question for Hoganites...

[akanacl]

I've seen it posted that Hogans irons were bent 4* flat. Since joining this website I've seen plenty of Hogan footage, and his setup looks pretty normal as far as posture and the ball placement. For the sake of a quick description, I have a one plane swing, and my big miss ALWAYS a big hook. The occasional block is usually serviceable. Did flat lies help him combat a hook, or somehow contribute to the refinement of his swing?

[hoganfan924]

Hogan was 5'8" tall with a flat swing. His hands and ball position were a little further away from his body at address than many other players. I think his lie angles were probably just normal for him. His grinds did result in his irons setting down very open, his reminder ribs under his grips were set at 5:30 (very weak), he had extremely stiff shafts and his grips were built up. I think it's those things that were "anti-hook" althought the flat lies help too.

[slicefixer]

[quote name='hoganfan924' post='844609' date='Jan 1 2008, 06:02 PM']Hogan was 5'8" tall with a flat swing. His hands and ball position were a little further away from his body at address than many other players. I think his lie angles were probably just normal for him. His grinds did result in his irons setting down very open, his reminder ribs under his grips were set at 5:30 (very weak), he had extremely stiff shafts and his grips were built up. I think it's those things that were "anti-hook" althought the flat lies help too.[/quote]


There is NO way he was 5' 8" tall........MAYBE 5' 7"......I met him when he was in his 70's and he couldn't have been even 5' 7".......No matter, he was NOT a "tall man".......we'd have NO problem establishing that as a fact........


The clubs were DEFINITELY flat compared to MODERN "standard"........the amount would vary depending on WHAT "standard" is to you.......there is 2 degrees of difference between some companies as to what is considered "standard" nowadays.......I'm 6'0" and normally use clubs that are 1/4" inch short and 1 - 2 degrees flat.........Mr. Hogan's irons "felt" VERY flat........but, they were set up in such an unusual manner that for some "quirky" reason I have NO idea there true lie angle........My estimate of 4 degrees FLAT is based on what I'm use to.........(I've NEVER seen/felt another set "set up" in such a manner).........I can also tell you that the FELT a LOT heavier than D-1......MUCH heavier......In fact, I have a very hard time believing the "specs" in Vasquez's (although he should know as he worked for the Hogan Co.) book and would have to see the clubs "measured" with my OWN eye's to believe them........ONE question I have is this, WHICH set are we talking about? From what era? etc. BTW, for every 1/2" you shorten/lengnthen a club there is a change of 3 swingweights and 2 degrees of lie angle.........

[crew_138]

[quote name='hoganfan924' post='844609' date='Jan 1 2008, 05:02 PM']Hogan was 5'8" tall with a flat swing. [b]His hands and ball position were a little further away from his body at address than many other players.[/b] I think his lie angles were probably just normal for him. His grinds did result in his irons setting down very open, his reminder ribs under his grips were set at 5:30 (very weak), he had extremely stiff shafts and his grips were built up. I think it's those things that were "anti-hook" althought the flat lies help too.[/quote]


hoganfan924,

Because of the above... was this why he looked perfectly on plane and it looked effortless.

[provx]

how does the grind on a club effect if its open or closed? or do you mean that if you were to sole the club the way it was balanced would kind of open the face?

[hoganfan924]

[quote name='crew_138' post='844853' date='Jan 1 2008, 08:07 PM'][quote name='hoganfan924' post='844609' date='Jan 1 2008, 05:02 PM']Hogan was 5'8" tall with a flat swing. [b]His hands and ball position were a little further away from his body at address than many other players.[/b] I think his lie angles were probably just normal for him. His grinds did result in his irons setting down very open, his reminder ribs under his grips were set at 5:30 (very weak), he had extremely stiff shafts and his grips were built up. I think it's those things that were "anti-hook" althought the flat lies help too.[/quote]


hoganfan924,

Because of the above... was this why he looked perfectly on plane and it looked effortless.
[/quote]

Not exactly sure what you're asking. If you mean was this why he was able to return the shaft at impact back to it's address plane (in a DTL view), then yes, his high hands at address have a lot to do with that

[quote]how does the grind on a club effect if its open or closed? or do you mean that if you were to sole the club the way it was balanced would kind of open the face?[/quote]
The sole grind on his irons was such that if you set the club down on the ground, it would naturally open up about 5 degrees (least that's what I've read)

[Dariusz J.]

Hello everyone !

This Forum has been recently referred to me from one of friends from other fora that I am participating. I usually do not like big open fora, prefer to concentrate on smaller ones dedicated to narrow specific branches concerning swing mechanics and clubfitting. However, having been surfing for some hours through WRXForum I encountered some excellent posts (especially, bowing my head to Mr.Slicefixer and Mr.Hoganfan) as well as great bunch of real golf nuts - and decided to join it in the search for new golf knowledge. Was also nice to see here some guys that I already know from other fora...

