Re: ShopTalk: Putter Shaft Trimming
In a message dated 7/1/2002 8:58:22 PM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: This is such a basic question I'm almost afraid to ask it ... are there any protocols for tip trimming a steel putter shaft as a function of length? I've been buying the inexpensive steel shafts and installing them without thinking much about it until I made up an extra long putter (37") for a real tall fellow. The finished putter seemed much more flexible than any of the 34 or 35 inch putters that I have put together. I've been conscious of getting swingweight into right ranges, but have not even thought about shaft tip trimming, at least until now. If any of you have trimming guides, I'd really appreciate the info. Better yet would be examples of how much to trim for various stiffness shafts. Thanks in advance, Ted Way Hi Ted, Interesting question, I have always built putters by butt cutting only with whatever shafts are around unless I need a bent one of course. I have been told that over 90% of PGA pros have putters that swing weight to d-3, I wonder what they freq. to on average, I suspect all over the place. Just out of curiosity I "ll check a few, assuming I can clamp them. The graphite driver shafts that have done well over the last several year "s have something in common, the hm-series, pro-lights, and pf gold's are all about 3.5 torque when measured at about a 40" beam length, its possible that the best selling putters such as Answers, Odyseys's, Cameron's etc. may share common frequency's, maybe someone out there knows. David
ShopTalk: Putter Shaft Trimming
Folks: This is such a basic question I'm almost afraid to ask it ... are there any protocols for tip trimming a steel putter shaft as a function of length? I've been buying the inexpensive steel shafts and installing them without thinking much about it until I made up an extra long putter (37") for a real tall fellow. The finished putter seemed much more flexible than any of the 34 or 35 inch putters that I have put together. I've been conscious of getting swingweight into right ranges, but have not even thought about shaft tip trimming, at least until now. If any of you have trimming guides, I'd really appreciate the info. Better yet would be examples of how much to trim for various stiffness shafts. Thanks in advance, Ted Way -Original Message- From: tflan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: June 27, 2002 9:14 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: ShopTalk: New catalog Its the only email address printed in the catalog. Try 1-800-574-1630. TFlan - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2002 9:09 AM Subject: Re: ShopTalk: New catalog > In a message dated Thu, 27 Jun 2002 10:46:39 AM Eastern Standard Time, "tflan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > >Hi; > > > >I just received a catalog from Golf Coast. Vector, Bang, and SMT heads and a lot of other stuff is included. Web site is www.thegolfcoast.com > > >The above link doesn't seem to work.?? > > > > >
Re: ShopTalk: Swingspeed vs. trampoline effect
Dave T you rat ;-) Here I am with several demo illegal driver heads installed on several different shafts. My old fart customers are conviced they hit it farther and straighter with them. What to do, what to do? Seriously though, I played an illegal AerMet with 4 different shafts installed. On average I didn't hit the ball any farther with any combination of illegal head/shaft than I did with my trusty Ping TiSi. In fact, I'm hitting the ball a lot longer with my ebay acquired 975J than I did with any of the non-conforming heads I've tried. I sincerely believe that no matter what the head composition/material, Joe Average will not . . . WILL NOT . . . hit the golf ball any longer or straighter than he does with any decent head. I don't recall who said it, probably paraphrased from Yogi Berra, but ". . . 90% of golf is 100% mental." If you believe you'll hit it farther you probably will - until the check clears. I've made up a whole lot of drivers over time, and each and every one of them has been "the longest, straightest, most accurate, most forgiving, most improved" product ever made. I guess that applies to cars, computers, laundry soap or any other consumer product on the market. I am reminded of the driver head filled with an inert gas, for instance, or magnets for the body, or the products 'guaranteed to catch fish'. TFlan - Original Message - From: Dave Tutelman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > This has been studied to some extent. The results are that the trampoline > effect is proportional, and the proportionality factor does not vary much > with clubhead speed. That is, suppose the trampoline effect of a given > clubhead is 2%. That is, it will give 2% more ball velocity than a rigid > clubface. Then: > * A clubhead speed that gives a 100mph ball speed with a rigid face will > give 102mph with this clubhead. > * A clubhead speed that gives a 50mph ball speed with a rigid face will > give 51mph with this clubhead. > * A clubhead speed that gives a 150mph ball speed with a rigid face will > give 153mph with this clubhead. > > The factor of 2% will not change much over the clubhead speeds. It varies a > little, but very little. (And one study I've seen says it actually increases > for lower clubhead speeds -- but again, not enough to matter.) > > So the ABSOLUTE VALUE of the trampoline effect is greater for greater > clubhead speeds, but the percentage of improvement is pretty much the same > for all clubhead speeds. > > > Is there a swingspeed where there is no trampoline effect? > > Not really. If you have a very small clubhead speed, then the absolute value > of your trampoline effect is very small. But you weren't working with much > to begin with. 2% of a small number is a very small number. > > > And would this vary depending on the design