ant

that 975D is a weapon, 260cc, Tiger used to bag one, GLWS!

thanx Tatsuro!

this bag is dope, price isnt but the bag is http://www.tourspecgolf.com/Mizuno-2012-241-Co-Frame-Walker-Caddy-Bag-45CM086

ok, thanx! at least it looks like they are not abandoning pro tp like designs completely. they are probably not the best sellers but some people like neutral clubs that dont get in their way ie you get exactly what you put in your shot. if its garbage in its garbage out, kinda like true blades i guess, same idea. sometimes its right tool for the job and sometimes not. like that mg hb4 i got from you that one just wants to go straight and high but it serves a different purpose. wedges look dope, hopefully that what they gonna look like on release and if you say its a smaller head but with more weight thats even better.

and yet another question for Tatsuro on DB Milled wedges : even tho it was mentioned they are smaller heads did they feel hefty or not ? dont mean swing weight but the overall weight of the club. i'm thinking stainless head should weight more than carbon steel head all things being equal.

thanx Chris! more questions of course :) what is the difference between TX and TR woods ? from the pictures i've seen elsewhere it appears that one is more deep faced than the other. what are the specs (volume, weight, lie) for both and what custom build options they gonna offer ? since RC site is mum on them and new wedges too i'm guessing they are not released yet so no specs no nothing. when they plan to release them or release more information on them at least ? i'm potentially interested in those depending on what custom options they can offer or i start rebuilding my beaten up pro tp instead which ought to be on par with those technology wise anyway me thinks.

thanx man, that would be great! I saw your original reply and just to clarify I'm interested to get more details on these here and their new wedges of course.

dont mean to highjack but whats the story with their Pro TR/TX line ? any details at this point ? so far the info dropped was they are custom order only ? specs ? specs they can tweak on custom order ? shaft options ?

even with top quality shafts it makes sense to align in a set like a set of irons or wedges and purely for consistency in feel between clubs in a set. how you align is up to you and what you believe in but for consistent feel you best align them all the same way in a set.

you just might be on to something here supo! between Nike integrating aerodynamics and Callaway Lamborghini composites into their drivers painting them Ferrari red might just be the next big thing. how about custom order option ? i can already see people arguing and agonizing over which shade and depth of Rosso is the best ;)

when COR is maxed out and design goal is to get more distance it can basically be achieved thru pretty much what you can group into : 1) club head speed increase; 2) minimizing losses from off center contact; 3) launch variables; 4) paint it white. so whatever manufacturers do would relates to one of those. for example, club head speed can be increased by reducing weight as well as making the club longer potentially giving the golfer ability to swing it faster if he or she can. that also ties in to the second group because now the club is more difficult to control so the design has to deal with more off center hits and be more forgiving but more forgiving is a separate goal in itself and that is likely where most of fancy new tech goes. the third would deal with things like spin eg less spin for players club more spin for average golfer type of club, spin angle eg workable or straightshooter, and launch angles. like you said these kinda design decisions would make it suit one person and not another. feel is something where manufacturing and various materials can really make a difference it seems. he talks about in the same tech faq how different treatment of the material can change its characterictics rather dramatically and that would no doubt affect feel. sound is very important to many folks too. that kinda thing i guess but again this is just my take on armchair club design here.