Just for your information, I am a big fan of Mr.Hogan's swing as many of you here, so if you can bear another Hawk's fan, I'd be delighted. I have been and still am also a fan of rotary swing mechanics (OnePlane, S&T as well as MORAD/TGM). As for clubfitting, I advocate Tom Wishon school, and if I could be helpful with something please do not hesitate to contact me.
Lastly, please forgive me all eventual mistakes in English language since it's not my native one.


Back to business - Mr.Hogan's equipment. I have learnt that according to Mr.Vasquez the Maestro's club specs was as follows:

2 18 58.5 39 D1
3 21 59 38.5 D1
4 23 59 38 D1
5 27 59 37.5 D1
6 31 60.5 37 D1
7 35 60 36.5 D1
8 38.5 61 36 D1
9 42 61 35.5 D1
pw1 44 63 35.5 D1
pw2 49 63 35.5 D1
SW 55 65 35 D1

Driver 8 55 43.25 D 2.5
#3 wood 15 55 42.25 D 2.5

Judging from SW values, lengths, lofts and lies of Hogan's clubs we can state as follows:

- Hogan preferred a tight lie pattern, i.e. lies of shorter irons are flattened more than those of long irons; I happened to discover that such a pattern is very sound for rotary types of swings, since it's definitely easier to hook shorter clubs; I have a similar pattern in my irons, although the lies are not so flat;

- comparing to today's standards, some of the clubs were flattened of 1* while others for 3*-4* (BTW, if the lie angle of the head fits the golfer for a specific club length, when you change the length you would need to flatten the lie by 1* for each half inch increase in the length and make the lie 1* more upright for each half inch you decrease the length (and not 2* as Slicefixer stated); we can assume that Hogan's irons were shorter of 0.5" comparing to today's standards, therefore, his lies are 1* flatter more.
The comparison of lie pattern would look like this (Hogan's -- today's standard for 0.5" shortened clubs on base of Wishon 550M blades):

58.5 -- 59.5
59 -- 60
59 -- 61
59 -- 62
60.5 -- 62.5
60 -- 63
61 -- 64
61 -- 65
63 -- 65
63 -- 65
65 -- 65

It's worth noting that lies of Hogans clubs were not patterned evenly - e.g. his irons #3, #4 and #5 had the same lie angle, the same in case of #8 and #9. Moreover, lies of his wedges are rather strange comparing to today's recommendations of using the same lie for #9 iron, PW, AW and SW, the more the lengths of those clubs are the same;

- when someone flattens lies so much as 3*-4* it's obvious that some corrections should be made as e.g. special grind of soles (e.g. heel relief to lay them open) or even bending open, since otherwise the heel part of the face becomes practically out of play due to hosels position. I have never heard about Hogan shanking (forgive me), thus, it's quite probable that he bent clubs open and/or made special grinds of the soles;

- Hogan matched his irons to one SW value (obviously he was not aware of MOI matching these times) which is surprisingly low - D1; I have heard that his clubs were very heavy - a bit contradictory statement to his D1 swingweight with steel shafts; Slicefixer mentioned about some wire under the grips (I wonder if such a thing is legal nowadays ?) which he used as a reminder; this wire could have been long, thick and heavy enough to increase the total weight of the clubs while diminishing their SW value (so-called counterweighting) - if yes, those D1 values look a bit more understandable;

- Hogans #3 wood and driver's SW is only D2.5 with steel shafts (!) - IMHO, it confirms that those clubs had to be counterweighted somehow, unless the weight of persimmon heads were lower than 195-200 grams; moreover, I wonder if the driver head's lie was also flattened to this 55* lie (I think it could be easier to flatten the lie in times of persimmon heads than now).

Last but not least, I must admit I was wrong in my suspicions concerning Hogan's ability to create so much shaft angle during downswing; I thought that his clubs' SW value was so big that it must have helped his wrists react the way they did...and the rest was just done by his excellent body and pivot work. If the data from Vasquez book are real - Hogan's swing mechanics seem to be even better than many of his fans think. I'm sorry if I made some errors in my calculations, but I am no expert as regards old equipment and I do not posses any reliable data about e.g. weight of structure of old steel shafts or persimmon heads data.

It's a pleasure to be able participate to this Forum - Happy New Year 2008 to all Members !

Cheers

[provx]

excellent first post dariusz, you are a good poster over at that other site you mentioned which i do the opposite of you. i lurk over there and post here. that rotary site seems to be slowing down a bit lately.

nice to have you over here.

[Dariusz J.]

Thank you very much, ProvX. It's very nice to meet you there, too.

Cheers

[slicefixer]

[quote name='Dariusz J.' post='846189' date='Jan 2 2008, 08:10 PM']Hello everyone !

This Forum has been recently referred to me from one of friends from other fora that I am participating. I usually do not like big open fora, prefer to concentrate on smaller ones dedicated to narrow specific branches concerning swing mechanics and clubfitting. However, having been surfing for some hours through WRXForum I encountered some excellent posts (especially, bowing my head to Mr.Slicefixer and Mr.Hoganfan) as well as great bunch of real golf nuts - and decided to join it in the search for new golf knowledge. Was also nice to see here some guys that I already know from other fora...

