Advantages of 430cc vs 460cc driver

[Titleist_PT23]

4 minutes ago, Stuart_G said:

 

Is there some reason you're completely ignoring what I already said about using Pros as an example for am's to base their decisions on?

 

It's not about pros.  Your completely ignoring the idea that people (pros and non-pros) can be better with something they aren't using today.  The 7w example is many non pros on this board.  I adjusted from 44 driver / 42.5 inch 3 wood / 41.25 inch 5 wood to 45 / 43.5 / 42.  I'm not a pro.  Yeah, it was awkward the first 5 rounds or so.  My timing was off especially with the driver.  But people need to give it a real try before concluding the original specs or their "fit" is better.

[Titleist_PT23]

21 minutes ago, agolf1 said:

I'd be really interested to see how many fitters have the golfer hit balls with a driver many inches shorter than 43.5 -44.5?  Or, they assume based on their expert knowledge that 43.5 - 44.5 or so is right and stop there.  Often times, it may be correct.  But the flaw has been exposed (likely justified on cost benefit analysis.  Takes time to hit everything and sw can become an issue).

@Stuart_G what's your practice?

[Stuart_G]

 

6 minutes ago, agolf1 said:

It's not about pros.  Your completely ignoring the idea that people (pros and non-pros) can be better with something they aren't using today. 

 

And you seem to be ignoring what it takes to successfully do it.  So it may not be about pro vs non prob but it certainly is about physical ability, knowledge of the golf swing, dedication and effort to making changes, availibility for time to make those changes, time to properly test different equipment options, access to the different options and someone who can make the changes/build the different options.

 

8 minutes ago, agolf1 said:

@Stuart_G what's your practice?

 

 

 

[Titleist_PT23]

Let me step back a bit.  My starting point is we (golfers) have a distance-dispersion tradeoff that starts at roughly 35.5 inches / 50 degrees and goes to ~45 inches / 10 degrees (+/-).  We know that if you hit it farther dispersion goes wider, and that's OK.

 

My belief for many (or at least more than the zero that results from people giving up) is that if you extend the driver from 44 inches to 45 inches, 46 inches, 47 inches, 48 inches the distance-dispersion will remain on this line.  Farther distance = more dispersion.  But the change cannot be made instantaneously.  Give someone that's used to a 44 inch driver something longer and the next 10 swings are likely worse on average.  Some are great, many are bad.  It's because the timing is off and the club feels funny.  Most quit there because it is a common belief longer = worse results (especially for ams).  But get familiar with the longer club and you'll be back on the distance-dispersion line.

 

Now maybe many should quit right away and that's fine.  But the conclusion after 10 swings is flawed in my view.  And in many cases the golfer can never adjust.  They've made so many swings with the 44 inch driver that they will never catch up with something longer to keep the distance-dispersion trade-off equal.  And in their mind they think they cannot hit anything longer than 44 inches.  They've lost before they truly try.  But give a new golfer a longer club and they'll do fine with equal practice of both lengths.  Same for people that have an open mind.

[GBBM]

On 2/22/2021 at 4:11 PM, zdtallan said:

As to why some swing a 3-wood better, I don't think it has anything to do with head size but rather the fact that people's mechanics often break down when you give them a longer club and throw a ball on a tee. 

This guy has seen me hit driver 😳

[Bad9]

On 2/23/2021 at 9:49 AM, Myherobobhope said:

Grab the regular weight speed stick and see how much more clubhead speed you have with it than your driver... it’s about as optimized as you can get in terms of aerodynamics... it shouldn’t be that much faster.

 

the whole aerodynamic argument for driver doesn’t make much sense to me... you just aren’t generating that much drag.

And in addition depending upon how the head is shaped most won't notice the difference in volume anyway.

[Stuart_G]

22 minutes ago, agolf1 said:

My belief for many (or at least more than the zero that results from people giving up) is that if you extend the driver from 44 inches to 45 inches, 46 inches, 47 inches, 48 inches the distance-dispersion will remain on this line.  Farther distance = more dispersion.

 

Why assume it's linear?     There has been some anecdotal data from the experience of many members and fitters here to suggest that it's not and performance/consistency can rapidly drop off at a certain length for each individual.

