Jump to content

Adam C

Established Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Adam C

  1. 1 hour ago, Craig24 said:

    Great advice. I also have a Dremel tool which would seem to be useful in the process, possibly cutting or. deburring

    Dremel is a great option. You can cut steel and graphite shafts with it. prep shafts (with some practice), could even clean out hosels with it with the right attachment.

  2. If you have been doing regrips you are already well on your way. There is nothing mystical about club making, just geometry, physics, and common sense. If you've got the vise (by far most important tool), torch or heat gun, and a drill as mentioned, those are 3 big basics. Here is what I would add.

    Utility knife

    48 inch ruler

    epoxy (start with quick set)

    sand paper (medium and fine grit)

    hacksaw, manual pipe cutter, rotary tool, or chop saw.

    Of course if you have a built out shop a belt sander is useful, as is the chop saw, but you can do all the same stuff with manual tools.

    If you have specific questions about picking shafts, I would ask those separately as you have to be more specific dealing with tip diameter, weight, length, flex, etc.

    I would look at some videos on Youtube as a starting point. I recommend finding the Mobile Clubmaker. 

  3. 10 hours ago, David in FL said:

    Thanks for that.  It cleared up a number of things for me.

    One question regarding the second “assumption”.  Would it be correct to say that rather than that the face remains oriented towards the target, that it must remain oriented the same as always...?  For instance, if someone orients the face 5° to the right of their ultimate target in their setup, that that’s what should remain constant?

    Correct, there is a graphic in the video with that caveat exactly. The face orientation can be in any direction as long as it is consistently used in that same position. The face at the target just insures that the loft number stated on the hosel will be accurate.

  4. Club Conex offers a couple products that allow for a conventional hosel modification for interchangeable heads. Pieces are around $10-$20 each for a head or shaft. This will add weight to the overall club in the end, both swing weight and static weight so you want to at least be aware of that. Look at the FAZ fit or the FUSE fit product line. One is epoxied inside the hosel and the other you epoxy to the outside of the hosel. Have not used it but looks like you need to sand the outside of the hosel for that one so there is no going back as you will mess up the look of the shaft. The final club lengths will also need to be adjusted depending on which one you use.

  5. 17 hours ago, Mhp2020 said:

    Did you have any luck with the reshafting?  
    I am having difficulty with a set of .355 I have but it appears the head tapers in to approx .317 at tip


    any local knowledge out there?

    You would have to bore out those hosels to get back to a .355 if they are in fact smaller than that. Just make sure it's not just a case of leftover debris in there. Adapters won't help. 

  6. 36 minutes ago, Jayclay said:

    Thanks, here's what I have - 

    3 - C9

    4 - D5

    5 - D3

    6 - D3

    7 - D3

    8 - D3

    9 - D3

    P - D2

    A - C8

    S - D7

    Do you think these weights are OK or do you think I should maybe change the 3, attack and sand wedge? 


    Only you can answer that question. If you hit certain clubs poorly, then you may need to adjust swing weight if it's one of the outliers. The only one that really stands out to me is the AW. I might add some lead tape to that one and get it up a little. The rest I am less concerned with assuming you hit them okay, comparatively.

  7. Don't do it, that's my advise. The idea is counterproductive for most golfers. You are adding to the static weight of the club to "trick" a swing weight scale into showing lower numbers. If you really want/need to lower SW, you need to reduce head weight, change shafts to lighter or counterbalanced, or shorten club. I know these options are more complicated but it is the better way.

  8. Little confused by your comments concerning the offset being the problem. Titleist makes some of the least offset clubs on the market across the board including hybrids. Probably less offset than TM. I am thinking this is more of a weight issue than an offset issue. Shaft weight and swing weight. Would really make sure you have the correct shaft weight in that hybrid as they can be all over the map as far as what the OEMs choose to install stock.

    That being said, the new TM hybrids will look very similar in general to the old Rescues.

  9. 1 hour ago, Carl3 said:

    Why wouldn't you look at putting the REAX 65 in? I am no shaft expert, but I think that there is a lot more to a shaft than the weight. I would be concerned about putting any old 65 gram shaft on that head. Looks like the shaft you have in there is a senior flex or one step up from "Ladies". 

    Actually, weight is by far and away the most important spec of any shaft. Way more important than, flex, bend profile, torque, even radial consistency. Getting the weight right is a must, the other stuff is more fine tuning at best.

    2 hours ago, jmanbooyaa said:

    i have the 17 M2 fw with the ReAx 55 shaft. I use a regular flex shaft throughout my bag. I am having a lot of difficulty with the weight of the club. It feels way too light. 0 control at contact. 

