Jump to content

Fade and draw bias by weighting


Deuce78

Recommended Posts

I have always heard that weighting a toe or heel "slows down" the weighted area, creating a closed or open face and a draw or fade. Is this actually true?

 

I think about this and wonder of the weighting, especially in the toe, actually has influence on dynamic lie angle creating more of a town down or toe up effect in the heel and causing a draw or fade that way? Any comments?

PING G410 9 Flat(HZRDUS T1100 75g 6.5/Ventus Black 7x)
PING G410 14.5 (HZRDUS T1100 75g 6.5)
PING G425 LST 14.5 (Speeder Tour Spec 7.2x)

PING G410 17.5 (HZRDUS T1100 85g 6.5)

NIKE Vapor Fly 20* Iron (Modus105x HS)

PING i500 20* iron (DG105x100)

P7TW 3-PW (DGX7)

52 milled grind (DGX7)  / Vokey TVD K 58 (DGX7)
TM Spider Armlock/SIK Armlock

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 16
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I have always heard that weighting a toe or heel "slows down" the weighted area, creating a closed or open face and a draw or fade. Is this actually true?

 

I think about this and wonder of the weighting, especially in the toe, actually has influence on dynamic lie angle creating more of a town down or toe up effect in the heel and causing a draw or fade that way? Any comments?

 

Nope. Doesn't happen that way. Let's take a draw bias as an example to explain. It's the same for fade bias but in the opposite.

 

As you add more weight to the heel side of the clubhead and especially far into the heel side of the head so the weight is farther from the CG of the head, you begin to move the CG toward the heel side of the face. Now with the CG on the heel side of the center of the face, if you hit the ball dead on center, the head will now rotate slightly in a clockwise manner (RH clubhead). This creates a slight horizontal gear effect on the shot that tilts the axis of rotation of the backspin slightly in a draw direction, tilted to the left for a RH shot.

 

Problem is, it takes a lot of weight far from the middle of the head to move the CG enough so the on center hit causes a more significant change in the spin axis from the horizontal gear effect. 20g is really the minimum for the vast majority of golfers to really be able to see the difference in their shots. Also, you have to make impact dead on center for the draw bias to be maximized in its effect. Also, if you have an off center hit toward the toe, now you accentuate the horizontal gear effect even more to create more of a tilt in the spin axis but you lose ball speed from the off center hit in the process. Also if you come into impact with the face open or on an outside in path, now you introduce a cancelling factor to the draw bias. Bring the clubhead into impact more significantly open or with more of a significant Out/In path and you still slice the ball, while you scratch your head wondering why your draw bias driver doesn't draw the ball.

 

Day in and day out if you want the clubhead to help you reduce a slice or enhance a draw, going with a driver head that is more closed for the face angle than what you currently play is BY FAR the most effective, most consistent and most repeatable way to do that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have always heard that weighting a toe or heel "slows down" the weighted area, creating a closed or open face and a draw or fade. Is this actually true?

 

I think about this and wonder of the weighting, especially in the toe, actually has influence on dynamic lie angle creating more of a town down or toe up effect in the heel and causing a draw or fade that way? Any comments?

 

Nope. Doesn't happen that way. Let's take a draw bias as an example to explain. It's the same for fade bias but in the opposite.

 

As you add more weight to the heel side of the clubhead and especially far into the heel side of the head so the weight is farther from the CG of the head, you begin to move the CG toward the heel side of the face. Now with the CG on the heel side of the center of the face, if you hit the ball dead on center, the head will now rotate slightly in a clockwise manner (RH clubhead). This creates a slight horizontal gear effect on the shot that tilts the axis of rotation of the backspin slightly in a draw direction, tilted to the left for a RH shot.

 

Problem is, it takes a lot of weight far from the middle of the head to move the CG enough so the on center hit causes a more significant change in the spin axis from the horizontal gear effect. 20g is really the minimum for the vast majority of golfers to really be able to see the difference in their shots. Also, you have to make impact dead on center for the draw bias to be maximized in its effect. Also, if you have an off center hit toward the toe, now you accentuate the horizontal gear effect even more to create more of a tilt in the spin axis but you lose ball speed from the off center hit in the process. Also if you come into impact with the face open or on an outside in path, now you introduce a cancelling factor to the draw bias. Bring the clubhead into impact more significantly open or with more of a significant Out/In path and you still slice the ball, while you scratch your head wondering why your draw bias driver doesn't draw the ball.

 

Day in and day out if you want the clubhead to help you reduce a slice or enhance a draw, going with a driver head that is more closed for the face angle than what you currently play is BY FAR the most effective, most consistent and most repeatable way to do that.

 

Tom,

Thank you for this explanation, and I agree with you 100% about club face angle vs. weight changes.

