What's new on the West Coast

Golf Equipment Chronicles 2008 (Part 7)

Copyright 2008 by Leith Anderson
All rights reserved
Originally appeared in April 2008 issue of Golf Today

New Driver Ideas - Summer 2008

by Leith Anderson

If you believe in the concept of “Magic Golf Clubs” – these are exciting times.  While most of the golf industry is mired in the misery of USGA-imposed limits on innovation – head size, face resiliency, shaft length, and moment of inertia – there are still some slightly crazy guys out there proposing new ideas that might help you cut a few strokes off of your handicap – and have some fun in the process.

My theme this month is experimentation, “tweaking”, improving “feel” and squeezing a little more performance out of your current clubs.  I have never seen an off-the-rack driver that could not be improved – whether that improvement is adding a few yards or simply improving reliability.  Optimizing your driver is a good investment and a logical start to make sure your clubs are as good as they can be. 

You know one thing for sure.  If you continue to play with clubs that are just like what you’re playing today, you will not witness “miracle improvement”.  Keep in mind, the definition of insanity is to continue to do things the same way – but expect different results.  If you’re looking for some help from your golf clubs, you’re going to have to do something different.  Start thinking “outside of the box.”

My inspiration for this article started with a trip to the Professional Clubmakers’ Society Expo in January and a chance encounter with Tom Wishon.  It’s arguable that there’s no one more connected in the golf equipment industry than Tom.  (Check out www.wishongolf.com.)  That conversation focused on “innovation” and the opinion that because of USGA-imposed limits, the major manufacturers were despairing – wondering where the next breakthrough would come from that would motivate hopeful golfers to pull out their wallets.  Could it be that all of those expensive R&D departments were out of new ideas?

Over the last couple of months I covered the “interchangeable shafts” story in depth.  I think that the opportunity to swap shafts and heads is going to be the story of the year for 2008.  Imagine getting your clubs out of your trunk on a windy day.  Why not put a lower loft head on your driver?  If you happen to be playing a wide open course for a scramble, why not mount a longer and lighter shaft on a lighter, lower loft head?  Need to hit it straight?  No problem, choose head that gives you the best control.  In the past, players could always do that, but they needed to have an extra bag full of drivers to fulfill the options.

The “interchangeable shafts ruling” is one area where the USGA has brought some consistency back to their mysterious decisions.  For reasons only the USGA will ever know, it has been OK to change the weights in a driver (as long as a player did not make modifications during a “specified round”).  It has also been OK to change the length or lie angle of a putter.  The “common denominator” seems to have been that the USGA wanted any screws, nuts and bolts to be adjusted with a tool that you can’t buy at Ace Hardware.

Before January, if a player wanted to change the shaft in his club, he had to do that “permanently” – defined by the USGA as requiring a dab of epoxy on the connection between the head and the shaft.  (Ignore the fact that a little hot air would dissolve the epoxy.)  Some truly innovative companies created “interchangeable shaft” golf clubs that were aimed at club fitting.  The early innovators never imagined that the USGA would approve interchangeable shaft golf clubs for regular play.

The first company that I know of that created a “fitting system” utilizing driver heads with measured specifications and interchangeable shafts is Max Out Golf (www.maxoutgolf.com).  Way back in the 90’s, Mitch Voges pioneered the concept of “performance based fitting” which required testing driver heads and shafts with known specifications and comparing the results with launch monitor data.  The idea was to choose the head and shaft combination that performed the best.  In the 1990’s that was a new idea.  That “new idea” is a popular club fitting method today.  The major OEM’s have all jumped on the bandwagon.

Today, thanks to the USGA ruling that “interchangeable shafts” are now legal for play in USGA sponsored events and rounds that players submit to determine handicaps, most of the Major Manufacturers have either introduced interchangeable shaft products, are thinking about doing so, or kicking themselves for missing the boat.

The key question is “will the boat sink?”  In prior Golf Equipment Chronicles articles I described Callaway and Taylor Made systems that will cost at least a “kilobuck” to buy.  Even then, the systems suffer from defects such as single club head weight, single shaft length, uncertain flex and inability to orient the shaft – for believers in PUREing, Spining and Floing.  My prediction?  Callaway and Taylor Made will rue the day that they decided to sell their products as “components” and get into the shaft distribution business. 

