The Only Way To Measure Club Length Accurately

[EmperorPenguin]

My first experience asking about how club length is measured was at a local Nevada Bob's.  The salesman simply took a tape measure, put the metal tab on the corner of the grip cap and then extended the tape to the corner of the heel.  It seems crude, but good enough for government work.  I want to be exact.  I later on read in a Golfsmith article that the correct way to measure is to start at an imaginary point where the club, when soled perfectly flat, starts even with the bottom edge of the sole from the ground and extends up the shaft all the way to the corner of the grip cap.  For a cambered sole, that imaginary starting point is hard to locate because it is located slightly below the edge of the heel.  I asked my clubmaking buddy and he suggested that I use a solid aluminum ruler, lay the club along the edge of it, and start at that imaginary point.  I did that, but I find that it is hard to locate that starting point when measuring a short iron or wedge.

 

So for the last set of irons I was trimming, what I did was locate that imaginary point on the 5 iron and noticed that the top hosel edge started at 2.25", so I kept that edge on the ruler throughout the set to measure.  It worked for all except the 3 iron, which was weird because on the ruler it seemed right and I did not question it because I had that clubhead lined up exactly to 2.25" at the top edge of the hosel.  After trimming I noticed that, when compared to the 4 iron, the 3 iron was only 1/8" longer.  Comparing ruler the 3 and 4 are 1/2" apart, but after putting grips on the 3 was almost the same as the 4.  So I had to go back in there and put in an extension for the shaft I overtrimmed.  This was a nightmare.

 

I gave up and decided to buy a club measurement rack from GolfWorks and it works perfectly.  From now on, I am using the club measurement rack because for me no other method seems to work.  For you clubmakers who got by without a club measurement rack, I ask: how do you reliably measure a club length without making a mistake?  Before buying this rack I used the solid aluminum ruler, which up until recently worked well most of the time.  It can be a real pain when trying to locate that imaginary starting point.  In the picture below you can clearly see what I am talking about.  I'm finally relieved now I have this rack.

 

 

 

 

Edited October 2, 2020 by EmperorPenguin

[Howard_Jones]

We have a issue here, the way OEMs mesure clubs is NOT the same for all, they all have their own standards and methods, so "accurately" will have to be vs the actual OEMs measure method, we CANT use the same method for all and have the numbers fit.....

So what do we mean by "accurately" and compared to what? 

All club makers i know in person is aware of this issue, and we DONT use several different rulers, but use the ruler and system we have, and as long as all clubs is measured by the same ruler and fits the player, the number values isolated does not matter, they will never be transferable to another ruler system anyway.

The standards for each OEM is described in this link, and it vary for both sole/lie angle and the grip, and as example Titleist measure with a variable lie, but UN-gripped clubs, TM used a fixed 60* lie and included the full butt cap of the grip, others something in-between those 2 where variable lie and to the edge of the grip.(ex dome) seems to be the most common.

That means the specs we see on each OEMs web page is NOT compatible number values, we have to measure and judge them with the same standards as the actual OEM to get the same numbers.
 

 

[Stuart_G]

4 hours ago, EmperorPenguin said:

For you clubmakers who got by without a club measurement rack, I ask: how do you reliably measure a club length without making a mistake? 

 

I just cut or angled a block of wood at 60* to a ruler laid out on the bench.    A simple, quick, and cheap alternative to buying one.  Just as accurate too.

Edited October 2, 2020 by Stuart_G

[Nessism]

I'm a fan of the Mitchell club length ruler which uses a 60 degree pin.  It's easy to use and has improved the consistency of my builds.  Highly recommended.

[EmperorPenguin]

I forgot to mention in the opening post that the camber of the sole moves the starting point about 1/8".  Aside from flat-sole clubs, is it safe to assume that most clubs' camber would result in that 1/8" difference?

[Stuart_G]

1 hour ago, EmperorPenguin said:

I forgot to mention in the opening post that the camber of the sole moves the starting point about 1/8".  Aside from flat-sole clubs, is it safe to assume that most clubs' camber would result in that 1/8" difference?

