Would you pay $750 or more for a shaft? Autoflex

[Bubbtubbs]

3 hours ago, LeoLeo99 said:

 

After seeing all the love for TXG on here I watched a few of their videos.  Thought there must be another TXG channel.  Those guys are insufferable.  And long winded.  And need to take a statistics or data analysis class.  

Not enough Michael Bay explosions for your taste?

[SPIF]

4 hours ago, Fairway14 said:

 

Nobody has to take my word for it. TXG videos are on You Tube for anyone interested to watch and decide for themselves what's what.

 

It seems you have an axe to grind with these guys.  I've watched plenty of their videos.  I disagree with your assessment of their games, and more importantly, knowledge base.

[pinhigh27]

My main problem with TXG is they don't point out things that are obvious to people with some launch monitor background and in fact they actually use clearly erroneous data to drive interest , ie the fact that foresights distance algorithm is severely jacked for low spin shots. Matt is essentially never going to hit it 350 on a flat course at sea level, but they post numbers all the time where he is. 

 

The drive at 5:15 of their recent autoflex video had the following stats: 176 ball speed,  13.7 launch, 1264 backspin. Their quad reported 336 carry, 374 total. 

 

Put those numbers into flightscope with hard surface and you get 302 carry, 337 total. on a medium surface its 314 total. At best its 37 yards off and up to 60 yards off. 

 

It's a huge difference, but they use it to sell clicks. No one is flying it 335 with 176 ball speed under normal conditions. I don't understand how someone can be a "leading fitter" and not make these basic things known. They also try to use things like what quad displays as "efficiency" and act like it means anything when based on the way quads measure it, clubhead speed is never going to be correct, resulting in poor smashes. I guess it's internally consistent but if you were an random person with no experience you'd think " why do these good golfers supposedly get 1.4 smash on every day" when it has to do with where foresight measures CHS. 

Edited October 2, 2020 by pinhigh27

[Whited107x]

10 hours ago, mosesgolf said:

TXG has done 2 Youtube videos on the Autoflex.  The 2nd video was even better than the first.  So if you could pick up a legit 10-15 yards, swing harder, and maintain or even improve accuracy would you pay $750 for a shaft.  For me YES!!!!!!!  Heck I paid apprrox $350 for the Ventus Velocore and it was worth it for me.  More yards, swing harder, and not spray it.  It looks like Autoflex has that and more.  I for one am looking to see what happens with this shaft going forward.  IMO this shaft appears to be a game changer.

save £750 and use that money for lessons. shafts clubs etc can only do so much. its ultimately down to the individual swinging the club. people get hooked on new technology yet ignore the most important part.

[pinhigh27]

Its also funny they call it the straightest driver when in the recent video like every shot he hits is a huge hook. The first one is 60 yards right. 

[mosesgolf]

42 minutes ago, Whited107x said:

save £750 and use that money for lessons. shafts clubs etc can only do so much. its ultimately down to the individual swinging the club. people get hooked on new technology yet ignore the most important part.

Well I’m a scratch golfer 3 out of my last 4 rounds at my home course have been under par.  I can save a stroke with more fairways hit and perhaps score another bird by being 10-15 yards longer.   I’d pay $750 for that. 

[Fairway14]

7 hours ago, myspinonit said:

 

 

Since you have apparently taken your eye off the ball, the Q at hand is "Would you pay $750 or more for a shaft? Autoflex".

 

 I would not pay $750 for a shaft.

Also, I agree with the guy who earlier questioned trying to swing a soft and lightweight driver shaft while also within the bag are relatively heavy and stout iron shafts.

[Fairway14]

51 minutes ago, Whited107x said:

save £750 and use that money for lessons. shafts clubs etc can only do so much. its ultimately down to the individual swinging the club. people get hooked on new technology yet ignore the most important part.

 

Tell it !

[LeoLeo99]

7 hours ago, Bubbtubbs said:

Not enough Michael Bay explosions for your taste?