I don’t think that a large number of serious golfers will be willing to pay the high prices demanded by Taylor Made and Callaway for a driver that is still basically “off-the-rack”.  On the other hand, I think that the “Universal” system invented by Eric Burch at Club Conex will be popular with players who want to experiment.  You can “try before you buy” for fifty bucks.

Now that you know that you can swap any shaft with any driver head, which head(s) will you choose?  You can find one in your garage or you can choose one of the new “high MOI” driver heads.

Understanding Moment of Inertia (MOI)

The second major theme for 2008 is going to be the new crop of high MOI driver heads.  They just go straight.

The formula to calculate MOI is “grams (times) centimeters squared”.  The most important factor producing high MOI is the shape of the clubhead.  The “centimeters squared” measurement is the outside dimension of the clubhead.  That’s why the new designs look like toast, pancakes and pie pans.  The bigger and flatter, the better.

The next factor is “grams” which means “head weight”.  If you’re looking for the highest moment of inertia measurement, you need to find the club head that is the largest, flattest and heaviest.  Overall, MOI is pretty simple if you understand the formula.

“Moment of Inertia” is about hitting the ball straight, not hitting the ball long.  The reason is hidden in the “formula”.  The problem is that if you want to hit the ball long, you need a driver head that is lighter, not heavier. 

Long drive contestants understand that lighter weight heads permit higher swing speeds.  For years, we’ve worked with Eric Jones to find heads eight or nine grams lighter than the “standard” head weight of 200 grams.  The problem is that very few companies can manufacture a head that is both light and strong enough to withstand the extreme punishment of long drive competition.

We had a chance to reconfirm the “light head weight” theory in a marathon testing session at the Northern California Golf Show where we had our Achiever launch monitor set up with both the EDH Kudu and the Trackman hooked up.  We captured each shot from multiple angles.  Our test subjects included Eric Jones – “third in the world” – in the Senior Long Drive Competition last year, John Johnson, founder of the Tour Lock Company and a host of show attendees.  I even jumped on the monitor and took my licks.

The bottom line?  The best ball speeds for all players were produced by longer, lighter shafts and lighter heads.  The difference in carry distance averaged about ten yards – with a high of fifteen yards.  For most players, if you want to carry the ball farther, you have to go long and light.

You’ve got to be desperate for distance.  Shaft length and weight is a relatively minor advantage in the “big picture”.  The difference between a 47” driver and a 44” driver – with Eric Jones delivering the blows – was just ten yards.  The 44” Adams BUL shafted with the Mitsubishi White Board from my bag averaged 295 yards in carry distance against 305 yards produced by Eric’s competition driver.

When I tested the same BUL against an Adams 460D – set up at 47’ and 193 gram head weight - it was worth four miles an hour of swing speed and about twelve yards.  I have a confession to make.  It’s been over a year since I’ve tested myself.  I don’t like getting on the scale either.  The bad news?  I’ve lost 5 MPH of swing speed in the last two years.

I’ll probably be back out there with a 47” driver in my next tournament.  I do it every year.  It lasts until I make a big swing and put one in the trees.  If you’re playing in competition, you have to think hard and long about how important an extra ten yards will be for you.

Hey Buddy!!  Want a SUMO?

Nike is selling their new SUMO2 - 5900 driver as the “next big thing”.  It’s a nice head design, (for a square driver) updated from a year ago and with the sound muted.  But, is it worth 399 of your hard-earned dollars?

We’ve received our first shipments.  As a custom shop, we like to take the clubs we receive apart and try to figure out what the product designers were trying to accomplish.  With the Nike SUMO2 – 5900 the answer is obvious.  They were aiming at hitting the USGA limit on “MOI Points”.  Nike “maxed out” the USGA limit 5900.  Alas, the SUMO2 - 5900 is probably not the best driver for distance. 

Why?  As shipped, the SUMO2’s are 45.75” in length.  The head weight is about 205 grams on the drivers we’ve measured.  The swingweights are in the high “D” range.  That’s just too heavy to maximize swing speed.

Most players will get better results by cutting at least three quarters of an inch from the length.  Each inch of length reduces the swingweight by 6 points.  Therefore, taking an inch off of the SUMO2 will bring the swingweight back down to a more manageable D-2 or D-3.  Don’t feel emasculated.  The average driver length on the PGA Tour is 44.5” so you have to ask yourself why you would play a driver more than an inch longer than that.  Remind yourself, high MOI is about straighter, not longer.