Just for your information, I am a big fan of Mr.Hogan's swing as many of you here, so if you can bear another Hawk's fan, I'd be delighted. I have been and still am also a fan of rotary swing mechanics (OnePlane, S&T as well as MORAD/TGM). As for clubfitting, I advocate Tom Wishon school, and if I could be helpful with something please do not hesitate to contact me.
Lastly, please forgive me all eventual mistakes in English language since it's not my native one.


Back to business - Mr.Hogan's equipment. I have learnt that according to Mr.Vasquez the Maestro's club specs was as follows:

2 18 58.5 39 D1
3 21 59 38.5 D1
4 23 59 38 D1
5 27 59 37.5 D1
6 31 60.5 37 D1
7 35 60 36.5 D1
8 38.5 61 36 D1
9 42 61 35.5 D1
pw1 44 63 35.5 D1
pw2 49 63 35.5 D1
SW 55 65 35 D1

Driver 8 55 43.25 D 2.5
#3 wood 15 55 42.25 D 2.5

Judging from SW values, lengths, lofts and lies of Hogan's clubs we can state as follows:

- Hogan preferred a tight lie pattern, i.e. lies of shorter irons are flattened more than those of long irons; I happened to discover that such a pattern is very sound for rotary types of swings, since it's definitely easier to hook shorter clubs; I have a similar pattern in my irons, although the lies are not so flat;

- comparing to today's standards, some of the clubs were flattened of 1* while others for 3*-4* (BTW, if the lie angle of the head fits the golfer for a specific club length, when you change the length you would need to flatten the lie by 1* for each half inch increase in the length and make the lie 1* more upright for each half inch you decrease the length (and not 2* as Slicefixer stated); we can assume that Hogan's irons were shorter of 0.5" comparing to today's standards, therefore, his lies are 1* flatter more.
The comparison of lie pattern would look like this (Hogan's -- today's standard for 0.5" shortened clubs on base of Wishon 550M blades):

58.5 -- 59.5
59 -- 60
59 -- 61
59 -- 62
60.5 -- 62.5
60 -- 63
61 -- 64
61 -- 65
63 -- 65
63 -- 65
65 -- 65

It's worth noting that lies of Hogans clubs were not patterned evenly - e.g. his irons #3, #4 and #5 had the same lie angle, the same in case of #8 and #9. Moreover, lies of his wedges are rather strange comparing to today's recommendations of using the same lie for #9 iron, PW, AW and SW, the more the lengths of those clubs are the same;

- when someone flattens lies so much as 3*-4* it's obvious that some corrections should be made as e.g. special grind of soles (e.g. heel relief to lay them open) or even bending open, since otherwise the heel part of the face becomes practically out of play due to hosels position. I have never heard about Hogan shanking (forgive me), thus, it's quite probable that he bent clubs open and/or made special grinds of the soles;

- Hogan matched his irons to one SW value (obviously he was not aware of MOI matching these times) which is surprisingly low - D1; I have heard that his clubs were very heavy - a bit contradictory statement to his D1 swingweight with steel shafts; Slicefixer mentioned about some wire under the grips (I wonder if such a thing is legal nowadays ?) which he used as a reminder; this wire could have been long, thick and heavy enough to increase the total weight of the clubs while diminishing their SW value (so-called counterweighting) - if yes, those D1 values look a bit more understandable;

- Hogans #3 wood and driver's SW is only D2.5 with steel shafts (!) - IMHO, it confirms that those clubs had to be counterweighted somehow, unless the weight of persimmon heads were lower than 195-200 grams; moreover, I wonder if the driver head's lie was also flattened to this 55* lie (I think it could be easier to flatten the lie in times of persimmon heads than now).

Last but not least, I must admit I was wrong in my suspicions concerning Hogan's ability to create so much shaft angle during downswing; I thought that his clubs' SW value was so big that it must have helped his wrists react the way they did...and the rest was just done by his excellent body and pivot work. If the data from Vasquez book are real - Hogan's swing mechanics seem to be even better than many of his fans think. I'm sorry if I made some errors in my calculations, but I am no expert as regards old equipment and I do not posses any reliable data about e.g. weight of structure of old steel shafts or persimmon heads data.

It's a pleasure to be able participate to this Forum - Happy New Year 2008 to all Members !

Cheers[/quote]

Dariuz..........ditto! First, last, or 10,000th that is a fine post.........

Two things, one I'm a "graduate" of both the Titleist and the original Hogan fitting schools.......(doesnt' take much to graduate, just "show up"....hehehe).....but, at both schools they told us "3 swingweights and 2 degrees of lie angle change for every 1/2 inch change.......but, as there is as much "grey" in club fitting as the golf swing itself, I/they could be all wrong...........Secondly, Mr. Hogan's clubs had a VERY pronounced reminder that was definitely made of wire......MUCH more pronounced than is standard to a "ribbed grip"........it had to be something along the lines of 10 gauge wire........I have NO idea how many "points" that would reduce the SW, but, it WAS a helluva' "counter balance".....