Never heard of him. 

[2bGood]

1 hour ago, Whited107x said:

save £750 and use that money for lessons. shafts clubs etc can only do so much. its ultimately down to the individual swinging the club. people get hooked on new technology yet ignore the most important part.

So at what point does technology start to matter in your opinion? When should someone start to take an interest in how technology help their game?

 

I have been golfing about 20 years and I am not sure I have an answer for this. When I took up the game I was fanatic, took weekly lesson and got fitted etc. Looking back I am not sure the fitting mattered much early on, but as I play pretty standard off the shelf specs, basic fitting has never been am important factor for me. But given the fitting was the same price as about 2 lessons, not really a big deal.

 

I would say I have wasted more money on lessons than gear over the years. Finding the right pro for you is not easily done. 

 

 

[Howard_Jones]

maybe my thinking and ideas is no longer valid, but ONE shaft or club in the bag, can make just as much issues as it makes improvements....even if that club works good.

We hardly ever see a plæayer where the full bag is fitted correct, and all players knows the phenomena "the swing of the day". If we have a "mixed bag", we will have days where some clubs works better than the others, next round it can be totally opposite what clubs that woks and what clubs that dont.

When we go to the xtreme like her and use total/shaft weight to gain club speed, we will very often go below the players ability to make a good impact on a consistent basis. The club is the players "dancing partner" and non of us deadly players has a swing so good that we aint "leaning on" our Dancing partner at some stages in the swing. That means weight is also a stabilizing factor, but if you actually can play without "support" from your club, go ahead....

But now im back to where i started, because the question is now, how is resistance and total weight in the rest of your bag? Does a shaft like the Autoflex fit in at all, or does it push you in direction of a full bag change?

I simply dont find it "natural" or beneficial, to play a shaft like this, combined with DG X100 as irons to put it on the edge, but the shaft might do wonders for some player, but think about ALL strokes you swing on a round.....we move the swing we use from one club to the other, so what happens if the clubs becomes "very different" to each other? can we expect both to work good the same day then?

Again, that shaft might make wonders for some players, but most will be better off by a good club fitting in general, and if your are the DIY type of player, you can make wonders out of the club you got, almost for free by following this easy DIY driver tune up. Some of them who did claimes they gained more than 30 yards, but they did not change the head or shaft, it was not needed.
 

  

Edited October 2, 2020 by Howard_Jones

[Red4282]

Im about as anti technology as it comes, but this thread is ridiculous. If you are familiar with the TXG, you clearly see he has gains from this shaft, and thats not gains from a wonky simulator formula. Gains With ball speed. Yea he hooked a bunch in the beginning but after the tweaks  to the heads, his dispersion was as good if not better than his usual, and he was swinging out of his shoes. Its not a miracle product by any means, yea go get lessons, but if you gained 10 yards from a shaft AND improved dispersion, you would be stupid to think there isnt something unique going on here. It certainly goes against traditional wisdom.Id like to see them test it against another cheap ol 50 gram weak shaft tho. See if the traditional wisdom is a myth or if theres something different with this product.

[Red4282]

9 minutes ago, Howard_Jones said:

maybe my thinking and ideas is no longer valid, but ONE shaft or club in the bag, can make just as much issues as it makes improvements....even if that club works good.

We hardly ever see a plæayer where the full bag is fitted correct, and all players knows the phenomena "the swing of the day". If we have a "mixed bag", we will have days where some clubs works better than the others, next round it can be totally opposite what clubs that woks and what clubs that dont.

When we go to the xtreme like her and use total/shaft weight to gain club speed, we will very often go below the players ability to make a good impact on a consistent basis. The club is the players "dancing partner" and non of us deadly players has a swing so good that we aint "leaning on" our Dancing partner at some stages in the swing. That means weight is also a stabilizing factor, but if you actually can play without "support" from your club, go ahead....

But now im back to where i started, because the question is now, how is resistance and total weight in the rest of your bag? Does a shaft like the Autoflex fit in at all, or does it push you in direction of a full bag change?