 

Let me ask a question, only out of curiosity, about the 20g figure that you cite. Is there a difference between a moveable or slider weight vs. lead tape? Suppose a driver has a 10g weight that can be placed in either the center or toward the heel or toe. If I (re)move the 10g weight from the center and relocate it to the heel, does that effectively add up to a 20g change?

 

Thanks in advance, and if this is a dumb question, forgive me. It's just always seemed to me to be a very different thing to add AND subtract weight vs. just adding weight with lead tape.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have always heard that weighting a toe or heel "slows down" the weighted area, creating a closed or open face and a draw or fade. Is this actually true?

 

I think about this and wonder of the weighting, especially in the toe, actually has influence on dynamic lie angle creating more of a town down or toe up effect in the heel and causing a draw or fade that way? Any comments?

 

Nope. Doesn't happen that way. Let's take a draw bias as an example to explain. It's the same for fade bias but in the opposite.

 

As you add more weight to the heel side of the clubhead and especially far into the heel side of the head so the weight is farther from the CG of the head, you begin to move the CG toward the heel side of the face. Now with the CG on the heel side of the center of the face, if you hit the ball dead on center, the head will now rotate slightly in a clockwise manner (RH clubhead). This creates a slight horizontal gear effect on the shot that tilts the axis of rotation of the backspin slightly in a draw direction, tilted to the left for a RH shot.

 

Problem is, it takes a lot of weight far from the middle of the head to move the CG enough so the on center hit causes a more significant change in the spin axis from the horizontal gear effect. 20g is really the minimum for the vast majority of golfers to really be able to see the difference in their shots. Also, you have to make impact dead on center for the draw bias to be maximized in its effect. Also, if you have an off center hit toward the toe, now you accentuate the horizontal gear effect even more to create more of a tilt in the spin axis but you lose ball speed from the off center hit in the process. Also if you come into impact with the face open or on an outside in path, now you introduce a cancelling factor to the draw bias. Bring the clubhead into impact more significantly open or with more of a significant Out/In path and you still slice the ball, while you scratch your head wondering why your draw bias driver doesn't draw the ball.

 

Day in and day out if you want the clubhead to help you reduce a slice or enhance a draw, going with a driver head that is more closed for the face angle than what you currently play is BY FAR the most effective, most consistent and most repeatable way to do that.

 

Tom,

Thank you for this explanation, and I agree with you 100% about club face angle vs. weight changes.

 

Let me ask a question, only out of curiosity, about the 20g figure that you cite. Is there a difference between a moveable or slider weight vs. lead tape? Suppose a driver has a 10g weight that can be placed in either the center or toward the heel or toe. If I (re)move the 10g weight from the center and relocate it to the heel, does that effectively add up to a 20g change?

 

Thanks in advance, and if this is a dumb question, forgive me. It's just always seemed to me to be a very different thing to add AND subtract weight vs. just adding weight with lead tape.

 

Not a dumb question at all. The only dumb question is one the person was too timid to ask.

 

It does not matter if the weight is a sliding mass, a permanently embedded weight or lead tape. Although getting up to 20g + with lead tape is probably going to be really ugly and globby on the head for how much tape would have to be stuck on the head, not practical at all in other words.

 

And no, 10g is 10g when it comes to moving the CG to allow the bias to be possible. However, 10g is insignificant for all but a much higher speed player who better be really consistent in being able to hit the center of the face with no error to see any type of shape change on the shot.

 

You can rely on this because a lot of people are not aware that I had the chance to co-create the first draw bias heel weighted driver that was sold commercially. I worked with the late and great Elmore Just of Louisville Golf to create a laminated maple driver head in 1988 that had a big brass plug embeded in the heel side of the head. Dynacraft and Louisville Golf sold this head named The Cure Driver.

 

We found in our development work that for the majority of golfers to visibly see a reduction in their fade or an enhancement to a draw, our brass plug had to be 35g. This much more weight was needed because of course back then heads were pretty small so it was hard to get weight far away from the center of the head to be able to move the CG enough to create the bias effect.

 

But Elmore and I did not come up with the bias concept on our own. We just were astute enough to realize this was worth testing when we read the 1968 classic book, The Search for the Perfect Swing by Cochran and Stobbs of the UK. There on page 209 was the graphic of C&S's experiment back in 67 when they theorized by putting weight in the heel you moved the CG toward the weight. They never made a head to test it, just wrote about it along with a bunch of other good stuff for golf club gear head types. That book really was the industry's very first scientific look at both the swing and equipment and is the publication that launched the modern technology era in golf equipment development.

 

Then in 1995 I had the chance to design an aluminum driver head with a 42 gram brass plug in the heel to push the draw bias even more than what Elmore and I had dome some years before that. That driver head was called the AccuCore 50 (ok, I fudged the amount of heel weight in the name!!) and worked better for more golfer types than did The Cure because there was more weight in the heel and with the head from aluminum it could be bigger by far than the wooden head we'd made in 88 so the weight had more effect on moving the CG.

