Jump to content

Adam C

Established Member
  • Content Count

    371
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Adam C


  1. 17 hours ago, Cantankerish said:

    On this note, I am curious.  Would you say that driver is the most important club to get fit for, and the other clubs become increasingly less important as you go down the list toward putter?

    No I wouldn't say that. Each club or group of clubs has certain elements that should be "fit" to the golfer. Drivers should have the correct weight, length, loft, grip size, swing weight etc, and this can be done in doors for many golfers and get the results you need. Wedges need to have the correct lofts and lies but this is much harder to discern indoors. Grinds can be important depending on the golfer but really need to be addressed outdoors on grass.


  2. On 6/29/2020 at 8:42 AM, GEC said:

    I have been using foam balls due to physical set up and kids using my Optishot.  Trying not to destroy my house.  I am considering going to a more advanced launch monitor like Skytrack but want to continue to use foam balls or similar softer ball.  Will the tracking be as accurate any suggestions as to what monitor will track these types of balls?

    Pretty sure the monitor will be accurately telling you how far and high you hit a foam ball. Don't know what that is worth unless you have some sort of conversion table of foam to real golf balls.

    In all seriousness, you need real golf balls with any of these systems as they are measuring the ball data and have preset info set into them so foam will most likely confuse them.


  3. This is funny b/c I just reshafted my Mizuno with a set of KBS Tours in that same finish since I was bored and wanted to try something different. I used my belt sander on all the shafts  and had the finish peel on one of the wedges. Only the one out of 8 I did had that issue. Also recently did a set of TMs with KBS $ tapers with a black finish but didn't have any peeling with those. I really just sand down to where I don't see any more black color and the tip looks almost copper-ish in color. I assembled them and have played a couple times with no issue with the peel since its locked into the hosel and ferrule at this point.

    My advise is just don't over sand them, and you should be good.


  4. 10 hours ago, Grizvok said:

    Typical driver contact is closer to the heel with toe strikes being very rare. The most common miss with my past driver (910D2) and the current TS2 is a ballooning fade/slice that has a considerable amount of spin; however, that miss is not as bad since the transition from the old 10.5 degree 910D2 to the new 9.5 degree TS2. I believe the loft decrease is responsible for most of that. The 910 shaft was 65g R-flex with the club being 45" and as I noted earlier the TS2 shaft is 50g R-flex with the club being 45.5". I realize it is impossible to give me recommendations on this information alone, and that the answer is to just stop messing around and get fit already! I think I'll try to attend a Titleist Thursday in July.

    Those general patterns also ring true for the TS2 3W.

    If you are hitting on both sides of the face I would definitely look at shortening the shaft some first and see if that can tighten it up a bit. Start by just gripping down 1/2 inch at a time and see where you get the best strike pattern. At that point you can start adding some head weight need be to get the feel back with a shorter club.

    Also along with this, you can take a piece of lead tape and run it down the back of the shaft starting an inch below the grip. A 12 inch piece will be about 10 grams. Again, see what this does for your consistency to give you a better idea of idea shaft weight.

    I've always said that if you can fit yourself, the results will be better assuming you know what to look for. Professional fittings can be misleading either from the fitter or from the environment (ie indoor, launch monitor issues, inconsistent swing). Not to say you shouldn't do a fitting, but definitely understand what's important especially to your particular game.


  5. 20 minutes ago, Grizvok said:

    I had absolutely no clue this was the case. After I read this thread I jumped online to check out the specs of the shafts in my new for me TS2 Driver and 3W, and the preliminary findings are that the shafts I currently have in these clubs are not at all what I should be using. My driver carry is around 250 yards which, according to a few charts online, equates to a roughly 95-100 mph swing speed. I also have a pretty quick tempo and transition.

    My driver shaft is a mere 50g when I should probably be looking at something in the 65g to 70g range. The 3W shaft is 65g when I should probably be looking at something in the 75-80g realm.

    Eye opening thread...thanks for sharing.