I simply dont find it "natural" or beneficial, to play a shaft like this, combined with DG X100 as irons to put it on the edge, but the shaft might do wonders for some player, but think about ALL strokes you swing on a round.....we move the swing we use from one club to the other, so what happens if the clubs becomes "very different" to each other? can we expect both to work good the same day then?

Again, that shaft might make wonders for some players, but most will be better off by a good club fitting in general, and if your are the DIY type of player, you can make wonders out of the club you got, almost for free by following this easy DIY driver tune up. Some of them who did claimes they gained more than 30 yards, but they did not change the head or shaft, it was not needed.
 

  

Yes that is exactly my concerns i raised as well, how functional is it during a round. Its one thing to get in a groove hitting dozens of balls on a simulator but a totally different animal switching back and forth from light and weak and strong and stiff constantly throughout your round.

Edited October 2, 2020 by Red4282

[Howard_Jones]

5 minutes ago, Red4282 said:

Yes that is exactly my concerns i raised as well, how functional is it during a round. Its one thing to get in a groove hitting dozens of balls on a simulator but a totally different animal switching back and forth from light and weak and strong and stiff constantly throughout your round.

For years we have said "play length" is the most important fitting parameter, but that was never true, the most important for scoring is how the bag as a sum is buildt up or whats called set make up.

A bag with "mixed" clubs is exactly that, and it will also play like that, so the better the bag is matched to the player as a sum, the easier it will be for the player to put the right swing on them, he should not have to adjust his swing for 13 different full swing clubs, or 12 thats matched and 1 outsider that works good when you have "warmed up" with a bucket of balls with that club, we dont play good golf that way.

Edited October 2, 2020 by Howard_Jones

[Fairway14]

10 minutes ago, Howard_Jones said:

For years we have said "play length" is the most important fitting parameter, but that was never true, the most important for scoring is how the bag as a sum is buildt up or whats called set make up.

A bag with "mixed" clubs is exactly that, and it will also play like that, so the better the bag is matched to the player as a sum, the easier it will be for the player to put the right swing on them, he should not have to adjust his swing for 13 different full swing clubs, or 12 thats matched and 1 outsider that works good when you have "warmed up" with a bucket of balls with that club, we dont play good golf that way.

 

Yes, absolutely correct. And this is why it is essentially worthless to "get fit" for clubs by making consecutive swings with a single club.

On the golf course a player moves from driver to swinging a 7-iron to a putter to a hybrid to a wedge to a putter again etc....

Any productive "fitting" should replicate on course conditions, not have a player make dozens of consecutive driver swings or 6-iron swings.

[pinhigh27]

30 minutes ago, Red4282 said:

Im about as anti technology as it comes, but this thread is ridiculous. If you are familiar with the TXG, you clearly see he has gains from this shaft, and thats not gains from a wonky simulator formula. Gains With ball speed. Yea he hooked a bunch in the beginning but after the tweaks  to the heads, his dispersion was as good if not better than his usual, and he was swinging out of his shoes. Its not a miracle product by any means, yea go get lessons, but if you gained 10 yards from a shaft AND improved dispersion, you would be stupid to think there isnt something unique going on here. It certainly goes against traditional wisdom.Id like to see them test it against another cheap ol 50 gram weak shaft tho. See if the traditional wisdom is a myth or if theres something different with this product.

golf isn’t played on a simulator. Take 1500 spin to the course and tell me how it works out. He is going to spray it all over the place. Is that ball speed even that high for him, I seem to recall him hitting similar ball speed in the past ? The exaggerated distances are from how foresight overcalculates distance on low spin shots , which has a way bigger effect than a few mph he may have added. 
 

he isn’t hitting it anywhere close to 370 in real life. 330 on a really good ball on flat ground with no bs. 

