Project X Chrome not so accurate......

[lunchbox573]

6.5's tested to a 10.0

I just recently purchased a mixed set of Mizuno irons about 3 weeks ago. Got MP 60's in 3-6 and MP 32's in 7-PW as well as a 52* and 60* with the PX in them. All came in with the same PX 6.5 shafts and I assumed they were all as labeled. A buddy came into town today and we did some frequency testing on them all and the CPM's progressed like they should, with 4 CPM's in between each one. But the problem was the CPM's were too high. They came out to a 10.0 on a Rifle scale. His machine was calibrated and my clubs were the first to go on the machine so I know it wasn't wrong. We even did another guys set and his came out right (of course his were the Satin's so it was expected).
So if you end buying some new irons with the PX in them test them to be sure. Seems they are getting a little careless with their stuff.

Needless to say I immediately pulled the shafts and slipped in some X 100's until I find a good set of PX's that are actually 6.5's. So if anyone with a set of pulls reads this, let me know, I would be very interested. Satin or chrome it doesn't matter. Just as long as they are what they are labeled.


The specs on the clubs we tested are as follows:

6 iron 38/337
7 iron 37.5/341
8 iron 37/345

[ckay]

10.0? Are you sure you are clamping the butt correctly?

[taylormadefan]

Paralysis by analysis . . . remember that the frequency numbers are raw shaft frequencies before anything else happens. Headweights, grips, etc. are all going to have an effect on the finished frequency.

 

I think the information about the 2.5" clamp vs. the 5.5" clamp in this post was very enlightening:

 

http://www.golfwrx.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=88614

[lunchbox573]

I know the guy personally and he is also a Certified Master Club Fitter. So I'm pretty sure he knew what he was doing. Not saying this hatefully. Just stating it.

[lunchbox573]

Remember that the Rifle scale is measured with a 2 1/2" clamp, and not a 5" clamp. The additional clamping length adds nearly 17 cpm to the measurement.

 

-t

 

That is quoted from the 2 1/2" vs 5" clamp post. But even if that is true that still doesn't even knock it down to an 8.0, which still isn't what I ordered. I also read in that post that Mizuno has a Precision guy there to build sets like mine specifically. This guy must have been drunk if that is true.

 

Either way I got word that the guy that has the Patents to the Rifle shafts is mad about how crappy of a job True Temper is doing and actually took a job with another company and is making the shafts again. So once I find out the company name I will be ordering a set of those shafts I believe.

[taylormadefan]

That is quoted from the 2 1/2" vs 5" clamp post. But even if that is true that still doesn't even knock it down to an 8.0, which still isn't what I ordered. I also read in that post that Mizuno has a Precision guy there to build sets like mine specifically. This guy must have been drunk if that is true.

 

Either way I got word that the guy that has the Patents to the Rifle shafts is mad about how crappy of a job True Temper is doing and actually took a job with another company and is making the shafts again. So once I find out the company name I will be ordering a set of those shafts I believe.

 

Just to save you the trouble, his name is Kim Braley and he now works for FST, they're about to introduce their new KB Tour and KB V Launch which you can find any day now through Accra Dealers. Thanks to Gawain Robertson from Accra, we're hopefully going to have him on for an interview very soon about the KB Tours.

 

Just out of curiosity, did you hit them, did they play like 10.0's?

[lunchbox573]

Oh yea, played them for about 3 weeks. I knew they were a little stiffer than 6.5's but it was my first set of PX's so I wasn't really able to compare them to anything else. Once I got on the monitor and hit my irons and then some others the guy had there I could feel a huge difference. Felt like I was swinging a 2 by 4.

 

The guy that was there is a Master Club Fitter for KZG. He told me about the guy going into business with that company but I had forgotten the name. Thank you.

[drpino]

somebody here at WRX mentioned a little while ago they felt the quality control of PX under TT (chrome version) was better than under RP and that the freqs. of a set of satin PXs was way too high/all over the place whereas the chromes were spot on. seems there are cases of poor quality control with both versions out there in the wild.

