Jump to content

Actual, technical definition of swing weight


Recommended Posts

I would be obliged if someone could tell me the technical definition of swing weight.  From watching a video of a scale in action, it appears to be a measure of the degree to which the portion of the shaft more than 14 inches from the butt outweighs that portion of the club within 14 inches of the butt.  This may or may not be expressed as grams per inch of the 14 inches then converted to the letter number combination mostly used.

 

Thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 34
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I think this page from Dave Tutelman is probably the best reference.   https://www.tutelman.com/golf/design/swingwt1.php#history  

The term "swingweight" is an English language misnomer.  It's neither a measurement of weight, nor is it taken when the club is swung.  As you've seen by looking at the measurement device, it is actua

To add to what @Noodler said above, it is also confusing because it was a system devised when there were fewer variables. They didn't have a wide variety of steel shafts back then covering a 50g+ rang

Posted Images

The term "swingweight" is an English language misnomer.  It's neither a measurement of weight, nor is it taken when the club is swung.  As you've seen by looking at the measurement device, it is actually a measurement of balance about a fulcrum 14" from the butt end of the club.  I think the term swingweight confuses golfers and the way the measurement values are expressed add to that confusion.  If the measurement was instead stated as a percentage, I think more golfers would understand that the measurement is not absolute, but rather it is relative.  For example, if we instead would state that the "swingweight" for a club is 54%, then it might be more obvious that many clubs of different total weight could also be at that 54% value, but not feel the same when swung.

 

For the true absolute measurement of the dynamic heft of a golf club when swung, learn about the MOI of a club.

Edited by Noodler
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

To add to what @Noodler said above, it is also confusing because it was a system devised when there were fewer variables. They didn't have a wide variety of steel shafts back then covering a 50g+ range like we do now, same for grips. When those two variables are relatively fixed, swingweight can be applied pretty universally. Once they start changing though, it completely goes out the window. 

  • Like 1

Taylormade SIM 10.5* Diamana X'17 70XX 
Taylormade SIM Ti V2 15* Kuro Kage XD 80TX || Taylormade SIM Ti Tour Issue 16* Kuro Kage 80XTS
Taylormade SIM Max 18.5* Tensei Pro White 90TX || Taylormade GAPR Lo 3 18.5* Kuro Kage 100XTS Hybrid
Taylormade RSI UDI 20* Project X PXi 7.0
Taylormade 
RSI UDI 23* Project X PXi 7.0
Bridgestone J40 DPC 4i-7i 27*- 35* Brunswick Precision Rifle FCM 7.0
Bridgestone J40 CB 8i-PW 39*- 48* Brunswick Precision Rifle FCM 7.0
Vokey Mild Raw 8620 54* Brunswick Precision Rifle FCM 7.0
Vokey SM6 58* Oil Can Low Bounce K-Grind Brunswick Precision Rifle FCM 7.0
Scotty Cameron Newport Tour Red Dot || Scotty Cameron Newport 2 Pro Platinum

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Noodler said:

The term "swingweight" is an English language misnomer.  It's neither a measurement of weight, nor is it taken when the club is swung. 

 

Minor side note: It might be measured statically, but the swing weight concept was formulated and developed based on dynamic testing and feel so it's only half a misnomer ?

 

Edited by Stuart_G
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, jvincent said:

I think this page from Dave Tutelman is probably the best reference.

 

https://www.tutelman.com/golf/design/swingwt1.php#history

 

 

Should be noted, the actual approximate equation is on the second page and there are 6 pages in total discussing swing weight, heft and MOI.

Edited by Stuart_G
Link to post
Share on other sites

The guys above are correct of course.  Just adding that there are indeed discrete torque numbers to the SW system.  I.e. a perfect D0 in torque units is 213.5 oz-in (or in the more known torque units "foot pounds" is 1.112 ft-lb or lb-ft) at the 14" fulcrum.  The numbers work out to 1.75 oz-in (0.009 lb-ft) per swingweight as shown in this table in Tutelman's site: https://www.tutelman.com/golf/design/swingwt4.php

Since it's balanced on that fulcrum you can have 2 clubs measure the same SW with massively different total weights and feel.

 

My SW Excel calculator was based on the one from @dieselG which has the same basis as above, and can be downloaded in this thread:

 https://forums.golfwrx.com/topic/1761398-swingweight-vs-gripping-down-from-d2-to-b3-rant/

 

FWIW as a feel reference, if a TaylorMade torque wrench is rated at 40 in-lb, that converts to 3.33 "foot pounds" which would be beyond Z9 on a SW scale.

 

Side thought:  Since MOI measuring like an Auditor has a zero fulcrum point at the butt, would an MOI match be better if the fulcrum was around 4" from the butt, closer to where the wrists hinge (although you'd be able to backweight or "trick the scale")?

