California Golf Technologies

What's new on the West Coast

Golf Equipment Chronicles 2006 (Part 5)

How Heavy Is Too Heavy, How Stiff Is Too Stiff, How Long Is Too Long?

By Leith Anderson

One of my most interesting problems in the last few years is that I sometimes distrust my fitting recommendations – for myself. What would you do if your club fitter recommended specifications that were dramatically different from clubs you have been playing and think you play well with? Can I fire myself?

Here’s the background: Over the last few years, there has been a trend toward lighter weight shafts – bringing down club weight – and more flexible shafts. That is a trend that has been followed by manufacturers and players alike. It wasn’t long ago that we NEVER saw a player at the Golf Lab who had shafts that were too flexible. EVERYONE who came in looking for custom shaft fitting had shafts that were too stiff.

Then times changed. First, OEM golf companies (OEM = Original Equipment Manufacturers, Callaway, Taylor Made, etc.) began to change the specifications on their of-the-shelf sets. Following the Callaway lead, most OEMs began to soften their flexes. Stiff shafts started looking regular, regular shafts started looking senior, ladies shafts started looking like spaghetti.

But players were reading the same articles. They started to think that they were playing shafts that were too stiff, so they dialed down their own fitting advice. Players who would never dream of buying regular flex a couple of years ago started to buy regular flex and think about senior flex. It was a sea change in the way players fit themselves for flex. It was a “double whammy”. The result: about half the players who come into the Golf Lab have shafts that are too soft to suit their game.

Shafts that are too soft feel great, especially for smooth swingers. You get a nice “squishy” release at the ball. The problem is with distance control more than direction. On occasions when I’ve played very soft shafts, I remember holding my finish, looking at the pin and thinking about a kick-in birdie. Then the ball fell fifteen yards short. Or you might see the other extreme. Your shot comes off hot and your last image is a little white bunny tail hopping over the green.

How do we know when a shaft is correct? Technology and testing is the answer. Most clubfitters have some way to measure swingspeed. With experience, a certain swingspeed usually translates to a certain flex recommendation. Of course, all of those recommendations are clubfitter-specific and can vary wildly. At the Golf Lab, we use the ultra-precise Professional Clubmaker Society (PCS) Equalizer method to interpret flex. Our slope chart runs from 2.0 to 8.0 with each flex divided into tenths. Overkill to be sure.

There’s another fly in the ointment. How does a clubmaker know that the shaft he’s recommending to fit a certain player is the correct flex, the right weight and appropriate bend profile? All manufacturers have their own proprietary ways of determining flex. There is no standard. The main benefit of the PCS Equalizer is that it is the only way to normalize the interpretation of flex values among shafts that have been measured and rated by different methods. It is certain that two shafts that most players think are almost identical will test and play much differently.

Once a clubfitter measures swingspeed, he tries to figure out what kind of swing the player has. A player with an aggressive move and fast downswing transition is going to receive a recommendation for a shaft that’s a little stiffer. Conversely, a “swinger” is likely to receive a recommendation for a shaft that’s a little softer. That’s been state of the art up until the Max Out Shaft Max came on the scene. (www.maxoutgolf.com) The Shaft Max uses an instrumented club that detects shaft deflection in two planes. Then it charts the deflection against a timeline and draws a graph that shows how a player applies power in his swing. The Shaft Max graph helps us determine not only flex, but also the best gram weight for the shaft, based on tempo and the best flex profile, based on actual shaft deflection measurements. Players who deflect the tip of the shaft a lot will get better results with stiff tip profiles. Players who don’t deflect the tip of the shaft are best fitted with a lively tip section. You can’t fool the Shaft Max. An efficient swing produces an acceleration curve that reaches maximum speed a split second before impact. Power leaks are revealed in less than perfect swings.

The main benefit of the Shaft Max technology at the Golf Lab is that it gives us confidence to make radical recommendations. If you’re looking for golf clubs that might actually make a difference in your game, you have to try clubs that are truly different.

The Shaft Max has a proprietary scale for fitting for flex based on the way a player “loads” the shaft. That scale runs from 0-12. The higher the number, the stiffer the flex recommendation. We occasionally find a senior player with a Shaft Max flex rating of 10-12. When that happens, we test him with a series of test clubs that get gradually stiffer. We watch the ball speed on a launch monitor. If the ball speed continues to go up, we continue to test stiffer flexes. It works. Dozens of players with relatively slow swing speeds have been fitted with extra stiff shafts at the Golf Lab. They have reported extraordinary improvement in their games measured by decreasing handicaps and increasing tournament winnings.

