Wishon: The practical facts about spin and shaft design

[wonderbred2nded]

[quote name='TMBob' timestamp='1358043789' post='6217869']
Great info, but I have to ask..

On the SS of 100 mph, why is the 0 AOA and the +5 AOA come out to the same yardage..272, when all of the SS show marked improvement in distance with the +5 AOA?

It shows a higher launch, less spin then the 0 AOA, but same distance....misprint?
[/quote]

You're looking at the Carry Optimizer, notice Carry distance goes up even though total distance is the same. Too many people don't put enough merit into Carry distance during driver fittings. Keep in mind the bounce and roll calculated on those charts is assuming a PGA Tour quality fairway/turf conditions, which most of us don't typically play.

PETER

[TMBob]

[quote name='wonderbred2nded' timestamp='1358188688' post='6226373']
[quote name='TMBob' timestamp='1358043789' post='6217869']
Great info, but I have to ask..

On the SS of 100 mph, why is the 0 AOA and the +5 AOA come out to the same yardage..272, when all of the SS show marked improvement in distance with the +5 AOA?

It shows a higher launch, less spin then the 0 AOA, but same distance....misprint?
[/quote]

You're looking at the Carry Optimizer, notice Carry distance goes up even though total distance is the same. Too many people don't put enough merit into Carry distance during driver fittings. Keep in mind the bounce and roll calculated on those charts is assuming a PGA Tour quality fairway/turf conditions, which most of us don't typically play.

PETER
[/quote]

Thanks, I noticed that...did you notice Tom's response? He agrees, must be a typo

[CheckJV]

Great write up and should be a sticky thread if we had such a thing in GolfWRX.

[rangecart]

Tom

I've recently discovered the counterbalanced option in some shafts and it has made a marked difference in my ball flight. I've had very good success with the Aldila nv-75X untipped this year and several other shafts that have similar bend profiles to the NV-75X. I knew I liked the NV-75X and as there is a post here on golfwrx where you grouped the nv75x with many other shafts that have similar bend profiles such as the diaman ahina-70X, I also tried those and had good results. I have a swingspeed of 103-105 which may be a little low for x but have a very late release and don't usually get enough control with stiff flexes. A couple months ago I tried a ZCOM Pro95 in my 5 wood and the feel was unlike anything I had tried prior and the performance as well. I then found out the Pro95 was counterbalanced and thought maybe that is why I liked the feel and performance. I then added the Pro95 to my 3 wood with excellent results as well and then looked into counterbalanced technology for my driver. I like heavier shafts anyway and found a new old stock UST HTD CB100X on ebay and got it cheap. I put it into one of my favorite standard heads, cleveland dst tour 10.5 or 9.5, and the results have been terrific. Obviously counterbalanced suits me well. Do counterbalanced clubs have any specific bend profiles vs non-counterbalanced? I've gone up 25 grams in weight from the NV-75x to the CB100x and am getting better ball flight and distance. I promise to buy your software this year as well. Not a clubfitter but really love the analytical part of this swing science and the emperical data you bring to it. Thanks a bunch.

[TomWishon]

[quote name='rangecart' timestamp='1358271591' post='6232963']
I have a swingspeed of 103-105 which may be a little low for x but have a very late release and don't usually get enough control with stiff flexes.

Do counterbalanced clubs have any specific bend profiles vs non-counterbalanced? I've gone up 25 grams in weight from the NV-75x to the CB100x and am getting better ball flight and distance.

[/quote]

First off, remember since there are no standards for how stiff any of the letter flex codes are, you can easily find shafts labeled as X which are more flexible than some shafts labeled as S - and vice versa of course. So you cannot just assume that your 103-105 swing speed is not strong enough to swing an X. This is a huge reason we created this Bend Profile software stiffness comparison methodology - so it would become possible to actually see how stiff any one shaft is to any other.