 

It's pretty much impossible to make a modern titanium driver of 450-460cc size with a sliding weight heavier than 20g because of head weight limitations. By the time you make a titanium head that big with all the surface area required to make the intricate channels in which the weight slides, you use up a lot of the head weight. Since the OEMs persist in making their driver length 45-46", even with very light shafts that means the total weight of the head with sliding weight can't be much over 190-something grams.

 

If they would ever get off this 45-46" length thing and make a driver 44", then they could have a heavier sliding weight which could allow a wider range of golfers to see benefit from the draw or fade bias technology. But it's doubtful they will go shorter as their standard because they are so paranoid about golfers believing some other company's driver hits it longer.

 

Anyway. More info than you asked for but head, I'm semi retired so I have the time to share all this stuff banging around in the brain from so many years doing this stuff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have always heard that weighting a toe or heel "slows down" the weighted area, creating a closed or open face and a draw or fade. Is this actually true?

 

I think about this and wonder of the weighting, especially in the toe, actually has influence on dynamic lie angle creating more of a town down or toe up effect in the heel and causing a draw or fade that way? Any comments?

 

Nope. Doesn't happen that way. Let's take a draw bias as an example to explain. It's the same for fade bias but in the opposite.

 

As you add more weight to the heel side of the clubhead and especially far into the heel side of the head so the weight is farther from the CG of the head, you begin to move the CG toward the heel side of the face. Now with the CG on the heel side of the center of the face, if you hit the ball dead on center, the head will now rotate slightly in a clockwise manner (RH clubhead). This creates a slight horizontal gear effect on the shot that tilts the axis of rotation of the backspin slightly in a draw direction, tilted to the left for a RH shot.

 

Problem is, it takes a lot of weight far from the middle of the head to move the CG enough so the on center hit causes a more significant change in the spin axis from the horizontal gear effect. 20g is really the minimum for the vast majority of golfers to really be able to see the difference in their shots. Also, you have to make impact dead on center for the draw bias to be maximized in its effect. Also, if you have an off center hit toward the toe, now you accentuate the horizontal gear effect even more to create more of a tilt in the spin axis but you lose ball speed from the off center hit in the process. Also if you come into impact with the face open or on an outside in path, now you introduce a cancelling factor to the draw bias. Bring the clubhead into impact more significantly open or with more of a significant Out/In path and you still slice the ball, while you scratch your head wondering why your draw bias driver doesn't draw the ball.

 

Day in and day out if you want the clubhead to help you reduce a slice or enhance a draw, going with a driver head that is more closed for the face angle than what you currently play is BY FAR the most effective, most consistent and most repeatable way to do that.

Thanks Tom. So is there zero impact on draw or fade with lie angle? I mean I know lie angle makes a difference in irons is that simply because if the club is too flat then the toe digs first, opening the face? Not sure that is actually correct if a club impacts a ball before turf, but I know it makes a difference just not sure how I guess. But was thinking that this may apply to drivers or metals with movable weights to create dynamic lie angle to draw/fade. I get the gear effect you said, but is that and face angle the only factor to draw/fade?

PING G410 9 Flat(HZRDUS T1100 75g 6.5/Ventus Black 7x)
PING G410 14.5 (HZRDUS T1100 75g 6.5)
PING G425 LST 14.5 (Speeder Tour Spec 7.2x)

PING G410 17.5 (HZRDUS T1100 85g 6.5)

NIKE Vapor Fly 20* Iron (Modus105x HS)

PING i500 20* iron (DG105x100)

P7TW 3-PW (DGX7)

52 milled grind (DGX7)  / Vokey TVD K 58 (DGX7)
TM Spider Armlock/SIK Armlock

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As you add more weight to the heel side of the clubhead and especially far into the heel side of the head so the weight is farther from the CG of the head, you begin to move the CG toward the heel side of the face. Now with the CG on the heel side of the center of the face, if you hit the ball dead on center, the head will now rotate slightly in a clockwise manner (RH clubhead). This creates a slight horizontal gear effect on the shot that tilts the axis of rotation of the backspin slightly in a draw direction, tilted to the left for a RH shot.

If you hit the ball dead on center, are you now losing (at least some) ball speed because the actual CG has moved towards the heel side of the face?

 

I've read some comments claiming that the sweet spot on draw biased drivers (Ping SFT or TaylorMade D-Type) was a bit towards the heel, which seems to match with what you are saying. But it also seems like if you adjusted your setup/swing so that you are making contact a bit towards the heel or on the "new sweet spot," then you would not get any change in how the ball is spinning (i.e. no draw spin or change in flight vs. a standard driver head / ball hit dead on center)?