 

i purchased my 695CB/PX5.5 combos used last season and haven't gotten a chance to plot the freq. progression yet but my curiousity is starting to build despite them feeling like the correct flex for my swing.

[es1]

very well informed sirs. kim braly has indeed developed a new shaft that almost mirrors the original px profile. butt heavy tip soft high launch efforts. once and for all the satin finish version under rifle was the only dedicated taper shaft available ever. the new one under TT is constant taper this approach to the design is a short cut cheap alternate. the rifle shaft required more than 100 SKU's to achieve the range of flexes(5.0-7.5). do not expect a hot veiled constant taper that contains an oxy-haze to come close to what most engineers consider a masterpiece. the new KB tours use flag pole technology in their stepping and oil quenching(mid temp) .early testing suggests that DR kim has rather cleverly circumvented the patents now owned (not used) by TT. whether or not the performance throughout the set is as good remains to be seen. big company(FST) bigger brain(KB) i would hope that is a match made in heaven.

[drpino]

very interesting comments regarding the original PX vs the TT version. can you please elaborate on the "dedicated" taper versus "constant" taper and also the "flag pole" technology and oil quenching?

 

i'm very interested to learn more about the engineering aspect of Project X shafts.

 

thanks in advance es1!

[NotEvenJail26]

I have seen one of the first Prototype sets of these shafts, My clubmaker had a set in the middle of Feb. At this point I was looking all over for a set of Satin PX's, I said to Sami can I have a set of these, he laughed and said he wouldnt have any on the Van tilll the end of March! Finally found some Satin PX and had to ship them over from Canada! None at the right length in the UK.

 

Tom

[es1]

okay. constant taper shafts are the same rate of taper for each iron in the set. whereas dedicated taper shafts are individually tapered from the mid to the tip section prior to them being "swaged". this process means that a 3 iron shaft has a slower rate of taper than a wedge shaft. this means that flight can be more controlled throughout the set. the whole reason the px was created is now somewhat defunkt in the new version. oil quenching is a way of applying coatings to raw shafts so that they do not over heat. it is generally cooler and more predictable than other methodoligies like "hot veiling". lastly a flag pole gains its' strentgh from the widest area, the base. the rest of the pole is supported by the rigidity of the thick part at the bottom giving support to the waving around bit at the top. thick to thin as it were. essentially voiding a CPM alone approach to shaft matching and fitting. surely Mark Timms said it best; "energy inertia curves or nothing".

[es1]

well now we come to the very core of the debate. different tempering methods will most certainly create different feel in golf shafts. not only in absolute tems but also in the synergies between the connected elements of shaft manufacture. to highlight an example ,certain graphite shafts have been iron plated to maximise their performance with regard to their "tonnage". this reveals a cost effective partnership of differently managed materials. HAZes alter most joints in an unpredictable manner . this can be avoided(drawn tube et al) or glazed over. thankfully not everyone takes the easy or cheap road. some manufacturers ,engineers and builders take pride in their work irrespective of the fact that it may ultimately become a commodity.

[drpino]

very fascinating info es1, thanks.

 

True Temper claims the shafts are exactly the same despite acknowledging the differences you stated above:

 

http://www.golfwrx.com/forums/index.php?sh...st&p=492501

0:55 – GolfWRX: Absolutely. Project X has a very strong following among better players, and many were disappointed to see that the finish was changing from satin to full chrome. Can you explain why that decision was made? Other than finish, also are there any other differences between the old and new Project X?

