Shaft Comparison: KBS C-Taper 120 vs. Project X 6.0

[bmday15]

I do not know much about golf equipment. I play a good amount of golf and am a relatively decent player (a 5 handicap, I shot 72, and 78 this past weekend), but have always just played what was given to me.

I have been fit into Project X 6.0 shafts multiple times by multiple fitters, but was wondering how the project x 6.0 shaft compares to the KBS C-Taper 120 shaft. I ask because there seems to be many more iron sets that I like available on e-bay with the KBS C-Taper 120 shafts in them than Project X shafts.

In general, are these two shafts vastly different from one another? Would I be remiss to attempt to play the KBS shafts after having been fit into Project X shafts?

 

Any and all comments, thoughts, and ideas are much appreciated!

[kmcelhaney]

There is not a huge difference with these shafts. I would say, that for me, the Project X seemed a softer and launched the ball higher and, in theory should spin the ball more. I recently switched to KBS and the only noticeable difference is they feel a bit stiffer. Both are great shafts and I do not think that you will really go wrong either way.

 

If it were me and I could get a better deal and clubs that I want with KBS cheaper, I would. If I could get exactly what I was fit for in the same price range I would do that. I am a 5.4 handicap just for reference.

[kmcelhaney]

What are you currently using and what is your ball flight looking like?

[bmday15]

I'm currently playing cobra amps with dynamic gold stiff 90 gram shafts. These are about 4 years old now and I'm a much better player now than I was when I got fit into those.

I'm very very happy with my game and my ball flight with each club. But sometimes in windy condition I get in trouble because I spin the ball a ton with every club.

[missourigolfer]

I play Project X Flighted 6.0. A year or so ago I stuck a C-Taper S in my 7 iron, just out of curiosity. I didn't notice much difference.

[Bomber_11]

I play the KBS 120's in stiff flex in my Taylormade MB's. I went in a week ago and demoed some irons w/ the KBS 120, the Project X 6.0, and the Dynamic Gold X100's. The Project X 6.0's felt absolutely better than the other two. I'd love to get the PX in my irons, but our local golf shop wants $550 to change my KBS to the Project X's.

 

They were the only shaft out of the bunch where I always knew exactly where my club head was - and how my club face was oriented - throughout the entire swing. The KBS and Project X launched at about the same angle, w/ the X100's launching slightly lower. Ball speeds and overall distance were close amongst the group.

 

Just so you know, the gentleman who started KBS (Kim Braly) is the same guy that designed Project X shafts. So feel and performance is going to be relatively similar.

In the 1980’s, Kim and his father formed Precision Shaft Corporation. Kim was responsible for developing and running production for proprietary steel shafts that were supplied to several of the major club head manufacturers. Through a series of buyouts in the 1990’s, Precision eventually became Royal Precision. While at Royal Precision, Kim patented Frequency Matching for graphite and created two revolutionary stepless steel shaft designs: the RIFLE ® Golf Shaft and Project X ® Golf Shaft.

In 2007, FST co-founders Rob Cheng and David Chuang approached Kim about starting a premier, high-performance line of steel golf shafts. Kim Braly Signature (KBS) Tour Shafts was formed in early 2008 and has rapidly become the fastest growing steel shaft brand in the industry

[kmcelhaney]

Yup, so I would say just go with which ever you can get a better deal on.

[playoffbeard23]

Sounds like you will definitely benefit from a stouter, heavier, lower spinning shaft than the ones you have; which both of those are. Also a lot of sets pop up on the BST on here with those shafts, very popular.

[bmday15]

Thanks for everyone's replies. Much appreciated.

[maowv]

Sorry to revise an old thread but thought this might be useful. I've been curious on the new tech shafts after 3 decades playing Dynamic Gold (S300, S400) and recently the KBS Tour shaft (120 stiff).

 

I bought 3 Ping i25 7 irons from Ebay at a total cost of about $50. Re-built them with all same components and to same swingsweights, only difference was the shafts.

 

1) DG S400 - used as my old standard to compare against.