Tom Wishon who is reputable source on the subject being a well known club designer and working with manufacturers for years has some interesting info on this in his Tech FAQ here http://wishongolf.com/technology/tech-faqs/ some highlights related to this discussion: What do the various numbers and letters that are used to describe metals in clubmaking mean? I mean things like 10-2-3 Titanium, SP700 Titanium, 1035 carbon steel, 17-4 or 431 Stainless Steel, and so forth? MOST IMPORTANT for clubmakers to remember is that just because you see an alloy name listed with a particular clubhead design does not in any way assure that the head is either made with that alloy, that it is the best alloy for that specific shape and design, or that it the alloy has been processed properly for its use in that particular head design. it is critical for quality that the clubheads you use for your clubmaking are designed and manufactured by reputable companies, because no clubmakers will ever be able to test the heads they buy for these properties. There are so many different Titanium alloys that are used to make drivers these days. What is the difference between them and is there one over all others that is best for performance? First of all, the performance of any Titanium alloy in a driver head is not so much in the make up of the alloy as it is in HOW the alloy was used in the design of the head. If the face of the driver is engineered poorly in terms of a face thickness that is too thick or too thin for the size/area/loft/bulge/roll of the face, then the entire potential of the alloy would be completely wasted and the performance of the head could have been exceeded by a well engineered Driver that was made from standard 17-4 stainless steel! To get to the point of the question, with the number of different Titanium alloys being used to make the faces of today’s large, 430 to 460cc Drivers, it is very easy to make the face achieve a COR of 0.830 with virtually any Titanium alloy. For most companies, it is a waste of money to use a high grade Titanium alloys such as 10-2-3, 15-3-3-3 or SP700 to make the face, because the COR limit can be achieved easily in a 380cc size head or larger using 6/4 Titanium. Since 6/4 Titanium alloy has a much lower cost than any of the other higher strength titanium alloys, most companies stopped using these more sophisticated alloys in their driver head design in the early 2000s. However, if the driver is designed with some other performance factor in mind such as a different weight distribution or a higher MOI, it is possible and often preferable to use a higher strength Titanium alloy for the face. By so doing, it is possible to make the face thinner than it would be using 6/4 so the face would comprise less weight that can be used elsewhere in the head to accommodate the designer’s goal for the MOI or center of gravity location while still being able to keep the COR within the rules of golf.

this exactly the reason for my reply, that kind of thinking. "this material is ok material but that one is better". are you a club designer to make such assessments ? can you evaluate a specific club design from engineering standpoint and say that had it used a different material it would have exceeded design goals behind it ? if not then your assertions dont mean much in the context of picking a design that would deliver the most for you personally and that isnt always the one that is made of the most expensive material or manufacturing process. the expression "right tool for the job" is appropriate here to explain what i mean. this is all fascinating stuff and i'm not against armchair club designer type of discussion here but i would never base my club selection on material used because i realize how folly that is. just saying.

TourSpecGolf makes this really good point in his post about manufacturing process and head design itself. design is probably the most important thing simply because that dictates the choice of material and manufacturing process to reach design goals which can differ dramatically for different designs. i think it is unfair to label materials as best or worst in this case because going that way you can miss on some good designs that can work really well for you just because the material in the spec doesnt match what somebody on the internet, individually or collectively, considers top tier material.

yeah, for some reason folks in Japan seem to measure club head speed in meters/second instead of miles/hour or kilometers/hour. i understand they are on metric system officially but they seem to mix metric and imperial here and there. ~105mph is what they wanted to say ;) more pictures/info on that blade putter or just the teaser ?

if its all the same to you guys would be real nice to see whats new and coming for Royal Collection this year. might have this mixed up but wasnt there a mention of ProTP resurrection ? anyways, looking forward for pictures and more info as always. wish i could make it over there at some point and see some of that gear in person. oh well, maybe someday ;)

I do it with all clubs not just the driver and thats just the way I grip them so no bother. bother is actually not to do it when the club is normal length like with my persimmon for instance tho with persimmon it doesnt hurt to choke down a bit either ;)

the actual length is 44.75 but I choke down on clubs quite a bit so effective length should be about 43.25-43.5 which is also where my persimmon driver actual length is. I realize that might be a bit unusual thing to do but I'm in a good company, for example Anthony Kim driver is at 44.5 but he chokes down 'about two full inches' in his own words so thats pretty much that Epon Zero typo spec right there.