 

Difference between what and what?   But most likely the answer is no.  Traditionally length is measured to the sole of the club, not the top of the camber.  But as Howard said, it doesn't really matter what you do as long as you are consistent with all your clubs.  If you'd rather measure to the top of the camber, go for it.

Edited October 2, 2020 by Stuart_G

[Howard_Jones]

1 hour ago, EmperorPenguin said:

I forgot to mention in the opening post that the camber of the sole moves the starting point about 1/8".  Aside from flat-sole clubs, is it safe to assume that most clubs' camber would result in that 1/8" difference?

If you follow the link i gave you, and read about Mizuno, you would find a term they call "pin height" who is a "correction factor" of 1/8" due to sole camber (heel to toe), sole bounce etc.

The ruler you are using is designed for "center of the sole aligning", and its hard to set lie angle correct because we need some "eye balling" to see if heel or toe side has a equal height above ground, but sole shape can fool us....(hand grinding before chrome on forged heads, meaning the heads actual shape might not be like that).

A ruler like the one Mitchell has, is using a "pin" who partly takes some of the sole camber out of play, but not as much as 1/8".

The simplest and safest is the USGA standard with a fixed 60* lie where the sole rest against a flat surface with contact at what ever point at the sole who is the lowest. 

The more the tool demands of user skills and precautions, the harder it is to use it right, so the simpler the better....
 

[EmperorPenguin]

Why 60 degrees?  I suppose it is because it is the median lie for the set?  My clubmaking book lists the 5 and 6 irons as 60 degrees, with increments going down to 56 degrees for the 1 iron and 64 degrees for the sand wedge.

 

What about the sand wedge?  If it has a high bounce, do we measure from where the flange touches the pin or plate?

[North Butte]

18 minutes ago, EmperorPenguin said:

Why 60 degrees?  I suppose it is because it is the median lie for the set? 

USGA/R&A arbitrarily chose 60 degrees as the lie angle at which drivers are measured for conformance to the new maximum club length Rule they instituted a few years ago. Since that is the only standardized length-measurement technique in existence, many clubmakers have adopted a 60-degree standard lie angle for measurement other clubs as a matter of simplicity and consistency. It also has the useful side effect of making it possible to use the same fixture for measuring all clubs, not just drivers. 

[EmperorPenguin]

I looked on eBay for a Mitchell Golf Clublength Ruler and found no results.  Mitchell Golf's website has the ruler for sale for $83.

 

https://www.mitchellgolf.com/shop/repair-tools/clublength-measuring-tools/clublength-ruler-measuring-tool/

 

This is in the description.

The sole centering method takes the club’s sole radius out of the equation and the length is measured in a linear relationship between the shaft and the heel of the club head. Other measuring devices that rely on resting the sole of the club head on a flat surface will give inconsistent measurements throughout the set. Clubs have different sole radiuses within each set and differ from brand to brand. Usually, the lowest point of a club’s sole radius is not in the center of club’s face, but is more towards toe. Measuring devices that rest the club’s sole on a flat surface produce measurments up to 1/2″ longer then measurements taken with our sole centering method.

 

Ha, and I just bought my club measurement rack from GolfWorks and Mitchell here is implying that even the rack may not be accurate.  For now, I will keep it. 

[Stuart_G]

8 hours ago, EmperorPenguin said:

I looked on eBay for a Mitchell Golf Clublength Ruler and found no results.  Mitchell Golf's website has the ruler for sale for $83.

 

https://www.mitchellgolf.com/shop/repair-tools/clublength-measuring-tools/clublength-ruler-measuring-tool/

 

This is in the description.

