SIM Drivers: Can only hit cuts and can't close the face!

[Hack Daddy]

You guys are too deep down the rabbit hole. 

 

The lie angle is too FLAT.

[getitdaily]

3 hours ago, Valtiel said:

 

I think he is asking whether or not it the fade tendencies people are reporting are related to strike or face angle. The two get conflated a lot when drivers are referred to being "biased" one way or the other, combined with the still nebulous claim/wisdom that heel/toe biased weighting impacts face closure rate. 

@getitdaily, the GolfTec CG measurements show the Sim standard being pretty significantly fade biased, so I don't think that is really a question.  

Yeah, I saw that pic. Still waiting on the other site's report so I can compare to m5 and m4. They were both fade biased but there was no talk of a hard right miss. 

 

I've been toying with heavier back weights in my sim...I've tried the 21g, 19g, and did initial indoor testing with the 17g and 15g. What I'm seeing is that face angle is much more to blame than fade CoG. The fade CoG certainly is a culprit. But I think it's a smaller factor than face angle. 

 

In that same CoG pic, sim.max showed to not be heavily fade biased but folks are talking about a hard right miss with it too.

[Red4282]

4 hours ago, Valtiel said:

 

I think he is asking whether or not it the fade tendencies people are reporting are related to strike or face angle. The two get conflated a lot when drivers are referred to being "biased" one way or the other, combined with the still nebulous claim/wisdom that heel/toe biased weighting impacts face closure rate. 

@getitdaily, the GolfTec CG measurements show the Sim standard being pretty significantly fade biased, so I don't think that is really a question.  

Why it confused me is, with what he is asking is a club using cog moved towards the the toe is going to be fade biased, because it will be much harder to square, and easier to come in open at impact. Its not necessarily the fault of the golfer, in some instances. Thats why i was unsure, if trackman showed face open to path, that doesnt tell us anything really, until we change to a different driver and suddenly start squaring it up.

Edited September 21, 2020 by Red4282

[getitdaily]

10 minutes ago, Red4282 said:

Why it confused me is, with what he is asking is a club using cog moved towards the the toe is going to be fade biased, because it will be much harder to square, and easier to come in open at impact. Its not necessarily the fault of the golfer, in some instances. Thats why i was unsure, if trackman showed face open to path, that doesnt tell us anything really, until we change to a different driver and suddenly start squaring it up.

Showing face open to path tells us a lot. Face determines where the ball.starts and determines how much sidespin will be imparted on the ball. CoG tells how much sidespin will be increased or decreased because of gear effect. 

 

A fade biased CoG means more right spin regardless of contact (this is relative to strike and face angle). Play a draw with perfect path and face to path and a fade biased CoG will reduce draw spin. Play a fade with perfect path and face to path and fade CoG will increase fade spin, before strike is factored in.

 

What I was saying is that claims of a hard right miss have to be a lot more face and face to path than fade biased CoG. Knowing path and face to path allows the golfer to adjust the face angle and maybe help with face orientation. 

[Trap Junior]

5 minutes ago, getitdaily said:

Showing face open to path tells us a lot. Face determines where the ball.starts and determines how much sidespin will be imparted on the ball. CoG tells how much sidespin will be increased or decreased because of gear effect. 

 

A fade biased CoG means more right spin regardless of contact (this is relative to strike and face angle). Play a draw with perfect path and face to path and a fade biased CoG will reduce draw spin. Play a fade with perfect path and face to path and fade CoG will increase fade spin, before strike is factored in.

 

What I was saying is that claims of a hard right miss have to be a lot more face and face to path than fade biased CoG. Knowing path and face to path allows the golfer to adjust the face angle and maybe help with face orientation. 

What drivers have a fade biased COG?   Been playing the Mizuno ST200 and its a pull draw machine.  Awful driver.

[getitdaily]

3 minutes ago, Trap Junior said:

What drivers have a fade biased COG?   Been playing the Mizuno ST200 and its a pull draw machine.  Awful driver.

Google 2019 cog and moi report...click on the link for my golf sqy

[Trap Junior]

11 minutes ago, getitdaily said:

Google 2019 cog and moi report...click on the link for my golf sqy

Thanks.  Pity there isn't one for this year.  Would Sim be fade biased?  I struggle with too much negative axis tilt and get pull draws/hooks

[getitdaily]

50 minutes ago, Trap Junior said:

Thanks.  Pity there isn't one for this year.  Would Sim be fade biased?  I struggle with too much negative axis tilt and get pull draws/hooks

That's a swing issue that you'll have a hard time finding a driver to help with...