2) C-Taper 120 (stiff)

3) Project X 6.0 (soft-stepped with a 6 iron shaft to bring stock FCM of 6.5 down to 6.1.

 

All clubs hover around the 6.0 FCM range now. Spent several weeks on an outdoor range and on a launch monitor. I play to an 8 by mid-summer, driver swing speed hovers around 107, usually hit a 7 iron to a 160 yardage. I've always had a high ball flight with fairly high spin numbers on the irons so am trying to get both down a bit.

 

Project X 6.0 soft-stepped - I really like the 6.0 soft-stepped better than straight in. To me, the 6.0 feels stiffer than the specs indicate it should be. The soft-step gave it a better feel, not significantly but enough to notice. I think this shaft is far more playable this way. For me, it launched higher than the S400 but with lower spin and a lower, flatter trajectory. A little more distance than the S400. Even soft-stepped, this is a big boy weapon.

 

C-Taper straight in - this one shocked me. On paper, it is the direct rival to the Project X. I expected a similar stout feel. The C-Taper feels nothing like the Project X, actually as far apart as possible. Overall, the C-Taper feels much, much softer than the PX and even the S400 although in a different way. There was no "kick point" feel to it like the other two. Instead, you can feel the entire length of the shaft flex a little bit. It's minimal but you can actually feel it but it's very damp, feels like it's flexing in slow motion compared to the other 2 shafts. It feels soft at impact. The ball launched the lowest for me, had the lowest spin numbers and flew the longest distance. The trajectory was lower but not significantly so. Still very playable. This one surprised me because I expected a shaft that might be too much for my swing and the C-Taper was anything but overpowering. I think this shaft gets a bad rap of being too stout for many players. Find the right flex for you and this one can be played by a wider group of golfers than the PX in my opinion.

 

Why the difference in feel? I wish I had taken a photo of the tips during installation. I put them down next to each other to look at structural differences and it jumps out at you. The metal thickness on the butt end of these shafts was pretty comparable. If there was a difference, it was nothing the naked eye could pick up.

 

The metal thickness at the tip end showed a drastic difference. The PX has the thickest metal at the tip, by far. The S400 is closer to the PX but still a visible difference. The C-Taper is thin, really thin at the tip end. The PX is easily double the thickness of the C-Taper. This is where 2 things likely come into play. The impact feel and the tip-bending issues that seem to plague the C-Taper.

 

I suspect the C-Taper feels so soft at impact because it is. The tip section is so very thin that it must factor into the impact force transmitted into the club. Also, that thin wall at the tip would bend much more easily than the other 2 shafts because there is so little metal there. It was shocking to see how thin the C-Taper is at the tip section.

 

After 3 weeks of feeding my OCD, I have reached paralysis through analysis. Each of the newer tech shafts provided better performance numbers than the S400 but each had their obvious drawbacks. The PX feels and plays stout. The impact is more harsh than the other two, even when soft-stepped. The C-Taper wins the feel game but I wouldn't expect those shafts to hold up long-term. There will be re-shaft projects over time due to how thin the metal design is. We've all read about it. Now I understand it and would expect it - although not welcome considering the premium price of these shafts.

 

On performance, both show better numbers than the S400. On impact feel, the S400 sits right in the middle. The S400 does feel the most active in its kick while the other two less so but in very different ways. Anyway, that's been my experience.

[Lloyd_Christmas29]

On 5/22/2017 at 9:21 AM, maowv said:

Sorry to revise an old thread but thought this might be useful. I've been curious on the new tech shafts after 3 decades playing Dynamic Gold (S300, S400) and recently the KBS Tour shaft (120 stiff).

 

I bought 3 Ping i25 7 irons from Ebay at a total cost of about $50. Re-built them with all same components and to same swingsweights, only difference was the shafts.

 

1) DG S400 - used as my old standard to compare against.

2) C-Taper 120 (stiff)

3) Project X 6.0 (soft-stepped with a 6 iron shaft to bring stock FCM of 6.5 down to 6.1.