 

  • Like 1

D Adams XTD, 70M4X 3W TEE CBX, HZBk75S 5W Titleist 915F, D+80X

3I Srixon Z 545 4H Adams S 9031 6I-PW Mizuno MP-54, C Taper Lite X

GW Nike VPC, Tour V X 54 60 Cleveland CBX, DG S300 Cure CX3

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, joostin said:

Side thought:  Since MOI measuring like an Auditor has a zero fulcrum point at the butt, would an MOI match be better if the fulcrum was around 4" from the butt, closer to where the wrists hinge (although you'd be able to backweight or "trick the scale")?

 

 

Don't want to completely derail this thread, but where does the notion of 4" from the butt come from?  When I grip a club and hinge my wrists, that hinge is at the very butt end of the club.  Why 4"?

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Noodler said:

 

Don't want to completely derail this thread, but where does the notion of 4" from the butt come from?  When I grip a club and hinge my wrists, that hinge is at the very butt end of the club.  Why 4"?

 

I can only guess since I don't know where you got the number from, but I would expect it's from a point roughly between the two hands as if you were to look at the two hands as generating a couple to rotate the club.  Is that the actual point of rotation?  No, not really.  Since the hands are a moving point of reference, the actual center or rotation is constancy moving.  A fact that makes even MOI an imperfect reference value, not matter what axis of rotation is used.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Stuart_G said:

 

I can only guess since I don't know where you got the number from, but I would expect it's from a point roughly between the two hands as if you were to look at the two hands as generating a couple to rotate the club.  Is that the actual point of rotation?  No, not really.  Since the hands are a moving point of reference, the actual center or rotation is constancy moving.  A fact that makes even MOI an imperfect reference value, not matter what axis of rotation is used.

That's true, I guess it's a case where the meauring cannot replicate reality, so the existing MOI about the butt end may be the best we can do practically. @Noodler I've just seen 4" and 6" referenced on the forum as somewhere between the wrists, but that probably only applies to a waggle.  Similarly certain swings like a chip without wrist hinge can rotate around the spine, so I'll take back the 4" fulcrum thought!

D Adams XTD, 70M4X 3W TEE CBX, HZBk75S 5W Titleist 915F, D+80X

3I Srixon Z 545 4H Adams S 9031 6I-PW Mizuno MP-54, C Taper Lite X

GW Nike VPC, Tour V X 54 60 Cleveland CBX, DG S300 Cure CX3

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, joostin said:

That's true, I guess it's a case where the meauring cannot replicate reality, so the existing MOI about the butt end may be the best we can do practically. @Noodler I've just seen 4" and 6" referenced on the forum as somewhere between the wrists, but that probably only applies to a waggle.  Similarly certain swings like a chip without wrist hinge can rotate around the spine, so I'll take back the 4" fulcrum thought!

 

I guess it totally depends on how you swing a club.  If you kind of pull your lead hand backward while pushing your trailing hand forward at impact then I guess you could make an argument for the club's axis of rotation being somewhere near where the hands interface with each other on the grip.  However, I'm a lead arm focused "swinger".  My right arm/hand are merely along for the ride.  So for me, I see the fulcrum as definitely being the butt end of the club where my lead wrist hinges.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, joostin said:

The guys above are correct of course.  Just adding that there are indeed discrete torque numbers to the SW system.  I.e. a perfect D0 in torque units is 213.5 oz-in (or in the more known torque units "foot pounds" is 1.112 ft-lb or lb-ft) at the 14" fulcrum.  The numbers work out to 1.75 oz-in (0.009 lb-ft) per swingweight as shown in this table in Tutelman's site: https://www.tutelman.com/golf/design/swingwt4.php

Since it's balanced on that fulcrum you can have 2 clubs measure the same SW with massively different total weights and feel.

 

My SW Excel calculator was based on the one from @dieselG which has the same basis as above, and can be downloaded in this thread:

 https://forums.golfwrx.com/topic/1761398-swingweight-vs-gripping-down-from-d2-to-b3-rant/

 

FWIW as a feel reference, if a TaylorMade torque wrench is rated at 40 in-lb, that converts to 3.33 "foot pounds" which would be beyond Z9 on a SW scale.

 

Side thought:  Since MOI measuring like an Auditor has a zero fulcrum point at the butt, would an MOI match be better if the fulcrum was around 4" from the butt, closer to where the wrists hinge (although you'd be able to backweight or "trick the scale")?

 


Like Stuart says, the 4" inch fulcrum is "someones estimated point of rotation" thinking the middle of the hands is that point, but the actual point of rotaion vary during the swing.