 

1:19 – Greg Cavill: I’ll answer that. No, there aren’t. I’ll take the last bit first, and that is when the designs came over, initially, I worked heavily on the blanks an all that to get them into the drawing format for our own manufacturing plant. And I can assure everyone listening that the parts, the blanks that the shafts are actually manufactured from, the machines that the shafts are manufactured on, apart from the taper presses which are actually True Tempers, the swage tools, the swage dies, etc, everything is exactly the same as it was in Connecticut. So, from that point, the shaft is exactly how it has always been. On the cosmetic side, it is purely as you say, just cosmetic, and at RP, they always struggled with the consistency of that finish. You can get shading, certainly if the shaft is rolled on a table, you will see that shading and that is just part of the plating process and the way that the actual nickel is deposited onto the shaft is not even. With standard duplex nickel chrome, with bright nickel over the top, we’re able to get a very level plate. With a Project X type finish, you don’t generally get that. So, there was a consistency issue and bringing it across, basically we were unhappy with that situation. Certainly we did not want to get into a couple of months down the road where we were having issues with that, certainly let’s say if someone breaks a shaft or has a club stolen, and then a shaft is replaced and lo and behold it doesn’t match up 100%. So we also went to Tour and found, basically, that finish – there was no sort of driving factor to have it, obviously in the marketplace it does distinguish the shaft, but there was no Tour players hell bent on keeping it. So, with that in mind, we decided to go on the quality route and on the consistency side and made it standard chrome finish. Also, the other thing, with duplex nickel, we have a dull nickel and then we deposit a bright nickel over the top and then we chrome flash it to get the bright, shiny finish. On the Project X finish, you do not have that bright nickel, and what happens is you can have a corrosion issue with that as well. And again we have our own internal standards and they’ve been in place for years and years and years with Dynamic Gold, etc, and the parts on our own salt spray cabinets and everything else did not perform as well as Dynamic Gold. So we basically have upped the corrosion resistance of Project X.

 

i'm not saying either party isn't providing the truth but the info is getting a little confusing...guess that's why i'm not an engineer.

[taylormadefan]

Right, that's what he's saying. The taper has been switched to true temper style, thus completely defusing one of the major things that made the PX different. The real bummer is, TT now owns the patents on the shafts *which they're not manufacturing* so nobody else can make them either without some clever manuvering.

 

Here's hoping they get it done.

 

They already might have at FST . . . :bigwhack:

[wildwilly911]

boy theres alot of smoke blowing in here that all i got to say, now whos selling what

[ripped]

boy theres alot of smoke blowing in here that all i got to say, now whos selling what

 

 

You said it. I have found this thread to be informative, educational and somewhat disturbing...... :cheesy:

 

Unless I am mistaken, what we appear to have is a scenario where Callaway are openly claiming that their 'chrome' px is the same as the legendary satin-finish original. I already suspected this was doubtful having tried my friend's awful x-20 irons with the so called 'flighted' px. Flighted? :bigwhack: Didn't feel like the pxs in my irons, nothing like. Perhaps they have stuck in a bog-standard flighted rifle and painted it chrome.

 

Just doesn't seem right........... :rolleyes:

[taylormadefan]

boy theres alot of smoke blowing in here that all i got to say, now whos selling what

 

 

You said it. I have found this thread to be informative, educational and somewhat disturbing...... :cheesy:

 

Unless I am mistaken, what we appear to have is a scenario where Callaway are openly claiming that their 'chrome' px is the same as the legendary satin-finish original. I already suspected this was doubtful having tried my friend's awful x-20 irons with the so called 'flighted' px. Flighted? :bigwhack: Didn't feel like the pxs in my irons, nothing like. Perhaps they have stuck in a bog-standard flighted rifle and painted it chrome.

 

Just doesn't seem right........... :rolleyes:

 

 

PX Flighted is supposed to be a more playable version of Project X, in no way was it ever intended to replace standard Project X or even play similarly. Sure companies are capitalizing on the Project X name, but when Royal Precision introduced the Project X High Launch you didn't see people ranting and raving like this. They understood that it was a different shaft intended for different purpose.