I do not see your success coming from more weight in the butt end of the shaft as much as it is coming from more weight overall in the shaft. None of the industry's butt heavy shafts have so much weight in the butt end that it could act the same way as if you were to install even a 10 gram counterweight in the butt end of the shaft. However, when you move up substantially in the weight of the shaft as you say you have by 25g, this increases the total weight of the whole club. And that is likely what is helping you by allowing the heavier total weight of the club to better match to your natural sense of swing timing, tempo, and overall weight feel preference for the club.


TOM

[esketores]

Thank you Mr. Wishon.
Education is a good thing.

Addendum:
About butt weight... Back in the early 90's when Adam's Golf was all about fitting and custom making irons... Not only were the heads matching sets, and the shafts all matched up on a frequency analyzer, a counter weight was added in the butt end of the shaft to so every club had a similar balance point.

[Howard_Jones]

[quote name='tmfool ' timestamp='1358020071' post='6216059']
Great stuff here...

seems like the "high launch, low spin" phrase has turned into a fitting cliche - sound good without a lot of comprehension.

biggest thing i took out of OP is - Angle of descent needs to be less than 40*

how many "clubfitters" -- or launch monitors -- measure that?

- or bother to explain that to consumer?
[/quote]

Im not sure if Tom did not get the question or what, so il chime in on that.

Descent angle or fall down angle of the ball is measured on both Trackman and Flightscope, and the others are not correct anyway so i dont care about them.

A educated club fitter would now the importance of descent angle, because it tells if he took out his potential for carry or not.
- If you with your driver get a descent angle who is steeper than 40*, you loose a lot of roll out, so depending on playing conditions, descent angle is important.

Descent angle also indicates if spin is to high or to low. A descent above 40* tells spin is to high, and to change descent angle we can use the rule of thumb that 250 rpm spin is 1*. If your descent with your driver is 44* you must cut of 1000 Rpm of spin to get it down to 40*.

For a low club speed player, a descent of 40% is good carry, but no roll out, so if we want him to get further out there, we must rely on roll out to make it, and then we must reduce descent angle to get it.

I live and work in the place on earth where the wind was born (or is it just a feeling:-), so windy playing conditions is the normal condition. High spin and wind is not good, so for a typical day here in DK, i would not suggest a club who go so high with so much spin that descent is up against 40%. Players with club speed in the area of 100-110 is better of with a descent angle at 36 to 37, who sometimes cost a few yards carry, but takes it all back by adding a lot of roll out and then some.

Ive spent all my data volume for upload so i have to link outside WRX to show photos, but take a look at the sheet ive made using PGA and LPGA average numbers, and pay attention to how descent angle changes between clubs and between PGA and LPGA who is in different worlds when it comes to club speed.

A good indicator of how much descent means to roll out, you will see that LPGA players has a average of 1 yard MORE roll out than PGA who on average takes it all out as maximized carry and a descent angle at 39*.
- If you look on irons, the typical #6 iron used for fitting say 4* difference in descent between PGA and LPGA

[url="http://peecee.dk/upload/view/334454/full"]http://peecee.dk/upl...iew/334454/full[/url]

The yellow part shows roll out in both yards, and as a % of total (The header Roll is metric - Roll Y is roll out in Yards)

EDIT:
To make a better judgement of whats good or bad compared to PGA numbers, we might make a chart who looks like this.

Club speed / descent with driver

115 = 40
110 = 39 (PGA is 112/39)
105 = 38
100 = 37
.95 = 36 (LPGA is 96/36)
.90 = 35

[philsRHman]

Tom,
Thanks so much for the time and energy you put into these posts. They're extremely informative.

I'm feeling more confused than ever though. I am quick transition swinger with a SS around 108 (although last summer when I was playing a lot and lost 25 pounds my SS was up to 115 during a TM session). I have a negative AoA that has ranged from 2-5 depending on when I've been on the monitor. Like so many on the site, I've been absolutely obsessed with spin and keep trying to get stiffer and heavier. I put a Whiteboard 73x into a Razr Fit 8.5* last season.