There’s another tweak that works.  We’ve had good luck swapping out the stock shaft (65 grams) with ultra light weight shafts – ACCRA T-40 and T50 models (40 or 50 grams) in appropriate flexes.  If you’re going longer and lighter, you should also go stiffer.  Replacing the stock shaft with a light weight shaft will save about three swingweight points.  Several customers have reported significant increases in distance with the SUMO2 reshafted with lighter and stiffer shafts.  It would be great if you could order a SUMO2 head from Nike at a specified head weight.  I’d love to try the SUMO2 at 193 grams on a 47” ultra light shaft.

If you’re thinking about buying a SUMO2 – 5900 you should test for loft.  Last year, the SUMO Square launched very high.  I normally play a 10.5* driver.  Last year, the 9.5 SUMO gave me the trajectory I wanted.  This year, the 10.5* produces the same trajectory.

Squeezing a Few More Yards Out of Your Driver

Now that you have your new “driver system” started, you can start thinking about “optimization”.

Long time Chronicles readers know that I have advocated counter balancing golf clubs with counterweights.  It’s pretty simple and delivers a provable benefit.  Drill a hole in the grip, drop in a counterweight.  Ball speed goes up 2-3 MPH.  Any questions?

Many players also report significant improvements in feel.  We’ve sold thousands of the Balance-Certified counterweights over the years.  Balance-Certified pioneered the concept of the after-market balancing of golf clubs.  The cost can add up.  The installed price is $40.  You want fourteen?  That will be $560.  There is no doubt that the cost of counter weighting and entire set can be prohibitive for a lot of players.

Balance-Certified – the “Mercedes”

Balance-Certified is a highly engineered product.  The parts are precise – produced in a state-of-the-art machine shop.  Each weight has two layers of rubber that can be peeled off to fit tight and accommodate shafts with smaller internal diameters.  The B-C weights are removable and reusable.  Fitting is imperative.  You can’t tell from feel which weight will produce the best results.  I think that most players who experiment with counterweights choose weights that are way too heavy.  Don’t waste your time.  Verify the best weight with launch monitor testing.

Tour Lock – the “Chevrolet”

John Johnson is a golf professional and tinkerer.  He took a look at the Balance-Certified system and “redesigned” it to cut costs.  Tour Lock counterweights are now available at Golfsmith and Wishon Golf for about half the price of the Balance-Certified system.

As you might guess, there is some friction between the companies.

Key Differences

As usual, I like to take a close look at each product.  If the cheaper product is the same or better, why pay more? 

There is a significant difference in the counterweights.  It is important to note that the technical brain behind Balance-Certified is Jeff Lindner, a mechanical engineer whose resume includes many years at NASA.  Jeff is also the inventor of the “frequency filtered” putter shaft now marketed by UST.  From the very beginning, Jeff has thought of a golf club as part of a “control system” that goes from a player’s brain, through his hands, to the clubhead and then back.  The notion of “control” and “feedback” are important objectives in Jeff’s inventions. 

Going back to the early days, when Balance-Certified only sold putter weights, Jeff’s theory was that “feel” is vibration that a player feels through his hands.  Consequently, Jeff recommends firm grips on all golf clubs – better to transfer vibration and promote feel.

The Balance-Certified counterweight is a machined brass or aluminum part that seats on top of the shaft.  The shaft-weight interface is “metal on metal”.  The positioning of the weight inside the shaft is intended to transfer vibration to a player’s hands.  To hear Jeff describe it, “it’s not about the first shot, it’s about the next shot” – the idea that feedback helps a player improve his technique.

The Tour Lock system also mounts through the grip, but it sits on top of the grip, and is cushioned by the grip.  The Tour Lock counterweight does not contact the shaft.  The effect is to “dampen” the vibration coming through the shaft.

The Tour Lock counterweights definitely have a “softer” feel.  They are muted, owing to the cushion of the grip.

Which one is better?  Inevitably, some players will prefer the firmer feel and some will prefer the softer feel.  Personally, my “gamers” are a set of Miuras, shafted with Aerotech 110 gram Steel Fiber shafts and – a key point – gripped with Golf Pride Tour Velvet Cord grips for better feel.  I chose the Balance-Certified counterweights.

