btk_1

I'm considering soft-stepping the Dynamic Gold X100 shafts (130g) two times. This should effectively make the flex approach the flex of the Dynamic Gold S300 shafts (also 130g). The main difference between the two shafts being that the tip section of the X100 shafts is 10" and the tip section of the S300 shafts is 12". Click http://www.truetemper.com/golf/dynamicgold.asp to see spec's. How will the soft-stepped (twice) Dynamic Gold X100 shafts play compared to standard Dynamic Gold S300 shafts? Due to the shorter tip section of the X100 shaft, shouldn't they play just slightly stiffer? Be slightly lower launching? Have slightly less spin? My swingspeed with a driver is 105... so I feel my optimum iron flex is close to an S300 or S400 flex. I don't want to play the heavier S400 shaft and I'm thinking that the soft-stepped (twice) X100 shafts with the shorter (stiffer) tip section will lead to slightly more accuracy and tighter dispersion than standard S300 shafts or hard-stepped (once) S300 shafts. Thanks!

I would like to hear comments from anyone who is currently playing or has played this shaft. I believe the Project X Flighted shafts are optimized to flight throughout the set like the 5-iron - at least that is what I've read as the target flight of the Rifle Flighted shafts. This means that the long irons flight higher and the short irons flight lower than standard Project X's. However, if just comparing 5-iron shafts (PX Flighted vs. std. PX), they should flight about the same. Initially, higher than say a 5-iron Dynamic Gold and then flattening out. Do you prefer or dislike having the flighted vs. the non-flighted technology? Has anyone frequency tested the PX Flighted vs. the std. PX in the same flex... on the Rifle scale do they test out about the same? What about the newer std. Project X (by True Temper) vs. the former std. Project X (by Royal Precision)... I've heard the newer TT produced PX's are softer... on the Rifle scale how did they compare? Thanks!