Anyway, WELCOME fellow Hogan nut!

[slicefixer]

[quote name='Dariusz J.' post='846189' date='Jan 2 2008, 08:10 PM']Hello everyone !

This Forum has been recently referred to me from one of friends from other fora that I am participating. I usually do not like big open fora, prefer to concentrate on smaller ones dedicated to narrow specific branches concerning swing mechanics and clubfitting. However, having been surfing for some hours through WRXForum I encountered some excellent posts (especially, bowing my head to Mr.Slicefixer and Mr.Hoganfan) as well as great bunch of real golf nuts - and decided to join it in the search for new golf knowledge. Was also nice to see here some guys that I already know from other fora...

Just for your information, I am a big fan of Mr.Hogan's swing as many of you here, so if you can bear another Hawk's fan, I'd be delighted. I have been and still am also a fan of rotary swing mechanics (OnePlane, S&T as well as MORAD/TGM). As for clubfitting, I advocate Tom Wishon school, and if I could be helpful with something please do not hesitate to contact me.
Lastly, please forgive me all eventual mistakes in English language since it's not my native one.


Back to business - Mr.Hogan's equipment. I have learnt that according to Mr.Vasquez the Maestro's club specs was as follows:

2 18 58.5 39 D1
3 21 59 38.5 D1
4 23 59 38 D1
5 27 59 37.5 D1
6 31 60.5 37 D1
7 35 60 36.5 D1
8 38.5 61 36 D1
9 42 61 35.5 D1
pw1 44 63 35.5 D1
pw2 49 63 35.5 D1
SW 55 65 35 D1

Driver 8 55 43.25 D 2.5
#3 wood 15 55 42.25 D 2.5

Judging from SW values, lengths, lofts and lies of Hogan's clubs we can state as follows:

- Hogan preferred a tight lie pattern, i.e. lies of shorter irons are flattened more than those of long irons; I happened to discover that such a pattern is very sound for rotary types of swings, since it's definitely easier to hook shorter clubs; I have a similar pattern in my irons, although the lies are not so flat;

- comparing to today's standards, some of the clubs were flattened of 1* while others for 3*-4* (BTW, if the lie angle of the head fits the golfer for a specific club length, when you change the length you would need to flatten the lie by 1* for each half inch increase in the length and make the lie 1* more upright for each half inch you decrease the length (and not 2* as Slicefixer stated); we can assume that Hogan's irons were shorter of 0.5" comparing to today's standards, therefore, his lies are 1* flatter more.
The comparison of lie pattern would look like this (Hogan's -- today's standard for 0.5" shortened clubs on base of Wishon 550M blades):

58.5 -- 59.5
59 -- 60
59 -- 61
59 -- 62
60.5 -- 62.5
60 -- 63
61 -- 64
61 -- 65
63 -- 65
63 -- 65
65 -- 65

It's worth noting that lies of Hogans clubs were not patterned evenly - e.g. his irons #3, #4 and #5 had the same lie angle, the same in case of #8 and #9. Moreover, lies of his wedges are rather strange comparing to today's recommendations of using the same lie for #9 iron, PW, AW and SW, the more the lengths of those clubs are the same;

- when someone flattens lies so much as 3*-4* it's obvious that some corrections should be made as e.g. special grind of soles (e.g. heel relief to lay them open) or even bending open, since otherwise the heel part of the face becomes practically out of play due to hosels position. I have never heard about Hogan shanking (forgive me), thus, it's quite probable that he bent clubs open and/or made special grinds of the soles;

- Hogan matched his irons to one SW value (obviously he was not aware of MOI matching these times) which is surprisingly low - D1; I have heard that his clubs were very heavy - a bit contradictory statement to his D1 swingweight with steel shafts; Slicefixer mentioned about some wire under the grips (I wonder if such a thing is legal nowadays ?) which he used as a reminder; this wire could have been long, thick and heavy enough to increase the total weight of the clubs while diminishing their SW value (so-called counterweighting) - if yes, those D1 values look a bit more understandable;

- Hogans #3 wood and driver's SW is only D2.5 with steel shafts (!) - IMHO, it confirms that those clubs had to be counterweighted somehow, unless the weight of persimmon heads were lower than 195-200 grams; moreover, I wonder if the driver head's lie was also flattened to this 55* lie (I think it could be easier to flatten the lie in times of persimmon heads than now).

Last but not least, I must admit I was wrong in my suspicions concerning Hogan's ability to create so much shaft angle during downswing; I thought that his clubs' SW value was so big that it must have helped his wrists react the way they did...and the rest was just done by his excellent body and pivot work. If the data from Vasquez book are real - Hogan's swing mechanics seem to be even better than many of his fans think. I'm sorry if I made some errors in my calculations, but I am no expert as regards old equipment and I do not posses any reliable data about e.g. weight of structure of old steel shafts or persimmon heads data.

It's a pleasure to be able participate to this Forum - Happy New Year 2008 to all Members !