The conventional wisdom of shaft fitting says that a player should play the softest flex that he can control. That might be good if you’re choosing shafts for feel, but definitely not for best performance. We constantly find players who hit the ball straighter and longer with shafts much stiffer than they were playing. The trick is finding a flex that performs but you can still “feel”. For me, that’s a PCS Equalizer 6.0 – in most shaft models. Softer shafts may feel better, but do not perform as well – measured by consistency of ball speed.

I’ve told parts of this story before but I’m motivated to repeat a little this month because the Shaft Max gave me a flat-out, off-the-scale reading of twelve. According to the way I load the shaft, The Shaft Max says I should be playing extra stiff shafts with very stiff tip sections. The funny thing is that I’ve been doing what most other players are doing, fitting myself with lighter and softer shafts. So just to make sure, I set up a couple of tests to figure out if I was, just maybe, fitting myself wrong. Who do you trust – the fitter or the electronics?

Nicklaus JNP Classic Blades and Rifle 5.5 Project X Shafts

The ultimate iron shaft profile for players who load the shaft heavily and produce a lot of tip deflection is the Royal Precision Project X. On the PCS Equalizer, Rifle shafts test out very stiff. Rifle 5.5’s come out to a solid 7.0 with the Equalizer – that’s extra stiff plus. Project X shafts weigh about 115 grams. When I had a love affair with Project X shafts a couple of years ago, I focused on the softest available flex, the 5.0. As time went on, I left Project X behind and shifted back to lighter weight graphite shafts – dropping down as low as the 80 gram range with the Aerotech Steel Fiber graphite that we favor. With the Shaft Max nagging me, I felt it was time for a reprise with very stiff Project X shafts. Was I selling myself short on flex?

For heads I chose a set of the Nicklaus JNP Classic forged blades that are available currently from Nicklaus Golf in limited edition sets. The Nicklaus blades are a very traditional muscle back, just a little larger in size than most of the forged blades on the market. The head weights were standard – the five iron at 254 grams. If you are a blade lover, the Nicklaus JNP heads deserve a place in your collection.

When you assemble 115 gram shafts with standard weight heads at 1” over length (39” five iron), you get swingweights up in the E-0 range with a midsize grip. Most players would say that’s too heavy. Years ago, before I really understood the balance relationships between heads and shafts, I built a couple of very heavy, extra long sets. (Remember, I’m 6’4”.) My memory is that such sets were good for distance and thrashing out of the rough but very bad for finesse. I went ahead with the project anyway, just to see if those prior recollections still held.

Can I play with Project X 5.5 shaft in a standard set of forged heads that swingweights out at E-0? Absolutely. Are they any fun? Absolutely not. The conventional wisdom of clubmaking says that for strong players, a heavy club will help them produce a consistent, “on plane” swing. The belief is that extra weight helps a player who is inclined to over swing to maintain his tempo. That could be true. But I’m sticking with my main criticism. For me, fun with irons comes from taking a little off of a shot when I want it to come up five yards short. Or, I might want to step on it to go a little longer, or knock it down, or hold my release and fade it a little, or turn it over. All of those motions require some kind of mystical communication from a player’s head to a player’s hands. I find that connection is much harder to make as irons become heavier. I think that lighter weight irons are easier to manipulate when you’re trying for finesse.

So, how heavy is too heavy? That might be a very fine line. Project X shafts weigh 115 grams. But so do the current favorites of most regulars at the Golf Lab, the Nippon 1150 Tours. Is it possible that one shaft could be too heavy at 115 grams but another is not?
The answer is in flex. The Nippon 1150 Tours test out on the Equalizer at a 6.0 flex value. That’s a solid flex and a half softer than the Project X 5.5’s. Many players are under the mistaken impression that more flex helps you hit the ball farther. They think that a shaft bends and then “kicks” in to propel the ball. Not so. If you want to understand what happens to a shaft during the swing, have a look at my prior articles, archived on www.calgolftech.com.

But a more flexible shaft can give a little sense of “kick” or “release” at the moment of impact. You don’t get that with shafts that are stiff as pipes. My belief is that the main effect of feeling a flex-related release at the moment of impact is that it reinforces a player’s tempo and timing. After playing and studying golf for over fifty years, I’ve come to believe that the most important factors in playing good golf are balance, tempo and timing. When you see a great player swing (with a few obvious exceptions) they exhibit the moves of a ballet dancer. If your clubs can help you do that, so much the better.