of the head? > > Clubface design does have an effect, but it's not what you think. > > The way you get a bigger trampoline effect (that is, increase the > percentage -- go for 5% instead of 2%) is to make the clubface more > flexible. That generally means thinner or a larger surface. It also > generally means that the clubface is under more stress, is operating closer > to its failure point. > > So the clubfaces with the highest trampoline effect (measured by the > proportionality factor) can not be used by golfers with the highest clubhead > speeds. They will break the face. Therefore, the slower your clubhead speed, > the more springy a face you will be able to use -- provided someone has seen > fit to design a club that can ONLY be used safely by slow swingers. > > Actually, Golfsmith used to have a design with various speed ratings -- and > they warned not to allow someone with a higher-than-rated swing use the > club. I don't know whether they still make this model. If not, I don't know > whether the almost-guaranteed failure due to misuse was the reason they > discontinued it. Tom W, any comment? > > Hope this helps! > DaveT > > >
Re: ShopTalk: Swingspeed vs. trampoline effect
Max, I tend to agree with you on all your contentions. But I stand by my statement that Golfsmith did this. Just looked it up in the 2002 catalog; it's still around. It's called the Snake Eyes Elasteel, and has four different models, based on face thickness and loft, and rated by clubhead speed. Why? You'd have to ask Tom Wishon (I'm pretty sure it was his doing). But consider: a few years ago, when this club was designed, the situation was a little different: (1) Beta Titanium wasn't available, at least not at a price point for a component clubhead. So it was harder to build high COR with strong faces. (2) The legal situation wasn't nearly as clear. There was the North American "very little spring allowed" and the rest of the world's "no limits". With Arnold Palmer's blessing, recreational golfers were paying premium prices to get clubs that were illegal in the US. So why stop at .85. (Though frankly, I doubt that even the <75mph model got to .85.) So the club probably served a market need at the time. At $60 today, you can get a high-COR beta-titanium clubfaced driver with all the COR and [probably] all the strength you need. Maybe not from Golfsmith, but definitely from Clubmaker Online. Cheers! DaveT - Original Message - From: Max Dupilka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, July 01, 2002 10:34 PM Subject: Re: ShopTalk: Swingspeed vs. trampoline effect > Dave: > > I have tried to get an answer about this question of whether the trampoline > effect (COR) varies with clubhead speed, but I haven't had much success. I tend > to believe what you are saying, that the COR for a given clubhead is pretty well > constant for all clubhead speeds. If that is the case, and a company can build > a clubhead with a COR of 0.85, say, and this clubhead can withstand swing > speeds of 130 mph or more, then why would a company build different face > thicknesses like GS was doing. If the COR is constant then it is 0.85 for an 80 > mph swing and 0.85 for a 130 mph swing. If you give even more flex for a slower > swing speed, wouldn't this imply the COR is greater and the club is now well > into the illegal range. Is this what GS was actually doing? > > Max... > > Dave Tutelman wrote: > > > > > This has been studied to some extent. The results are that the trampoline > > effect is proportional, and the proportionality factor does not vary much > > with clubhead speed. That is, suppose the trampoline effect of a given > > clubhead is 2%. That is, it will give 2% more ball velocity than a rigid > > clubface. Then: > > * A clubhead speed that gives a 100mph ball speed with a rigid face will > > give 102mph with this clubhead. > > * A clubhead speed that gives a 50mph ball speed with a rigid face will > > give 51mph with this clubhead. > > * A clubhead speed that gives a 150mph ball speed with a rigid face will > > give 153mph with this clubhead. > > > > The factor of 2% will not change much over the clubhead speeds. It varies a > > little, but very little. (And one study I've seen says it actually increases > > for lower clubhead speeds -- but again, not enough to matter.) > > > > So the ABSOLUTE VALUE of the trampoline effect is greater for greater > > clubhead speeds, but the percentage of improvement is pretty much the same > > for all clubhead speeds. > > > >
Re: ShopTalk: Swingspeed vs. trampoline effect
Dave: I have tried to get an answer about this question of whether the trampoline effect (COR) varies with clubhead speed, but I haven't had much success. I tend to believe what you are saying, that the COR for a given clubhead is pretty well constant for all clubhead speeds. If that is the case, and a company can build a clubhead with a COR of 0.85, say, and this clubhead can withstand swing speeds of 130 mph or more, then why would a company build different face thicknesses like GS was doing. If the COR is constant then it is 0.85 for an 80 mph swing and 0.85 for a 130 mph swing. If you give even more flex for a slower swing speed, wouldn't this imply the COR is greater and the club is now well into the illegal range. Is this what GS was actually doing? Max... Dave Tutelman wrote: > > This has been studied to some extent. The results are that the trampoline > effect is proportional, and the proportionality factor does not vary much > with clubhead speed. That is, suppose the trampoline effect of a given > clubhead is 2%. That is, it will give 2% more ball velocity than a rigid > clubface. Then: > * A clubhead speed that gives a 100mph ball speed with a rigid face will > give 102mph with this clubhead. > * A clubhead speed that gives a 50mph ball speed with a rigid face will > give 51mph with this clubhead. > * A clubhead speed that gives a 150mph ball speed with a rigid face will > give 153mph with this clubhead. > > The factor of 2% will not change much over the clubhead speeds. It varies a > little, but very little. (And one study I've seen says it actually increases > for lower clubhead speeds -- but again, not enough to matter.) > > So the ABSOLUTE VALUE of the trampoline effect is greater for greater > clubhead speeds, but the percentage of improvement is pretty much the same > for all clubhead speeds. >
