it faster and that the mass isn't having an effect. You still wouldn't hit the centre of the face anywhere near as often and mishits would be far more penal. Why else do you think the tour pros choose a shorter shaft (most are playing near 44.5 inches) over the stock 46 inch shaft that the manufacturers put out to sell speed and distance to the consumers? Along that lines, why are the tour players not all playing the 'better player' versions of each driver, which has a smaller head. Answer: less forgiveness is a bad thing, which means you need a bigger head.

I know I've written about head size, but they've made the 460cc heads as light as they can, so I can only imagine you're encouraging smaller size heads with longer shaft. If that's the case, just bag a three wood. I really don't get what point you are trying to make...

Oh not at all I'm theorizing a smaller lighter overall head at 155 grams with the same face size as the current driver. My test concluded that I could swing the 44.5 inch 60 gram shaft 155 gram driver head 119 mph with ease because of it's head weight vs my 200 gram standard club 110 with measurable effort.. Current drivers are big in the wrong places mostly the body which only provides stability within itself. A smaller body results in less stability needs and with correct engineering more centered mass and the same energy transfer.  I'm not sure if companies have done this yet,i'm sure they have tried many of things but not sure if they've done what I have proposed. I believe to certain tolerances less weight can apply the same force if applied correctly. Imagine hitting a large faced small bodied driver that the average Joe could swing 110 mph with ease yet still have the same cubic cm of face area to hit the ball. Forgiveness comes from face size not so much from a large exterior body. Ask your self this what comes in contact with the ball the back of your bazooka driver,the movable weights or the face? 

 

Due to a more centered mass they would simply tweak the loft to get the spin low and such instead of adding speed crippling metallic baggage and tungsten weights to make the ball go up.

 

The point of this thread is the average bloke swings it 90 mph and hit's it 230 yards wouldn't be nice to krank it out there 270 legally?

m1_20front_67ad45e2-78d5-4a0b-a28f-a4d8a5f504a7.jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Mike Boatright said:

Forgiveness comes from face size not so much from a large exterior body.

Ask your self this what comes in contact with the ball the back of your bazooka driver,the movable weights or the face? 

Ok, I'm trying, but this is just wrong and goes in the face of logic. Try swinging a pane of glass on a stick or a very long shafted putter as fast as you can and see where it gets you... The weight promotes stability, which you need in order to create :

a) favourable loft conditions

b) stability and therefore consistency

I'm also unsure why you keep going for more swing speed. In your swing thread it's clear that you have enough, but what you don't have is control. The ideas you put forward in this thread may (and I'm being generous here) increase your speed, but you have way less control. 

Share this post


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

6 minutes ago, b101 said:

Ok, I'm trying, but this is just wrong and goes in the face of logic. Try swinging a pane of glass on a stick or a very long shafted putter as fast as you can and see where it gets you... The weight promotes stability, which you need in order to create :

a) favourable loft conditions

b) stability and therefore consistency

I'm also unsure why you keep going for more swing speed. In your swing thread it's clear that you have enough, but what you don't have is control. The ideas you put forward in this thread may (and I'm being generous here) increase your speed, but you have way less control. 

Well yes and no I'm sure tour guys who swing it 119 mph like to feel the clubhead for control. When my swing is on plane it's in control it's much easier for me to do so when I have less effort. I have a swing plane guide and have found the 155 gram club is easier to stay in balance with. I can slow it down to 99 or so with the standard driver but that loses much yardage.. A pane of glass doesn't really apply to a near spherical clubhead? Your correct though some people wouldn't like it until they see the results. Who knows maybe the end result would be 165 grams either way it couldnt look or feel any different in fact it would probably feel more balanced.

 

See picture below here is a sphere on a stick. say it's on a 44.5 inch driver shaft yet the face is as large as the current driver in cm and the head is wrapped around a 300 cc composite design.. It weighs 155 to 165 grams yet it so centered you can feel the head throughout your swing just fine maybe even better. Because it's light you can whale on it yet remain in balance and actually keep it on plane better that the current tin can models.

 

Modern drivers are getting less tin canny and more aerodynamic all the time but it's mostly hype a lot and cool looks. I swung this club on a machine 107 no different than any driver within the last 20 years and it still felt heavy. Don't get me wrong this is a bad ass driver that's designed to move it's 460 cc of wasted materiel as fast as it can and if it was on a shorter lighter shaft I may have picked up speed.

download (3)ball.jpg

maxresdefault.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Mike Boatright said:

This is very un scientific, but...  

 

That's ok, science is pretty much all bullshit anyway. 

Share this post


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

8 minutes ago, Ernest Jones said:

that's ok, science is pretty much all bullshit anyway. 

I like a good joke as much as the next guy. I hope your kidding though and not one of those the earth is 1000 years old kinda followers are you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, Mike Boatright said:

I swung this club on a machine 107 no different than any driver within the last 20 years and it still felt heavy. Don't get me wrong this is a bad ass driver that's designed to move it's 460 cc of wasted materiel as fast as it can and if it was on a shorter lighter shaft I may have picked up speed.

Ok, thing is, golf is about getting the ball in the hole, not what number you can produce on a swing speed monitor. Let's try this a different way. How many fairways do you hit and how far do you hit it on average, including the mishits? 

Quote

Because it's light you can whale on it yet remain in balance and actually keep it on plane better that the current tin can models

Yet from every swing of yours I've seen, you aren't in balance and can't hold your follow-through. Everything is about hitting it as hard as you possibly can and that can't lead to good results.

Happy to say otherwise if you are actually hitting a load of fairways, but based on pretty much every post you've made, more speed is the last thing you need - this is a compliment, you can clearly hit it a long way. However, it seems to be all you are interested in, which just doesn't add up if you're trying to reduce your scores. If you're competing against mates for who's got the biggest balls for bashing driver as far as you can with no regard for direction, then carry on.

Share this post


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

16 minutes ago, Mike Boatright said:

I like a good joke as much as the next guy. I hope your kidding though and not one of those the earth is 1000 years old kinda followers are you?

I would guess that would be you since you seem to ignore all scientific facts and get all in a bother when we bring them up.

Share this post


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

1 hour ago, Mike Boatright said:

I like a good joke as much as the next guy. I hope your kidding though and not one of those the earth is 1000 years old kinda followers are you?

Anyone who has ever gone for a walk knows the earth is flat. 

Share this post


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

The phrase "point of diminishing returns" seems to fit here.... Also, I'm pretty sure that the reason club heads are typically all in the 180-200 gram weight range is not by accident but by design due to years of research showing that is the optimal weight giving maximum results within the confines of the rules of golf... But hey, what do I know, I'm just a bad golfer who likes to to read golf forums and stuff.

Share this post


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

Note: This thread is 1626 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!

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  



×
×
  • 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.

The popup will be closed in 10 seconds...