Cheers[/quote]

Dariuz..........ditto! First, last, or 10,000th that is a fine post.........

Two things, one I'm a "graduate" of both the Titleist and the original Hogan fitting schools.......(doesnt' take much to graduate, just "show up"....hehehe).....but, at both schools they told us "3 swingweights and 2 degrees of lie angle change for every 1/2 inch change.......but, as there is as much "grey" in club fitting as the golf swing itself, I/they could be all wrong...........Secondly, Mr. Hogan's clubs had a VERY pronounced reminder that was definitely made of wire......MUCH more pronounced than is standard to a "ribbed grip"........it had to be something along the lines of 10 gauge wire........I have NO idea how many "points" that would reduce the SW, but, it WAS a helluva' "counter balance".....

Anyway, WELCOME fellow Hogan nut!

[Dariusz J.]

Thanks, Slicefixer, for your kind words.

According to modern clubfitting the rule is, as I wrote, if the lie angle of the head fits the golfer for a specific club length, when you change the length you would need to flatten the lie by 1* for each half inch increase in the length and make the lie 1* more upright for each half inch you decrease the length. As you look at modern lie pattern in a conventional set, you'll notice that a 0.5" longer (shorter) club has usually a 1* smaller (bigger) lie angle, therefore, it would be a bit odd if shortening or lengthening a club brings a necessity of changing lie of more than 1*.
SW increase (decrease) that you quoted is more or less accurate - 3 SW points on the average in case of standard steel shafts.

I wonder if you could describe how long and thick (more or less) was this wire under Hogan's grips and which way it was put under the grips. We will be able to calculate then an approximate SW of his clubs that he achieved before "counterweighting".
It may sound funny, but counterweighting is considered as a controversial method of tuning clubs even today and there are practically no effective rules of thumb in this area. FYI, we have now a great discussion about the role of pommels in medieval swords as pioneers in counterweighting a device that is being operated by a human...
I am more than sure that if it appeared that the best ballstriker that ever lived used counterweighting in his clubs and how much he backweighted them can be a small milestone in this section of clubfitting.

Cheers

[slicefixer]

[quote name='Dariusz J.' post='847246' date='Jan 3 2008, 02:44 PM']Thanks, Slicefixer, for your kind words.

According to modern clubfitting the rule is, as I wrote, if the lie angle of the head fits the golfer for a specific club length, when you change the length you would need to flatten the lie by 1* for each half inch increase in the length and make the lie 1* more upright for each half inch you decrease the length. As you look at modern lie pattern in a conventional set, you'll notice that a 0.5" longer (shorter) club has usually a 1* smaller (bigger) lie angle, therefore, it would be a bit odd if shortening or lengthening a club brings a necessity of changing lie of more than 1*.
SW increase (decrease) that you quoted is more or less accurate - 3 SW points on the average in case of standard steel shafts.

I wonder if you could describe how long and thick (more or less) was this wire under Hogan's grips and which way it was put under the grips. We will be able to calculate then an approximate SW of his clubs that he achieved before "counterweighting".
It may sound funny, but counterweighting is considered as a controversial method of tuning clubs even today and there are practically no effective rules of thumb in this area. FYI, we have now a great discussion about the role of pommels in medieval swords as pioneers in counterweighting a device that is being operated by a human...
I am more than sure that if it appeared that the best ballstriker that ever lived used counterweighting in his clubs and how much he backweighted them can be a small milestone in this section of clubfitting.

Cheers[/quote]


Dariuz, it's been 5 years since I touched em. but, as I've always experimented with different "objects" to manufacture a reminder (two way tape, wire, coat hanger, and I now use eletrical ties) I think I can tell you that a piece of metal coat hanger would be pretty close......the reminder was VERY noticable........VERY, VERY noticable.........I think if you installed a piece of metal coat hanger underneath a velvet cord (assuming that this type of cord grips weight hasn't changed a ton over the years) you would be darned close........the grips were also oversized.......I'd estimate 3 wraps under the irons and 4 or 5 under the driver, but, I can't remember the butt diamter of an Apex 5 right off hand, but, seems to me they are slightly thicker than a X - 100.........IF memory serves me the APEX shaft has a thinner wall thickness than an X-100..........

Hope that helps.......

Cheers!

[Dariusz J.]

Slicefixer, OK, but tell me HOW the reminder wire was placed ? I am trying to determine the lenght of wire that was used...three (five) wraps of wire (on the shaft under the grip) one under each other ?
I simply do not understand it since I remember that you said in one of your previous posts that the reminder was settled at 5-5.30 hours (i.e. very weak)...and I have a hard time to understand how a wrapped wire (around a shaft) can be set this way...

Excuse me if it's my fault of lack of understanding due to my some obvious problems with English language...