 

I believe the heart of this debate is between the old Rifle versions of Project X (i.e. not Flighted) and the new True Temper versions of Project X. True Temper claims they are identical, others say not so.

[Dyno]

When RP went out of business....I bought mad inventory of original TFR's. I knew they would never be the same at TT.

[ripped]

boy theres alot of smoke blowing in here that all i got to say, now whos selling what

 

 

You said it. I have found this thread to be informative, educational and somewhat disturbing...... :cheesy:

 

Unless I am mistaken, what we appear to have is a scenario where Callaway are openly claiming that their 'chrome' px is the same as the legendary satin-finish original. I already suspected this was doubtful having tried my friend's awful x-20 irons with the so called 'flighted' px. Flighted? :bigwhack: Didn't feel like the pxs in my irons, nothing like. Perhaps they have stuck in a bog-standard flighted rifle and painted it chrome.

 

Just doesn't seem right........... :rolleyes:

 

 

"PX Flighted is supposed to be a more playable version of Project X, in no way was it ever intended to replace standard Project X or even play similarly. Sure companies are capitalizing on the Project X name, but when Royal Precision introduced the Project X High Launch you didn't see people ranting and raving like this. They understood that it was a different shaft intended for different purpose.

 

I believe the heart of this debate is between the old Rifle versions of Project X (i.e. not Flighted) and the new True Temper versions of Project X. True Temper claims they are identical, others say not so.

 

 

No "ranting and raving" (we're talking about golf shafts - let's put it in perspective), but the key suggestion here is that, whether we're talking about their flighted or unflighted version, TT's - "approach to the design is a short cut cheap alternate". That does not tie in with what TT claims about the manufacture of their PX version. Someone's right, someone's wrong.

 

Never mind though, I'm off to chill...... :cheesy:

[sheppy335]

I just recently purchased a mixed set of Mizuno irons about 3 weeks ago. Got MP 60's in 3-6 and MP 32's in 7-PW as well as a 52* and 60* with the PX in them. All came in with the same PX 6.5 shafts and I assumed they were all as labeled. A buddy came into town today and we did some frequency testing on them all and the CPM's progressed like they should, with 4 CPM's in between each one. But the problem was the CPM's were too high. They came out to a 10.0 on a Rifle scale. His machine was calibrated and my clubs were the first to go on the machine so I know it wasn't wrong. We even did another guys set and his came out right (of course his were the Satin's so it was expected).

So if you end buying some new irons with the PX in them test them to be sure. Seems they are getting a little careless with their stuff.

 

Needless to say I immediately pulled the shafts and slipped in some X 100's until I find a good set of PX's that are actually 6.5's. So if anyone with a set of pulls reads this, let me know, I would be very interested. Satin or chrome it doesn't matter. Just as long as they are what they are labeled.

 

 

The specs on the clubs we tested are as follows:

 

6 iron 38/337

7 iron 37.5/341

8 iron 37/345

Not to be mean but i think it would be Mizuno's fault they would have cut and assembled that shafts. Plus if you ordered them from them send them back, dont pay for something that isnt what you want. I would have marched them right back to were i purchased them from and told them these arent right and i want them to be fixed for free.

[sheppy335]

I have both that Satin and the Chrome and they are no differnt to me at all!

[joeburdo3]

I just bought a new set of Titleist 670's and I am having the same trouble with my PX 6.5's. Mine are too strong as well and they arent even frequency matched. The are all over the board. Do I really have to order 6.0's to get something close to a 6.5 frequency? I should have True Temper send me some PX blanks and I will build them myself if I have to. What a joke. It is a guessing game now. Why did I pay an upcharge for shafts that are more inconsistant that x100s?

[jcosjrgolf]

Project X shafts are not frequency matched. They are not designed/manufactured to follow a slope. Project X is a constant weight shaft that is weight sorted just like the TT DG's. You install the shaft and butt trim to length. The cpm's from iron to iron will vary and follow no consistent slope.