    Would putting in a new shaft at a 65 weight benefit me? Was going to put in a Aldila Nvs  orange nxt. Cheap shaft that I have played in the past. 

    If you want to know better before you go ahead and reshaft, get some lead tape and run strips down the length of the shaft starting an inch or so below the grip. Put 10g of tape on and go hit it. Add or subtract until you get the feel and dispersion you are looking for. You may find you want it even heavier, say around 70 or maybe lighter say 62. Then you can pick your shaft based off that.

  10. 2 hours ago, ncates00 said:

    Any time you push for a specific metric without consideration of other factors, that is the very definition of "one size fits all."  You have made a blanket over-generalization that this guy should go with 12* of launch based upon your view of ball speed and what some tour players do.  Sounds like one size fits all to me.


    A better understanding is one that looks at all delivery metrics, not just what you think is the best launch angle.  You are essentially basing your assumption off 2 metrics and that is all--ball speed and launch angle.  There are other factors.  You are not basing things off some deep understanding when that takes place.




    Agreed, however, not everything is in a vacuum.  Certainly up to 3k spin on a driver is not optimal.  Maybe he needs to work on his delivery.  Lowering launch angle isn't the only route here.  You're not tackling the root of the problem by merely saying  go with 12* of launch!


    Maybe that is a good place to start, but maybe not.  We need to see more.  The guy said he wants lower spin.  Lower spin and higher launch would work for him.  I'm not saying he should go sub-2k spin; he could do well with 2000-2200 as he said he wanted.  But again, you are incorrect to assume the only important data points here are ball speed and 12* launch angle. The higher launch angle with the lower spin can keep the ball around 40* descent angle so as not to balloon up in wind (see posts on here again about normal driving being the play into the wind most of the time).  Your suggestion of just change launch angle and do nothing to spin doesn't help him--you're advocating for a low riser flight, when he probably needs the penetrating rainbow flight of high launch/lower spin.

    I'm done. I will let the OP, or any other readers for that matter, decide for themselves if they want to consider my opinions on this.

  11. 28 minutes ago, Rippy_72 said:

    Thank you very much, I didn't think of that.  The shafts just screw in.  Good idea. That is what I am going to try.  Not a lot of risk that way.   The more I think about it, the less confident I am in the fitting.  I am going to look on fleebay for a Graphite Designs AD-DI 6S or maybe 7S or maybe AD-IZ.

    I think what might be going on, the COR on the sweet spot probably is better on the R11S compared to the Cobra but the shafts demo'd on the Cobra are much "better" than the Diaman Kali S flex 70 grams that I have on the R11S.  It is also possible that the instruments are inaccurate.  I was told my smash was 1.52 on the best shots,  I hand calculated taking ball speed divided by clubspeed. Maybe I got a R11S clubhead that is just right up to the 0.830 COR limit.  Normal process variability that Taylormade now smartly adjusts right up to the limit on the M6.  I have always, always focused on solid strikes and have always used a high tee off the left toe, striking on the upswing.  Anyways.  The only two advantages that I see with a new head would be more forgiveness on off center hits and possibly better aerodynamics.  The R11S head is not sleek.  It could be draggy aerodynamic wise...?

    I rarely lose a ball off the tee and driving has always been my strength.  I had always used 6 degree or 7.5 degree drivers years ago with an angle of attack around +5 degrees.  IIRC, during my six days with Jim Mclean in my late 40's, my driver spin was around 1800-2200 with a 13 degree launch off a 7.5 degree headed driver.  Carry distance was 320 with optimal smash factor per Jim, but would not let me hit driver if others were at the far end of the range.  A few years earlier in my mid 40's, I had balls speed measured at 190-195 mph in Clementon, NJ. So, the smash factors told to me by the fitter are not a surprise except that the old head wasn't no slouch so to speak.  I was expecting the new stuff to be hot, but it was not.  Also, 2-3 hits per club isn't statistically valid.    Really need 20-30 of each.

    I can tell that my old driver does not launch like it used to, so, I don't know how much of that is me and how much of it is the club fit.  Now that I am  older and have a screwed up neck (lower back is totally fine), I am just trying to get 10-20 more yards because there is a huge difference getting it very close to a long par 5 in two and being 30-50 yards back.  Maybe going from 44.75 to 46 with a more modern shaft and better matched to a slower speed might get me 10 more yards.  I am less a bit than 40% chances to make birdie from 30-50 yards but if I get it to chipping range or into the front bunker, I am closer to 70% up and down overall.  3-7 yards for $7-800 isn't worth it to me, especially if it looks like the shaft is the one making the difference.  But, 10+ yards would be worth it.