Anyway, the debates about the SW scale is never ending, we had enough of those about changing grip weights, especially "what happens to SW" when we go from standard to MID size, but we never had a debate about THIS:.....Actual weight on the SW scales side of the fulcrum, here a example of 2 different shaft weights, both with a STD 50 gram grip.....

image.png.8de50af0cbf2c77b2cbf1e0cc3cc7431.png


The SW scale can match a set where 1 club is already tuned up, and we want a copy of that one. We cant and never could navigate on SW values when we change grip or shaft weight (grip of shaft weight is invisible for the scale, it has no clue what changed, only the user has knowledge of that). The above example is one of the "not mentioned" and visual for all cases who tells we cant mess with anything grip side and think the scale still returns value we know the meaning of since 5 grams change grip side change return values with 1 SWP (when the BP is 4 inch from the butt of that mass), The combined BP of the DG shaft and grip is 5.47" from the butt, the combined BP of the 95 grams shaft and grip is 5.24" from the butt, or 0.23" as difference.
 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/19/2020 at 10:06 PM, Valtiel said:

To add to what @Noodler said above, it is also confusing because it was a system devised when there were fewer variables. They didn't have a wide variety of steel shafts back then covering a 50g+ range like we do now, same for grips. When those two variables are relatively fixed, swingweight can be applied pretty universally. Once they start changing though, it completely goes out the window. 

 

I believe the increased availability of varied weight components (shafts, grips, club heads ) makes the swing weight scale more helpful than ever before.

For example putter manufacturers decided to produce heavier heads, which in turn provoked grip producers to make heavier grips (so that the increased head and grip weights would offset each other to make for a playable (reasonably balanced ) final swing weight.

KZG SP700 driver

Srixon F65 3-wood

Srixon H65 3, 4 hybrids

Mizuno MP63 5 thru 9-iron

Cleveland RTX 48-52-56-64 wedges

Scotty Cameron Classic III putter

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Fairway14 said:

 

I believe the increased availability of varied weight components (shafts, grips, club heads ) makes the swing weight scale more helpful than ever before.

For example putter manufacturers decided to produce heavier heads, which in turn provoked grip producers to make heavier grips (so that the increased head and grip weights would offset each other to make for a playable (reasonably balanced ) final swing weight.


That is fine for putters, and it is great when people understand the variables, but unfortunately most don't. Swingweight scales would need to be far more sophisticated e.g. digital scales where you can input things like grip weight and shaft weight to really give people the "proper" information. 

Taylormade SIM 10.5* Diamana X'17 70XX 
Taylormade SIM Ti V2 15* Kuro Kage XD 80TX || Taylormade SIM Ti Tour Issue 16* Kuro Kage 80XTS
Taylormade SIM Max 18.5* Tensei Pro White 90TX || Taylormade GAPR Lo 3 18.5* Kuro Kage 100XTS Hybrid
Taylormade RSI UDI 20* Project X PXi 7.0
Taylormade 
RSI UDI 23* Project X PXi 7.0
Bridgestone J40 DPC 4i-7i 27*- 35* Brunswick Precision Rifle FCM 7.0
Bridgestone J40 CB 8i-PW 39*- 48* Brunswick Precision Rifle FCM 7.0
Vokey Mild Raw 8620 54* Brunswick Precision Rifle FCM 7.0
Vokey SM6 58* Oil Can Low Bounce K-Grind Brunswick Precision Rifle FCM 7.0
Scotty Cameron Newport Tour Red Dot || Scotty Cameron Newport 2 Pro Platinum

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Valtiel said:


That is fine for putters, and it is great when people understand the variables, but unfortunately most don't. Swingweight scales would need to be far more sophisticated e.g. digital scales where you can input things like grip weight and shaft weight to really give people the "proper" information. 

 

I've got a postage scale that is suitable for weighing grips , heads, shafts. I've got a swing weight scale.

Variables affecting swing weight are well known; for example........

1) an inch change in length equate to a 6 swing weight point change,

2)n change in head weight of 2 grams equals a 2 swing weight point change,

3) a change in grip-grip end weight of 5 grams equals a 1 swing weight point change.

 

So, one can change the length of shafts, change grip weights, add lead tape to club heads etc...and know in advance the club's final swing weight number.

KZG SP700 driver

Srixon F65 3-wood

Srixon H65 3, 4 hybrids

Mizuno MP63 5 thru 9-iron

Cleveland RTX 48-52-56-64 wedges

Scotty Cameron Classic III putter

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Fairway14 said:

 

I've got a postage scale that is suitable for weighing grips , heads, shafts. I've got a swing weight scale.

Variables affecting swing weight are well known; for example........

1) an inch change in length equate to a 6 swing weight point change,

2)n change in head weight of 2 grams equals a 2 swing weight point change,

3) a change in grip-grip end weight of 5 grams equals a 1 swing weight point change.

