|
|
Post by Richie3Jack on Jul 2, 2013 13:02:39 GMT -5
Here's a review that Russ Ryden did of the UST Recoil on his fabulous, must read Web site. www.golfshaftreviews.info/index.php/ust-mamiya-recoil-iron-shaft/I didn't know this, but he says that the UST Recoils are ascending weight shaft designs. Meaning that they get heavier as they get shorter. This is the same concept prevalent in MOI Balance Index. And it's the same thing that Aerotech is doing with their Player Spec model. I've been told they also do it with the Steel Fiber model, but I have yet to see proof of it. I really believe that ascending shaft weights will be something to look out for in irons over the next year or two. 3JACK |
|
|
|
Post by pavaveda on Jul 2, 2013 14:57:44 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Richie3Jack on Jul 2, 2013 15:19:54 GMT -5
I believe there's a difference in the concept between 'constant weight' shafts and 'ascending weight shafts.' I'll have to ask Russ and see what he says.
However, to my knowledge after the shafts are trimmed, the constant weight shafts should all weigh the same. The ascending weight shafts will have more weight as the clubs get shorter.
As it pertains to MOI Balance Index, we need the shaft weights to ascend (as you can see in Part XI) because the head weights ascend as the club has more loft.
Since we are trying to keep the distribution of the weight between the shaft+grip vs. the head close to the same, if the head weight is increasing the shaft weight will have to increase as well.
With the constant weight shaft concept, it gets closer to MOI Balance Index matching, IMO. It is still far off compared to using an ascending shaft weight design. But, it's better than the typical descending shaft design.
3JACK
|
|
|
|
Post by pavaveda on Jul 2, 2013 15:24:00 GMT -5
I agree that there's a difference between constant weight and ascending weight. For example, the KBS C-Taper tapers are constant weight (120 grams over different lengths), but the Nippon 999GH that I mentioned are ascending weight (105 gram design in the high lofted clubs and the 95 gram design in the low lofted clubs)
|
|
|
|
Post by Richie3Jack on Jul 2, 2013 15:31:25 GMT -5
I see.
I didn't see the bottom part on the 999GH shafts. Because Nippon is known for their 'constant weighted shafts.' It appears the 999GH is their only ascending shaft weight model.
3JACK
|
|
|
|
Post by golfbaka on Jul 3, 2013 8:33:33 GMT -5
I see. I didn't see the bottom part on the 999GH shafts. Because Nippon is known for their 'constant weighted shafts.' It appears the 999GH is their only ascending shaft weight model. 3JACK Think they may have been rebranded as Nippon NS PRO 950 GH Weight Flow shafts now. |
|
|
|
Post by pavaveda on Jul 3, 2013 9:22:48 GMT -5
I see. I didn't see the bottom part on the 999GH shafts. Because Nippon is known for their 'constant weighted shafts.' It appears the 999GH is their only ascending shaft weight model. 3JACK Think they may have been rebranded as Nippon NS PRO 950 GH Weight Flow shafts now. Ah, yes. Second shaft down on this page: www.nipponshaft.co.jp/english/steel/950.htmLooks like places like GolfWorks don't carry them, but looks like they are available through Tour Spec. Unlike the Nippon Super Peening  It is cool that the ascending weight is available in a graphite iron shaft. It looks like the Aerotech Steelfiber are constant weight. |
|
|
|
Post by Richie3Jack on Jul 3, 2013 10:18:16 GMT -5
The only thing about ascending weight shafts is that Tom Wishon is skeptical about their bend profile matching throughout the set. And even with ascending weight shafts, they may not fit your optimal MBI because the shaft may be too heavy or too light. But, the ascending weight shaft I believe gives the golfer a closer semblance of having the same feel in heft and provides similar trajectory and spin that corresponds throughout the set.
3JACK
|
|
|
|
Post by golfbaka on Jul 4, 2013 5:07:37 GMT -5
Is it possible to MBI match using by picking measuring specific DG S200s, S300s and S400s and then weight sorting them? I presume any club builder building using say S300s would install the slightly heavier ones in the wedges and the lightest ones in the longer irons as a matter of course anyway...
|
|
|
|
Post by Richie3Jack on Jul 5, 2013 7:57:53 GMT -5
I don't think it's likely that a builder could do that.
The 'baseline' is essentially the 6-iron.
My 'stock shaft' was the Wishon Stepless Steel. It weighs 116 grams when it's not trimmed. Trim the 6-iron shaft and it's going to weigh around 106 grams.
The only way I could MBI match my 3 and 4-irons was to get a shaft that weighed around 96-98 grams after trimming. So they would need a couple of shafts where the Quality Control on the weight of the shaft was really bad and I don't see that happening.
The only way they could possibly MBI match throughout the set is if the weight of the trimmed shafts in the 3 & 4-irons were what they needed in those clubs. However, this would mean that as the clubs get shorter, they'll need to find a way to add weight to the shaft.
So, let's say a 108 gram trimmed shaft fits a golfer in their 3 and 4-irons. Then the rest of the irons need shafts that are heavier than that.
If you don't have an ascending weight shaft model, the best way to figure out what to do is to have Wishon's Bend Profile software. Find your baseline shaft and then get the list of shafts with similar bend profiles (there's a filter function on the Software that makes this easy to do). Then look for shafts that are heavier (for the shorter irons) and lighter (for the longer irons) than your baseline shaft.
3JACK
|
|