 

I've been somewhat interested in one of the draw biased drivers, as it is much easier for me to hit the ball straight or with a slight fade vs. a draw, but I'm now wondering if these draw biased clubheads are in some ways making things "worse" (i.e. not just less effective than a closed face angle but actually worse by giving up some distance to create the draw spin).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As you add more weight to the heel side of the clubhead and especially far into the heel side of the head so the weight is farther from the CG of the head, you begin to move the CG toward the heel side of the face. Now with the CG on the heel side of the center of the face, if you hit the ball dead on center, the head will now rotate slightly in a clockwise manner (RH clubhead). This creates a slight horizontal gear effect on the shot that tilts the axis of rotation of the backspin slightly in a draw direction, tilted to the left for a RH shot.

If you hit the ball dead on center, are you now losing (at least some) ball speed because the actual CG has moved towards the heel side of the face?

 

I've read some comments claiming that the sweet spot on draw biased drivers (Ping SFT or TaylorMade D-Type) was a bit towards the heel, which seems to match with what you are saying. But it also seems like if you adjusted your setup/swing so that you are making contact a bit towards the heel or on the "new sweet spot," then you would not get any change in how the ball is spinning (i.e. no draw spin or change in flight vs. a standard driver head / ball hit dead on center)?

 

I've been somewhat interested in one of the draw biased drivers, as it is much easier for me to hit the ball straight or with a slight fade vs. a draw, but I'm now wondering if these draw biased clubheads are in some ways making things "worse" (i.e. not just less effective than a closed face angle but actually worse by giving up some distance to create the draw spin).

 

The reason that draw bias (or fade bias) weighting does not work that well for less skilled players is because the CG movement from the heel weight is very small. Based on the average dimensions of the average 450-460cc volume head, a 20g weight slid to the outer heel edge of the sole will only move the CG 1/8" to 3/16" away from where it was before. That's pretty small. So yes, from a pure gnat's rear measurement, impact on the center of the face after the CG is moved over toward the heel will cause a tiny, tiny, VERY tiny loss in ball speed which is typically not able to be detected by the majority of players. Only when the on center impact is over 1/4" away from the new CG location would the energy loss from the head twisting possibly begin to start to be detected.

 

Keep in mind too that the center of the face is still going to always be the highest COR point on the face. so even if the CG is moved over a little bit such that the on center hit now causes a little bit of head twisting, the fact that you are still hitting the highest COR point on the face is going to prevent any detectable loss in ball speed, smash factor or distance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Thanks Tom. So is there zero impact on draw or fade with lie angle? I mean I know lie angle makes a difference in irons is that simply because if the club is too flat then the toe digs first, opening the face? Not sure that is actually correct if a club impacts a ball before turf, but I know it makes a difference just not sure how I guess. But was thinking that this may apply to drivers or metals with movable weights to create dynamic lie angle to draw/fade. I get the gear effect you said, but is that and face angle the only factor to draw/fade?

 

An ill fit lie does NOT cause misdirection on the shot because of the heel or toe digging into the ground to cause the face to turn open or closed. IT DOES NOT HAPPEN THAT WAY because the ball is hit by the face BEFORE the head digs into the ground. Only if you hit the ball fat would the toe or heel of the sole digging into the ground cause face rotation that would cause the shot to fly more off line. Here is a proper explanation for how an ill fit lie hits the ball off line -

 

As to the factors of draw and fade, I assume you are asking for factors from the CLUBHEAD that affect draw or fade and not anything from the swing itself that causes the draw or fade. 1) an ill fit lie can cause an off line curving shot, 2) a different face angle can cause a draw or fade, hook or slice, 3) impact on the toe side of the face usually causes some draw, impact on the heel side can cause some fade. However if the golfer hits the ball on the toe but has a distinct outside in path or leaves the face open at impact from a swing error, that very easily cancels the draw effect from the toe to still cause a slice or fade. 4) Substantial weight in the heel or toe sides of the head brings about a draw or fade bias in the manner I explained in a previous post in this thread.

 

And that's about it for the clubhead's contribution to draw or fade.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really interesting stuff Tom! Thanks for all of the information in the forums of late. I really enjoy learning about club design and your explanations are always a good read. I really appreciate it!

Cleveland Launcher HB 10.5* - Stock Miyazaki C. Kua 50 Stiff
Callaway Diablo Octane Tour 13* - Aldila NV 75 Stiff
or
Callaway Diablo Edge Tour 15* - Accra Dymatch M5 75
Mizuno F-50 18* - Stock Stiff
or
Callaway Diablo Edge Tour Hybrid 21* - Aldila NV 85 Stiff
Callaway RAZR Tour Hybrid 24* - Stock XStiff
5 - PW Cleveland CG7 Tour Black Pearl - DGSL S300
Cleveland 588 RTX Rotex 2.0 50* DG Wedge
Cleveland 588 RTX Rotex 2.0 54* DG Wedge
Callaway X-Series JAWS Slate CC 58* Stock Wedge
Odyssey White Ice #7 - Golf Pride Oversize

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As you add more weight to the heel side of the clubhead and especially far into the heel side of the head so the weight is farther from the CG of the head, you begin to move the CG toward the heel side of the face. Now with the CG on the heel side of the center of the face, if you hit the ball dead on center, the head will now rotate slightly in a clockwise manner (RH clubhead). This creates a slight horizontal gear effect on the shot that tilts the axis of rotation of the backspin slightly in a draw direction, tilted to the left for a RH shot.

