Mjr. D Posted February 18, 2012 Report Share Posted February 18, 2012 Vegaman peaked my curiosity with his post in the Epon Zero thread - I'd like to know the differences in titanium metals used in woods. From top of the line best of the best to the most average - "6-4 ti is a budget s**t metal and only DAT 55, 56, SP700 or that special Endo Ti" Also this monocoque structure design.... is this a big advantage?? Can someone do a quick summary of all the different face metals and what is considered the best and "worst". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mjr. D Posted February 25, 2012 Author Report Share Posted February 25, 2012 Can someone chime in on this please. I'm very interested. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shambles Posted February 27, 2012 Report Share Posted February 27, 2012 Vegaman peaked my curiosity with his post in the Epon Zero thread - I'd like to know the differences in titanium metals used in woods. From top of the line best of the best to the most average - "6-4 ti is a budget s**t metal and only DAT 55, 56, SP700 or that special Endo Ti" Also this monocoque structure design.... is this a big advantage?? Can someone do a quick summary of all the different face metals and what is considered the best and "worst". Metals and construction technique are subjective. There is no outright " best " unless related to specific functions and specifications. For example, before steel shafts were created, hickory was the best because it was easily available and the available technology made maintenance easy for wood heads. Steel shafts had a bit of a struggle in their early days but given time, they developed enough to become acceptable. More time and development made them even better but the steel shaft of today is nothing like the steel shaft of the early days regardless that they perform the same function. Today's steel shaft offers many options as to performance that were not available in the early days. The same is true of titanium and it's many grades. It's a matter of how well it can be applied and the performance and durability it provides as against cost. There is no " best ", but there is suitability and the judge thereof is you. New technology has many dead ends and wrong applications. New technology only offers the possibility of something better and the cost vis a vis the improvement may or may not be worth it to you. You be the judge. Shambles Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mjr. D Posted February 27, 2012 Author Report Share Posted February 27, 2012 Appreciate it. I guess another way to pose the question would be - what are the advantages and disadvantages of the different types of metals/titaniums used in drivers today? There has to be some reason Tourstage uses metal A whereas Epon uses metal B and Ryoma uses metal C... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+TourSpecGolfer Posted February 27, 2012 Report Share Posted February 27, 2012 While it's true there is no best there is a hell of alot better. Also I would not throw cost into the equation as lower cost usually always have a trade off. In regards to drivers I am bias toward Forged Ti produced by Endo mostly for feel. When it comes to performance DAT 55, 56, produce fantastic numbers but cost quite a bit more. A lot of it has to do with the process of how it's made. You can have the same material made 2 different ways and the result is totally different. Also combined with other design factors the result can vary as well. There is an unlimited amount of tech/design/manufacturing/material combinations. It's about finding balance somewhere in that criteria that satisfies you that counts most. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vegaman Posted February 27, 2012 Report Share Posted February 27, 2012 I think...6-4 is cheap and good enough for most manufacturers. The cost versus performance makes it popular. And if cost is part of the equation it might be the "best" Ti. But I guess what you mean with best Ti for face construction, you mean the best metal regardless of cost. And from what i understand 6-4 would not be on any brands list of favourite face metal if it cost the same as DAT 55, 56, SP700 or that Endo VL Ti. It's cheap and decent enough I guess? I'm no expert though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+TourSpecGolfer Posted February 27, 2012 Report Share Posted February 27, 2012 I think your right Vegaman. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mjr. D Posted February 27, 2012 Author Report Share Posted February 27, 2012 Good stuff! Thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ant Posted February 27, 2012 Report Share Posted February 27, 2012 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vegaman Posted February 28, 2012 Report Share Posted February 28, 2012 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. I don't think it has anything to do with what somebody thinks "on the internet". Design is of course extremely important, but I'm pretty sure the larger OEMs would like to use DAT 55 for example, but the cost rules it out. This would be more than somebody on the internet, it would probably include the whole golf industry. 