 

All clubs hover around the 6.0 FCM range now. Spent several weeks on an outdoor range and on a launch monitor. I play to an 8 by mid-summer, driver swing speed hovers around 107, usually hit a 7 iron to a 160 yardage. I've always had a high ball flight with fairly high spin numbers on the irons so am trying to get both down a bit.

 

Project X 6.0 soft-stepped - I really like the 6.0 soft-stepped better than straight in. To me, the 6.0 feels stiffer than the specs indicate it should be. The soft-step gave it a better feel, not significantly but enough to notice. I think this shaft is far more playable this way. For me, it launched higher than the S400 but with lower spin and a lower, flatter trajectory. A little more distance than the S400. Even soft-stepped, this is a big boy weapon.

 

C-Taper straight in - this one shocked me. On paper, it is the direct rival to the Project X. I expected a similar stout feel. The C-Taper feels nothing like the Project X, actually as far apart as possible. Overall, the C-Taper feels much, much softer than the PX and even the S400 although in a different way. There was no "kick point" feel to it like the other two. Instead, you can feel the entire length of the shaft flex a little bit. It's minimal but you can actually feel it but it's very damp, feels like it's flexing in slow motion compared to the other 2 shafts. It feels soft at impact. The ball launched the lowest for me, had the lowest spin numbers and flew the longest distance. The trajectory was lower but not significantly so. Still very playable. This one surprised me because I expected a shaft that might be too much for my swing and the C-Taper was anything but overpowering. I think this shaft gets a bad rap of being too stout for many players. Find the right flex for you and this one can be played by a wider group of golfers than the PX in my opinion.

 

Why the difference in feel? I wish I had taken a photo of the tips during installation. I put them down next to each other to look at structural differences and it jumps out at you. The metal thickness on the butt end of these shafts was pretty comparable. If there was a difference, it was nothing the naked eye could pick up.

 

The metal thickness at the tip end showed a drastic difference. The PX has the thickest metal at the tip, by far. The S400 is closer to the PX but still a visible difference. The C-Taper is thin, really thin at the tip end. The PX is easily double the thickness of the C-Taper. This is where 2 things likely come into play. The impact feel and the tip-bending issues that seem to plague the C-Taper.

 

I suspect the C-Taper feels so soft at impact because it is. The tip section is so very thin that it must factor into the impact force transmitted into the club. Also, that thin wall at the tip would bend much more easily than the other 2 shafts because there is so little metal there. It was shocking to see how thin the C-Taper is at the tip section.

 

After 3 weeks of feeding my OCD, I have reached paralysis through analysis. Each of the newer tech shafts provided better performance numbers than the S400 but each had their obvious drawbacks. The PX feels and plays stout. The impact is more harsh than the other two, even when soft-stepped. The C-Taper wins the feel game but I wouldn't expect those shafts to hold up long-term. There will be re-shaft projects over time due to how thin the metal design is. We've all read about it. Now I understand it and would expect it - although not welcome considering the premium price of these shafts.

 

On performance, both show better numbers than the S400. On impact feel, the S400 sits right in the middle. The S400 does feel the most active in its kick while the other two less so but in very different ways. Anyway, that's been my experience.

That would explain why so many people have had the tips bend on their C tapers. I game T100’s with C-taper 125 S+ and I’m currently demoing some 620 MB’s with Project X 6.0’s against them. Feel is very individual but for me the C-taper feels softer at impact and overall stiffness feels basically the same.
 

C-taper 125S+ = 6.7 FCM

C-taper 120S = 6.2 FCM

Project X 6.0 = 6.5 FCM

so that makes sense why C-taper felt softer to you, because it is almost half a flex softer.

[KevCannon]

I’m glad somebody mentioned the issue with the C Taper bent tips. For anyone that practices fairly regularly, you will most likely have to deal with a bent tip. C Taper felt like it always had a bit higher balance point vs PX, as i was almost always fit into px 6.0, C Taper 120, and px LZ 6.0’s.