 

So, one can change the length of shafts, change grip weights, add lead tape to club heads etc...and know in advance the club's final swing weight number.


But that is exactly my point, and the point of parts of this conversation. That final swing weight number as you mention is useless without accounting for the variables in a way you aren't mentioning here. What I mean by that is, 5g of grip weight makes a swingweight scale read 1 point lighter, but the club isn't actually one point lighter, because that is not how a swingweight scale is supposed to be used. The same goes for shaft weight. Here are some examples to illustrate the point.

- Take your standard "D2" 7-iron with a 50g grip and a 130g shaft. Let's say for the sake of simplicity that the total weight of this club is 460g. Now add a jumbo grip that weighs 80g. Your club is now 30g heavier (490g) and now swingweights 6pts lighter (C6). Shoot, that is really light! Now we need to add approximately 12g to the head to get it back to D2, and now the club weighs 502g. Obviously this 502g D2 club is going to feel and play significantly different than the original 460g D2 club. Yes the weight is distributed differently, but those two clubs will not feel the same. 

- Take the same club and change the grip to a lightweight 25g model. Now your club weighs 445g and measures D7, too heavy! Subtract 10g of headweight to bring it back down to D2, and how your club weighs 435g. 435g D2 versus 502g D2. Same swingweight, 67g difference in total weight. 

- Now take that 435g D2 club and change out the 130g for a 100g shaft with the same balance point. Now the entire club weighs 405g, a full 97g lighter than the 502g club yet they still both measure D2.

The point is that swingweight is completely useless if you do not know shaft weight, total weight, and grip weight, and this where people get messed up chasing swingweight numbers when they shouldn't be. 

Edited by Valtiel
  • Like 1

Taylormade SIM 10.5* Diamana X'17 70XX 
Taylormade SIM Ti V2 15* Kuro Kage XD 80TX || Taylormade SIM Ti Tour Issue 16* Kuro Kage 80XTS
Taylormade SIM Max 18.5* Tensei Pro White 90TX || Taylormade GAPR Lo 3 18.5* Kuro Kage 100XTS Hybrid
Taylormade RSI UDI 20* Project X PXi 7.0
Taylormade 
RSI UDI 23* Project X PXi 7.0
Bridgestone J40 DPC 4i-7i 27*- 35* Brunswick Precision Rifle FCM 7.0
Bridgestone J40 CB 8i-PW 39*- 48* Brunswick Precision Rifle FCM 7.0
Vokey Mild Raw 8620 54* Brunswick Precision Rifle FCM 7.0
Vokey SM6 58* Oil Can Low Bounce K-Grind Brunswick Precision Rifle FCM 7.0
Scotty Cameron Newport Tour Red Dot || Scotty Cameron Newport 2 Pro Platinum

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Valtiel said:


But that is exactly my point, and the point of parts of this conversation. That final swing weight number as you mention is useless without accounting for the variables in a way you aren't mentioning here. What I mean by that is, 5g of grip weight makes a swingweight scale read 1 point lighter, but the club isn't actually one point lighter, because that is not how a swingweight scale is supposed to be used. The same goes for shaft weight. Here are some examples to illustrate the point.

- Take your standard "D2" 7-iron with a 50g grip and a 130g shaft. Let's say for the sake of simplicity that the total weight of this club is 460g. Now add a jumbo grip that weighs 80g. Your club is now 30g heavier (490g) and now swingweights 6pts lighter (C6). Shoot, that is really light! Now we need to add approximately 12g to the head to get it back to D2, and now the club weighs 502g. Obviously this 502g D2 club is going to feel and play significantly different than the original 460g D2 club. Yes the weight is distributed differently, but those two clubs will not feel the same. 

- Take the same club and change the grip to a lightweight 25g model. Now your club weighs 445g and measures D7, too heavy! Subtract 10g of headweight to bring it back down to D2, and how your club weighs 435g. 435g D2 versus 502g D2. Same swingweight, 67g difference in total weight. 

- Now take that 435g D2 club and change out the 130g for a 100g shaft with the same balance point. Now the entire club weighs 405g, a full 97g lighter than the 502g club yet they still both measure D2.

The point is that swingweight is completely useless if you do not know shaft weight, total weight, and grip weight, and this where people get messed up chasing swingweight numbers when they shouldn't be. 

 

I understand your point but don't believe it is a practical one. For example, the "extreme component grip and, or, head weights" are usually only found for putters.

There is relatively little weight variance ranges for the swing club (wedges, irons, hybrids, metal woods) heads and grips.