6-4 is of course an ok material, but if cost was not an issue the whole industry would be using more premium Ti..Of course. Or do you think they just happen to think the cheapest Ti was absolutely the best? That would be a HUGE coincidence. Not likely at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ant Posted February 28, 2012 Report Share Posted February 28, 2012 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. I don't think it has anything to do with what somebody thinks "on the internet". Design is of course extremely important, but I'm pretty sure the larger OEMs would like to use DAT 55 for example, but the cost rules it out. This would be more than somebody on the internet, it would probably include the whole golf industry. 6-4 is of course an ok material, but if cost was not an issue the whole industry would be using more premium Ti..Of course. Or do you think they just happen to think the cheapest Ti was absolutely the best? That would be a HUGE coincidence. Not likely at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+TourSpecGolfer Posted February 28, 2012 Report Share Posted February 28, 2012 Just about every OEM would also choose ENDO if they could afford it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
potuna Posted February 28, 2012 Report Share Posted February 28, 2012 I'd go for best design along with best materials. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ant Posted February 28, 2012 Report Share Posted February 28, 2012 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shankopotamus Posted February 28, 2012 Report Share Posted February 28, 2012 Thanks, Ant. Very thorough. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mjr. D Posted February 29, 2012 Author Report Share Posted February 29, 2012 Wow very insightful. So why do people go nuts over new drivers every year if distance is maxed out with COR? How is one driver longer than the next? They're not, they just suite someone's swing more than another? Also, and a big reason i'm into Jspec equipment is "feel". I find a lot of the Jspec stuff feels better than the US equipment. Is that due in part to the higher quality alloys? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ant Posted February 29, 2012 Report Share Posted February 29, 2012 (edited) 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. Wow very insightful. So why do people go nuts over new drivers every year if distance is maxed out with COR? How is one driver longer than the next? They're not, they just suite someone's swing more than another? Also, and a big reason i'm into Jspec equipment is "feel". I find a lot of the Jspec stuff feels better than the US equipment. Is that due in part to the higher quality alloys? Edited February 29, 2012 by ant Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supo Posted March 1, 2012 Report Share Posted March 1, 2012 (edited) ant, seriously ur babling on like a physics professor with all this diatribe. what everyone is missing here, and i cant believe no one has picked up on it yet its so plain and simple..... has NOTHING to do with materials, none what so ever...., bah! nope, the proof is everywhere around us, evey day to get the MOST distance possible u have to get the clubhead speed up and the ONLY way to do that is drivers MUST be painted ferrari red.! Edited March 1, 2012 by supo67 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supo Posted March 1, 2012 Report Share Posted March 1, 2012 kidding mate , love reading ur posts. u know what ur on about. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+TourSpecGolfer Posted March 1, 2012 Report Share Posted March 1, 2012 The design staff at huge companies like Endo, Bridgestone, Yamaha, Sumitomo, etc.. are not only light years ahead of the old school basic golf club principles but they are big teams not concerned with marketing or gimmick they only care about improving performance through scientific data & testing. Making a driver without taking advantage of lighter and better materials that can be milled thinner or feature more rebound among many other attributes puts a company at a disadvantage in terms of performance and feel. I think Wishon was and is correct if your talking about producing basic golf clubs in comparison to what is standard in the U.S market and even low end in the JDM market. Here's another controversial topic for some but basic knowledge to those with their boots on the ground. SST Pure, none of the Japanese shaft makers or material suppliers believe in it. It's kinda a Gimmick or Joke over there as the largest imperfection on a shaft is the seam or spine and lining that seam up with the target makes no sense and simply deforms kick reducing distance and accuracy. Thats the exact opposite of what it's advertised to do. Crazy, Quadra, Mitsubishi, Techno, Graphite Design and all of their designers believe in spine up. Not down or front and back.. UP as its the place where the spine will get in the way the least not hindering the kick forward or kick downward. Ever wonder why the spine on really good shafts is aligned with the logo up side? About 6 years ago I was all about SST this and that. Boy was I wrong when they showed us how the spine get's in the way of a consistent kick. We argued and asked every source we could. This is not opinion and they are not wrong. It's fact and think about it, what is the spine? it's the seam and it's the