I think that this experiment also points out that if you’re testing different combinations, it’s imperative to know exactly what you’re testing. In my case, two shafts that weigh the same gave much different results. That mystery can be understood by comparing flex values. But to do that, you have to have a common way to measure and interpret flex. If you read manufacturers’ specifications, the Project X and the Nippon 1150’s are rated more or less the same. Only by applying a common measurement – the PCS Equalizer – can you begin to distinguish meaningful differences in flex that might otherwise be overlooked.

The bottom line: the JNP’s went right back to the bench. The next step is setting them up with Aerotech Steel Fiber 110’s – built to a PCS 6.0 – a known good flex value for me, equivalent to the Nippon 1150’s and certainly respectable – even for a player who rates 12 on the Shaft Max. I’m still looking for the exact right weight that delivers the magic. In the end, it probably won’t be a single weight, but a range – probably from 90-115 grams, depending on the shaft flex and bend profile. I know I’ll never play standard, 125 gram steel shafts again. That takes popular S-300, S-400, X-100, Tour Concepts and stiff Rifles out of my game. With golf shafts, 15 grams can be a huge difference.

I have one warning. Most OEM stock graphite iron shafts are very light. Reviewing specifications, I find sub-80 gram shafts to be the most common in off-the-shelf sets. In our experience, the only players who have been successful with sub-80 gram shafts are seniors and women with average to slow swing speeds. Better players who want to try graphite shafts are going to do better with at least 90 gram shafts. If you are thinking about graphite in your irons, be sure to check out the weight. Better yet, find a clubmaker who can set up the exact club that you’re thinking about buying. If you try before you buy, you can eliminate all of the guesswork.

MacGregor 685’s with Rifle Lite 5.5 Shafts

We’ve been following the revival of MacGregor for the last few years. Owner Barry Schneider has made a serious commitment to restore the fabled brand to its former glory. We’re hoping that it doesn’t turn out to be another Don Quixote inspired quest like so many that have gone before – losing tens of millions of dollars before quitting.

MacGregor is still in the game. The new MacTec2 driver is testing out very well for certain players – measured by more ball speed on our Launch Max. But MacGregor has always been known for its forged blades. Mac’s flagship forged blade – the V-Foil – turned out to be something of a dud over the couple of years that it’s been out. This spring, MacGregor brought out a new forged blade, this one updated with some Japanese styling that has taken over as the main MacGregor design influence. It will be the ultimate irony if the proud old American company is saved by up-to-date Japanese designs. In any event, I thought I’d take a good look at the new MacGregor 585 forged irons.

The 585 head is a smallish forged cavity back with very, very little offset. The top line is a little thicker than most blades – a factor that will be noticed by blade aficionados – but I’ve come to like a little thicker top line despite my role as a card-carrying golf snob. The interior of the cavity is distinguished by a very noticeable weight pillow that is positioned directly behind the sweet spot. The downside is the decoration. Like so many companies have done to dress up their irons over the last few years, MacGregor chose a shiny sticker pasted inside the cavity. Golf snobs hate stickers. They discolor, peel and come loose. I could fall in love with decorated irons for a while – if they performed – but never get married.

For shafts, I chose the stock Rifle Lite 5.5’s. Once again, I wanted to try something around that 110 gram weight class. We discovered the Rifle Lites last year, almost by accident. MacGregor is the only company that uses Rifle Lites in its stock line. Time and again, in launch monitor testing the MacGregor irons shafted with Rifle Lites came up as top performers. We got to like the shafts well enough that we began to stock them for reshafting at the Golf Lab.

The setup got off to a fast start. On my very first hole, first swing, I hit a nine iron to one foot. Auspicious beginning. After that, it was more of a mixed bag. Early on, I thought that the sound was a funny, kind of hollow. Later on, I thought I was working a little too hard to hit the irons. I had quite a few birdie putts – defined by me as anything inside of 20 feet. Will the 585’s make the final cut? Not in this setup. But there’s another reason for that. I think that the Rifle Lite is a shaft without a future. (See “Goodbye Royal Precision” coming up next.) This experience illustrates another truth: Just because a certain shaft feels great with one head doesn’t mean that it will feel the same in every head. The acid test will be mounting the 585 heads in Nippon shafts. That’s a project for next month.

How Long Is Too Long?

Over the years, I’ve tested clubs from standard to 3 inches over for myself. In the past, golf snobs always liked the idea that they played over length clubs. The idea was that a little extra length let you choke up a bit for the finesse shots.

I’ve now focused on 1” over (39” five iron) as “my length”. That was based on extensive testing with various lengths, launch monitor oversight, and Neanderthal impact labels. The most reliable way to find your club length is to test with impact labels and a launch monitor looking over your shoulder. You want the tightest pattern and the highest ball speed. While you’re at it, you might just try increasing your swing weight a bit with lead tape and see if that doesn’t help.