 

Which actually makes sense since the biggest issue with a driver too long is being able to maintain a consistent face impact location.   And thanks to gear effect, with the driver moving from consistent face impact to inconsistent face impact will drastically reduce performance.

 

[NRJyzr]

2 hours ago, agolf1 said:

Further, there are plenty of guys here that say "I always cut down my new driver to X because I can't hit anything longer."

 

This is a huge bias. 

 

We could equally say your posts are filtered thru a huge bias in the other direction.  It certainly seems you're predisposed towards longer.  I'm guessing it must work for you? (Edit: no snark intended)

 

I started out playing 45.5" drivers, only found consistency when I went shorter (and heavier).  As time went on, I experimented with all permutations, found there was a length at which point the sewers rose to claim my tee game, regardless of weight.  I stay under that now.

 

Then a fitting showed me I swung faster at 43" than at 44", much less 45" and higher.  Its taken a while for me to accept that, but I'm finally adapting to even shorter.

 

I may well be an exception, but the various discussions here have shown I'm not alone in the universe.  <shrug>

 

Edited February 24, 2021 by NRJyzr

[Titleist_PT23]

2 minutes ago, Stuart_G said:

 

Why assume it's linear?     There has been some anecdotal data from the experience of many members and fitters here to suggest that it's not and performance/consistency can rapidly drop off at a certain length for each individual.

 

Which actually makes sense since the biggest issue with a driver too long is being able to maintain a consistent face impact location.   And thanks to gear effect, with the driver moving from consistent face impact to inconsistent face impact will drastically reduce performance.

 

I totally agree eventually people hit a wall and it falls off rapidly.  Not everyone can make it to 48 (or 45).

 

My point is and always has been that one cannot conclude after 10 swing (or some short amount of time) that the longer club is worse.   But many do based on the generic "rule of thumb" (pushed often and by many.  Not you specifically).  I've seen pros and non-pros make the change.  As I've indicated, changing one's belief standing over the ball has a lot to do with it.

[Titleist_PT23]

8 minutes ago, NRJyzr said:

 

We could equally say your posts are filtered thru a huge bias in the other direction.  It certainly seems you're predisposed towards longer.  I'm guessing it must work for you?

 

My only claim is the blanket idea ~44 is best for ams stops some people from finding something that is better.   It's pushed too much.  I don't believe today's "fitting" tells you what could be best.  It tells you what is best today, and the "bias" is that you swing what you are familiar with better today.  

 

When I originally started using clubs that were longer in length, I would hit some bad shots.  Grip down towards the more traditional lengths and contact was good.  Go get it cut down, weight it properly, and everything should be great, right?  Over time I found I hit the same bad shots with the shorter club.  It is impossible to separate the two but I think gripping down and making it shorter resulted in a more controlled swing.  But when shorter becomes your "normal' length, you make the same screwups you always do from time to time.

 

I also wondered if I can hit a 42.5 inch 3 wood and a 44 inch driver, why can't I hit a 42.5 inch 5 wood?  I thought distance-dispersion would be somewhere between the 42.5 in 3 wood / 41.25 inch 5 wood.  I think that's pretty much what you get.  And then why not put the 3 wood between 42.5 - 44?  Bam, it works fine after a few rounds because this shaft length is not the problem.

 

There are other variables at play too.  Maybe my swing is better or more controlled?  Maybe today's heads allow you to play a longer shaft?  But if people only stick with what worked yesterday they'll never know if there's something better.  And to find out if it's better (or no worse), you need to give it real time on the course.  Not a few swings on the range ("fitting") or a handful of rounds.

[Titleist_PT23]

1 hour ago, Stuart_G said:

So it may not be about pro vs non prob but it certainly is about physical ability, knowledge of the golf swing, dedication and effort to making changes, availibility for time to make those changes, time to properly test different equipment options, access to the different options and someone who can make the changes/build the different options.

So you've actually just reinforced my point.  Time to properly test and conclude is what I've said is not done when you do a "fitting" and conclude this is the best for me.  It's what's best right now.

 

Glad to see you can see it's not just pros now too.

[NRJyzr]

18 minutes ago, agolf1 said:

My only claim is the blanket idea ~44 is best for ams stops some people from finding something that is better.   It's pushed too much. 

 

I can't agree, because whats actually pushed in the overall golf world is playing stock length.  Its almost exclusively on WRX that shorter lengths are discussed.