most flawed and inconsistent area on a shaft. It's more ridged which prevents the shaft's natural kick hindering distance and of the 4 basic directions a shaft can kick the least important is UP. front and back kick is very important for distance and downward bend is natural on a descending blow. SST pure will work on really cheap and poorly made shafts that have inconsistencies as it stabilizes forward kick meaning straighter shots yet at the cost of distance. On anything decent it reduces performance and this comes from the chief designers of every brand that produces all the worlds best shafts. Interesting No? I'm sure some of you believe in it through experience just like I did. Now I know my mind had a lot to do with that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sundowner Posted March 1, 2012 Report Share Posted March 1, 2012 The design staff at huge companies like Endo, Bridgestone, Yamaha, Sumitomo, etc.. are not only light years ahead of the old school basic golf club principles but they are big teams not concerned with marketing or gimmick they only care about improving performance through scientific data & testing. Making a driver without taking advantage of lighter and better materials that can be milled thinner or feature more rebound among many other attributes puts a company at a disadvantage in terms of performance and feel. I think Wishon was and is correct if your talking about producing basic golf clubs in comparison to what is standard in the U.S market and even low end in the JDM market. Here's another controversial topic for some but basic knowledge to those with their boots on the ground. SST Pure, none of the Japanese shaft makers or material suppliers believe in it. It's kinda a Gimmick or Joke over there as the largest imperfection on a shaft is the seam or spine and lining that seam up with the target makes no sense and simply deforms kick reducing distance and accuracy. Thats the exact opposite of what it's advertised to do. Crazy, Quadra, Mitsubishi, Techno, Graphite Design and all of their designers believe in spine up. Not down or front and back.. UP as its the place where the spine will get in the way the least not hindering the kick forward or kick downward. Ever wonder why the spine on really good shafts is aligned with the logo up side? About 6 years ago I was all about SST this and that. Boy was I wrong when they showed us how the spine get's in the way of a consistent kick. We argued and asked every source we could. This is not opinion and they are not wrong. It's fact and think about it, what is the spine? it's the seam and it's the most flawed and inconsistent area on a shaft. It's more ridged which prevents the shaft's natural kick hindering distance and of the 4 basic directions a shaft can kick the least important is UP. front and back kick is very important for distance and downward bend is natural on a descending blow. SST pure will work on really cheap and poorly made shafts that have inconsistencies as it stabilizes forward kick meaning straighter shots yet at the cost of distance. On anything decent it reduces performance and this comes from the chief designers of every brand that produces all the worlds best shafts. Interesting No? I'm sure some of you believe in it through experience just like I did. Now I know my mind had a lot to do with that. I wish, I had read your post one year before...-) So I tried spine alignement´s: 12/9/3/6 o´clock .. What a difference in feel/trajectory/launch and distance!! Learning buy doing... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mjr. D Posted March 1, 2012 Author Report Share Posted March 1, 2012 REAAAAAALY!!? Spine up hey - Does the apply to steal shafts as well? And what about tuning the shaft with the head on it - a lot of club builders believe in this, rather than just spine aligning without the head on it. I'm very interested in this. Also, do Japanese top end shafts usually come marked? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+TourSpecGolfer Posted March 1, 2012 Report Share Posted March 1, 2012 Every shaft is different. I really shouldn't have said spine up for all shaft's as many brand's vary in logo placement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ant Posted March 1, 2012 Report Share Posted March 1, 2012 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 ;) ant, seriously ur babling on like a physics professor with all this diatribe. what everyone is missing here, and i cant believe no one has picked up on it yet its so plain and simple..... has NOTHING to do with materials, none what so ever...., bah! nope, the proof is everywhere around us, evey day to get the MOST distance possible u have to get the clubhead speed up and the ONLY way to do that is drivers MUST be painted ferrari red.! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ant Posted March 1, 2012 Report Share Posted March 1, 2012 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. REAAAAAALY!!? Spine up hey - Does the apply to steal shafts as well? And what about tuning the shaft with the head on it - a lot of club builders believe in this, rather than just spine aligning without the head on it. I'm very interested in this. Also, do Japanese top end shafts usually come marked? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.