[es1]

are you sure that the blank weight of a px 3 iron is the same as that of a pw ? if not are you infact waxing an opinion ? please describe the inevitable quandry caused by the difference between px taper and px parallel. weight sorting 100+ SKU's would take for ever, i am sure that the original question and subsequent replies were with reference to original vs new in terms of flex. that is to say general flex, cpm readings generated by deflection at the tip end whilst clamped at the butt end. this gives a butt frequency reading only. considering the widely known fact that Dr Braly invented frequency matching it is unlikely that his son would refuse to employ it in further design methodologies. ultimately it is the job of a fitter or rep to investigate the true implications of design and manufacture so that a prescriptive solution can be gleaned from an objective diagnosis. a juggling act between arbitrary "scales" will not contribute to the right club for the job at hand. bear in mind that TT paid $13M+ for a company that spent more on individual steel product manufacture than ever before or since. that is not usually a recipe for fiscal improvement . unless ,of course , it involves monopoly by obliteration. Apollo Hump ring a bell ?

[TrueTemper]

very fascinating info es1, thanks.

 

True Temper claims the shafts are exactly the same despite acknowledging the differences you stated above:

 

http://www.golfwrx.com/forums/index.php?sh...st&p=492501

0:55 � GolfWRX: Absolutely. Project X has a very strong following among better players, and many were disappointed to see that the finish was changing from satin to full chrome. Can you explain why that decision was made? Other than finish, also are there any other differences between the old and new Project X?

 

1:19 � Greg Cavill: I�ll answer that. No, there aren�t. I�ll take the last bit first, and that is when the designs came over, initially, I worked heavily on the blanks an all that to get them into the drawing format for our own manufacturing plant. And I can assure everyone listening that the parts, the blanks that the shafts are actually manufactured from, the machines that the shafts are manufactured on, apart from the taper presses which are actually True Tempers, the swage tools, the swage dies, etc, everything is exactly the same as it was in Connecticut. So, from that point, the shaft is exactly how it has always been. On the cosmetic side, it is purely as you say, just cosmetic, and at RP, they always struggled with the consistency of that finish. You can get shading, certainly if the shaft is rolled on a table, you will see that shading and that is just part of the plating process and the way that the actual nickel is deposited onto the shaft is not even. With standard duplex nickel chrome, with bright nickel over the top, we�re able to get a very level plate. With a Project X type finish, you don�t generally get that. So, there was a consistency issue and bringing it across, basically we were unhappy with that situation. Certainly we did not want to get into a couple of months down the road where we were having issues with that, certainly let�s say if someone breaks a shaft or has a club stolen, and then a shaft is replaced and lo and behold it doesn�t match up 100%. So we also went to Tour and found, basically, that finish � there was no sort of driving factor to have it, obviously in the marketplace it does distinguish the shaft, but there was no Tour players hell bent on keeping it. So, with that in mind, we decided to go on the quality route and on the consistency side and made it standard chrome finish. Also, the other thing, with duplex nickel, we have a dull nickel and then we deposit a bright nickel over the top and then we chrome flash it to get the bright, shiny finish. On the Project X finish, you do not have that bright nickel, and what happens is you can have a corrosion issue with that as well. And again we have our own internal standards and they�ve been in place for years and years and years with Dynamic Gold, etc, and the parts on our own salt spray cabinets and everything else did not perform as well as Dynamic Gold. So we basically have upped the corrosion resistance of Project X.

 

i'm not saying either party isn't providing the truth but the info is getting a little confusing...guess that's why i'm not an engineer.

 

This quote from TT's engineer should put this to rest once and for all. We are talking about a golf shaft here, not something that is very difficult to reproduce, as I'm sure FST is planning on doing. Look at the source of a lot of the negative claims about TT's version. It's obvious ES1 has a realtionship with or works for FST.