But I remember reading something by you, and something reiterated when I met a clubfitter two years ago, who suggested that with my numbers, I would likely be better off with a 10.5 or even 11.5 driver if I want to optimize my distance. It seems counterintuitive but I remember seeing a chart at one point, but can't find it now. I was playing with the Flightscope Optimizer [url="http://www.flightscope.com/index.php/Technology-Explained/trajectoryoptimizer.html"]http://www.flightsco...yoptimizer.html[/url] and it seems like with my ballspeed, the higher I launch, the better. But I guess it's a case where 2500 rpm at 10* is similar to 3000 rpm at 12* or something like that, since you can't launch higher without significantly increasing spin?

But then I see on the chart here, that 7.7* launch with 3500 is going to be best. I'm quite confused.

I don't know if it will post, but here's a TM report I have from about a year ago. The spin is out of control!!! I didn't realize how bad it was. The only driver that my HotStix fitter could get any decent results on was a Cobra S3, and he said he thought it was because it was an inch longer than the others and that it might be helping smooth everything out. He said I was one of the most challenging fittings he'd ever done. But as I look at the numbers here, but AoA wasn't that bad, so I'm extra confused. I play off 3.0 handicap, so I feel like I've got a pretty good swing, not something crazy that's baffling the Trackman numbers.

Any thoughts? I just got a Nike Covert (KK 60x) with the thought I could go all over the place with the loft and experiment but I don't think I'll be on TM for a while, so I might be stuck doing the experiment on the course or on a Golf Galaxy indoor LM (which sounds like I shouldn't waste my time). Any thoughts to get my mind from overanalyzing?

[attachment=1542447:Shot report.pdf]

[TomWishon]

[quote name='philsRHman' timestamp='1361145890' post='6447857']

Any thoughts? Any thoughts to get my mind from overanalyzing?

[/quote]

Sure thing. . . According to TrackMan's own research, done over YEARS of analyzing tons of golfers' launch characteristics, for a golfer with a 110mph driver speed and a -2 to -3 angle of attack, the optimum launch angle for maximizing a combination of carry WITH roll for total distance would be in the area of 8*, with carry being in the area of 253 yds. Then depending on the firmness of the fairways, the total distance could be +15 to +35 from that.

From looking at your TM data, you do have some inconsistency in your club delivery but we all do, but from looking at your outputs, you do have swings which get to the point that you are not that far off from what TM's research says is about right for your driver shots - EVEN WITH THESE HIGHER SPIN NUMBERS.

One of the main purposes I wrote this article was to try to get golfers to stop looking so critically at their spin numbers from a launch monitor and to focus on whether they are close to their optimum launch angle, ball speed and distance for their specific clubhead speed and angle of attack. And give you do have a somewhat downward A of A, your numbers for LA, BS and distance are not that far off from what TM says is optimum for you.

No question that a downward A of A prevents a golfer from getting the very most possible from hi swing speed. To overcome that is always going to be a product of working on the swing technique to level that A of A and reduce how much downward it is.

So my advice would be to work on your swing to try to level out that A of A as much as you can and forget about the spin numbers.

TOM

[Fourmyle of Ceres]

So how about an off-the-cuff sensitivity analysis of that Angle-of-Attack issue. If he could get from 2-3 degrees downward to, let's say, a dead level AoA without losing any clubhead speed is that like 5-10 yards of carry for a payoff? Alternatively, what if leveling out his swing cost him a couple mph of clubhead speed, would it still be worth it on balance?

[GooseHook]

I'm so glad I read this post when I did, it kind of put things at ease in my mind. Based on the chart, my 9.5-10* launch angle isn't such a bad thing, and the spin is within reason. It's funny how you can be on the course, see that the ball flight is exactly the way you want it, then hit on a LM and start to question what's going on.

Fourmyle, I think your guess is about right. It depends on the ball speed as well. If a lower speed player increases their AoA and launch, spin might drop to a point where the gains aren't as substantial.

Just another thing worth noting, Trackman's compilation of data has the average PGA TOUR player launching at 11.2 with a [i]negative angle of attack.[/i] It's not the end of the world if your a little down, but more negative might warrant another look.