The sole centering method takes the club’s sole radius out of the equation and the length is measured in a linear relationship between the shaft and the heel of the club head. Other measuring devices that rely on resting the sole of the club head on a flat surface will give inconsistent measurements throughout the set. Clubs have different sole radiuses within each set and differ from brand to brand. Usually, the lowest point of a club’s sole radius is not in the center of club’s face, but is more towards toe. Measuring devices that rest the club’s sole on a flat surface produce measurments up to 1/2″ longer then measurements taken with our sole centering method.

 

Ha, and I just bought my club measurement rack from GolfWorks and Mitchell here is implying that even the rack may not be accurate.  For now, I will keep it. 

 

"Accuracy" requires a well defined basis from which to judge.    It's just a length measurement, it's not rocket science.  Any ruler is measuring the distance from pt A to pt B.      The problem is that there is no one single definition of what two points should be used in the context of a golf club.

 

So different rulers just have different point A's and point B's which is being measured.   All that quote really says is that mitchell thinks their choice of how those two points are defined is better then someone else's.  It and especially the bit about better consistency is just marketing.   Any ruler will give consistent results if used consistency.

Edited October 3, 2020 by Stuart_G

[Howard_Jones]

Resolution vs precision....

If we have 2 hand held stop watches, one had a resolution down to 1/10 of a second, the other down to 1/1000 of a second. Tell med who of them would be the most precise?

The less movable parts or possible user errors, the better will precision be.

Just try to measure your own irons, and take notes of numbers.
Measure them first with their actual lie angle, the way you mean the ruler should be used.
Then set the lia angle fixed to 60*, and measure all clubs again, take notes...
Publish those numbers...
 

[Seamus_McDuff]

So using the USGA method, about how much would the measured length change on a club with a 60* lie angle that was then bent to 56* or 64*?

[North Butte]

23 minutes ago, Seamus_McDuff said:

So using the USGA method, about how much would the measured length change on a club with a 60* lie angle that was then bent to 56* or 64*?

That depends on the shape of the sole, the heel-toe length of the clubhead and so forth. You won't really know exactly until you measure a given club at both lie angles. 

 

In my experience, for most irons the difference in measured length when measuring at 60 degrees versus the actual lie angle is maybe 1/8" or 1/4", something in that neighborhood. Note that I said "measured length", of course the actual length of the club is whatever it is, it's only your measuring method that changes...important to keep that in mind lest you disappear down the rabbit hole...

[Howard_Jones]

2 hours ago, Seamus_McDuff said:

So using the USGA method, about how much would the measured length change on a club with a 60* lie angle that was then bent to 56* or 64*?

if we reverse the ruler (point zero at butt side), we will se that the clubs shrink or stretch by about 1* mm for each 1* on lie angle, so 3* on line becomes about 1/8" and 4* is a tad more than that.

 

[joostin]

Went down this rabbit hole before: https://forums.golfwrx.com/topic/1751466-differences-in-club-length-measuring/

Sadly as everyone says there is no "one way", just self consistency.  Since USGA's standard is 60* on a flat plate, that's what many including myself prefer.  Golfworks defines length measured through the centerline of the shaft, shown below, as it appears the Mitchell one does.  But even Golfworks' own rulers don't all measure like that!  This is the biggest difference between measuring methods as shown in the thread above.

 

Because of that difference, it affects how people call out BBGM.

 

Sole grounding on a flat plate vs. on a pin at the approx. center of the face.  Fixed 60* vs. at lie angle...

On top of that, you get into the grip end (no grip, base of dome, end of dome).  Take your pick!

[SecondandGoal]

On 10/2/2020 at 4:37 AM, Stuart_G said:

 

I just cut or angled a block of wood at 60* to a ruler laid out on the bench.    A simple, quick, and cheap alternative to buying one.  Just as accurate too.

 I attached a hinge to the end of my bench, made a mark to line it up on at 60*, and secured a 48" metal ruler to the bench. As Howard mentions above, it may not match some of the OEM measurements, but it's going to be consistent, and just as accurate as a purpose-built ruler for a fraction of the cost (I think the ruler cost about $3 and the hinge about $1).