If you hit the ball dead on center, are you now losing (at least some) ball speed because the actual CG has moved towards the heel side of the face?

 

I've read some comments claiming that the sweet spot on draw biased drivers (Ping SFT or TaylorMade D-Type) was a bit towards the heel, which seems to match with what you are saying. But it also seems like if you adjusted your setup/swing so that you are making contact a bit towards the heel or on the "new sweet spot," then you would not get any change in how the ball is spinning (i.e. no draw spin or change in flight vs. a standard driver head / ball hit dead on center)?

 

I've been somewhat interested in one of the draw biased drivers, as it is much easier for me to hit the ball straight or with a slight fade vs. a draw, but I'm now wondering if these draw biased clubheads are in some ways making things "worse" (i.e. not just less effective than a closed face angle but actually worse by giving up some distance to create the draw spin).

 

The reason that draw bias (or fade bias) weighting does not work that well for less skilled players is because the CG movement from the heel weight is very small. Based on the average dimensions of the average 450-460cc volume head, a 20g weight slid to the outer heel edge of the sole will only move the CG 1/8" to 3/16" away from where it was before. That's pretty small. So yes, from a pure gnat's rear measurement, impact on the center of the face after the CG is moved over toward the heel will cause a tiny, tiny, VERY tiny loss in ball speed which is typically not able to be detected by the majority of players. Only when the on center impact is over 1/4" away from the new CG location would the energy loss from the head twisting possibly begin to start to be detected.

 

Keep in mind too that the center of the face is still going to always be the highest COR point on the face. so even if the CG is moved over a little bit such that the on center hit now causes a little bit of head twisting, the fact that you are still hitting the highest COR point on the face is going to prevent any detectable loss in ball speed, smash factor or distance.

Thank you for the detailed reply and explanation. I will try closing the face angle (and not squaring the face to change the loft) as you have suggested.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have always heard that weighting a toe or heel "slows down" the weighted area, creating a closed or open face and a draw or fade. Is this actually true?

 

I think about this and wonder of the weighting, especially in the toe, actually has influence on dynamic lie angle creating more of a town down or toe up effect in the heel and causing a draw or fade that way? Any comments?

 

Nope. Doesn't happen that way. Let's take a draw bias as an example to explain. It's the same for fade bias but in the opposite.

 

As you add more weight to the heel side of the clubhead and especially far into the heel side of the head so the weight is farther from the CG of the head, you begin to move the CG toward the heel side of the face. Now with the CG on the heel side of the center of the face, if you hit the ball dead on center, the head will now rotate slightly in a clockwise manner (RH clubhead). This creates a slight horizontal gear effect on the shot that tilts the axis of rotation of the backspin slightly in a draw direction, tilted to the left for a RH shot.

 

Problem is, it takes a lot of weight far from the middle of the head to move the CG enough so the on center hit causes a more significant change in the spin axis from the horizontal gear effect. 20g is really the minimum for the vast majority of golfers to really be able to see the difference in their shots. Also, you have to make impact dead on center for the draw bias to be maximized in its effect. Also, if you have an off center hit toward the toe, now you accentuate the horizontal gear effect even more to create more of a tilt in the spin axis but you lose ball speed from the off center hit in the process. Also if you come into impact with the face open or on an outside in path, now you introduce a cancelling factor to the draw bias. Bring the clubhead into impact more significantly open or with more of a significant Out/In path and you still slice the ball, while you scratch your head wondering why your draw bias driver doesn't draw the ball.

 

Day in and day out if you want the clubhead to help you reduce a slice or enhance a draw, going with a driver head that is more closed for the face angle than what you currently play is BY FAR the most effective, most consistent and most repeatable way to do that.

 

Tom,

Thank you for this explanation, and I agree with you 100% about club face angle vs. weight changes.

 

Let me ask a question, only out of curiosity, about the 20g figure that you cite. Is there a difference between a moveable or slider weight vs. lead tape? Suppose a driver has a 10g weight that can be placed in either the center or toward the heel or toe. If I (re)move the 10g weight from the center and relocate it to the heel, does that effectively add up to a 20g change?

 

Thanks in advance, and if this is a dumb question, forgive me. It's just always seemed to me to be a very different thing to add AND subtract weight vs. just adding weight with lead tape.

 

Not a dumb question at all. The only dumb question is one the person was too timid to ask.