[sharedmedia=core:attachments:1511675]

[philsRHman]

[quote name='TomWishon' timestamp='1361199725' post='6451145']
Sure thing. . . According to TrackMan's own research, done over YEARS of analyzing tons of golfers' launch characteristics, for a golfer with a 110mph driver speed and a -2 to -3 angle of attack, the optimum launch angle for maximizing a combination of carry WITH roll for total distance would be in the area of 8*, with carry being in the area of 253 yds. Then depending on the firmness of the fairways, the total distance could be +15 to +35 from that.

From looking at your TM data, you do have some inconsistency in your club delivery but we all do, but from looking at your outputs, you do have swings which get to the point that you are not that far off from what TM's research says is about right for your driver shots - EVEN WITH THESE HIGHER SPIN NUMBERS.

[/quote]

Thanks for this. It breeds so much confidence to hear it directly from someone of your caliber. Thinking back, I had brought 3-4 drivers to that fitting and not one of them would have really been considered a low-spin, and 2-3 of them weren't even X shafts. Now I'm even more curious to get onto Trackman and see if I've made progress with the AoA.

It's also reassuring to hear that my MAX drive is going to be around 250 carry (and playing in the northeast there's not much roll 10 months of the year). Watching the guys on tour or even playing with the top ams in the area, I feel like I should be belting it out there 300 all the time, but it's not possible. Maybe on the day where my swing is really grooved and 115 vs 110, and the fairways are running hard and fast. But in reality, 260-270 is where I'll be happy, which isn't too shabby!

I also think it's important to realize that in my mid-30s, I've learned how important it is to control the ball. Gone are my days as a 22 year old lashing away and hitting a 7 iron 200 yards, even though it was through a super strong grip and a 20 yard draw and in reality I was turning my 7 iron into a 4 iron. These days, I am OK hitting an 8 iron from 145, knowing that from time to time I can crank it up to 160 if I need to, or gear it down to 130 if it's cold and I'm not playing much. The ego of distance is gone, and my handicap has fallen from a steady 8-10 over the past decade down to 2.9 to close 2012. I just need to embrace that off the tee! haha

[dtrain5555]

I have always had trouble with spin with my driver. Another thing is that even on hard courses I can spin the ball back in the fairway without my ball ballooning -- I have always found that odd. So I am just curious if my shaft is good for me. I have a Diamana Ali' Isle 73gram stiff. I am a late releaser, carry the ball 240, have a 170 ball speed, about a ten launch, and a very shallow angle of attack. Thanks for any help anyone can give.

[justodd]

Thanks for such a wealth of information. We are lucky to have your contributions to the forum.

[TomWishon]

[quote name='dtrain5555' timestamp='1363376537' post='6618511']
I have always had trouble with spin with my driver. Another thing is that even on hard courses I can spin the ball back in the fairway without my ball ballooning -- I have always found that odd. So I am just curious if my shaft is good for me. I have a Diamana Ali' Isle 73gram stiff. I am a late releaser, carry the ball 240, have a 170 ball speed, about a ten launch, and a very shallow angle of attack. Thanks for any help anyone can give.
[/quote]

Based on all your numbers being right, it very much sounds like the reason the ball has no roll when it lands is because you have a downward angle of attack coming into impact. 170mph ball speed indicates a clubhead speed in the area of 115-120mph. A 240 carry would be short for that clubhead speed and typically can only be that short if the angle of attack is very downward. The 10* launch supports that as well because a downward A of A delofts the head which then brings about a lower launch angle.

Bottom line then is really to see if you can work on your swing to at least level out the A of A, which very much should increase carry distance and allow you then to use less loft to achieve a 10* launch angle, which for a clubhead speed of 115-120 would be in the ball park of being what you want. Then from a lower loft being able to get that same launch angle, spin would go down.

But for now, in all honesty, until you get rid of that downward A of A, things with respect to your roll after carry are not going to be relieved.