The bottom line on club length? Most players are inclined to play clubs that are too long. Get your static measurements done – especially if you’re playing graphite irons. Then, take the time and do the testing. You’re likely to find that shorter golf clubs perform better. If you want a lot more detail on this subject, find a copy of Tom Wishon’s book Search for the Perfect Golf Club. If you’re playing a 45” driver, definitely schedule a visit with your local clubmaker. Let him chop off half an inch and see what the launch monitor says. Then, you’ll be playing PGA Tour “standard” length.

Goodbye Royal Precision

The golf industry is unhealthy. Rounds played, the ultimate measurement of popularity, are in decline. On the equipment side, there are too many manufacturers and too few buyers. There is a sea of inventory washing around at continually lower prices. The USGA has stifled invention. Meantime, companies like Taylor Made continue to release two lines of new models a year. eBay and the monster chains – fueled by big-money buyout groups looking to strike it rich are taking over the distribution of golf equipment – driving small independent retailers out of business and threatening to do the same with smaller, boutique manufacturers.

The scenario continued to play out this month more dramatically than even I imagined. Royal Precision, the number two shaft manufacturer in the world – closed its doors. They couldn’t make any money. Royal Precision’s assets were picked up by True Temper. There is now one dominant shaft company. Maybe the consolidation will help True Temper survive in the global economy – increasingly challenged by Chinese manufacturers. At press time, the story was that True Temper planned to continue to manufacture RP’s product line in Tennessee. You can bet that there will be some changes. It’s interesting that this is the year that True Temper decided to compete with Royal Precision with a new stepless shaft, patterned after the Rifle. Was that the kiss of death? I’m betting that the lines will be pared down and I doubt that the Rifle Lite will survive as a product. Hopefully, the trademark Rifle frequency matched shafts and the revolutionary Project X will survive.

So Many Drivers, So Little Time

So where is innovation centered in today’s golf industry? There are a dozen or so innovative little manufacturers who deserve the support of all golfers who get excited when a small guy creates a great golf club. When you make your equipment choices based on performance, rather than marketing programs, you can have a lot of fun supporting the underdog.

One of the stories we’ve followed for the last three years is the odyssey of Scott Son, originally with Alpha, then with Nakashima and lately the one man show at Versus Golf. I received a couple of samples of his new line this month. There has been a little buzz on the Internet about longer distances – a claim that’s usually hollow. I had 36 holes – 18 with each of the models shafted up with the very same Aldila prototype “By You” shaft. It was a windy day at the Palo Alto Muni so you can’t say for sure what’s real and what’s wind-assisted, but I logged two season-best distances on one day. Shaft or head? Hard to say. It got my attention.

The new Versus heads are a different shape. They are longer from toe to heel. That works out great for me since I’m a habitual toe hitter. It is a unique shape, reminiscent of the SMT Nemesis. The heads are designed with square face angles, but still appear to be a bit closed. (To appear square, a driver face angle actually needs to be 2* open.) The Versus heads are going to require more testing. They seem to deliver exceptionally low spin. I noticed quite a few of my drives tend to “knuckle” and dive. Heather and Iron Byron concurred. They certainly play below stated loft. I played two 10.5* heads and hit the ball very low. This is one club head you are certainly going to want to try before you buy – and worth trying.

In keeping with my theme of “supporting the underdog” I encourage all Golf Today readers to step out and buy something from a little guy. Take your pick of Versus, SMT, KZG, Geek, Advanced Golf Technology, Tom Wishon, Infiniti, Nakashima, Ashton, Scratch or Miura. I think that the health of the golf industry depends on an economic environment where the small, innovative entrepreneurial companies survive and prosper. If you’re too hooked on Titleist to even consider an underdog driver purchase, at least you can buy a bag from an American company that makes undisputed, top quality products. For the last several weeks I’ve been carrying an Aficionado bag by Club Glove. I don’t think I’ll wear it out in my lifetime. Get with the quality American companies. They make good products. Find one to buy.

The Next Stage in Clubfitting – Outdoor, Radar-Based Technology

A year ago, we outfitted the Golf Lab Tour Van with the EDH Flightscope, a small box of electronics that contains the most powerful radar licensed for civilian use. The idea was to bring indoor clubfitting technology outdoors. We made good use of the Flightscope, but over time became more familiar with its limitations than strengths. This was mainly because we have two other launch monitors at the Golf Lab, the Achiever – a laser-based technology and the Max Out Launch Max – a high speed photography-based technology. For driver fitting, we rely on the Launch Max which only works indoors. The reason? We’re convinced that the Launch Max gives the best spin rate and launch angle numbers – the most important factors in determining the best launch conditions. The Launch Max has an optimization routine built into the software that compares each shot to theoretically perfect. Indoors, you can test the balls you play. Range balls don’t behave the same. The Launch Max does fitting magic.