You shouldn't compare PX vs. PX Flighted or how they are manufactured, they are different animals. As far as the RP made PX vs. the TT made PX, if the finish was never changed, I would be willing to say this would never come up. TT made a large monetary investment to buy RP because there was some equity in the Rifle brands, we are not going to compromise those brands or the reputation of our company as the #1 supplier of golf shafts.

Clamping a Rifle branded shaft on a 5 1/4" inch machine completely changes the frequency as noted. Mizuno has the old RP frequency machine in house, so I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt that when the clubs left their factory, they were a lot closer to 6.5 than 10.0.

 

TTS

[es1]

NE TE CONFUNDANT EST. work for ,connected to ? yeah i'm the fluffer . negative comments aside, truth is truth, don't like it ? ignore me. otherwise we can go on 'til the cows come . let sleeping dogs lie down that forum list ,or remind me......"what is the definition of workers' comp ?" branding value , dialectical materialism more like. why do business with a firm when you can buy them and sell their marquee products direct. Thane of Glamis put down your pen and pick up your sword, your heat opressed brain has met its' Macduff.

[lunchbox573]

I started this post talking about Project X shafts, not the flighted. I would have put Project X flighted if I was talking about them. What makes me mad is if all these factors (i.e. head, grip, etc) play a role is the shafts stiffness and we all seem to know this, then why is it so hard for a guy who gets paid to do this daily to understand? What I was wanting was a club that played a 6.5 after complete assembly. Instead I got a club that played a 10.0 all the way through. I would love to send the clubs back and get them fixed for FREE. But I don't have a back up set nor do I want to buy a back up set. I have a scholarship to start playing next fall as well as many tournaments I am entered in over the summer so 4 weeks without my clubs isn't good for the game. This is something that should have been done properly and right the FIRST time. No matter what company it may be. You have a customer who is willing to spend a good chunk of money on your product so you better get it right the first time. Needless to say I have found the shaft to replace my junk PX's and from here on out if I ever buy clubs it will be heads only and I will pick the shaft I put in myself. This way I can't blame somebody else and I can fix it myself. The golf business has gone downhill in my opinion.

[geeza_1]

I started this post talking about Project X shafts, not the flighted. I would have put Project X flighted if I was talking about them. What makes me mad is if all these factors (i.e. head, grip, etc) play a role is the shafts stiffness and we all seem to know this, then why is it so hard for a guy who gets paid to do this daily to understand? What I was wanting was a club that played a 6.5 after complete assembly. Instead I got a club that played a 10.0 all the way through. I would love to send the clubs back and get them fixed for FREE. But I don't have a back up set nor do I want to buy a back up set. I have a scholarship to start playing next fall as well as many tournaments I am entered in over the summer so 4 weeks without my clubs isn't good for the game. This is something that should have been done properly and right the FIRST time. No matter what company it may be. You have a customer who is willing to spend a good chunk of money on your product so you better get it right the first time. Needless to say I have found the shaft to replace my junk PX's and from here on out if I ever buy clubs it will be heads only and I will pick the shaft I put in myself. This way I can't blame somebody else and I can fix it myself. The golf business has gone downhill in my opinion.

 

I take your point. It is unfortunate that companies are not capable of maintaining tolerances.

 

As far as Project X is concerned, I feel it is a real shame that no-one really seems to know what is going on with the flex. From a marketing standpoint, the last thing you want is confusion over the performance of your product. All that does is push potential customers away.

 

True Temper should have kept the finish, the flex profile and everything else identical IMHO. There is already enough confusion over the PX 5.5 playing like a TFR 6.0 etc. It is easy to get to a point where you simply no longer know what is what.

 

Let's hope it all gets sorted out soon. In the meantime, try the black gold or DGSL.

[cmuniz]

Call Mizuno and tell them about your situation. You should have no problem with them sending you a new set with the right specs. Then you can just send the set back that have now. I would go through an authorized dealer if you are friends with one... they seems to get things done quicker when you give them an account number.