TOM

[dtrain5555]

[quote name='TomWishon' timestamp='1363452832' post='6623891']
[quote name='dtrain5555' timestamp='1363376537' post='6618511']
I have always had trouble with spin with my driver. Another thing is that even on hard courses I can spin the ball back in the fairway without my ball ballooning -- I have always found that odd. So I am just curious if my shaft is good for me. I have a Diamana Ali' Isle 73gram stiff. I am a late releaser, carry the ball 240, have a 170 ball speed, about a ten launch, and a very shallow angle of attack. Thanks for any help anyone can give.
[/quote]

Based on all your numbers being right, it very much sounds like the reason the ball has no roll when it lands is because you have a downward angle of attack coming into impact. 170mph ball speed indicates a clubhead speed in the area of 115-120mph. A 240 carry would be short for that clubhead speed and typically can only be that short if the angle of attack is very downward. The 10* launch supports that as well because a downward A of A delofts the head which then brings about a lower launch angle.

Bottom line then is really to see if you can work on your swing to at least level out the A of A, which very much should increase carry distance and allow you then to use less loft to achieve a 10* launch angle, which for a clubhead speed of 115-120 would be in the ball park of being what you want. Then from a lower loft being able to get that same launch angle, spin would go down.

But for now, in all honesty, until you get rid of that downward A of A, things with respect to your roll after carry are not going to be relieved.

TOM
[/quote]

Thanks for your input.

[RonSwanson]

[quote name='TomWishon' timestamp='1357946244' post='6212137']
Torque and tip stiffness are two totally different characteristics in a shaft. Tip stiffness is the resistance to longitudinal bending at the small end of the shaft. Torque is the resistance to rotational twisting on the shaft.

It is true that tip stiffness and torque both contribute to the stiffness FEEL of a shaft at impact. But the tip stiffness affects the forward bending of the shaft to have an effect on launch angle and spin while torque does not really have much of any effect on the forward bending, launch angle and spin rate.

If a golfer hits a low torque shaft and swears that he is hitting the ball lower with more spin, then 99 times out of 100 if a specific tip stiffness measurement were done on both shafts, the one with the lower torque probably also has a stiffer tip. Torque is a property that affects the stiffness FEEL of the shaft and [color=#ff0000]which also can affect the dispersion of the shot by limiting how much the head may twist as the golfer swings the club down to the ball[/color]. Torque is not a factor for launch angle or spin on its own.

TOM
[/quote]

Tom, let me know if I'm misinterpreting this, but is it your opinion that lower torque should produce less dispersion?

Have you had any dealings with the UST shafts, specifically the Elements, that have a higher torque in a mid and tip stiff type profile?

[TomWishon]

[quote name='RonSwanson' timestamp='1363717445' post='6644695']

Tom, let me know if I'm misinterpreting this, but is it your opinion that lower torque should produce less dispersion?

Have you had any dealings with the UST shafts, specifically the Elements, that have a higher torque in a mid and tip stiff type profile?
[/quote]

It is true that lower torque can produce less dispersion, but unless you are talking about a very strong transition move + >100mph swing speed using a 5* or higher torque shaft, you're not talking that much difference in shot dispersion when using a lower torque shaft. Difference in the FEEL of impact, yes.

An interesting and fairly new trend in shaft design has been to design the tip stiffness of the shaft so that the very lower section of the tip, meaning the last 12" of the shaft, is VERY tip stiff while the upper tip section is not so stiff. We've seen this in a few more shafts over the last year in our measurement work for our Bend Profile software data base. The upper tip section being not so stiff helps to offset the lower tip being very stiff so the overall tip section feel is not too stiff and boardy, with the additional benefit being that the very stiff lower tip helps keep the head more stable after an aggressive release move to help offer better shot dispersion.

Again though, this is measurable but it does not have that much of a visible effect on dispersion. Some, but not a lot.

