Gentlepersons,
I have been lurking on this NBP-COG "Fest" and lacing the level of
technical acumen the protagonists and antagonists possess have become
totally confused! However, its too juicy to not dive in; so here's at it!
I read some time ago that Golfsmith did some experimenting/testing with
the Spine/Cog alignment and found there was no appreciable/discernable
difference in shaft performance vs. Spine at one of the 4 cardinal
positions. Also if I'm not mistaken, John Kaufman got confirming results
when he did similar experimenting/testing. Is this the same thing that's
being discussed in this case? Please advise. Thanks in advance!!
----- Original Message -----
From: "MPRUITT" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2003 9:48 PM
Subject: Re: ShopTalk: NBP-COG
> Jim , what kind of procedure did you use given the fitting of a shaft in a
> titleist 975 series head ?
> Ray
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Thomson, Jim" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2003 4:12 PM
> Subject: RE: ShopTalk: NBP-COG
>
>
> > I have reshafted my three drivers using the NBP-COG alignment
> (975J/Graphite
> > Design YS-6; 975J-VS/Graphite Design Purple Ice; 983K/Aldila NV) and was
> > very pleased with the results of all three. I reshafted one of my
Titleist
> > 962 sets with the new Balistik shaft using the S1-COG alignment and
really
> > like these as well. Anecdotal info for what it's worth.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Letourneau, Henry J AM1(AW) (VAW120)
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: October 8, 2003 2:23 PM
> > To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
> > Subject: RE: ShopTalk: NBP-COG
> >
> >
> > Richard, there seems do be as many different views on spine allignment
as
> > there are positions to allign to! In the end I will have to do some
> testing
> > to see for myself, I will mention however that when i started spine
> > alligning about a year ago i was doing all of the clubs spined to the
1200
> > position because it felt better. My question to you is have you tried
the
> > nbp-cog allignment and what were your results. Would S1-COG make more
> sense
> > than simply alligning a set of irons to 1200? My experience is limited
to
> > building 10 to 12 sets a year over the past three years and am always
> > looking for the best possible method af set matching available for my
> > customers as well as myself. Thanks - Jim Letourneau
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Richard Kennedy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2003 10:46 AM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Re: ShopTalk: NBP-COG
> >
> >
> >
> > Scott, to put it very simply , ALIEN THE HARD SPINE AT 12:00. 12:00
> keeps
> > the clubhead toe from drooping. Forget what ever anybody else says,
> > especially Mr. David T.whom is not a clubmaker per se & who knows very
> > little about making/fitting of golfclubs. By his own admission he only
> > makes , at the very most, one set of clubs per year and those are
strictly
> > for his own personal use, Mr. David T. made that statement not I. In
> fact
> > Mr. David T. fought us "SPINER'S" tooth and nail that the position off
the
> > spine had no effect on the playability or the flex of the golfclub. It
> was
> > not until several People outside of ShopTalk or SpineTalk got into the
> fray,
> > with lots of money backing them,that he got into the discussion. I'm
> not
> > to sure but I think that Ed J., the host of SplineTalk, asked, I feel is
a
> > better word to use then lets say kicked off of SpileTalk, because of his
> > disruptive and know it all air that he tried to use in his posts. I do
> not
> > subscribe to SpineTalk not because I do not believe in their views,
which
> > by the way I helped to put into use, but because I'm am presently
engaged
> in
> > other web sites that will have some, I hope, effecting with my health.
I
> > am not the clubmaker that has been spining the longest but i have been
> > "SPINEING" golfclubs since 1984 long before it became popular.
> >
> > RK
> >
> > KENNEDY
> > golf equipment
> > manufacturer's of world class golfclub repair equipment
> > -------Original Message-------
> >
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Date: Wednesday, October 08, 2003 1:02:35 AM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Subject: Re: ShopTalk: NBP-COG
> >
> > Let me preface this by saying my introduction to this subject is at most
> > a week old, and if my statements seem out to lunch, they very well may
> > be. I'm trying to think this through with my own limited understanding.
> > I'm certainly not trying to pass this off as if I know something that
> > the rest of you don't.
> >
> > If I remember my physics correctly (and I probably don't), I expect any
> > system like this to have some natural vibration; the twang you induce
> > for FLO would cause this particular system to vibrate at its natural
> > frequency. If the system is FLO aligned correctly this vibration is
> > along the target line at impact, i.e 3-9 o'clock. Otherwise this
> > vibration has a 12-6 o'clock component to it, which would help take the
> > clubface out of the line with the ball. Please note that I have no idea
> > how large this component would be. Are we talking fractions of
> > millimeters here? If the NBP is aligned to COG, the local minima for
> > shaft rigidity, then the vibration should be at a minimum because this
> > is the most inherently stable shaft orientation for the force applied (I
> > used the term damping to describe this ... I shouldn't have, it isn't
> > the correct term). If the spine were aligned at COG, then when force is
> > applied from the downsing, the shaft wants to rotate away (as in a spine
> > finder), because this is the most inherently unstable shaft orientation
> > and you would get the most vibration.
> >
> > Again, I have no idea if the deflection due to this oscillation could
> > cause a toe or heel hit. When I started reading up on this, I was
> > suprised aligning the spine would have any noticable affect on your shot
> > at all.
> >
> > Thank you for your patience.
> >
> > Scott
> >
> > Dave Tutelman wrote:
> >
> > > At 08:40 PM 10/7/03 -0600, Scott Stephens wrote:
> > >
> > >> It makes sense to me to align a NBP to the COG, since this should
> > >> contribute the least amount of oscillation of the club head/shaft. I
> > >> was originally thinking that the spine should be here so that the
> > >> least amount of bending of the shaft would happen at the bottom of
> > >> the downswing, but that would result in the most amount of
oscillation.
> > >
> > >
> > > Scott,
> > > I'm sorry, but you lost me. Why would there be more oscillation with
> > > the spine aligned with the CG than NBP-CG? Here's my take on it;
> > > please tell me where I'm wrong:
> > >
> > > If you align either the NBP or the spine with the CG, then any force
> > > arising from bending at the bottom of the swing will be in the plane
> > > of the shaft and the CG. Any other alignment will have forces outside
> > > that plane, which could cause bending (and perhaps oscillation) in
> > > other planes as well.
> > >
> > >> Then I read about FLO alignment where it is stated that alignment
> > >> should be along the target line (see "SPINE FINDING AND WHAT TO DO
> > >> WITH THEM AFTER YOU FIND THEM"). Am I correct that these orientations
> > >> would be close to 90° out of phase in a 3 iron (but not nearly that
> > >> much for a driver or sand wedge)? It seems to me that aligning the
> > >> NBP(s) along the target line would not maximally dampen the
> > >> oscillations, but would keep whatever oscillations are present going
> > >> parallel to the target line (so you should hit closest to the sweet
> > >> spot). Is that the essence of FLO alignment?
> > >
> > >
> > > Again, I'm confused by your statement. In particular, I don't have a
> > > clue what would cause damping of oscillations to be different in the
> > > different planes. I can see a difference in the creation of
> > > oscillations and their size, but I see no difference in how the
> > > oscillations would be damped.
> > >
> > > Thanks in advance,
> > > DaveT
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
