Jim: I have had success using a procedure from Maltby's book: "GOLF CLUB DESIGN, FITTING, ALTERATION & REPAIR" by Ralph Maltby. It really helps to have the Super LockTight Shaft Holder. This procedure requires the removal of the head from the club with the ferrule to be saved. You secure the shaft in the LockTight Shaft Holder (I suggest using masking tape to protect the section of shaft in the shaft holder). Then wrap the ferrule with a water-soaked paper towel and make sure the wrapping does not dry out (I use a squeeze bottle filled with water handy). Now heat the hosel of the clubhead with a heat gun for about 45 sec. and try to twist the shaft off with leather work gloves (be careful). If more heat is needed, heat for 15 sec. intervals until the clubhead twists off. Let the tip cool down and sand off the epoxy residue. Now take an discarded rubber grip and cut a strip from the thinnest part about 1/2 in. wide and 3 i. long. Now wrap this strip around the ferrule stretching as tightly as possible. You should be able to twist the ferrule off the shaft grasping the outside of the strip.
If you can get your hands on Maltby's book, there is an illustated run-through of this procedure (along with countless others). PS - This procedure will is for steel only; it will ruin a graphite shaft. Also, although I have never seen this happen, clubheads have been known to fly off the shaft end when heated, so don't stand with the shaft end pointed toward you when heating. John B -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Letourneau, Henry J AM1(AW) (VAW120) Sent: Thursday, April 15, 2004 8:52 AM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: ShopTalk: SAVING OEM FERRULES? CAN ANY ONE OFFER GUIDENCE ON REMOVING FERRULES TO BE USED ON A REPLACEMENT STEEL SHAFT FOR AN IRON? THANKS - JIM > -----Original Message----- > From: Greg Vincent [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 2004 8:09 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: ShopTalk: Conversion factors > > I was referring mostly to the Apple equipment. We use Macs exclusively in > the school system, and I get a laugh when other teachers have to order > keyboards for $70 or a mouse for $40, and pay full price for software. > There > are so many discount vendors for PC software, Hell, you can get it for > free > if you are a bit unscrupulous...I'm running XP Pro on 4 computers and it > runs like Superman minus Kryptonite...and I get the systems for $1 each > through the University. I've been out golfing 3 times this week, yet to > break 100, but I'll keep trying..... > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Mats Bengtsson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 2004 7:22 AM > Subject: Re: ShopTalk: Conversion factors > > > > I think you haven't been checking the mac market for a while. I don't > > think you can find many accessories that don't work on a mac. It's > > almost always so that it's easier to get something to work on a Mac > > than on a Win system. > > Bluetooth is one of them. > > It took me about 5 min to get my SE T68i to talk to my Powerbook, so > > that I could use adressbook on the computer to make calls. > > My friend tried to connect his phone to his PC. After 2 hours he gave > > up, he was missing a couple of drivers. > > I agree that a Mac are a bit more expensive that a PC, but it has > > longer lifespann and the cost for support are a lot less, i.e if a > > company buys Mac it's a bigger investment but in the long run it evens > > out pretty nice. > > > > It's a bit of topic but still. > > > > Now any day our courses around here open, I hope!!! > > > > Mats B > > Karlstad > > > > 2004-04-13 kl. 09.02 skrev Greg Vincent: > > > > > Sure Mac is nice....if you like paying double for software and triple > > > for > > > accessories...and if you like throwing out perfectly good monitors > with > > > obsolete computers, and if you like supporting proprietary > monopolizing > > > corporate greed, ala Microsoft...Apple never could find a way to open > > > its > > > code and maintain it's 6% market share...LOSERS > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "Mats Bengtsson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 2004 2:44 AM > > > Subject: Re: ShopTalk: Conversion factors > > > > > > > > >> There has been a lot of developments in Mac since you gave up on > them, > > >> specially OS X, now in it's 3rd version. It is built on Unix and are > a > > >> LOT more stabile than any Win version you could think about. > > >> When it comes to apps, I think you could find just about anything you > > >> will ever need. > > >> > > >> just my 2 ct > > >> > > >> Mats B > > >> Karlstad > > >> Sweden > > >> > > >> > > >> 2004-04-13 kl. 02.44 skrev Mark A Patton: > > >> > > >>> Sorry to come into this thread late (and I haven't seen what other > > >>> posts > > >>> there may have been) > > >>> > > >>> RK, Your on XP (hopefully Pro) and having issues? > > >>> Dave T, you're on 98? > > >>> Linux? > > >>> > > >>> For