[GooseHook]

On 9/5/2020 at 9:26 AM, jjmurry said:

Playing the max right now and have fallen in love with the upright + open + higher back weight. The club has become "workable" in that I can play either a draw or fade should I desire to. 

I'm definitely going to try the Upright+lower setting this weekend. I've been hitting my good drives a little too high right now and it wouldn't hurt to try a different lie angle out. 

 

The driver Max in STD LOFT definitely looks flat, even more so than my Sub Zero fairways which are flat by current standards. And I play my driver somewhat shorter than standard which doesn't help.

[Hack Daddy]

4 hours ago, Trap Junior said:

What drivers have a fade biased COG?   Been playing the Mizuno ST200 and its a pull draw machine.  Awful driver.

 

Any TM; Cally sub zero line; Ping LST.

 

Like I said, drivers these days are too FLAT for mass consumption. 

[getitdaily]

10 minutes ago, Hack Daddy said:

 

Any TM; Cally sub zero line; Ping LST.

 

Like I said, drivers these days are too FLAT for mass consumption. 

G410 lst in neutral is fade biased CoG. Epic flash sz in neutral is draw biased CoG. Nearly all tm drivers are fade biased. The D type TMs are not.

[Hack Daddy]

6 minutes ago, getitdaily said:

G410 lst in neutral is fade biased CoG. Epic flash sz in neutral is draw biased CoG. Nearly all tm drivers are fade biased. The D type TMs are not.

 

CoG means nothing if the ball starts out on a push/fade/push slice flight. For example, the sub zero line is 3° flatter than non sub zero. You really think weight CoG means the average person is going to draw the ball?! Lmao

[Red4282]

8 hours ago, getitdaily said:

Showing face open to path tells us a lot. Face determines where the ball.starts and determines how much sidespin will be imparted on the ball. CoG tells how much sidespin will be increased or decreased because of gear effect. 

 

A fade biased CoG means more right spin regardless of contact (this is relative to strike and face angle). Play a draw with perfect path and face to path and a fade biased CoG will reduce draw spin. Play a fade with perfect path and face to path and fade CoG will increase fade spin, before strike is factored in.

 

What I was saying is that claims of a hard right miss have to be a lot more face and face to path than fade biased CoG. Knowing path and face to path allows the golfer to adjust the face angle and maybe help with face orientation. 

Moveable cog doesnt affect gear effects nearly as much as it effects the players rate of rotation with the clubface. Thats why im saying an open face on trackman doesnt mean much because it can be the player, OR the head or any combination of both causing it.

[Red4282]

Duplicate

Edited September 21, 2020 by Red4282

[Valtiel]

6 hours ago, Hack Daddy said:

 

CoG means nothing if the ball starts out on a push/fade/push slice flight. For example, the sub zero line is 3° flatter than non sub zero. You really think weight CoG means the average person is going to draw the ball?! Lmao

Hasn't it already been gone over and pretty much decided that lie angle with the driver has an extremely minimal impact on start direction? I have also never seen any published lie angles on modern drivers that were anywhere near "too flat". 
 

2 hours ago, Red4282 said:

Moveable cog doesnt affect gear effects nearly as much as it effects the players rate of rotation with the clubface. Thats why im saying an open face on trackman doesnt mean much because it can be the player, OR the head or any combination of both causing it.

That is actually something I would really like to see tested on something like GEARs to determine rate of face closure, because i'm a bit skeptical as i've never heard anything other than anecdotal evidence to support the clubface rotation/CG bias concept. 

[getitdaily]

32 minutes ago, Valtiel said:

Hasn't it already been gone over and pretty much decided that lie angle with the driver has an extremely minimal impact on start direction? I have also never seen any published lie angles on modern drivers that were anywhere near "too flat". 
 

That is actually something I would really like to see tested on something like GEARs to determine rate of face closure, because i'm a bit skeptical as i've never heard anything other than anecdotal evidence to support the clubface rotation/CG bias concept. 