 

It does not matter if the weight is a sliding mass, a permanently embedded weight or lead tape. Although getting up to 20g + with lead tape is probably going to be really ugly and globby on the head for how much tape would have to be stuck on the head, not practical at all in other words.

 

And no, 10g is 10g when it comes to moving the CG to allow the bias to be possible. However, 10g is insignificant for all but a much higher speed player who better be really consistent in being able to hit the center of the face with no error to see any type of shape change on the shot.

 

You can rely on this because a lot of people are not aware that I had the chance to co-create the first draw bias heel weighted driver that was sold commercially. I worked with the late and great Elmore Just of Louisville Golf to create a laminated maple driver head in 1988 that had a big brass plug embeded in the heel side of the head. Dynacraft and Louisville Golf sold this head named The Cure Driver.

 

We found in our development work that for the majority of golfers to visibly see a reduction in their fade or an enhancement to a draw, our brass plug had to be 35g. This much more weight was needed because of course back then heads were pretty small so it was hard to get weight far away from the center of the head to be able to move the CG enough to create the bias effect.

 

But Elmore and I did not come up with the bias concept on our own. We just were astute enough to realize this was worth testing when we read the 1968 classic book, The Search for the Perfect Swing by Cochran and Stobbs of the UK. There on page 209 was the graphic of C&S's experiment back in 67 when they theorized by putting weight in the heel you moved the CG toward the weight. They never made a head to test it, just wrote about it along with a bunch of other good stuff for golf club gear head types. That book really was the industry's very first scientific look at both the swing and equipment and is the publication that launched the modern technology era in golf equipment development.

 

Then in 1995 I had the chance to design an aluminum driver head with a 42 gram brass plug in the heel to push the draw bias even more than what Elmore and I had dome some years before that. That driver head was called the AccuCore 50 (ok, I fudged the amount of heel weight in the name!!) and worked better for more golfer types than did The Cure because there was more weight in the heel and with the head from aluminum it could be bigger by far than the wooden head we'd made in 88 so the weight had more effect on moving the CG.

 

It's pretty much impossible to make a modern titanium driver of 450-460cc size with a sliding weight heavier than 20g because of head weight limitations. By the time you make a titanium head that big with all the surface area required to make the intricate channels in which the weight slides, you use up a lot of the head weight. Since the OEMs persist in making their driver length 45-46", even with very light shafts that means the total weight of the head with sliding weight can't be much over 190-something grams.

 

If they would ever get off this 45-46" length thing and make a driver 44", then they could have a heavier sliding weight which could allow a wider range of golfers to see benefit from the draw or fade bias technology. But it's doubtful they will go shorter as their standard because they are so paranoid about golfers believing some other company's driver hits it longer.

 

Anyway. More info than you asked for but head, I'm semi retired so I have the time to share all this stuff banging around in the brain from so many years doing this stuff.

 

Thank you, Tom.

 

I don't have a better compliment than to simply say that I feel smarter after I read your stuff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tom,

 

Cool to see you on the forums again. Does the effect (or lack thereof due to not enough mass) get enhanced or diminished as that mass moves away from the face? So for example, the old Taylormade T track where the fade/draw bias weight was right near the face, compared to the Y track they use now (or Callaway's) where the fade/draw bias is all the way in the back?

 

I've seen some evidence of the Y track working during fittings to correct/enhance shot shapes in very small amounts. I'm talking.... you turned the 10 yard over draw into a 4 or 5 yard over draw. I know a weight track or anything won't fix a face massively open to path. I'm talking for good golfers striking the ball in the center... but maybe the face gets just a few degrees too closed to their path. That way, they don't have to look down and see a face that looks different to them if the weight can help make a small correction.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It’s easy enough to add additional weights to make heavier or remove weights to make lighter on these heads with adjustable channels. Hell of lot better then hot melting a head or covering one in lead tape. Plus I can dictate where the weight goes.

 

All driver heads still weigh around 200g with the weights. Remove the weights and they are around 175-180g. Pretty sure if the OEM’s wanted to make them even lighter they could.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Thanks Tom. So is there zero impact on draw or fade with lie angle? I mean I know lie angle makes a difference in irons is that simply because if the club is too flat then the toe digs first, opening the face? Not sure that is actually correct if a club impacts a ball before turf, but I know it makes a difference just not sure how I guess. But was thinking that this may apply to drivers or metals with movable weights to create dynamic lie angle to draw/fade. I get the gear effect you said, but is that and face angle the only factor to draw/fade?