TOM

[philsRHman]

[quote name='TomWishon' timestamp='1363718105' post='6644779']
[quote name='RonSwanson' timestamp='1363717445' post='6644695']
Tom, let me know if I'm misinterpreting this, but is it your opinion that lower torque should produce less dispersion?

Have you had any dealings with the UST shafts, specifically the Elements, that have a higher torque in a mid and tip stiff type profile?
[/quote]

It is true that lower torque can produce less dispersion, but unless you are talking about a very strong transition move + >100mph swing speed using a 5* or higher torque shaft, you're not talking that much difference in shot dispersion when using a lower torque shaft. Difference in the FEEL of impact, yes.

An interesting and fairly new trend in shaft design has been to design the tip stiffness of the shaft so that the very lower section of the tip, meaning the last 12" of the shaft, is VERY tip stiff while the upper tip section is not so stiff. We've seen this in a few more shafts over the last year in our measurement work for our Bend Profile software data base. The upper tip section being not so stiff helps to offset the lower tip being very stiff so the overall tip section feel is not too stiff and boardy, with the additional benefit being that the very stiff lower tip helps keep the head more stable after an aggressive release move to help offer better shot dispersion.

Again though, this is measurable but it does not have that much of a visible effect on dispersion. Some, but not a lot.

TOM
[/quote]

Interesting. I found that on the VTS series, I liked the high-torque, but it's not quite tip stiff enough for me (any of the three models). Can you name drop a couple of the shafts you're finding that fit the model you're describing? Especially if one of them is relatively affordable I might keep an eye out for one.

[TomWishon]

[quote name='philsRHman' timestamp='1363785688' post='6649535']

Interesting. I found that on the VTS series, I liked the high-torque, but it's not quite tip stiff enough for me (any of the three models). Can you name drop a couple of the shafts you're finding that fit the model you're describing? Especially if one of them is relatively affordable I might keep an eye out for one.
[/quote]


I'm seeing more of these normal upper tip stiffness + very stiff lower tip stiffness on some of the new shaft models that we are in the process of measuring to add to the data base of our Bend Profile software for this year's 2013 update. I haven't memorized the names, I've just noted this as we do the measurements of shaft after shaft after shaft (and man can that get boring to do !!!).

Anyway, just trying to remember off the top of my head, Black Tie and TP6 , 7 from Matrix were like this, so too is my company's S2S Red - Sorry I can't remember more but we're slamming through so many new shafts trying to get them all measured in time to get this update done before it gets too far into the season.

TOM

[Myherobobhope]

I just re-read this as I've been getting 0 roll on the course of late (the ball has been backing up).

My shots don't balloon but I just don't get any forward movement when they hit.

I need to check on my wrists at impact, as my AoA has been fine recently.

[TomWishon]

[quote name='Myherobobhope' timestamp='1364842963' post='6738241']
I just re-read this as I've been getting 0 roll on the course of late (the ball has been backing up).

My shots don't balloon but I just don't get any forward movement when they hit.

I need to check on my wrists at impact, as my AoA has been fine recently.
[/quote]

If you detect that the launch angle and apex height of the driver shot are both reasonable and do not look like they are too high, see if you can get your angle of descent of the ball to the ground. If the fairways are moist or longer grass (which that should not be the case in early April in OH) then the A of D needs to be under 36* to prompt the ball to kick forward upon landing to promote more roll. And about the only way that one can lower the A of D is to go lower in loft.

TOM

[Myherobobhope]

Thanks Tom! I'm currently playing an 8.5 driver (stamped, not actually checked)...

Once the wife OKs a fitting, I'm going to ClubFit International to get a Wishon built. I'm thinking of going heavy and short, and I will be interested to see what loft best fits with those characteristics.