The only thing I've found on the CoG and face rotation piece is that the closer the CoG is to the shaft axis, the faster the face will rotate and the farther away from the shaft axis, the slower the face will rotate. I'd post the article but I can't find the link.

[Hack Daddy]

43 minutes ago, Valtiel said:

Hasn't it already been gone over and pretty much decided that lie angle with the driver has an extremely minimal impact on start direction? I have also never seen any published lie angles on modern drivers that were anywhere near "too flat". 
 

That is actually something I would really like to see tested on something like GEARs to determine rate of face closure, because i'm a bit skeptical as i've never heard anything other than anecdotal evidence to support the clubface rotation/CG bias concept. 

 

No, it hasn't. Lie angle on driver is extremely important. Especially at the amateur level. 

 

Any given course, on any given weekend, has a bunch of am's that hit all their clubs fine, but slice the $hyte out of driver. ESPECIALLY push slice. 

 

Modern day drivers are TOO flat for the average player. They're giving us lie angles that tour pros prefer, to keep from the massive hooks. 

[Valtiel]

5 minutes ago, Hack Daddy said:

 

No, it hasn't. Lie angle on driver is extremely important. Especially at the amateur level. 

 

Any given course, on any given weekend, has a bunch of am's that hit all their clubs fine, but slice the $hyte out of driver. ESPECIALLY push slice. 

 

Modern day drivers are TOO flat for the average player. They're giving us lie angles that tour pros prefer, to keep from the massive hooks. 

Sorry but that isn't supported by any measurable science in this case. Lie angle can only impact spin axis, and the closer the loft of a club gets to 0*, the less impact lie angle has to the point that it would take an impossibly flat/upright driver to create such a wide miss. A push is a club path -> face angle relationship problem, lie angle does not factor in here. Both @Howard_Jones and @Stuart_G have weighed in on this with more detail in the past and are more knowledgeable on the subject, but I would far sooner blame about a dozen other factors in amateur's driver slice problems than lie angle. 

[Hack Daddy]

1 minute ago, Valtiel said:

Sorry but that isn't supported by any measurable science in this case. Lie angle can only impact spin axis, and the closer the loft of a club gets to 0*, the less impact lie angle has to the point that it would take an impossibly flat/upright driver to create such a wide miss. A push is a club path -> face angle relationship problem, lie angle does not factor in here. Both @Howard_Jones and @Stuart_G have weighed in on this with more detail in the past and are more knowledgeable on the subject, but I would far sooner blame about a dozen other factors in amateur's driver slice problems than lie angle. 

 

What is a push. It is when the face is aligned with in-to-out path. Meaning the ball STARTS OUT the wrong way. Spin has zero to do with initial direction. 

 

Lie angle on irons too flat - ball STARTS off in wrong direction. 

 

No different with driver - especially when drivers are 3-4° FLATTER than they should be for amateurs. 

 

Do your homework on what off the shelf lie angles are for drivers. Especially from, for example, sub zero to draw. It's significant. To say, or believe, that lie angle isn't a factor with driver lofts... Is laughable. 

[Valtiel]

34 minutes ago, Hack Daddy said:

 

What is a push. It is when the face is aligned with in-to-out path. Meaning the ball STARTS OUT the wrong way. Spin has zero to do with initial direction. 

 

Lie angle on irons too flat - ball STARTS off in wrong direction. 

 

No different with driver - especially when drivers are 3-4° FLATTER than they should be for amateurs. 

 

Do your homework on what off the shelf lie angles are for drivers. Especially from, for example, sub zero to draw. It's significant. To say, or believe, that lie angle isn't a factor with driver lofts... Is laughable. 

I'm not saying that lie angle isn't a factor, i'm saying that it can not be responsible for what you are claiming for several reasons. As loft decreases, lie angle has less and less of an impact in start direction. Taken from Tutleman's website which breaks down the geometry:

"How much of a directional error will you get from an error in lie angle? The greater the loft, the greater the angle of error. The formula controlling the directional error is actually pretty simple:
 

DirectionalError  =  Loft * sin( LieError )
 

If the loft is zero, then lie errors don't matter. If the lie error is zero, then there is no directional error. Here's a table of where the clubface points for various lofts and lie errors.