 

And we are the lunatic fringe of golfers.

 

The shorter length being pushed is among a small subset of a very small subset of the golf population.  When one considers the number of responses in "going shorter" threads that are from those suggesting going longer, or comments saying it doesn't work for them....  I can't say its pushed at all, much less too much.

 

It works for me.  It doesn't work for others.  I get that; I try to offer my experience as an alternative,  but not the Grail.  Not even a beacon that happens to be Grail shaped....

 

[Stuart_G]

21 minutes ago, agolf1 said:

Glad to see you can see it's not just pros now too.

 

It never was just pros from my standpoint.  I was never being exclusive.  I was just countering your specific use of pros as validation for your ideas. 

 

And it was never about what was possible but rather about what is available to the average amateur to make it both practicable and a useful approach for them to take.

 

Edited February 24, 2021 by Stuart_G

[2Down]

If you guys put your hand out the window next time you're doing north of 80mph, you may rethink the aerodynamics not mattering much idea.  

[Titleist_PT23]

1 minute ago, Stuart_G said:

 

It never was just pros from my standpoint.  I was never being exclusive.  I was just countering your specific use of pros as validation for your ideas. 

 

And it was never about what was possible but rather about what is available to the average amateur to make it both practicable and a useful approach for them.

 

Well, I'm glad you don't write history books.  What is practicable and useful is subjective and for each to decide.  I said you can't conclude in a short period of time.  Then you concurred with me.  And you told me pros don't matter for ams, stop looking at pros.  But if some ams can do what pros do, then pros do matter.

[Nard_S]

What Pro's do and what they gravitate towards does and should have bearing, After all they do this for a living  and they hit thousands of balls a week. If their is reward and merit in going to 46"-48" in Drivers they would have done so in mass. The fact is they don't, in fact they generally stay around 44.5". The one guy who is touting going to 48" has done zip, nada, zero with it aside from IG memes.

[Stuart_G]

55 minutes ago, agolf1 said:

What is practicable and useful is subjective and for each to decide.  I said you can't conclude in a short period of time.  Then you concurred with me.  And you told me pros don't matter for ams, stop looking at pros.  But if some ams can do what pros do, then pros do matter.

 

Sorry but the problem is not my points but your perception of them.   I actually never concurred with that point.  I said that adapting to the longer length could potentially take a lot of time and effort.  And that's not agreeing that everyone will be able to adapt even with a lot of time and effort.   But that's not the same as the initial evaluation taking a lot of time.  And if the percentage of ams that can do what pros do is very small then no, what pros can do doesn't matter.

 

And what's practicable is a lot less subjective than you seem to think.  Actual historical data (even anecdotal) and the resulting statistics can be very telling particularly when you try to argue what is best for the masses. 

[RogerinNewZealand]

Nike Vr Tour 2011 420cc..i miss you....fairway finder and cool styling!

[Titleist_PT23]

5 hours ago, Nard_S said:

What Pro's do and what they gravitate towards does and should have bearing, After all they do this for a living  and they hit thousands of balls a week. If their is reward and merit in going to 46"-48" in Drivers they would have done so in mass. The fact is they don't, in fact they generally stay around 44.5". The one guy who is touting going to 48" has done zip, nada, zero with it aside from IG memes.

Driver length trends on PGA Tour - WRX Club Techs - GolfWRX

 

44.5 is a myth.  At one time probably.  Maybe not Stuart but a lot of people quote "you should be shorter, look at the pros."  Issue is they fail to update what the pros are doing.

[Titleist_PT23]

4 hours ago, Stuart_G said:

 

Sorry but the problem is not my points but your perception of them.   I actually never concurred with that point.  I said that adapting to the longer length could potentially take a lot of time and effort.  And that's not agreeing that everyone will be able to adapt even with a lot of time and effort.   But that's not the same as the initial evaluation taking a lot of time.  And if the percentage of ams that can do what pros do is very small then no, what pros can do doesn't matter.

 

And what's practicable is a lot less subjective than you seem to think.  Actual historical data (even anecdotal) and the resulting statistics can be very telling particularly when you try to argue what is best for the masses. 

Do you have a split of data for a) players that started playing when drivers were < 45 and b) players that just started playing with off the rack 45+ clubs.