Cheers

[provx]

i think he is saying that there were 3 to 5 wraps of extra grip tape to make them oversized, and then in addition there was a wire set in a straight line at 5 or 5:30

[slicefixer]

[quote name='Dariusz J.' post='847481' date='Jan 3 2008, 05:51 PM']Slicefixer, OK, but tell me HOW the reminder wire was placed ? I am trying to determine the lenght of wire that was used...three (five) wraps of wire (on the shaft under the grip) one under each other ?
I simply do not understand it since I remember that you said in one of your previous posts that the reminder was settled at 5-5.30 hours (i.e. very weak)...and I have a hard time to understand how a wrapped wire (around a shaft) can be set this way...

Excuse me if it's my fault of lack of understanding due to my some obvious problems with English language...

Cheers[/quote]

NOT the wire, the number of "wraps" of tape.........common language for the amount/placement of TAPE under the grip......"he had 4 wraps under the left hand and 2 under the right" or visa versa........etc.

[Dariusz J.]

OK, Gents...I wanted to calculate it more accurately but it would require more data that is probably unknown, such as shaft, grip and head weight and raw shaft length.
I have experimented with changing the weight of grip section only. As an example, I took the weight of 100 mm long copper wire of 5.0 mm o.d. (I rather think that the o.d. taken is too big despite Slicefixer said that the reminder was very noticeable) which is equal to 17.5 grams.
Roughly, we may say then that the grip section in Hogan's irons was 20 grams higher than standard (he had more tape under grips, too).
In such a case, practically no matter what other parameters were, SW value changes of ca. 4 points while counterweighting the clubs with 20 grams in all cases. It would suggest that without it Hogans set of irons was matched to D5 SW. If the wire was shorter and/or with a smaller o.d. the difference would, of course, have been smaller. Personally, I am a bit surprised that the change in SW is not bigger, although SW value of D5 is rather above average even now.
Please take this post rather in the category of speculations than reliable information.

Just to complete this post - I have my own theory about the impact of counterweighting on creating and maintaining shaft angle during downswing, and it's no surprise for me that Mr.Hogan could find counterweighting as some help in his swing.

Cheers

[hoganfan924]

[quote name='Dariusz J.' post='847686' date='Jan 3 2008, 07:22 PM']OK, Gents...I wanted to calculate it more accurately but it would require more data that is probably unknown, such as shaft, grip and head weight and raw shaft length.
I have experimented with changing the weight of grip section only. As an example, I took the weight of 100 mm long copper wire of 5.0 mm o.d. (I rather think that the o.d. taken is too big despite Slicefixer said that the reminder was very noticeable) which is equal to 17.5 grams.
Roughly, we may say then that the grip section in Hogan's irons was 20 grams higher than standard (he had more tape under grips, too).
In such a case, practically no matter what other parameters were, SW value changes of ca. 4 points while counterweighting the clubs with 20 grams in all cases. It would suggest that without it Hogans set of irons was matched to D5 SW. If the wire was shorter and/or with a smaller o.d. the difference would, of course, have been smaller. Personally, I am a bit surprised that the change in SW is not bigger, although SW value of D5 is rather above average even now.
Please take this post rather in the category of speculations than reliable information.

Just to complete this post - I have my own theory about the impact of counterweighting on creating and maintaining shaft angle during downswing, and it's no surprise for me that Mr.Hogan could find counterweighting as some help in his swing.

Cheers[/quote]

I think you need to adjust your assumptions. The reminder rib will run the full length of the grip, so I'd use around 250mm for the length of the wire but only a 1.8 mm diameter. 5mm would be gigantic!!! A coat hanger wire is usually around 13 gauge (US spec.) which is 1.83 mm.

With those assumptions, turns out just the wire would weight 20.6 gm (used steel at 7850 kg/m3, which is what coat hangers are made of)

I would think that so much tape and a 21 gm. reminder wire would add enough weight to the grip end to decrease the swing weight a few points.

Good luck, interested to hear the results!

[Dariusz J.]

Thanks for your suggestions, Hoganfan.

I do agree that a 5 mm o.d. is kinda gigantic. If we take the data quoted by you - 1.83 mm o.d. steel wire - according to my calculation the weight of 250 mm is equal to 5.2 grams only, thus, the counterweighting effect will be more marginal than in my previous example. Even if we use lead, the weight increases only to 7.7 grams.

Anyhow, if the real diameter was bigger than 1.83 (it could be since I presume the wire was under the tape, not between the tape and the grip - because it would be harder to put the grip on, and to make it noticeable, as Slicefixer said he could need, say, 2.5 or even 3 mm o.d. wire), and we can run into 30 grams of counterweight, as you suggest, it would appear that the difference is of ca. 6 SW points.
Thus, Hogans "raw" irons could be of D7.

Please correct me if I am wrong.

Cheers

[hoganfan924]

[quote name='Dariusz J.' post='847737' date='Jan 3 2008, 08:07 PM']Thanks for your suggestions, Hoganfan.

I do agree that a 5 mm o.d. is kinda gigantic. If we take the data quoted by you - 1.83 mm o.d. steel wire - according to my calculation the weight of 250 mm is equal to 5.2 grams only, thus, the counterweighting effect will be more marginal than in my previous example. Even if we use lead, the weight increases only to 7.7 grams.