its a typo indeed. got interested in this and turns out the actual length is pretty standard modern 45.25. oh well, somebody will get it right someday ;) http://www.gcc-tomita.ne.jp/img/zero.jpg http://www.gcc-tomita.ne.jp/pdf/zero123.pdf

there would be a loss not as much as marketing machine would lead us to believe. distance loss from off center hit is more significant than distance gain from longer shaft. there are plenty of people who play their 3 wood instead of driver, met a few and they always say that its because the distance for them is roughly equal on average between the two but 3 wood is more reliable. think about this for minute. people hit a smaller size, much worse COR club and get roughly the same distance and more reliable accuracy. granted that can be for variety of reasons but you give them a reasonably forgiving high COR driver head on a shorter stick similar length to their 3 wood and they just might wanna buy it. maybe its a typo and maybe its too extreme and maybe they are not doing it but i was hoping that in addition smaller heads trend among manufacturers theres gonna be shorter shaft trend coming and not just cutting shafts to shorter length but also designing clubheads that should work better with shorter shaft length. its ridiculous that manufacturers sell longer stock drivers to general public while even tour players whos ability to hit consistently is ways higher and who play on super manicured courses with practically no real rough still prefer to play shorter length. how is that logical ?!

it doesnt go against all logic, its quite logical and actually does makes alot of sense. if they are truly doing it kudos to them. the shorter the shaft the more control you have over the club. the more control you have over the club the more chance you have at having repeatable solid hits right on the sweetspot. the closer you are to the sweetspot the better is energy transfer from the clubhead to the ball and this results in higher ball speed and thus more distance. it also brings more accuracy as on center hits tighten dispersion. yes, you can get more clubhead speed with longer shaft but in most cases it is wasted due to lack of solid contact making added length and speed detrimental. ask Jamie Sadlowski, he has shorter driver that he is using in actual play and its not because he overshoots otherwise. anyone who can consistently hit their 46/45 on the screws i salute you but those who cant might benefit from shorter shaft length quite alot. this excerpt from Tom Wishon book which is worth reading in relation to this whole thing http://www.wishongolf.com/books/search_club_excerpt.php

AX is very solid FW shaft, very straight and true but if you like to feel your shafts before impact you probably aint gonna like it. if that feel is important not tipping it is another option if you go with right flex, it should still perform great. havent tried K but my understanding is that K is supposed to allow for a bit more feel comparing to A which is kinda strange because A isnt like AX and has significantly more feel to it although that might be due to longer length and thinner walls and I havent tried A in FW, maybe it would feel similar although I very much doubt it.

forged heads of S25 and S20 are more than fine with bending, I had one of my sets bent 5 degrees flatter 3-PW, no problem. the only issue with bending that much is possible chrome plating wrinkles/damage, depending on each specific plating used and they all seem to a bit different from different manufacturers, but that is purely cosmetic, the steel underneath seem to have no problem coping tho. also this looks like an old thread so hopefully OP got this resolved by now but it just I'm confused by why would he need more upright lie angles and at the same time saying hes working on a swing change to keep his hands lower thru impact. The lower your hands are thru impact the flatter lie angle you need.

yeah MacGregor is another example. the difference in branding is just a technicality dictated by target market and resources available plus they are called GeoTech Golf Components after all so for all we know they could have started as components seller then started making or branding their own products as well. Plus say Crazy products they sell are not in the same segment as their own so its not like they gonna cannibalize their own product by doing that. I know what you mean tho and it is kinda confusing because we are looking at it from the outside in and we know GeoTech simply as brand. I was asking same kinda questions on this forum before about GeoTech and Crazy but then it made sense to me.

sure you do. GolfSmith sells SnakeEyes which is owned by GolfSmith. they sell everything else as well. supermarkets sell their own consumer brands and other businesses do the same even in corporate/enterprise markets like IBM for instance. it makes sense if you think about it. if for instance, like Tario tells you, GeoTech is known as the place for components, its in their best interest to be a one stop shop for components on the market because if potential customer does not want to buy GeoTech own component for specific order they gonna loose a customer instead of gaining one. its that simple really.