    Don't assume that you need lighter based on some online charts alone. You should look at impact location on your driver and see how consistently you hit the center and look at your launch and spin numbers to see if they are in a good range and consistent. Weights are really about fitting yourself into a range of weights and then having your whole bag move smoothly through with your driver being the lightest and wedges being the heaviest. I think most pros are in the 60-70g class at this point which wasn't the case a few years ago so lighter isn't bad for many golfers. Heck, Webb Simpson plays a 57g driver shaft I believe right now, at least I know he has recently. Also need to take into consideration the length you play your driver at. If you play it shorter then a heavier shaft can be a good option. However if you play at something over 45 inches, you may be better off with the lighter shaft.

     


  6. Ferrules warp very easily even when you are careful so it would be good if you have a few extra just in case. Focus the torch low on the hosel and no closer than a half inch from the ferrule when heating, and as said above wrap the ferrule in wet towels before you start. Personally I go fast with the heat on this sort of job, the less time with the ferrule in contact with the hot hosel tip, the better.


  7. Yes, weight is by far the most important spec in shafts. Most people don't realize this and assume it's flex or bend profile but those are minimally impactful for most golfers compared to shaft weight. The other spec to be aware of is balance point on these shafts. I wrote about this in another post but you need to be aware that those KBS tour shafts are more butt weighted than many shafts including the Elevates. So be aware of your SW when building these clubs as the head weights may need to be adjusted moving into them.


  8. You are very likely going to want to use new tip weights. Those KBS tour shafts have more weight in the back end than the DGs. Unless you are planning to play them well over standard length, they will come out light. I reshafted my MP18 MMCs from Nippon Modus3 120s to KBS Tour 120s and had to add between 6 and 10g to all the heads and this was at 1/2inch over standard length.


  9. Don't make any snap judgements until you have more than one round under your belt. Sounds like you now have a considerably different set up than previously so it will take some time to get used to. At least 4 more rounds or some time at the range before I would start guessing and changing things willy nilly.


  10. If you are saying that you have rotated the shaft 180 degrees to get from 8 to 12, then if you believe in the merits of flo, there is zero difference because you are returning to the same bend plane, just flipped over. The result would be the same. I would personally tell you never to worry about flo, spine, PURE in the first place, but that is for a different discussion.


  11. Wedge specs are really dictated by the golfer's swing, preferred short game style, and course conditions. Not knowing anything about your game other than your a 10, those specs seem pretty reasonable. The grinds aren't of much concern to me unless you are playing on some really tight surfaces or really hilly. I don't know if you need the C grind on that 60 as I'm not sure how often you plan on really opening that club up and Mickelsoning it. I usually vote for more bounce and less grind for most people as a rule but everyone is different so you have to weigh the pros and cons.


  12. Ideally you would tip it a 1/2 inch and butt cut it down to length as others have mentioned, however since it's an adjustable hosel and you can just screw it in I would say try it at the range first and see. Then you can decide if you need to tip and or butt cut it down, but you might as well try the simplest thing first.


  13. From the picture, I would agree with a 7 out of 10 rating. Face wear on that club is pretty obvious but the grooves appear to be in good shape. Any club with good grooves and no big dings or dents I would put over a 6. The ferrules look a little scuffed and clouded, at least the one. You could fix that and get them looking new though.

    At least from that picture it looks like a pretty good golfer owned them and took as good a care as can be expected of them.


  14. 10 minutes ago, iacas said:

    And I said the blade would likely be more consistent too.

    I don't think that's necessary, and you don't seem to be understanding that he wasn't trying to see how well he could hit each club. He didn't hit the blade better - he hit them the SAME - but the blade performed better.

    Again, that's not what the video was about.

    Given the last two comments I'm not sure what you're talking about or whether you saw the video? He hit them both the same, and got surprising results.

    He didn't hit the blade better!

    I don't think you have.

    I disagree, and I don't really think he's done so here.

    He may not have said that he hit the blades better, however every chart you showed from the video is in fact demonstrating that he hit the blades better (ie more consistent) based on every metric you showed compared to the Max.

    Again I say these were only his personal results, and I would need to see other golfers who would usually benefit from the SGI iron types go through this to be on board.

    And who knows, maybe those Mavrik Max clubs are crap, never hit them myself.

    If people really think this has merit, then if you're in the market for some SGI irons, buy yourself a set of heavy old blades and see how that works out for you.

     


  15. 2 hours ago, iacas said:

    That's a disappointing response.