[Howard_Jones]

1 hour ago, joostin said:

Went down this rabbit hole before: https://forums.golfwrx.com/topic/1751466-differences-in-club-length-measuring/

Sadly as everyone says there is no "one way", just self consistency.  Since USGA's standard is 60* on a flat plate, that's what many including myself prefer.  Golfworks defines length measured through the centerline of the shaft, shown below, as it appears the Mitchell one does.  But even Golfworks' own rulers don't all measure like that!  This is the biggest difference between measuring methods as shown in the thread above.

 

Because of that difference, it affects how people call out BBGM.

 

Sole grounding on a flat plate vs. on a pin at the approx. center of the face.  Fixed 60* vs. at lie angle...

On top of that, you get into the grip end (no grip, base of dome, end of dome).  Take your pick!

So true,. we have a complete "model line up" of different mesure methods and "standards", so those who complain about a lack of standards is wrong....its too many, and they are not always compatible and possible to convert from one "standard" to another, so all we know for sure is that 45.00" long dont really tell anything, but we do get the area of where you can expect to see that club on your ruler within plus minus about 0.5 inch, all depending on what ruler that club specs comes from, compared to what you are using. 

We have the same issue with most other specs, like Smash factor as example.
1.46 on Trackman aint the same as 1.46 on Foresight, not even when the Foresight measured both ball and club.

We can say they are like shoe numbers, some might be a little small vs size number, others is both wider and longer, but the size number is still the same.

[joostin]

21 minutes ago, Howard_Jones said:

We can say they are like shoe numbers, some might be a little small vs size number, others is both wider and longer, but the size number is still the same.

Great analogy!  Shoe size, shirt size.  We may be disappointed by what we get.  At the end of the day... what the heck, we're still playing golf!

[EmperorPenguin]

Daymn, this is complicated!  The club manufacturers need to get together and agree on a standard, then submit that standard to the USGA.

 

What is the maximum difference you guys have seen between one standard and another?  Maybe 1/2"?

[Howard_Jones]

3 hours ago, EmperorPenguin said:

Daymn, this is complicated!  The club manufacturers need to get together and agree on a standard, then submit that standard to the USGA.

 

What is the maximum difference you guys have seen between one standard and another?  Maybe 1/2"?

1/8" to 3/8" thats where we normally will be, i never say more than 3/8" so when i wrote plus minus 0.5" i think we have covered the most.

Good luck with your thinking (getting OEMs to use the same standards), you want even find a common standard for how long a uncut shaft is, and most have no clue about this, so when we compare let say 2 classics, Dynamic Gold vs Project X you have all seen that DG X100 is 130 grams, and the typical PX option as 6.5 flex is 125 grams. The reader then gets the idea that this shafts is 5 grams appart in weight.....NOPE

Project X is 0.5" longer uncut than DG is, so down to play length, we will cut off 0.5" MORE on the PX shaft than the DG shaft, so we loose weight on the PX equal to 0.5" inch who is a a little more than 1.5 grams

That means "comparable weight" is 130 for DG and 123.5 grams for PX 6.5 = 6.5 grams difference

Wood shafts the same, some is 70 grams at 46.00" = 1.52 grams pr inch, the next model could be 70 grams as 47.00" =1.49 grams pr inch...Hybrids the same, some is 41.00" uncut, others is 43.50" uncut......

So we hardly have club specs thats directly compatible as the numbers is served to us, in most cases we have to do some numbers to get a apple to apple compare, so never forget that 45.00" and 45.00" most likely is 2 different measurements, and 70 grams vs 70 grams is most likely 2 different weights....

THATs Golf club tech in a nut shell....hardly no value is transferable or compatible due to different measure standards or uncut start length. 

[NRJyzr]

11 hours ago, EmperorPenguin said:

Daymn, this is complicated!  The club manufacturers need to get together and agree on a standard, then submit that standard to the USGA.

 

What is the maximum difference you guys have seen between one standard and another?  Maybe 1/2"?