[Red4282]

Just now, pinhigh27 said:

golf isn’t played on a simulator. Take 1500 spin to the course and tell me how it works out. He is going to spray it all over the place. Is that ball speed even that high for him, I seem to recall him hitting similar ball speed in the past ? The exaggerated distances are from how foresight overcalculates distance on low spin shots , which has a way bigger effect than a few mph he may have added. 
 

he isn’t hitting it anywhere close to 370 in real life. 330 on a really good ball on flat ground with no bs. 

I understand that, as does ian, and thats why you see him trying to loft up or move weights to get the spin up. He has hit 180 before, but not consistently, he lives in the low 170s normally. Also, low spin doesnt make you “spray it all over the place”.

[Red4282]

29 minutes ago, Howard_Jones said:

For years we have said "play length" is the most important fitting parameter, but that was never true, the most important for scoring is how the bag as a sum is buildt up or whats called set make up.

A bag with "mixed" clubs is exactly that, and it will also play like that, so the better the bag is matched to the player as a sum, the easier it will be for the player to put the right swing on them, he should not have to adjust his swing for 13 different full swing clubs, or 12 thats matched and 1 outsider that works good when you have "warmed up" with a bucket of balls with that club, we dont play good golf that way.

The only caveat i would say, is while with the waggle test it looks incredible weak, and you can see how much it flexes,  everyone says it does not feel that way when you swing it. Hence the “autoflex” name. It somehow feels like it stiffens up the more speed you put on it. I have not swing it, but thats just what i have heard. Now being lightweight is something else, which could be an issue.

[pinhigh27]

5 minutes ago, Red4282 said:

I understand that, as does ian, and thats why you see him trying to loft up or move weights to get the spin up. He has hit 180 before, but not consistently, he lives in the low 170s normally. Also, low spin doesnt make you “spray it all over the place”.

Did you watch the video or the newest one ? Do you see how much curve the ball has ? It absolutely makes you spray it. 1200 spin is not playable. When you toe it the ball will literally go 200 yards for him and fall out of the sky 

[Red4282]

7 minutes ago, pinhigh27 said:

Did you watch the video or the newest one ? Do you see how much curve the ball has ? It absolutely makes you spray it. 1200 spin is not playable. When you toe it the ball will literally go 200 yards for him and fall out of the sky 

yes i watched both.
 

No, low spin does not directly cause bigger dispersion left to right. Spin axis determines this, To a degree and actually a higher spin rate with the same axis would result in it further offline. The one exception would be gear effect. Gear effects seem to be stronger on low spin shots and in my opinion that has more to do with moi. Low spin can cause inconsistent carry distances, you need a certain amount of spin to keep its “lift”. 

[pinhigh27]

It’s easier to tilt the axis when the backspin vector component of spin is lower. 
 

Have seen tons of people who hit it relatively straight but a little shorter, driver spin too high. They chase distance and lower spin, magically start spraying it 

[03trdblack]

I'm going to guess that TXG is going to become a distributor, if not the only North American distributor for these shafts which is why they are hyping them up so much. 

 

I just like them because they're neon pink 😁

[Valtiel]

1 hour ago, pinhigh27 said:

Did you watch the video or the newest one ? Do you see how much curve the ball has ? It absolutely makes you spray it. 1200 spin is not playable. When you toe it the ball will literally go 200 yards for him and fall out of the sky 

Matt is a normal drawer of the ball and is consistently extremely low spin, so that was a function of a low spin head in its lowest spin setting which they literally corrected in the video that you're implying people didn't watch(?) and saw his dispersion turn into a hula hoop sized plot. I'm not sure what your point is. 

As for the OP, no I wouldn't pay $750 for a shaft (I got an insane deal on the Diamana X'17 in my sig). As for @Fairway14, lighten up and back off. You came in accusing a couple of pretty well respected guys in the industry of things that you not only couldn't back up, but were actively proven wrong about. You have some valid points in the concerns you raised after you backpedaled off your initial ad hominem position, but the aggressively know-it-all attitude is not going to last long around here. Apparently you've done this before based on the other comments, so chill and stick the objective observations and be helpful, not spiteful. You are right about both Ian's and Matt's swings, just wrong about what they can do with them since they are both at scratch or better.