So, your point about the dead weight of clubs (versus swing weight) is a good one. And you're right that dead weight should be  a consideration. But the reality is that extremely heavy dead weight clubs are hardly ever assembled, it's just not a common thing people find. On the "light" side, in recent years some misguided equipment companies have promoted super light shafts as a way for players to increase their swing speed. These light overall dead weight clubs are produced to a nice balanced normal type swing weight, but they often cause players to struggle finding good swing rhythm and tempo. So, to your point, I agree that (in the case of super light clubs) swing weight number alone may be deceiving.

 

KZG SP700 driver

Srixon F65 3-wood

Srixon H65 3, 4 hybrids

Mizuno MP63 5 thru 9-iron

Cleveland RTX 48-52-56-64 wedges

Scotty Cameron Classic III putter

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Fairway14 said:

 

I've got a postage scale that is suitable for weighing grips , heads, shafts. I've got a swing weight scale.

Variables affecting swing weight are well known; for example........

1) an inch change in length equate to a 6 swing weight point change,

2)n change in head weight of 2 grams equals a 2 swing weight point change,

3) a change in grip-grip end weight of 5 grams equals a 1 swing weight point change.

 

So, one can change the length of shafts, change grip weights, add lead tape to club heads etc...and know in advance the club's final swing weight number.

 

We're trying to help you understand that you're missing a critical piece in the problem with swingweight values.  Swingweight only is a measure of relative balance.  It's not a measure of weight at all.  Because it's missing the total weight, it doesn't account for what a golfer actually feels when it comes to the dynamic heft required to swing the club.  Just because two clubs both measure D2 on a swingweight scale is meaningless without knowledge of the weights of all of the components and the distribution of the weight across those components.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Fairway14 said:

 

I understand your point but don't believe it is a practical one. For example, the "extreme component grip and, or, head weights" are usually only found for putters.

There is relatively little weight variance ranges for the swing club (wedges, irons, hybrids, metal woods) heads and grips.

So, your point about the dead weight of clubs (versus swing weight) is a good one. And you're right that dead weight should be  a consideration. But the reality is that extremely heavy dead weight clubs are hardly ever assembled, it's just not a common thing people find. On the "light" side, in recent years some misguided equipment companies have promoted super light shafts as a way for players to increase their swing speed. These light overall dead weight clubs are produced to a nice balanced normal type swing weight, but they often cause players to struggle finding good swing rhythm and tempo. So, to your point, I agree that (in the case of super light clubs) swing weight number alone may be deceiving.

 

 

Although you seem to understand that there is more to this, you're making an assumption about overall weight not varying much; and that's just not true.  You can have clubs be widely varying in overall weight while measuring the same on a swingweight scale.  When they're measured on an MOI machine (a real absolute measurement of the "weight" felt when swung), you find that they're quite different; like comparing swinging a feather to a telephone pole.

Edited by Noodler
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Fairway14 said:

 

I understand your point but don't believe it is a practical one. For example, the "extreme component grip and, or, head weights" are usually only found for putters.

There is relatively little weight variance ranges for the swing club (wedges, irons, hybrids, metal woods) heads and grips.

So, your point about the dead weight of clubs (versus swing weight) is a good one. And you're right that dead weight should be  a consideration. But the reality is that extremely heavy dead weight clubs are hardly ever assembled, it's just not a common thing people find. On the "light" side, in recent years some misguided equipment companies have promoted super light shafts as a way for players to increase their swing speed. These light overall dead weight clubs are produced to a nice balanced normal type swing weight, but they often cause players to struggle finding good swing rhythm and tempo. So, to your point, I agree that (in the case of super light clubs) swing weight number alone may be deceiving.

 


I agree that the heavier side is less common, but the lighter side most definitely is, as you mentioned. That is the bigger concern, especially when it comes to steel shafts which can range from 70-130g. But larger grips are far more popular these days as well, and you can find 100 threads on people asking how to "restore" their club to the "proper" swingweight after putting on a heavier midsized grip, and it is this approach and attitude that the basic swingweight scale seems to promote and that many of us here try to correct. 

Taylormade SIM 10.5* Diamana X'17 70XX 
Taylormade SIM Ti V2 15* Kuro Kage XD 80TX || Taylormade SIM Ti Tour Issue 16* Kuro Kage 80XTS
Taylormade SIM Max 18.5* Tensei Pro White 90TX || Taylormade GAPR Lo 3 18.5* Kuro Kage 100XTS Hybrid
Taylormade RSI UDI 20* Project X PXi 7.0
Taylormade 
RSI UDI 23* Project X PXi 7.0
Bridgestone J40 DPC 4i-7i 27*- 35* Brunswick Precision Rifle FCM 7.0
Bridgestone J40 CB 8i-PW 39*- 48* Brunswick Precision Rifle FCM 7.0
Vokey Mild Raw 8620 54* Brunswick Precision Rifle FCM 7.0
Vokey SM6 58* Oil Can Low Bounce K-Grind Brunswick Precision Rifle FCM 7.0
Scotty Cameron Newport Tour Red Dot || Scotty Cameron Newport 2 Pro Platinum

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Noodler said:

 

We're trying to help you understand that you're missing a critical piece in the problem with swingweight values.  Swingweight only is a measure of relative balance.  It's not a measure of weight at all.  Because it's missing the total weight, it doesn't account for what a golfer actually feels when it comes to the dynamic heft required to swing the club.  Just because two clubs both measure D2 on a swingweight scale is meaningless without knowledge of the weights of all of the components and the distribution of the weight across those components.