    I probably expected too much from a $325 fitting.  The iron shafts are completely wrong.  he wants me to hit it for 2 weeks.  I could tell in 10 balls it was wrong and 300+ balls later, they still balloon and still have 30 yards of hook on a 6 iron....no thanks.   I thought the driver would have found a more appropriate head and shaft.  Maybe shaftlab load values are too simplistic. Maybe I am impatient.

    Thank you to all for the advice.  I have done some some reading, I think I better understand some of this better now.  I am just going to softstep my KBS 130 X shafted irons and bottom feed ebay for a driver shaft until I find one that I like.


    It is also possible that your current driver is no longer "conforming". If the face was pretty hot to start with, after this much time and many strikes at your speed, the face may now be above the COR limit.

    Also just as a point of reference, that R11S head usually spins much more than a new driver of today. The fact that you saw the opposite tells me either the loft needs to go down or you need to look at a different current driver to see what you might be missing.

    I don't think you are going to get much of a change out of just a shaft switch unless, you go with a different weight, or go longer to increase club head speed. And I would be worried that your contact may suffer if you go that route. Even if those numbers seem overly generous, its obvious that you make solid contact right now.

  12. 12 hours ago, ncates00 said:

    I did. However, you are ignoring a lot of variables in pursuit of prescribing some meaningless one size fits all launch angle. It’s more nuanced than that and you should know better.  And If you’re going to talk about wind, you’re off base yet again. @iacas and others have talked about a normal drive being the play more often than not into the wind. After all, driver has the most ball speed and the least spin to cut through the wind better. Check the forum for info on that. It’s pretty intuitive though. 

    My problem again is just you’re over generalizing without any thought to other variables in delivering the golf club. 

    This isn't one size fits all. This is understanding what kind of golfer we are talking about here. Clearly a good player with plenty of speed to burn. Find me a single fitter out in the world who would be happy with those launch and spin numbers based on his speed (even factor in his AoA if you are wanting to be more "precise") and I will show you a bad fitter. Just look at his old driver numbers, those were really solid. Then jumps into the new driver and numbers jump way up. Obviously something is not where it should be, and the best place to start would be with lofting down that new driver.

  13. 38 minutes ago, ncates00 said:

    That's slightly overstated/generalized.  The optimal launch angle for a player depends on other factors too, e.g., angle of attack, backspin, dynamic loft, and the player's desired trajectory (carry v. total).  A tour player who is only around 165 mph of ball speed and 12* of launch theoretically is not optimizing their driver as there are faster players with higher launch than 12*.  Again, one must look at the totality of the circumstances of other factors present.

    There are plenty of tour players with over 12* of launch.  Here are just a few:Image result for rory trackman driverImage result for rory trackman driverimage.jpeg.f6d95041d6fca3f941da9206e9297509.jpegJames Hahn Driver 8-25-15Scott-Hend-Driver-May-2015

    You need to pay attention to what I said first off. I said for distance and control, not just talking about pure distance. Yes, I see you found some LM data with players hitting individual drives (not averages) way up in the air with minimal spin. That is all good and fine when you are down wind or play golf in Palm Springs. However most players don't want to always hit it high, especially better ones.

    By the way, feel free to check out the tour averages for players, you will see I am correct with my numbers.

  14. 31 minutes ago, Missouri Swede said:

    (raises his hand from the back row of the conference hall):  Why wouldn't he want higher launch and much lower spin? Wouldn't that give him longer carry and total distance?




    At 165 ball speed, you don't need or want 15 degrees or more of launch angle. It's too much by far. For control and better overall distance you want to be around 12 degrees. You can look at tour guys around that 165 ball speed. All of them are under 12 degrees of launch. 

  15. At your ball speeds, those launch and spin numbers are way higher then you would want. Your current driver is giving you much more appropriate numbers for your speed. The new heads are supposed to be more aerodynamic to increase speed. The shaft won't really change speed unless the weight is different (ie lighter). That being said, different feeling shafts can change how you deliver the club and sequence your down swing which might give better club speed.

    I would dial down the loft on that Cobra and see if the numbers get better.

    The numbers as they are would not make me want to change unless your dispersion was better? Did not see anything about your misses in your post.

  16. I would call Cobra as possibly the very last resort. You will not get any useful information from anyone there, or any OEM for that matter. Sorry, this sort of thing is above the pay grade of anyone you would talk to. May have slightly better chance calling Fuji.

    Again though it's more educated guess when dealing with one length clubs based on weight and desired help with ball flight.

  • 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...