    Those two are slightly contradictory, and the blade would see a "more consistent distance if paired with a slower swing speed" as well.

    Okay, first I said the distance would be more consistent referring to only the Max, not against the blade. 

    2 hours ago, iacas said:

    Do you really expect the results to be that different if he had hit 100 balls in each type of strike versus 40 with each club in total? I don't. Just more dots.

    Sure, more dots are better. But again what I said was 500 ball to get used to the club then 40 balls, and repeat with the other.

    2 hours ago, iacas said:

    Obviously, the sample size of the person hitting the club is "one" but I think people know this, and it's impractical to cite a long list of disclaimers before the video about how "YMMV" and so on.

    It may seem obvious that he is only one person, but he presents himself as an expert so that what he says carries weight for many of his viewers (scary but true). You don't need a long disclaimer about it, maybe just title the video Do I Hit Blades better than Cavity Backs? Of course that's not the kind of click bait title that Golf Myths Busted is.

    2 hours ago, iacas said:

    He compared similar hits to similar hits. He didn't just hit 40 shots with one club and then the other, happen to strike the blade well and the SGI club poorly, and compare them.

    Never said he was cherry picking, or it was random chance that he hit the blade better, have been trying to explain why he got the results he did. This is a case where the results are less important than what was behind them.

    2 hours ago, iacas said:

    This is a non-point. This is like a film critic saying "That guy has always been a comedy actor in the past, so I didn't even watch his artsy film to see if he was any good."

    Pretty sure I covered objectively why the results were what they were and what the value of those results were before I got into his video history.

    2 hours ago, iacas said:

    Debate the actual merits of the video, don't just say "Well, this guy…".

    When "this guy" makes claims about debunking golf myths and that leads people to incorrect conclusions then yes I think it's okay to explore his tendencies and motivations.

    2 hours ago, iacas said:

    Club fitting is over-rated.

    This I agree with completely.


  16. I'm not going to respond individually to every comment from above but here are my main points.

    1. No argument with blade face being more consistent then high COR iron faces with more flex. Obviously, the amount of flex on a small surface area like an iron head will lead to larger variations on misses compared to a fixed face on the blade.

    2. Sample size is super important, otherwise it's just a personal review.

    3. Weight is so important for consistency within your set and people do have an ideal weight range for the clubs they use. Here we have Mark hitting with an 80g steel shaft in the Max against a 130g (guessing at exact weight) in the Top Flite. That 80g shaft is going to be an issue of him and obviously contributed to a lack of consistency at impact. Not even going to get into what the flex of that shaft may be contributing.

    4. The Max was not designed for Mark, not in shape, weight, features, whatever. It's designed for slower, less consistent golfers who need help getting the ball in the air and hitting it farther. That same hot face would be much more consistent on distance if paired with a slower swing speed.

    5. I've seen more than a few of this type of video from this guy. Sensationalism gets clicks, and yes it can even be entertaining but it should be viewed for what it is, more National Enquirer than Wall Street Journal. 


  17. 11 minutes ago, billchao said:

    His methodology isn’t perfect but I think the principle is valid. Did you see the article @iacas linked in the OP? They found similar results in testing clubs with Iron Byron.

    But again, we’re talking about contact very close to the sweet spot here. This isn’t about a 20 who hits his 6i 60 yards high in the air playing blades. I’m sure we’d all agree that player could use more help in the club design aspect.

    Disagree. One golfers statistics only makes the results valid for one golfer. Again, what he is coming from and used to, I believe makes a huge difference in how these results play out. Not to get into my personal issues with club fittings and all their shortcomings but how your body reacts to changes in feel (broad term "feel" meaning weight, balance, flex feel, sound etc.)from what you currently use, plays a major role in the results you see. Have him hit 500 balls with only that one club and then take the measurements, then 500 with the other and repeat.


  18. Needs bigger sample size. One professional golfer hitting is only useful for showing his personal results, not transferable to everyone. There are so many variables that aren't accounted for. I don't know what clubs he uses normally but I would guess they are closer to the blade in both look and weight. That will make a huge difference in the results.

    Show me this test using 4 irons and show me it using a golfer with a sub 100mph driver swing speed and let's see what the difference is then. 

×
×
  • 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...