This means that it takes 6* too flat or too upright to create just 1* of face angle change, and there are no drivers out there that are 6* flatter than any other model. Callaway and Taylormade advertise 56* as their stock lie angle, but I have literally never seen a measured driver be terribly close to that. Most Taylormade drivers are 59*-60* lie angle and Callaway are around 57*-59*. But regardless, it would take them being 6* MORE upright than that to impact face angle by 1*. And using Tutleman's face angle error chart...



We see that it takes 0.17* of face angle error to create an approximate target "miss" of 2.5 yards, which fits in to the general rule of thumb that "for every degree if lie angle error you get 3 yards of directional "miss".

This means that giving one of these amateurs that you are referring to a driver that is 6* more upright would only result in ~9 yards of difference assuming it is a 10* driver. 
 

Edited September 22, 2020 by Valtiel

[Valtiel]

Duplicate. 

Edited September 22, 2020 by Valtiel

[Hack Daddy]

38 minutes ago, Valtiel said:

I'm not saying that lie angle isn't a factor, i'm saying that it can not be responsible for what you are claiming for several reasons. As loft decreases, lie angle has less and less of an impact in start direction. Taken from Tutleman's website which breaks down the geometry:

"How much of a directional error will you get from an error in lie angle? The greater the loft, the greater the angle of error. The formula controlling the directional error is actually pretty simple:
 

DirectionalError  =  Loft * sin( LieError )
 

If the loft is zero, then lie errors don't matter. If the lie error is zero, then there is no directional error. Here's a table of where the clubface points for various lofts and lie errors.



This means that it takes 6* too flat or too upright to create just 1* of face angle change, and there are no drivers out there that are 6* flatter than any other model. Callaway and Taylormade advertise 56* as their stock lie angle, but I have literally never seen a measured driver be terribly close to that. Most Taylormade drivers are 59*-60* lie angle and Callaway are around 57*-59*. But regardless, it would take them being 6* MORE upright than that to impact face angle by 1*. And using Tutleman's face angle error chart...



We see that it takes 0.17* of face angle error to create an approximate target "miss" of 2.5 yards, which fits in to the general rule of thumb that "for every degree if lie angle error you get 3 yards of directional "miss".

This means that giving one of these amateurs that you are referring to a driver that is 6* more upright would only result in ~9 yards of difference assuming it is a 10* driver. 
 

 

I believe none of that. But I appreciate you taking the time to make such a detailed reply. We'll agree to disagree. 

[Red4282]

12 minutes ago, Hack Daddy said:

 

I believe none of that. But I appreciate you taking the time to make such a detailed reply. We'll agree to disagree. 

You dont believe in science and data? I feel like you are trolling

[Valtiel]

15 minutes ago, Hack Daddy said:

 

I believe none of that. But I appreciate you taking the time to make such a detailed reply. We'll agree to disagree. 

That is fine, I appreciate the respectful response. I would encourage you to consider what parts of your belief on the subject give you that level of conviction beyond just watching amateurs tee off though. Because unless you have a Trackman hooked up to your brain, you can't possibly be accounting for things like face rotation throughout the swing and at impact, as well as club path which stand to impact ball flight exponentially greater than lie angle. 

[Hack Daddy]

32 minutes ago, Red4282 said:

You dont believe in science and data? I feel like you are trolling

 

Is this data peer reviewed? Has it been proven for validity? Am I supposed to agree with someone because they uploaded some subjective data points? 

 

Do you honestly believe face angle doesn't change that much with true lie angle adjustment? I don't want to go down this rabbit hole, but I may have to...

[Red4282]

4 minutes ago, Hack Daddy said:

 

Is this data peer reviewed? Has it been proven for validity? Am I supposed to agree with someone because they uploaded some subjective data points? 

 

Do you honestly believe face angle doesn't change that much with true lie angle adjustment? I don't want to go down this rabbit hole, but I may have to...

I dont think you understand the concept at hand. Ever see those magnets with a rod attached that you can set on the face of the club? It indicates face angle/loft. If you move lie angle, it moves too. However, it moves MUCH more with higher lofted clubs and very little versus low lofted clubs. As mentioned a 0 lofted club it wouldnt move at all. You or anyone can validate this. You can also MEASURE IT. Its not subjective. At all.

[Valtiel]

 

10 hours ago, Hack Daddy said:

 

Is this data peer reviewed? Has it been proven for validity? Am I supposed to agree with someone because they uploaded some subjective data points? 