[Titleist_PT23]

5 hours ago, Nard_S said:

What Pro's do and what they gravitate towards does and should have bearing, After all they do this for a living  and they hit thousands of balls a week. If their is reward and merit in going to 46"-48" in Drivers they would have done so in mass. The fact is they don't, in fact they generally stay around 44.5". The one guy who is touting going to 48" has done zip, nada, zero with it aside from IG memes.

 

PING - Pros - PGA Tour

 

Length	# Players	% Players
44.50	1	5%
44.75	4	18%
45.00	3	14%
45.25	8	36%
45.50	2	9%
45.75	2	9%
46.00	2	9%

 

[Nessism]

I've played my driver at 44.5" for the last 20 years and have no interest in anything else.  Club lengths for my other clubs is set as well.  If it ain't broke don't fix it.

[Titleist_PT23]

18 minutes ago, Nessism said:

I've played my driver at 44.5" for the last 20 years and have no interest in anything else.  Club lengths for my other clubs is set as well.  If it ain't broke don't fix it.

Don't want to change is fine, it's a personal choice.  But I think it kind of illustrates what I'm saying.  Hard to definitely conclude there's nothing better when not even willing to consider something else.

 

As an aside, I'd bet 20-30 years ago no one could imagine someone swinging 110+ would use a 60 gram driver shaft.  There were probably "rules of thumb" for this too.  Initially the lighter shaft threw people off but with practice they figure out it was actually a better combo.  Again, everyone has a limit but I don't see many people swinging 100+ gram driver shafts anymore.

[Nard_S]

45 minutes ago, agolf1 said:

 

PING - Pros - PGA Tour

 

Length	# Players	% Players
44.50	1	5%
44.75	4	18%
45.00	3	14%
45.25	8	36%
45.50	2	9%
45.75	2	9%
46.00	2	9%

 

So only 18% play over 45.5"& 70% play below. Wow, you sold that one, lol.

[krazykarlsig]

Jack Hamm plays a Hammer X with X7 shaft wrapped in lead tape. POWWWWWW!

[Titleist_PT23]

12 minutes ago, Nard_S said:

So only 18% play over 45.5"& 70% play below. Wow, you sold that one, lol.

point is your 44.5 that you pulled up is DEAD WRONG.  Show me how you get a 44.5 average out of the data above.

 

I'm not pushing 46-48 for everyone.

[Titleist_PT23]

17 minutes ago, Nard_S said:

So only 18% play over 45.5"& 70% play below. Wow, you sold that one, lol.

There's 14 players above 45 and 5 players below 45.  But stick with your stats from 10-20 years ago that the average length is less than 45.  Yeah, you sold that one, LOL. 

 

If you read what I said, it is a) people quit before giving something else a real chance and b) players that aren't wedded to a < 45 driver often find a > 45 driver works.  Look at the table again for b).

 

 

Edited February 24, 2021 by agolf1
.

[Nard_S]

3 minutes ago, agolf1 said:

There's 14 players above 45 and 5 players below 45.  But stick with your stats from 10-20 years ago that the average length is less than 45.  Yeah, you sold that one, LOL. 

 

If you read what I said, it is a) people quit before giving something else a real chance and b) players that aren't wedded to a < 45 driver often find a > 45 driver works.  Look at the table again for b).

 

 

Oh so now it's 45" not 45.5" which is in fact standard OEM offering.

 

"Oh after 10 swings, it's all good dude, peeps just afraid to try".

 

[Titleist_PT23]

4 minutes ago, Nard_S said:

Oh so now it's 45" not 45.5" which is in fact standard OEM offering.

 

"Oh after 10 swings, it's all good dude, peeps just afraid to try".

 

The point is your dinosaur stat was just wrong.  But you were very convinced it was right.  Just like Stuart_G in the other thread I recently posted in.  And the average is 45.227, not 45.  Wrong again.

Edited February 24, 2021 by agolf1
.227 not .2277 (typo)

[Nard_S]

1 minute ago, agolf1 said:

The point is your dinosaur stat was just wrong.  But you were very convinced it was right.  Just like Stuart_G in the other thread I recently posted in.  And the average is 45.227, not 45.  Wrong again.

Fact: OEM's sell 45.5" as standard length.

Fact: PGA Pro's overwhelmingly use less than 45.5"