 

It's a lovely idea, but is almost certain to never happen.

 

FWIW, I bought an Auditor club ruler, just as you got the GolfWorks ruler.  I knew there was slop in the way I had been doing it, when I happened across one used, jumped on it.

 

[EmperorPenguin]

On 10/2/2020 at 9:52 AM, Howard_Jones said:

The ruler you are using is designed for "center of the sole aligning", and its hard to set lie angle correct because we need some "eye balling" to see if heel or toe side has a equal height above ground, but sole shape can fool us....(hand grinding before chrome on forged heads, meaning the heads actual shape might not be like that).

I have an idea.  Assuming you are working with standard lies, why not refer to your clubs' spec sheet to determine a lie angle for a particular club, then using a protractor to set the plate at that angle, center the sole on that plate and then eyeball the heel and toe?

[Howard_Jones]

1 hour ago, EmperorPenguin said:

I have an idea.  Assuming you are working with standard lies, why not refer to your clubs' spec sheet to determine a lie angle for a particular club, then using a protractor to set the plate at that angle, center the sole on that plate and then eyeball the heel and toe?

All that, just to get a play length measurement?

Since lie angles does have a influence on both measured play length, and SW values, i guess you can see why a good club making job has to start with control and adjustment of Loft and Lie....Then you can set your ruler to those specs, add the shaft, mark for cut....
 

[Noodler]

2 hours ago, EmperorPenguin said:

I have an idea.  Assuming you are working with standard lies, why not refer to your clubs' spec sheet to determine a lie angle for a particular club, then using a protractor to set the plate at that angle, center the sole on that plate and then eyeball the heel and toe?

 

That's exactly how I do it.  I always measure length using the club's actual lie measurement.

[Noodler]

At the end of the day, all that really matters when it comes to club length measurement is how it will impact the golfer.  I think most will argue that the very slight variation that may occur in the length increments, due to the length measurement method used, will have little impact on the golfer.  I know that I probably do not grip every club at the same exact position every single time.  It's hard to argue why a few mm might be consequential.

 

However, for me, since the club builds are verified by measuring the swingweight and MOI, the club lengths are critical to ensuring that these measurements are meaningful and trusted.  Using a fixed 60* lie angle for length measurements will not result in the level of accuracy I need for the MOI measurements.  Length is the single most impactful element in the determination of MOI (or swingweight).  Very small changes in the length will result in significant changes to the measured MOI.  So I go out of my way to be very careful about my length measurements when prepping for the build and completing the build.

[JCAG]

18 hours ago, EmperorPenguin said:

Daymn, this is complicated!  The club manufacturers need to get together and agree on a standard, then submit that standard to the USGA.

 

What is the maximum difference you guys have seen between one standard and another?  Maybe 1/2"?

Over the years there have been many attempts at getting manufacturers together to agree on standard measuring methods. All attempts have failed. They do not want to do so as it might limit their "performance claims".

[geochitown]

On 10/4/2020 at 7:25 AM, EmperorPenguin said:

I have an idea.  Assuming you are working with standard lies, why not refer to your clubs' spec sheet to determine a lie angle for a particular club, then using a protractor to set the plate at that angle, center the sole on that plate and then eyeball the heel and toe?

that’s exactly what I do, except I just go with the length at point at which the center of the sole touches 

Edited October 6, 2020 by geochitown

[johngalt312]

Ping measures and cuts drivers/woods using a fixed 60* lie angle and irons using a fixed 58* lie angle.  Unsure their position on wedges and putters.

Edited October 8, 2020 by johngalt312

[Howard_Jones]

9 hours ago, johngalt312 said:

Ping measures and cuts drivers/woods using a fixed 60* lie angle and irons using a fixed 58* lie angle.  Unsure their position on wedges and putters.

Thats not what PING say when i ask them, and i cant see any reasons for why irons would be measured with a fixed lie of 58* since thats more flat than irons is played, it makes no sense.