 

An ill fit lie does NOT cause misdirection on the shot because of the heel or toe digging into the ground to cause the face to turn open or closed. IT DOES NOT HAPPEN THAT WAY because the ball is hit by the face BEFORE the head digs into the ground. Only if you hit the ball fat would the toe or heel of the sole digging into the ground cause face rotation that would cause the shot to fly more off line. Here is a proper explanation for how an ill fit lie hits the ball off line -

 

As to the factors of draw and fade, I assume you are asking for factors from the CLUBHEAD that affect draw or fade and not anything from the swing itself that causes the draw or fade. 1) an ill fit lie can cause an off line curving shot, 2) a different face angle can cause a draw or fade, hook or slice, 3) impact on the toe side of the face usually causes some draw, impact on the heel side can cause some fade. However if the golfer hits the ball on the toe but has a distinct outside in path or leaves the face open at impact from a swing error, that very easily cancels the draw effect from the toe to still cause a slice or fade. 4) Substantial weight in the heel or toe sides of the head brings about a draw or fade bias in the manner I explained in a previous post in this thread.

 

And that's about it for the clubhead's contribution to draw or fade.

 

I haven’t seen Maltbys video on lie angle for years. Thanks for posting it. I bookmarked it for future use.

 

It comes up so often on this site that it will be easier to just post the video than try to explain it over and over.

 

I love that gizmo he made with the wedge club head and rod to illustrate what happens when the lie is wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It’s easy enough to add additional weights to make heavier or remove weights to make lighter on these heads with adjustable channels. Hell of lot better then hot melting a head or covering one in lead tape. Plus I can dictate where the weight goes.

 

All driver heads still weigh around 200g with the weights. Remove the weights and they are around 175-180g. Pretty sure if the OEM’s wanted to make them even lighter they could.

 

And, in the red corner, weighing in @ 211g - The Srixon Z355! :king:

 

This thread really is pretty cool techy stuff for me.....of all the adjustable drivers I've used over the past 11 years whence I began golfing more than several times/year, I enjoy them in neutral settings and still making my draw or fade with grip to club face adjustments, and then ball placement forward/back.

BAG ONE:                                                                                                   BAG TWO:
D - Callaway Rogue ST Max D                                               - Cobra F9 Tour Length  

5 -  Ping G425 Max 5(16.5)                                                    3 -  TEE C721 Pro 3 HL(16.5)

H - Callaway Mav P (18) Titleist TS2 (21)                              H - TM SF 2.0 (18) & (21)

I -  Titleist T300 4                                                                   I -  Taylormade SIM Max 4      
I -  Titleist T100 5-P/MR KK TiNi 105                                     I -  Taylormade P760 5-P/Recoils 110 F4

W - Vokey SM8 52, Vokey SM6 58                                        W - Vokey SM8 52, Vokey SM6 58 
P - Bellum Winmore Midi  787                                                - Guerin TS Black 370

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It’s easy enough to add additional weights to make heavier or remove weights to make lighter on these heads with adjustable channels. Hell of lot better then hot melting a head or covering one in lead tape. Plus I can dictate where the weight goes.

 

All driver heads still weigh around 200g with the weights. Remove the weights and they are around 175-180g. Pretty sure if the OEM’s wanted to make them even lighter they could.

 

And, in the red corner, weighing in @ 211g - The Srixon Z355! :king:

 

This thread really is pretty cool techy stuff for me.....of all the adjustable drivers I've used over the past 11 years whence I began golfing more than several times/year, I enjoy them in neutral settings and still making my draw or fade with grip to club face adjustments, and then ball placement forward/back.

 

There are always a few models that have higher static weight, apparently the Z355 is one of them. Since there are no weight channels and moveable weights on the bottom it doesn't really pertain to this discussion.

 

 

Would be interesting to know what the actual CoG location movement is with heads utilizing weight channels. Auditor makes a CoG machine for this exact purpose that could provide real data.

 

20g moving around on a large footprint, hollow 460cc head has a much larger influence then 35g grams on a very small footprint, solid 140cc head. On a 460cc head the 20g is several inches from the CoG while on a 140cc head the 35g weight would barely be moving about the CoG. These clubs are so different to just not be comparable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Our picks

    • 2024 Valspar Championship WITB Photos (Thanks to bvmagic)- Discussion & Links to Photos
      This weeks WITB Pics are from member bvmagic (Brian). Brian's first event for WRX was in 2008 at Bayhill while in college. Thanks so much bv.
       
      Please put your comments or question on this thread. Links to all the threads are below...
       