 

Already answered. 

KZG SP700 driver

Srixon F65 3-wood

Srixon H65 3, 4 hybrids

Mizuno MP63 5 thru 9-iron

Cleveland RTX 48-52-56-64 wedges

Scotty Cameron Classic III putter

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Noodler said:

 

Although you seem to understand that there is more to this, you're making an assumption about overall weight not varying much; and that's just not true.  You can have clubs be widely varying in overall weight while measuring the same on a swingweight scale.  When they're measured on an MOI machine (a real absolute measurement of the "weight" felt when swung), you find that they're quite different; like comparing swinging a feather to a telephone pole.

 

I've answered this point already. Specifically, putter clubs are the primary category where component weights have become extreme. To a lesser degree companies are assembling iron sets with super light shafts, and that does cause a conflict where swing weight may be at a proper balance number but the over all too light dead weight 

of the club (s) causes the player swing tempo-rhythm problems. For the swing clubs (wedges, irons, hybrids, woods) , too heavy of a dead weight is very rare, and probably not worthy of much discussion.

KZG SP700 driver

Srixon F65 3-wood

Srixon H65 3, 4 hybrids

Mizuno MP63 5 thru 9-iron

Cleveland RTX 48-52-56-64 wedges

Scotty Cameron Classic III putter

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Valtiel said:


I agree that the heavier side is less common, but the lighter side most definitely is, as you mentioned. That is the bigger concern, especially when it comes to steel shafts which can range from 70-130g. But larger grips are far more popular these days as well, and you can find 100 threads on people asking how to "restore" their club to the "proper" swingweight after putting on a heavier midsized grip, and it is this approach and attitude that the basic swingweight scale seems to promote and that many of us here try to correct. 

 

It's true that larger diameter grips are gaining popularity.  WINN company has good solutions with an impressive selection of mid and jumbo size grips that are relatively light weight. For those that don't like WINN, companies such as Golf Pride offer mid size grips that are not extraordinarily heavy. for example my GP CP2 Wrap mid size grips 

only decrease swing weight by 1.5 to 2 points (compared to a standard GP Tour Velvet grip). This loss of swing weight due to heavier grips can be off set by a bit of lead tape to the heads, and the overall increase of dead weight to the clubs is insignificant.

I do think people are putting worse than ever do to the industry trend of heavy putter heads-heavy grips. Sledgehammers are not good for the putting game.

KZG SP700 driver

Srixon F65 3-wood

Srixon H65 3, 4 hybrids

Mizuno MP63 5 thru 9-iron

Cleveland RTX 48-52-56-64 wedges

Scotty Cameron Classic III putter

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Fairway14 said:

 

It's true that larger diameter grips are gaining popularity.  WINN company has good solutions with an impressive selection of mid and jumbo size grips that are relatively light weight. For those that don't like WINN, companies such as Golf Pride offer mid size grips that are not extraordinarily heavy. for example my GP CP2 Wrap mid size grips 

only decrease swing weight by 1.5 to 2 points (compared to a standard GP Tour Velvet grip). This loss of swing weight due to heavier grips can be off set by a bit of lead tape to the heads, and the overall increase of dead weight to the clubs is insignificant.

I do think people are putting worse than ever do to the industry trend of heavy putter heads-heavy grips. Sledgehammers are not good for the putting game.


But the overall point is swingweight is not a gold standard, it is just one method of measurement, and many (maybe even most) people do not take the time to actually experiment and development a sense of feel or find what works for them. This idea then that slapping some lead tape on the head because a heavier grip is tricking the scale is not only misguided for the purposes of utilizing swingweight as a measurement, but also misguided as a means of actually finding the right feel for you as a player, because you are chasing a number just for the sake of "appeasing" the scale. Once the variables start changing, so does the actual swingweight that will result in the same feel as before, and in most cases that same feel isn't even possible anymore, which is why many of us advocate going completely by feel and ONLY using the swingweight scale at the end to document the results. 

In your hypothetical scenario that the bigger grip is causing a "loss" of two swingweight points (10g of grip weight) that you then add ~4g of head weight to make up for, you now have a club that is 14g heavier overall which most people will in fact notice and will not feel like the same "swingweight" it started as.  