I also very much agree with what @Red4282, both about what they did in the short fitting, and about the usability during an actual round. It really does seem that a shaft like that would take some serious adjustment for some people and could be a classic darling on the range/disaster on the course kind of deal. Interesting though, and I would be curious to find out what supposed technology/materials the maker is hiding.  

Edited October 2, 2020 by Valtiel

[mcounci2]

You all really need to get into cars.  This is a bush league dyno queen thread.  "Let's see the timeslips."  Oh and Foresight is Dynojet and Flightscope is a Mustang Dyno, apparently.  Go check out LS1Tech or YellowBullet, some of y'all would cream your pants at the argument opportunities!!! LOL.
 

Something I think some people forget about with fittings and launch monitors- the numbers as an absolute are ABSOLUTELY MEANINGLESS.  There are WAY too many variables to control to think that you could take indoor, off-turf LM numbers to the course, or even compare LM numbers one day to some LM numbers the next.  It's a measurement system based completely on relative measurement, useful only for qualitative comparison (more/less spin, higher/lower launch, shorter/longer carry, etc) between club/ball combos on whatever particular day.  At least that's how I look at it.

I think TXG actually has a pretty decent grasp of this...I can't recall ever watching an on course video where Matt carries 286 and then wonders why he isn't carrrying 335 like he did on the launch monitor.  Many of their LM videos are done to compare two or more different products in back-to-back testing, which, to me, is the correct application of the technology.  Maybe they could use a lesson in normally-distributed representative datasets, but they're making 20min videos, not conducting research for peer review, so there's a practicality problem there.

RE criticism of clubfitting.  Ok, sure, does the equipment matter THAT much?  Probably not.  However, golf is a mental game first and last.  If you think your clubs are helping, they are.  If your clubs give you confidence because they're custom fit, you'll play better.  If you think a clubfitting is fun and you have a good time, it was worth it.  Let people have fun the way they want to have fun.  I'm not ever going to tell someone they're doing golf wrong as long as it isn't hampering someone else's ability to play.

RE the autoflex.  I think it seems interesting.  If I tried a $700 shaft that made my dispersion 40% better and increased my carry by 7%, I'd buy two.

[SoCalTitleist]

what happened to the WRX TXG partnership , havent seen any of that in a long time. 

[golffeen007]

14 hours ago, Fairway14 said:

Edited October 2, 2020 by golffeen007

[golffeen007]

14 hours ago, Fairway14 said:

I suggest ignoring everything the two charlatans who run TXG are trying to sell you.

People watch TXG for what they are. I wouldn’t buy a shaft blindly because of what either Matt or Ian did with it, but I like the guys channel a lot. Very informative and even try to help golfers with shaft choices in their live casts. 

[golffeen007]

14 hours ago, Fairway14 said:

 

Edited October 2, 2020 by golffeen007

[Bubbtubbs]

3 hours ago, LeoLeo99 said:

Never heard of him. 

You're a fortunate soul indeed.

[nsxguy]

14 hours ago, Fairway14 said:

 

Posing as highly skilled players when neither Ian or Matt breaks 80,

 

12 hours ago, gwelfgulfer said:

 

 

Matt also isn't in the golf industry anymore, but was a Class A pro.

 

12 hours ago, Fairway14 said:

 

What are you babbling about now? I guarantee you that if Jack Nicklaus or Tiger Woods (or any Tour pro you like) were posting messages on Golfwrx they would wholeheartedly agree that learning how to properly swing a club is how one improves their game.

 

What is HE babbling about ?

 

I wonder if you really ARE @LICC. He'd be exactly the kind of guy to think in advance and create a 2nd user ID for when the first inevitably got banned.

 

Of course he mostly trolled the Rules Forum but,,,,,,,,,,

Edited October 2, 2020 by nsxguy