Anyhow, if the real diameter was bigger than 1.83 (it could be since I presume the wire was under the tape, not between the tape and the grip - because it would be harder to put the grip on, and to make it noticeable, as Slicefixer said he could need, say, 2.5 or even 3 mm o.d. wire), and we can run into 30 grams of counterweight, as you suggest, it would appear that the difference is of ca. 6 SW points.
Thus, Hogans "raw" irons could be of D7.

Please correct me if I am wrong.

Cheers[/quote]

Yes, 5.2 gm. I goofed up my calculation! (forgot to divide Pi Dsquared by 4!). I think Slicefixer's suggestion that the wire was similar to a coat hanger is probably correct and 5.2 gm should work fine as a weight assumption. Not sure how much tape weighs though (probably not more than a few grams I'd think). Not sure how much grips of the 1950's & 60's weighed either.

[slicefixer]

[quote name='Dariusz J.' post='847686' date='Jan 3 2008, 08:22 PM']OK, Gents...I wanted to calculate it more accurately but it would require more data that is probably unknown, such as shaft, grip and head weight and raw shaft length.
I have experimented with changing the weight of grip section only. As an example, I took the weight of 100 mm long copper wire of 5.0 mm o.d. (I rather think that the o.d. taken is too big despite Slicefixer said that the reminder was very noticeable) which is equal to 17.5 grams.
Roughly, we may say then that the grip section in Hogan's irons was 20 grams higher than standard (he had more tape under grips, too).
In such a case, practically no matter what other parameters were, SW value changes of ca. 4 points while counterweighting the clubs with 20 grams in all cases. It would suggest that without it Hogans set of irons was matched to D5 SW. If the wire was shorter and/or with a smaller o.d. the difference would, of course, have been smaller. Personally, I am a bit surprised that the change in SW is not bigger, although SW value of D5 is rather above average even now.
Please take this post rather in the category of speculations than reliable information.

Just to complete this post - I have my own theory about the impact of counterweighting on creating and maintaining shaft angle during downswing, and it's no surprise for me that Mr.Hogan could find counterweighting as some help in his swing.

Cheers[/quote]


Don't forget the weight of the TAPE too.........a "standard" grip would take quite a bit of tape to get it to the diameter of Mr. Hogan's.......

[provx]

i imagine it would be difficult to get the reminder in exactly the right posistion for all clubs or is this relatively easy?

[slicefixer]

[quote name='provx' post='847866' date='Jan 3 2008, 10:32 PM']i imagine it would be difficult to get the reminder in exactly the right posistion for all clubs or is this relatively easy?[/quote]


Naw, it's really quite easy as the reminder is placed over the first level of double stick tape.......I use the electrical ties nowadays because they are FLAT and REALLY stick to the tape when placed in position........plus they are offered in a wide variety of sizes/shapes/lengths so you can really change the feel of the rib, etc.

[birdie_man]

What's the deal with counter-weighting now Dariusz? (I take it you have experience with the results?)

[hoganfan924]

[quote name='birdie_man' post='847961' date='Jan 3 2008, 10:24 PM']What's the deal with counter-weighting now Dariusz? (I take it you have experience with the results?)[/quote]

I think the theory behind it is pretty simple. Add weight to the butt end of the club increases the total club weight but decreases the swing weight without decreasing head weight. Theoretically, it should make it easier to uncock/unhinge the wrists and release the club. I know there's been some testing done on this that has shown that golfers with the proper counterweighting for their swing results in more clubhead speed and distance.

Therefore, you could take a club that's a D6, add maybe 30 grams to the butt end and turn it into a D1 (hypothetical numbers, I'm not sure what the actual amount of counterweighting required to do that is). There's a company that sell these butt end counterweights. Sounds like Hogan, with his thick grips, extra tape and reminder wire added weight to the grip end, effectively "counterweighting" his otherwise heavy clubs.

Kind of like the big counterweights that are on railroad crossing gates, the torque required to lift the gate is very low due to the counterweighting.

[Dariusz J.]

[quote name='slicefixer' post='847875' date='Jan 3 2008, 09:36 PM'][quote name='provx' post='847866' date='Jan 3 2008, 10:32 PM']i imagine it would be difficult to get the reminder in exactly the right posistion for all clubs or is this relatively easy?[/quote]


Naw, it's really quite easy as the reminder is placed over the first level of double stick tape.......I use the electrical ties nowadays because they are FLAT and REALLY stick to the tape when placed in position........plus they are offered in a wide variety of sizes/shapes/lengths so you can really change the feel of the rib, etc.
[/quote]

Slicefixer, please enlight me why do you think that the placement of the wire reminder was set for a weak grip. What part of the right/left hand should feel the reminder ? 2nd joint in left hand fingers (counting from the finger top) ?

Moreover, I still do not know if having such a reminder under the grip is a "legal" thing according to the new USG/R&A rules.

Cheers

[Dariusz J.]

[quote name='birdie_man' post='847961' date='Jan 3 2008, 10:24 PM']What's the deal with counter-weighting now Dariusz? (I take it you have experience with the results?)[/quote]

Well, Hoganfan has explained the deal pretty well.