what it's worth: > > >>> I'm no computer pro. I'm a lazy man that figured I could make a > > >>> computer > > >>> work for me. > > >>> Started with OS/400 and at home once the PC launched used MS. 3.X > was > > >>> OK. 95 > > >>> was a disaster, with 98 being only a minalization of that (har to > > >>> rebuild 98 > > >>> every 2 months). W2K was better, but much like driving a Semi > > >>> through a > > >>> tropical paradise (getting the job done but inflicting casualties > > >>> long > > >>> the > > >>> way, and not a good experience). > > >>> > > >>> Back when I was on 98, I tried many distros of Linux. Great for > > >>> someone who > > >>> knows puters and OSs, elsewise no go. > > >>> Later w/ W2K I tried again and found the same thing for the most > part > > >>> except > > >>> Linux was more intuitive (ie like MAC & windows). Linux could catch > > >>> ground, > > >>> and would work well for me, but the apps I use aren't available (the > > >>> same > > >>> reason I gave up on MAC years ago. Doesn't matter how well it works > > >>> if > > >>> it > > >>> doesn;t do what I need it to.) > > >>> > > >>> Made the change to XP Pro, and as much as I hate to say it, it has > > >>> been > > >>> Wonderful! > > >>> No system issues, no my not understanding what I need to do minor > > >>> points, > > >>> etc, NO NOTHING. The damn thing just WORKS (within reason of any OS > > >>> under > > >>> constant attack)! It has just plain WORKED since day one with more > > >>> robustness than W2K or Linux ever though about, and with more > > >>> intuitiveness > > >>> than 3.X, 95 or 98. For the record, I really don;t like it's > > >>> interface, so > > >>> it was simply reconfigured to look like W2K (which felt like a semi > > >>> without > > >>> a clutch). > > >>> > > >>> I guess its just me as adoption rate is low, but as much as I would > > >>> like to > > >>> deride it, I really like XP Pro. > > >>> Word to the wise: any MS product that hints to Home, Education, etc > > >>> is > > >>> crap. > > >>> Pro is the way to go (I guess that is MS terminology for "it works", > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> Mark A Patton > > >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> -----Original Message----- > > >>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Corey Bailey > > >>> Sent: Monday, April 12, 2004 3:41 AM > > >>> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >>> Subject: Re: ShopTalk: Conversion factors > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> Hi Dave, > > >>> If you liked Win NT 3.5, then you will like Win 2K Pro. It's > > >>> essentially NT > > >>> 5. I use it as the default OS for the PC machines at home with one > > >>> box > > >>> still running Win 98 R2 for those apps that need it as Win 2K does > > >>> obsolete > > >>> a number of apps and hdwe that run on 98. > > >>> > > >>> At work they just changed out everything for new HP's running XP. I > > >>> hate it > > >>> and it does not interface to the Novel network nearly as well as the > > >>> Win 2k > > >>> boxes they removed. > > >>> > > >>> Best, > > >>> > > >>> CB > > >>> Sorry for continuing the "non-golf" thread. > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> At 10:09 AM 4/11/2004 -0400, you wrote: > > >>> > > >>>> My issues are not UNIX skills. I have been a UNIX user since 1976. > > >>>> I'm a > > >>>> fairly proficient user of things like "ksh" and "sed". "Vi" used to > > >>>> be my > > >>>> editor of choice, but the current mouse-based editors have won me > > >>>> over > > >>>> (about 10 years ago). I waited until Windows got to NT3.5 before I > > >>>> made it > > >>>> my OS of choice. (I am currently running Win98.) > > >>>> > > >>>> Like RK, I dislike depending on Microsoft. And that's on the basis > > >>>> of > > >>>> up-close-and-personal; I made a lot of business and technical trips > > >>>> to > > >>>> Redmond (and Bellevue, back in 1983 when they were only 350 > people), > > >>>> so I > > >>>> know them and how they work. And I'd rather opt out -- if I could. > > >>>> > > >>>> My problem is that I use a lot of programs and utilities that only > > >>>> run on > > >>>> Windows. I haven't tried WINE. If it works well (meaning not much > > >>>> lost > > >>>> speed running some of the apps), then it might fill the bill for > me. > > >>>> But I > > >>>> don't have the time to experiment with it to find out. Guess I care > > >>>> -- but > > >>>> not enough to make migration a priority. > > >>>> > > >>>> Cheers! > > >>>> DaveT > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> --- > > >>> Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. > > >>> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > > >>> Version: 6.0.656 / Virus Database: 421 - Release Date: 4/9/2004 > > >>> > > >>> --- > > >>> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. > > >>> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > > >>> Version: 6.0.656 / Virus Database: 421 - Release Date: 4/9/2004 > > >>> > > >> > > > > >