My advice?  Even at a lower price, the Tour Lock counter weights will cost around $300.  If you’re going to spend that kind of money to change the feel of your clubs, you should test both systems to be sure that you’re getting the system that works the best for you.

The “Bleeding Edge”

John Johnson trekked up from Ventura County in Los Angeles to spend a couple of days with the Golf Lab Gang at the San Mateo Golf Show.  The idea was to do some testing with his new invention – this time a new kind of weight that can be located at any point in the shaft.

It was an intriguing thought for me.  I liked the idea of placing a weight several inches under my right hand to see what effect that would have on performance and feel of the club.  Because of our prior experience, we knew better than to trust our instincts or intuition.  We wanted the precision and rigor of launch monitor testing.

The “new” Tour Lock weight system combines counterweights located at the butt end of the club with weights positioned at various positions in the shaft.  John invented a way to locate the shaft weights and tighten them down.  It consists of a tool with a magnetic connection to locate the weight inside the shaft.  Twist the tool and a rubber washer expands to wedge the weight in the shaft.  It was a little testy, but I found it could be made to work with practice.

While we were at it, we also took the opportunity to test the latest Balance-Certified invention – the Shaft Stabilizer.  To some extent, the ideas were in the same ball park.  The B-C Shaft Stabilizer is similar in concept, combining a butt weight with another weight under the player’s lower hand, connected by a tube.

Testing Results

The problem with testing is that sometimes the tests don’t come out the way you want or hope.  Twenty or thirty players hit hundreds of shots.  We positioned the shaft weight from close to the butt to twelve inches down the shaft.  I wanted the “deep” position twelve inches down to feel great and provide a measurable improvement in performance.  In my imagination, that was going to be the perfect setup.

Alas, it did not work out that way.  Once the shaft weight was positioned more than a few inches underneath the lower hand, ball speed declined.  Some players reported a slight improvement in “feel” – but there was no measurable performance improvement. 

The Tour Lock system is going to be an “experimenter’s delight”.  As the weekend wore on, my continuous conversation with John turned to how the golf club performed in a player’s hands with the weights installed at various positions. 

John is intrigued by the theory that repositioning the weight can influence the way a player releases the club.  Unfortunately, that’s impossible to measure.  Undoubtedly, a good deal of experimentation and testing will have to follow.  I’m pretty stubborn.  My next test will be to try the internal shaft weights positioned at twelve inches in my set of Tour Stage MR-23’s shafted with Nippon 950’s in “X” flex.  This is golf.  Who needs proof?

We then turned our attention to the Balance Certified Shaft Stabilizer.  It was a good performer.  We recorded familiar ball speed increases of 2-3 MPH, pretty common for counterweights positioned at the butt of the shaft.  Most players reported a “more solid feel”.  What’s going on with that?

I phoned Jeff Lindner for an explanation.  I asked him “why?”  He said that the reason that the Shaft Stabilizer produces more consistent results, measurable in “center contact” is understanding the connection of the player’s “control system” with the golf club.  During the downswing, the golf club loads and unloads in two complete cycles.  Jeff’s theory is that the player can “feel the clubhead” when he loads the shaft at the top of his swing.  During the downswing, the player “loses contact” with the golf club as it unloads, loads and unloads again.  Jeff’s theory is that the Stabilizer weight in the player’s hands allows his “control system” to maintain contact with the golf club.  Hence, the perception, and perhaps even the reality, of improved control.

The Achiever launch monitor with its “electronic impact tape” reported a higher incidence of center contact with the Stabilizer installed.  That looked like “proof”.

The Balance-Certified Shaft Stabilizer is a brand new product.  We have tested the Stabilizer with a few players at the Golf Lab.  In all cases, we recorded higher ball speeds and more consistent center contact.  The best increase so far has been eight yards.  That’s pretty impressive.  Same player, same club, same swing.  Eight extra yards.  Why not?

The principal selling point of the Balance-Certified Shaft Stabilizer is going to be “ease of use”.  It is a “two size fits all” system, one heavy, and one light.  If a player wants the Stabilizer to be heavier, he can wrap the connecting tube with lead tape.  We know that counterweights improve ball speed and we can measure that.  The uncharted territory is improving feel and control. 