       
       
       
        • Like
      • 31 replies
    • 2024 Arnold Palmer Invitational - Discussion and Links to Photos
      Please put any questions or comments here
       
       
       
      General Albums
       
      2024 Arnold Palmer Invitational - Monday #1
      2024 Arnold Palmer Invitational - Monday #2
      2024 Arnold Palmer Invitational - Monday #3
       
       
       
       
      WITB Albums
       
      Matt (LFG) Every - WITB - 2024 Arnold Palmer Invitational
      Sahith Theegala - WITB - 2024 Arnold Palmer Invitational
       
       
       
       
       
      Pullout Albums
       
      New Cameron putters (and new "LD" grip) - 2024 Arnold Palmer Invitational
      New Bettinardi MB & CB irons - 2024 Arnold Palmer Invitational
      Custom Bettinardi API putter cover - 2024 Arnold Palmer Invitational
      Custom Swag API covers - 2024 Arnold Palmer Invitational
      New Golf Pride Reverse Taper grips - 2024 Arnold Palmer Invitational
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
        • Like
      • 15 replies
    • 2024 Cognizant Classic - Discussion and Links to Photos
      Please put any questions or comments here
       
       
       
       
      General Albums
       
      2024 Cognizant Classic - Monday #1
      2024 Cognizant Classic - Monday #2
      2024 Cognizant Classic - Monday #3
      2024 Cognizant Classic - Monday #4
       
       
       
      WITB Albums
       
      Brandt Snedeker - WITB - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Max Greyserman - WITB - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Eric Cole - WITB - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Carl Yuan - WITb - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Russell Henley - WITB - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Justin Sun - WITB - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Alex Noren - WITB - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Shane Lowry - WITB - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Taylor Montgomery - WITB - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Jake Knapp (KnappTime_ltd) - WITB - - 2024 Cognizant Classic
       
       
       
      Pullout Albums
       
      New Super Stoke Pistol Lock 1.0 & 2.0 grips - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      LA Golf new insert putter - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      New Garsen Quad Tour 15 grip - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      New Swag covers - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Jacob Bridgeman's custom Cameron putter - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Bud Cauley's custom Cameron putters - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Ryo Hisatsune's custom Cameron putter - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Chris Kirk - new black Callaway Apex CB irons and a few Odyssey putters - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Alejandro Tosti's custom Cameron putter - 2024 Cognizant Classic
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
        • Like
      • 2 replies
    • 2024 Genesis Invitational - Discussion and Links to Photos
      Please put any questions or comments here
       
       
       
      General Albums
       
      2024 Genesis Invitational - Monday #1
      2024 Genesis Invitational - Monday #2
      2024 Genesis Invitational - Tuesday #1
      2024 Genesis Invitational - Tuesday #2
      2024 Genesis Invitational - Tuesday #3
      2024 Genesis Invitational - Tuesday #4
       
       
       
       
      WITB Albums
       
      Rory McIlroy - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Sepp Straka - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Patrick Rodgers - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Brendon Todd - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Denny McCarthy - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Corey Conners - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Chase Johnson - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Tiger Woods - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Tommy Fleetwood - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Matt Fitzpatrick - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Si Woo Kim - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Viktor Hovland - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Wyndham Clark - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Cam Davis - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Nick Taylor - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Ben Baller WITB update (New putter, driver, hybrid and shafts) – 2024 Genesis Invitational
       
       
       
       
       
      Pullout Albums
       
      New Vortex Golf rangefinder - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      New Fujikura Ventus shaft - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Tiger Woods & TaylorMade "Sun Day Red" apparel launch event, product photos – 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Tiger Woods Sun Day Red golf shoes - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Aretera shafts - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      New Toulon putters - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Tiger Woods' new white "Sun Day Red" golf shoe prototypes – 2024 Genesis Invitational
       
       
       
       
       
      • 22 replies
    • 2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open - Discussion and Links to Photos
      Please put and questions or comments here
       
       
       
       
      General Albums
       
      2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open - Monday #1
      2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open - Monday #2
       
       
       
       
      WITB Albums
       
      Ben Taylor - WITB - 2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open
      Garrick Higgo - WITB - 2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open
      Billy Horschel - WITB - 2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open
      Justin Lower - WITB - 2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open
      Lanto Griffin - WITB - 2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open
      Bud Cauley - WITB - 2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open
      Corbin Burnes (2021 NL Cy Young) - WITB - 2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open
      Greyson Sigg - WITB - 2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open
      Charley Hoffman - WITB - 2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open
      Nico Echavarria - WITB - 2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open
      Victor Perez - WITB - 2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open
      Sami Valimaki - WITB - 2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open
      Ryo Hisatsune - WITB - 2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open
       
       
       
       
       
       
      Pullout Albums
       
      Jake Knapp's custom Cameron putters - 2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open
      New Cameron putters - 2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open
      Tyler Duncan's custom Cameron putter - 2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open
      Greyson Sigg's custom Cameron putters - 2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open
      Sunjae Im's custom Cameron putter - 2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open
      Ping's Waste Management putter covers - 2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open
      Vincent Whaley's custom Cameron - 2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open
      Odyssey Waste Management putter covers - 2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open
      Super Stroke custom grips - 2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open
      Cameron putters - 2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open
      Zac Blair's custom Cameron putter - 2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open
      Bettinardi Waste Management putter covers - 2024 Waste Management Phoenix Open
       
       
       
       
       
       

       
      • 12 replies

×
×
  • Create New...