Taylormade SIM 10.5* Diamana X'17 70XX 
Taylormade SIM Ti V2 15* Kuro Kage XD 80TX || Taylormade SIM Ti Tour Issue 16* Kuro Kage 80XTS
Taylormade SIM Max 18.5* Tensei Pro White 90TX || Taylormade GAPR Lo 3 18.5* Kuro Kage 100XTS Hybrid
Taylormade RSI UDI 20* Project X PXi 7.0
Taylormade 
RSI UDI 23* Project X PXi 7.0
Bridgestone J40 DPC 4i-7i 27*- 35* Brunswick Precision Rifle FCM 7.0
Bridgestone J40 CB 8i-PW 39*- 48* Brunswick Precision Rifle FCM 7.0
Vokey Mild Raw 8620 54* Brunswick Precision Rifle FCM 7.0
Vokey SM6 58* Oil Can Low Bounce K-Grind Brunswick Precision Rifle FCM 7.0
Scotty Cameron Newport Tour Red Dot || Scotty Cameron Newport 2 Pro Platinum

Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Fairway14 said:

 

I understand your point but don't believe it is a practical one. For example, the "extreme component grip and, or, head weights" are usually only found for putters.

There is relatively little weight variance ranges for the swing club (wedges, irons, hybrids, metal woods) heads and grips.

So, your point about the dead weight of clubs (versus swing weight) is a good one. And you're right that dead weight should be  a consideration. But the reality is that extremely heavy dead weight clubs are hardly ever assembled, it's just not a common thing people find. On the "light" side, in recent years some misguided equipment companies have promoted super light shafts as a way for players to increase their swing speed. These light overall dead weight clubs are produced to a nice balanced normal type swing weight, but they often cause players to struggle finding good swing rhythm and tempo. So, to your point, I agree that (in the case of super light clubs) swing weight number alone may be deceiving.

 

I think people often modify clubs -- especially oversize grips -- without understanding the significant effects those changes have on weight and feel.

 

just bought a set of Steelfiber shaft pulls that someone had put on midsize MCC +4 grips with a wrap of masking tape, and two wraps of what looked like duct tape -- creating an oversize grip.

 

Between the tape and the midsize grips, the Total weight per grip was ~70 grams. Which would take a huge amount of tip weighting to balance.

 

I wonder if the previous owner pulled the shafts because they were "unplayable" without realizing that the issue was cause by his desire for oversize (heavy) grips. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Valtiel said:


But the overall point is swingweight is not a gold standard, it is just one method of measurement, and many (maybe even most) people do not take the time to actually experiment and development a sense of feel or find what works for them. This idea then that slapping some lead tape on the head because a heavier grip is tricking the scale is not only misguided for the purposes of utilizing swingweight as a measurement, but also misguided as a means of actually finding the right feel for you as a player, because you are chasing a number just for the sake of "appeasing" the scale. Once the variables start changing, so does the actual swingweight that will result in the same feel as before, and in most cases that same feel isn't even possible anymore, which is why many of us advocate going completely by feel and ONLY using the swingweight scale at the end to document the results. 

In your hypothetical scenario that the bigger grip is causing a "loss" of two swingweight points (10g of grip weight) that you then add ~4g of head weight to make up for, you now have a club that is 14g heavier overall which most people will in fact notice and will not feel like the same "swingweight" it started as.  

 

You seem to be implying that players are targeting swing weight to achieve some sort of original "feel". You may be right about that but I don't use swing weight to try and duplicate the original/former feel of a club. I use swing weight to achieve a club that swings-feels balanced when swung. For me a club has an out of balance feel when the swing weight is lower than C9 or above D5. My own definition of swing weight it's a measure of how "balanced" the club feels when swung.

When I installed my CP2 Wrap mid size grips it brought down the swing weight of my clubs 1.5 to 2 points, from D3 to D1. I find the D1 balance fine for my driver-hybrids, and iron set. For my wedges the mid size grip took the SW down to D2, and I did add a bit of lead tape those heads to get the wedges up to D4, D5, which is easy to do.

Your point about advocating players going by feel/playing shots etc... is a good one, nothing wrong with that .Lee Trevino never wanted to know the specs of any of his clubs.

he just hit shots and then added lead tape, or changed shaft length or  loft or lie angle etc...until he was satisfied with shot results.

KZG SP700 driver

Srixon F65 3-wood

Srixon H65 3, 4 hybrids

Mizuno MP63 5 thru 9-iron

Cleveland RTX 48-52-56-64 wedges

Scotty Cameron Classic III putter

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, COL_B said:

 

 

I wonder if the previous owner pulled the shafts because they were "unplayable" without realizing that the issue was cause by his desire for oversize (heavy) grips. 