Re: ShopTalk: Swingspeed vs. trampoline effect
- Original Message - From: Tom Janson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, July 01, 2002 7:05 PM > I heard some guys talking today about the interaction of > swing speed and the trampoline effect. One guy swore > that with a swing speed below 100 mph there is no > trampoline effect. Others disagreed. I imagine that at > some point there will be no trampoline effect but has this > been studied at all? This has been studied to some extent. The results are that the trampoline effect is proportional, and the proportionality factor does not vary much with clubhead speed. That is, suppose the trampoline effect of a given clubhead is 2%. That is, it will give 2% more ball velocity than a rigid clubface. Then: * A clubhead speed that gives a 100mph ball speed with a rigid face will give 102mph with this clubhead. * A clubhead speed that gives a 50mph ball speed with a rigid face will give 51mph with this clubhead. * A clubhead speed that gives a 150mph ball speed with a rigid face will give 153mph with this clubhead. The factor of 2% will not change much over the clubhead speeds. It varies a little, but very little. (And one study I've seen says it actually increases for lower clubhead speeds -- but again, not enough to matter.) So the ABSOLUTE VALUE of the trampoline effect is greater for greater clubhead speeds, but the percentage of improvement is pretty much the same for all clubhead speeds. > Is there a swingspeed where there is no trampoline effect? Not really. If you have a very small clubhead speed, then the absolute value of your trampoline effect is very small. But you weren't working with much to begin with. 2% of a small number is a very small number. > And would this vary depending on the design of the head? Clubface design does have an effect, but it's not what you think. The way you get a bigger trampoline effect (that is, increase the percentage -- go for 5% instead of 2%) is to make the clubface more flexible. That generally means thinner or a larger surface. It also generally means that the clubface is under more stress, is operating closer to its failure point. So the clubfaces with the highest trampoline effect (measured by the proportionality factor) can not be used by golfers with the highest clubhead speeds. They will break the face. Therefore, the slower your clubhead speed, the more springy a face you will be able to use -- provided someone has seen fit to design a club that can ONLY be used safely by slow swingers. Actually, Golfsmith used to have a design with various speed ratings -- and they warned not to allow someone with a higher-than-rated swing use the club. I don't know whether they still make this model. If not, I don't know whether the almost-guaranteed failure due to misuse was the reason they discontinued it. Tom W, any comment? Hope this helps! DaveT
ShopTalk: trsmpolinr effect
There's only one way to find out! Drop a feather on your bed then drop a bowling ball on the same spot. Note that the bowling ball caused a trampoline effect! You have to hit the face of the club with enough force (speed or weight) to cause it to flex and rebound. Probably a head speed of 95 MPH + would cause the effect. What will happen at 120+ MPH? You will most likely break the face. Now, I'm going out to buy a new bed.
ShopTalk: Swingspeed vs. trampoline effect
I heard some guys talking today about the interaction of swing speed and the trampoline effect. One guy swore that with a swing speed below 100 mph there is no trampoline effect. Others disagreed. I imagine that at some point there will be no trampoline effect but has this been studied at all? Is there a swingspeed where there is no trampoline effect? And would this vary depending on the design of the head? Inquiring minds want to know!! Tom Janson
Re: ShopTalk: Forged iron comparison
Thank You! Rob ---Original Message--- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Monday, July 01, 2002 7:10:19 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: ShopTalk: Forged iron comparison Rob It is Infiniti with an I not a y and that is why you came up empty. I don't know if the new irons are on the site but you can have them send a catalog. Charlie B IncrediMail - Email has finally evolved - Click Here
Re: ShopTalk: Forged iron comparison
Rob It is Infiniti with an I not a y and that is why you came up empty. I don't know if the new irons are on the site but you can have them send a catalog. Charlie B
Re: ShopTalk: Forged iron comparison
www.infinitigolf.com - Original Message - From: Rob To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, July 01, 2002 1:09 AM Subject: Re: ShopTalk: Forged iron comparison This sounds like a great club. Does anyone know if there is a web site out there that has pictures and specs of these irons? I did a search for Infinity Golf and came up empty. Thanks ---Original Message--- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Friday, June 28, 2002 3:23:18 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: ShopTalk: Forged iron comparison JP If you are looking for a players blade try Infiniti Golf out of Chicago (800) 253-6370. I made a couple of demos for a tour player and he said the most solid iron he has ever felt. The CG are all petty much in the center of the blade and they are bendable with a nice non glare finish. Charlie B IncrediMail - Email has finally evolved - Click Here
