First build: .366 taper?

[mx-20]

I bought a cheap set of Cleveland UHX irons with stock DG 98. Doing my first reshaft and bought some C Taper Lite taper tip shafts. When I emailed Cleveland, they said they are .366 taper. I am just familiar with .355 taper and .370 parallel. Does that change anything when I go to epoxy?

[Steve-Holloway]

It’s probably an error from Cleveland, someone hit 66 instead of 55. Just clean out hosed good, and check the fit of your C Taper shaft. If the fit is loose worst case might need shim, but I’m 98% sure you just got bad information. Reach out to true temper on this forum and they will tell you what DG98 shaft spec was. I’d be more concerned that the DG98 was a parallel shaft made for Cleveland, then you would know the hostels were .370 and you would have to shim them.

[mx-20]

Thank you. I had just never heard that before.

[mx-20]

 

[Colej]

Pick yourself up a .370 reamer and make them easier to work with. You may not even need a reamer.

if your shafts are .355 and these are indeed .366 you can pick up some SHIM T from golfworks. Either ream them to .370 and use the full shim or modify the shim without reaming them. You can cut most of the tabs off the shim. My first thought would be cutting off every other tab. The dry fitting.

[Stuart_G]

There is no industry standard for what a .366 tp tip even means. A .355 tp tip starts at .355 at the very tip and tapers up to .370 over just the 1st 1/2" of the tip than is a constant .370 after that.

So does the .366 also taper up to .370 or does it taper up to some different (also larger) diameter? I doubt there is any place to get an answer to that.

Maybe it's just a small increase in hosel diameter to accommodate various tolerances in the shaft manufacturing processes. Who knows.

But bottom line I doubt it's much to worry about. Just treat them like any other .355 tp hosel. Prep the shaft, test the fit. If it's good, then no worries. Worse case it might be a tiny bit loose and you may have to find a way to shim based on how loose it turns out to be for each head/shaft. Manufacturing tolerances can always cause variations so that should be the 'normal' approach with all builds.

[Yarra]

If my memory serves me well, PXG's hosel size is rather odd. It is not exactly a .370 but it is slightly bigger than .355

[Nessism]

Lots of guys using .370" shafts in PXG's so the hosel must be designed to accommodate.

Regarding these Cleveland heads, you could always tip some .355 shafts a little to tighten up the fit as needed. 3/8" off the tip maybe. That small bit of trimming won't noticeably affect the shafts playing characteristics but it would affect the fit.

[Adam C]

I really hope this oversizing the hosels doesn't become in industry wide thing thanks to PXG and their .390 hosels. It's just a lazy way to move a little more weight out of the hosel in my book.

[Howard_Jones]

That cant be done for weight reasons...take a old crappy 0.355 head, and drill it up to 0.370 parallel.....its 0.1-0.2 grams only, so i cant imagine they use that hosel size for that reason, a weight port below the shaft tip would do "more", if weighting was the issue.

But, i never hear of 0.366 tapers, and that dimension makes no sense either. My old set of Callaway X-Tours from 2005 has a special shaft and hosel thats 0.363 Taper tips, but with replacement we just use .355...while .366??? makes no sense since we are only .004 from Parallels.

 

[Adam C]

The PXGs are over .390 and are extremely deep also so the weight would be more substantial. Not sure what the reason could be otherwise? Just to make things more difficult for club builders?

[Stuart_G]

Ping has also used a very odd/atypical taper in their iron hosels for a long time.

I doubt they care anything about 3rd party builders or hobbyists, more likely some consequence of the club manufacturing process.

[Howard_Jones]

I never worked with PXG heads, but i know they are using their own shim system, so i see this as a "multi size hosel" who makes it easy for themselves to use tapers or parallels as they like. Yes i know they could have just used 0.370 and a standard brass star shim if the actual set was to be build with tapers, but for some reason they have chosen not to go that way. Improved dampening (lower shaft stress at the hosel top) when using graphite could be another reason for this. Dont forget that the Engineers at PXG comes from PING, they have always done things "their way" like when 0.350 hosels for drivers and woods was the norm there. That extra shaft tip resin was to reduce shaft breakage at the hosel top, so this 0.390 iron hosel could be the same "idea", reducing stress when graphite shafts is used via a shim.