The Club Conex Exchangeable Shaft Fitting System

Just before press time, we received a small sample package of the new Club Conex fittings that allow a player to build his own exchangeable shaft system from parts that he might already own.

I built a few test clubs and took them to the Northern California Golf Show in San Mateo, California where they were tested by dozens of players to see if they felt the “same” as normal drivers and if they could be broken.

The “can they be broken” question was answered by Eric Jones who exercised several of the sample clubs with his dialed down World Champion swing speed north of 130 MPH.  There were no players who reported a difference in feel.  In the process, I learned quite a bit about what to expect from this exciting new option for golfers who want to experiment with their drivers.

The “Value Proposition”

The idea behind the Club Conex system is that it is “universal”.  The hosel fitting is a sleeve with a threaded collar.  The sleeve is epoxied into the hosel of the club head.  The shaft fitting mates with the hosel fitting and is secured with the threaded collar.  The Club Conex system is similar to the Callaway system, just “upside down”.  Each fitting will sell at retail for around $40.  Installation will be extra.  A player who wants to convert the excess drivers in his garage to an exchangeable shaft system can do exactly that.  Any shaft can be fitted to any head. 

Working with Club Conex Adapters

There are some interesting options with Club Conex.  Many drivers – especially those Callaway, Taylor Made and Nickent heads that are made for “consumers” are delivered with hosels that require .350 shafts to curtail breakage and warranty repair claims.  With the Club Conex system, you can install a .350 hosel sleeve in a driver that is built to accept that size shaft and then mate it with a shaft adapter that fits a .335 shaft – the much more common size popular on the professional tours.  Today, the only way to install a .335 diameter shaft in a .350 hosel is to use a shim – a technique that is reliable, but eschewed by many professional clubmakers.

Installation is tricky.  The hosel sleeve has to be carefully slathered with epoxy to make sure that the threaded collar is not glued solid.  Alignment is the biggest question mark.  On the first several installations that I made, I found it very tricky to position the hosel sleeve in the hosel so that the shaft would be correctly aligned when it was fitted to the head.  I’m sure I’ll figure out how to do that with a jig and laser alignment aids, but for now it’s still a “by hand and by eye” procedure.

When you take a good look at the driver heads in your collection, you will notice that some have much longer hosels than others.  The Taylor Made Burner is an example of a very long hosel.  Since the shaft connector weighs about eight grams, I thought that positioning it at the top of the long hosel would raise the center of gravity too much.  If you’re going to fit out a small collection of heads with the adapters, you might have to figure out a good way to cut titanium neatly.

System Requirements

For a player who wants to put together a “driver system” I have a few suggestions. 

The essence of creating a “driver system” is to choose a collection of heads that have different weights, or heads that allow weights to be adjusted.  Taylor Made drivers are good for that.  The “unloaded” weight of a Taylor Made driver is in the mid 180 gram range.  You can fill the weight ports with 2 gram weights and end up with a head in the low 190 gram range.  That’s just what the doctor ordered if you want to play a 47” or 48” driver.  Another good alternative is the old Adams 460D driver head from a couple of years ago.  It is a good performer, highly adjustable, and can be bought for low prices on eBay.

There’s also an economical way to buy shafts.  Most club fitters have racks full of shafts that were “pulled” from drivers and saved.  At the Golf Lab, we have hundreds of “pullouts” that are all for sale for half of their original price.  That’s the best way acquire a collection of shafts economically.

Bottom Line

After preliminary testing, I’m a big fan of exchangeable shafts for both fitting and playing.  Over the next several weeks, we’ll be converting our entire collection of demo drivers, fairway woods, utilities and irons to the Club Conex system. 

It is a great method for fitting.  Taking the exact combination of head and shaft that you’re thinking of buying to the range – together with two or three additional shafts that you want to test – is going to be the ultimate way to decide the feel and compare the performance of shafts that you’re testing.  Finally, you can test the exact same head with a range of shafts.

If you find a combination that’s “Magic” you can put it in your bag.

Leith Anderson is a Partner in the Golf Lab, Palo Alto, CA.
He will answer any and all questions about club fitting and club making. Contact:  Leith@calgolftech.com.  Or by phone (650) 493-1770