According to my own personal theory, counterweighting may help in another aspect of the swing.
Please note that counterweighted clubs are usually heavy clubs with their "raw" SW relatively high. A high SW club helps to create a proper shaft angle at the top since it provokes a bigger wrist **** at the top (heavy mass at the end of a relatively long stick). IMHO, the bigger the SW value is the easier is to begin the downswing before backswing ends (other words, to extend transition phase in time). But, the negative effect is that during downswing the centrifugal force and gravity helps to lose the shaft angle earlier - the sooner, the heavier is the mass at the end of the stick.
Now, when a club is counterweighted, first - the handle is being brought a bit more down (because it's heavier) which move delays the activity of both centrifugal and gravitational forces. a golfer is able to maintain his/her shaft angle a bit longer. Of course there's a qui pro quo - a counterweighted club will not help that much in creating the shaft angle at transition.
Long story short - I believe that there are golfers who can benefit from counterweighting as well there are golfers who can't. Unfortunately, I have not a big experience in counterweighting, what I know for sure is that it works very well in case of short putters. I am currently using such a putter. I haven't tested it in my irons yet since I regard myself as a person who rather needs help in creating lag than maintaining it.

Cheers

[Dariusz J.]

[quote name='birdie_man' post='847961' date='Jan 3 2008, 10:24 PM']What's the deal with counter-weighting now Dariusz? (I take it you have experience with the results?)[/quote]

Well, Hoganfan has explained the deal pretty well.

According to my own personal theory, counterweighting may help in another aspect of the swing.
Please note that counterweighted clubs are usually heavy clubs with their "raw" SW relatively high. A high SW club helps to create a proper shaft angle at the top since it provokes a bigger wrist **** at the top (heavy mass at the end of a relatively long stick). IMHO, the bigger the SW value is the easier is to begin the downswing before backswing ends (other words, to extend transition phase in time). But, the negative effect is that during downswing the centrifugal force and gravity helps to lose the shaft angle earlier - the sooner, the heavier is the mass at the end of the stick.
Now, when a club is counterweighted, first - the handle is being brought a bit more down (because it's heavier) which move delays the activity of both centrifugal and gravitational forces. a golfer is able to maintain his/her shaft angle a bit longer. Of course there's a qui pro quo - a counterweighted club will not help that much in creating the shaft angle at transition.
Long story short - I believe that there are golfers who can benefit from counterweighting as well there are golfers who can't. Unfortunately, I have not a big experience in counterweighting, what I know for sure is that it works very well in case of short putters. I am currently using such a putter. I haven't tested it in my irons yet since I regard myself as a person who rather needs help in creating lag than maintaining it.

Cheers

[birdie_man]

[quote name='Dariusz J.' post='848332' date='Jan 4 2008, 07:55 AM'][quote name='birdie_man' post='847961' date='Jan 3 2008, 10:24 PM']What's the deal with counter-weighting now Dariusz? (I take it you have experience with the results?)[/quote]

Well, Hoganfan has explained the deal pretty well.

According to my own personal theory, counterweighting may help in another aspect of the swing.
Please note that counterweighted clubs are usually heavy clubs with their "raw" SW relatively high. A high SW club helps to create a proper shaft angle at the top since it provokes a bigger wrist **** at the top (heavy mass at the end of a relatively long stick). IMHO, the bigger the SW value is the easier is to begin the downswing before backswing ends (other words, to extend transition phase in time). [b]But, the negative effect is that during downswing the centrifugal force and gravity helps to lose the shaft angle earlier - the sooner, the heavier is the mass at the end of the stick.[/b]
Now, when a club is counterweighted, first - the handle is being brought a bit more down (because it's heavier) which move delays the activity of both centrifugal and gravitational forces. a golfer is able to maintain his/her shaft angle a bit longer. Of course there's a qui pro quo - a counterweighted club will not help that much in creating the shaft angle at transition.
Long story short - I believe that there are golfers who can benefit from counterweighting as well there are golfers who can't. Unfortunately, I have not a big experience in counterweighting, what I know for sure is that it works very well in case of short putters. I am currently using such a putter. I haven't tested it in my irons yet since I regard myself as a person who rather needs help in creating lag than maintaining it.

Cheers
[/quote]

This is very interesting. Like someone already said I though Hogan's clubs were high swingweight to contribute to his loading.....perhaps not I guess.

BTW are you sure about the bolded part? I'm no Bill Nye (The Science Guy) lol.........but that seems counter-intuitive to me. And I know gravity acts equally on all things. (air resistance aside)

Just a thought. I really am no expert. (science-wise, that might be about as far as I can go with this debate, lol...)

[provx]

i think dariusz is right about a higher swingweight making it harder to retain lag. an extreame example would be this. try to imagine creating lag with a sledgehammer. i would think that would force you to cast to get it back to the ball.

on the other hand if you swing a shaft with no clubhead you can really whip it down at the ball and hold the angle with no problems