 

Do you honestly believe face angle doesn't change that much with true lie angle adjustment? I don't want to go down this rabbit hole, but I may have to...

 

10 hours ago, Red4282 said:

I dont think you understand the concept at hand. Ever see those magnets with a rod attached that you can set on the face of the club? It indicates face angle/loft. If you move lie angle, it moves too. However, it moves MUCH more with higher lofted clubs and very little versus low lofted clubs. As mentioned a 0 lofted club it wouldnt move at all. You or anyone can validate this. You can also MEASURE IT. Its not subjective. At all.

What Red is pointing out would be a visual example of what I was trying to get at above. As loft decreases, lie angle changes the direction the face is pointed less and less, to the point as Red mentioned, it would literally do nothing to the face angle of a club with zero loft. 

Also, just about every driver has the ability to both close the face and raise the lie angle, so a driver that is too flat can be easily corrected. 

Edited September 22, 2020 by Valtiel

[gentles]

2 hours ago, Hack Daddy said:

 

I believe none of that. But I appreciate you taking the time to make such a detailed reply. We'll agree to disagree. 

 

Given that every manufacturer has some form of super draw biased head as part of the lineup, I don't see the logic in why they would willingly market drivers which promote a slice (based on your comments about lie angles being too flat for most amateur golfers etc), when selling a driver that goes straight would be a much better decision.

 

That and I 100% with the above posters that a driver has so little loft on it that lie angle makes far less of a difference than irons and wedges - the above information is geometry/math and definitely not subjective evidence

 

[joostin]

So before it was pointed out to me that Tutelman already did the work on the lie vs loft vs where the face is pointing thing, I posted the same thing with some 3D models as visual: https://forums.golfwrx.com/topic/1718804-face-angle-vs-lie-and-loft/#latest

 

 

I'd like to say though that what I think we may be seeing in this thread and generally with 460cc more forgiving heads is this:  Sensitivity to torque/MOI about the shaft axis.  It was alluded to in a "rate of closure" comment.  Yes, the more the head is weighted toward the toe / toe-rear, the more dynamic face closure we'd get as CG tries to align with the shaft axis (in addition to toe droop and forward shaft bend). 

 

However, the farther the head's CG is away from the shaft axis, the higher the torque and MOI about that axis.  That means it's more resistant to twisting/rolling of the hands and wrists.  Since that pronation & supination of the wrists is just part of the kinetic chain, it has implications of the whole movement of your body in the swing ... which of course differs from person to person.  Some may find it more difficult to square a 460cc driver vs a 300cc driver (me included).  Some may not.  Wherever that CG lies in the clubhead certainly can affect our feel and the dynamics of our swing because of the rotation around the shaft axis.  We don't have a swingweight or MOI scale for it, but that torque and that MOI exists around the shaft axis.  Yes, CGs of all newer driver heads fit in a small 14mm x 12mm box (per mygspy's CG report), but that doesn't mean that a shift within those amounts doesn't affect some people's feel and ability to square / close / manupulate the clubhead.

 

It's actually similar to how we think of putters having toe hang vs being face balanced.  It's probably too difficult to tell, but maybe a driver toe hang test can be a rough reference showing a person's preferred face angle / CG location.  SLDR for instance should have a more vertical toe hang than SIM Max.  Who knows.

Edited September 22, 2020 by joostin

[Stuart_G]

6 hours ago, Hack Daddy said:

 

Is this data peer reviewed? Has it been proven for validity? Am I supposed to agree with someone because they uploaded some subjective data points? 

 

Do you honestly believe face angle doesn't change that much with true lie angle adjustment? I don't want to go down this rabbit hole, but I may have to...

 

Face angle doesn't' change (based on the traditional defn).   The d-plane tilts.  Not the same thing - two completely different axis of rotation of the head (despite the fact that the results are somewhat similar).  

 

Yes there is both a directional and a spin component to the lie able being off - but Tutelman covers both of those.  And Tutelman's calc's are fairly straight forward.   You can review most of them yourself if you don't believe them.

 

But if you have any calculations to dispute his results and support your opinions, feel free to share them.  Most people here are fairly open to counter arguments when some actual substance is used to try and support them.

 

 

Edited September 22, 2020 by Stuart_G