Most likely, yes.

KZG SP700 driver

Srixon F65 3-wood

Srixon H65 3, 4 hybrids

Mizuno MP63 5 thru 9-iron

Cleveland RTX 48-52-56-64 wedges

Scotty Cameron Classic III putter

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Valtiel said:


That is fine for putters, and it is great when people understand the variables, but unfortunately most don't. Swingweight scales would need to be far more sophisticated e.g. digital scales where you can input things like grip weight and shaft weight to really give people the "proper" information. 

 

Actually, the swing weight scale is a very poor tool for putters IMO.   The swing weight scale and concept was designed as an method to help approximate an MOI match in a set.  The putter is the one club in the bag in which rotation (about the butt) during the swing is almost non-existent so MOI in a putter is really has no practical usefulness.

 

Now sure, the relationship between the head weight and grip side weight is very important in a good fitting putter.  But the place where the swing weight scale breaks down with putters is that the length between the two (butt weight and head weight) doesn't really play much of a part in finding the best weights.

 

 

Edited by Stuart_G
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Our picks

    • 2021 FARMERS WITB & Equipment Photos- Links and comments
      We are back on the ground at the 2021 Farmers PGA Tour event. Please add you comments in this thread. Here are links to all the galleries:
       
      Special galleries:
      2021 Farmers - Tuesday #1
      2021 Farmers - Tuesday #2
      2021 Farmers - Tuesday #3
      2021 Farmers - Tuesday #4
      2021 Farmers - Tuesday #5
       
      2021 Farmers - Tuesday #6
       
      2021 Farmers - Tuesday #7
       
      Cameron putters - Farmers 2021
       
      Odyssey 2-ball Ten - Farmers 2021
       
      Project X Even Flow RipTide MX & LX proto shafts - Framers 2021
       
      TaylorMade putter cover for Torrey Pines - Farmers 2021
       
      Sling Shot training aid - Farmers 2021
       
       
      • 37 replies
    • 2021 American Express WITB & Equipment Photos- Links and comments
      We are back on the ground at the American Express PGA event.
       
      Here are links to all the galleries:
       
      Cameron putters - 2021 American Express
      PXG Gen 4 prototype drivers - new putters
      UST Maymiya LinQ shafts - American Express 2021
      Mitsubishi Kaili & MMT shafts - American Express 2021
      Titleist TSi 2 & TSi 3 hybrids - American Express 2021
      TaylorMade putter cover for Palm Springs/Palm Desert - American Express
      New Aldila Synergy, Ascent & prototype shafts - American Express 2021
      Callaway Apex Pro iron, Epic Driver and fairway, Apex iron & hybrid - American Express 2021
      New Perfect Practice training aids - American Express 2021
      New KBS prototype shafts - American Express 2021
       
        • Like
      • 17 replies
    • Kevin Na WITB: 2021 Sony Open Winner (pics and specs)
      Kevin Na's What's In The Bag?
       
      Specs are on the front-page as well-
      https://www.golfwrx.com/645178/kevin-nas-winning-witb-2021-sony-open/
       
      Driver- Callaway GBB Epic (9 degrees) Graphite Design Tour AD GP 6 TX
      3w- Callaway Epic Flash Sub Zero (13.5 degrees) Mitsubishi Diamana RF 70 TX
      5w- Callaway Epic Flash Sub Zero (18 degrees) Mitsubishi Diamana RF 80 TX
      Hybrid- PXG 0317 X Gen 2 (19 degrees) Graphite Design Tour AD DI 95X
      Irons- Callaway Rogue Pro (4), Callaway Apex Pro 16 (5-PW) True Temper Dynamic Gold Tour Issue S400
      Wedges- Callaway Mack Daddy 4 (54), Vokey Design prototype (’18) (60-06K ) True Temper Dynamic Gold Tour Issue S400
      Putter- Odyssey Toulon Madison
      Grips- Golf Pride Tour Velvet Plus4
      Ball- Titleist Pro V1x
       

       
        • Like
      • 51 replies
    • SIM up close
      Here some pictures up close of the SIM only for now.  
       
      Wk
        • Thanks
        • Like
      • 174 replies
    • 2021 EQUIPMENT LAUNCHES (Running thread of all our launch pieces)
      A continually updated table of contents of our front page 2021 equipment launch stories for your reading pleasure. 
       

      Callaway
      Apex irons, Apex Pro irons, Apex DCB irons Apex hybrids, Apex Pro hybrids  
      Mizuno 
      MCraft putters
      Ping
      G425 driver G425 fairway woods, hybrids and crossover G425 irons
       
      PXG 
      PXG 0211 series
        • Thanks
        • Like
      • 60 replies

×
×
  • Create New...