[denkea]

[quote name='TomWishon' timestamp='1358176218' post='6224887']
[quote name='mmack067' timestamp='1358107480' post='6220719']
I'd love to see comparisons of some of the top manufacturers best selling shafts. Possibly top selling low, mid and high launch shafts broken down by flex and weight. Might give people a better starting point when looking to optimize their flight.
[/quote]

This is exactly one of the many things that everyone who has bought our Shaft Bend Profile software uses it for. BTW, that's the software that generates the graphs and stiffness data charts like the one I showed in this article. At present we have about 2100 different shafts in there. After this winter that should be up to around 2600. We can't have EVERY possible shaft in the industry in there because that's just far too difficult to do, but we usually always have the majority of the industry's more popular shafts in there so clubmakers and golfers can access their data to be able to make better fitting decisions and know much more about how this shaft compares to that shaft. BTW, that software is not restricted to being bought only by clubmakers - several WRX'ers have it now.

TOM
[/quote]

Tom ~~~~ Is your software compatible with the MAC operating system?
thx
-d

[TomWishon]

[quote name='denkea' timestamp='1364906709' post='6742985']

Tom ~~~~ Is your software compatible with the MAC operating system?
thx
-d
[/quote]

Unless you have a special program installed on your Mac which allows it to run Windows based software, the BP software won't operate on a Mac. I have heard of some people who have this on their Mac, and from it, I have heard that they can operate the BP software program. BUt I am very sorry that I have not dug into this any deeper such that I could tell you exactly what programs are out there that allow Macs to run Windows based PC software programs. Perhaps if you know an IT person they can tell you or you can Google that to see what's out there.

TOM

[Stretch]

I can answer that one more specifically since I do use some of Tom's (excellent) software on my Macs. There are two ways to do so -- you can either boot straight into Windows at startup (using an OS X utility called Boot Camp) or you can set up a virtual Windows machine that lives on your Mac desktop. For the latter, you will need to buy either the Parallels or VMWare Fusion virtualization software, and in both cases you will have to acquire a valid copy of Windows to install. So it will cost some additional time and money to make it work.

[HISPL]

Mr Wishon, I would like to request an iOS version of your software as an app.

I can imagine being able to do a fitting going between the trackman data and the shaft information on the same device instantly anywhere you want!

It would probably be a lot of work, but I would certainly be popular amongst fitters!

[TomWishon]

[quote name='HISPL' timestamp='1364943200' post='6747277']
Mr Wishon, I would like to request an iOS version of your software as an app.

I can imagine being able to do a fitting going between the trackman data and the shaft information on the same device instantly anywhere you want!

It would probably be a lot of work, but I would certainly be popular amongst fitters!
[/quote]

I like that idea - we'll check on what that might cost to develop that.

[b]Say - anyone on WRX who is an app programmer who might be willing to engage in a little bartering trade???????????[/b]

TOM

[denkea]

[quote name='TomWishon' timestamp='1364913107' post='6743625']
[quote name='denkea' timestamp='1364906709' post='6742985']
Tom ~~~~ Is your software compatible with the MAC operating system?
thx
-d
[/quote]

Unless you have a special program installed on your Mac which allows it to run Windows based software, the BP software won't operate on a Mac. I have heard of some people who have this on their Mac, and from it, I have heard that they can operate the BP software program. BUt I am very sorry that I have not dug into this any deeper such that I could tell you exactly what programs are out there that allow Macs to run Windows based PC software programs. Perhaps if you know an IT person they can tell you or you can Google that to see what's out there.

TOM
[/quote]
Thanks Tom ~~~~ Pretty much what I thought and that has kept me from purchasing in the past. That and along with the cost of Windoze which is the only reason I would use it.
Thanks again.

[quote name='TomWishon' timestamp='1364913107' post='6743625']
[quote name='denkea' timestamp='1364906709' post='6742985']
Tom ~~~~ Is your software compatible with the MAC operating system?
thx
-d
[/quote]

Unless you have a special program installed on your Mac which allows it to run Windows based software, the BP software won't operate on a Mac. I have heard of some people who have this on their Mac, and from it, I have heard that they can operate the BP software program. BUt I am very sorry that I have not dug into this any deeper such that I could tell you exactly what programs are out there that allow Macs to run Windows based PC software programs. Perhaps if you know an IT person they can tell you or you can Google that to see what's out there.

TOM
[/quote]