Our experience with the Flightscope was that it gave spin rate readings that were too high – even with range balls. We were never quite sure that the launch angle readings were absolutely accurate. Finally, we had difficulty figuring out just where the Flightscope was aiming. To be fair, the Flightscope was very good at some operations. For players who wanted to know exactly how far they carried each club in their bag, it was terrific to track each ball with radar. “Club gapping” is a service that turned out to be very valuable for tournament players. We liked the ball speed numbers. Overall, for a rather scary $15,000 investment, we had the best technology that was available at the time.

New Kid on the Block – Trackman

EDH is a South African company. ISG is a Danish company. In the past the Danes tried to work with the South Africans but couldn’t make a deal. In the spirit of entrepreneurial business, the Danes built their own radar-based launch monitor – the Trackman.

The Trackman solved a lot of the problems of the Flightscope. The system has a built in camera which allows you to target very accurately. The routines to measure spin have been greatly refined, coming close to matching our indoor results with the Launch Max. The most amazing of the Trackman’s features is that when you set it up, you hear a little electric motor take over and level the system automatically. The launch angle and spin rate numbers appear to be very accurate. As of now, the Trackman is definitely state-of-the-art. It has been purchased by most of the major OEM’s for use in their fitting and testing programs and it has been adopted by the PGA Tour to take over a part of the labor-intensive Shotlink system. So, since we’re crazy golf techno-nuts, we laid down another $25,000 for our own Trackman. We simply can’t stand the idea that there might be a better system out there for understanding how to fit clubs and balls to a particular player’s swing. Our first outing was at the Amateurgolf.com Monterey Bay Classic tournament at Bayonet/Blackhorse. The Trackman lived up to expectations, keeping some players occupied for long stretches.

Flightscope Fights Back

After having been left in the dust for the last year, EDH is fighting back with a new release. The “Cheetah” is patterned after the Trackman, with camera-based targeting, an improved leveling system and much more accurate spin detection technology. It will be interesting to see how the competition plays out. We will know soon. By the time you read this article, we will have the updated EDH Cheetah system, side by side with the Trackman. So the whole saga leads to an interesting opportunity for players who are interested in outdoor, radar-based launch monitors.

Test Radar-Based Launch Monitors for Yourself

On the weekend of July 14-16 the Golf Lab is sponsoring a “Technology Shootout” at Poppy Ridge Golf Course in Livermore. We plan some interesting demonstrations as well. Eric Jones will be doing a long drive clinic. But the main event will be a “technology shootout” between the Cheetah and the Trackman - $50K worth of electronics. In order to provide an incentive for interested players to make the trek out to Poppy Ridge, we’re offering a low price and upgraded fitting options to make the trip worthwhile. You will have a full hour of undivided attention from a Golf Lab club fitter. You will have either the Trackman or the Cheetah (or both) at your service. You will have the complete Golf Lab array of hundreds of demo combinations (drivers, shafts, irons, fairways, utilities and wedges) available. You will have the factory consultation from Matt Frelich from ISG. Fit your clubs, fit our clubs, test demo clubs, perform club gapping, whatever you want to accomplish. We will answer all of your questions. You get unlimited range balls and the Golf Lab Tour Van at your disposal. The price? $75 for a full hour of launch monitor fitting. Plus, you are free to stay and test clubs for as long as you last. Reservations are required, so please call the Golf Lab at 650-493-1770 to reserve your time. We will have enough personnel on site to accommodate two players at the same time, so friends can come together. Leith, Bob, Eric, “Iron Byron” (Patrick Boyd), Andrew Losik and Heather Hughes will all be on hand the entire weekend so you can meet up with the Golf Lab Gang, have some fun and tune up your game at the same time.

We might even have time for a late-afternoon round of golf.

Work Not Done

Last month I promised a review of Tom Wishon’s new book: Common Sense Clubfitting. It’s 485 pages. It’s still on my bedside table. I repeat my recommendation. This is a book worth reading if you’re a golf equipment geek. It’s also a lot of work. I’ll get it done – by Christmas for sure.

Leith Anderson is a Partner in the Golf Lab, Palo Alto, CA.
He will answer any and all questions relating to club fitting and club making. Contact: Leith@calgolftech.com.