Help me understand how builders achieve proper SW

[Righty to Lefty]

17 hours ago, bnperrone said:

40g weight is, itself, massively different than 60-70g weigh series shafts. I don't need a whole lot more than one sentence when the things you're saying are so patently false. Your final point simply shows that professional golfers of each gender play equipment fine-tuned to THEM. Whatever that may be. Which means that their own bodies and swings and skill level make females more efficient. It isn't the equipment handing them an advantage like you've stated.

No it shows that there isn't a massive difference between men's and women's clubs as you state and when measured at the highest levels the women are more efficient with those particular clubs.  The caveat is that if you increased the weight of men's clubs you would almost certainly see an increase in their efficiency but the problem is that many think that speed equals leverage, and it doesn't.  Women pros lever the ball better than male ones because the weight of the club is a larger percentage of their total strength. 30 grams simply isn't a massive amount of weight and this is proven by the fact that no one's swing speed falls off a cliff from hitting a a 40 gram shaft compared to a 70, 80, 90, or even a 100 gram shaft more than a couple mph at most.  It would take much more mass added to the club to significantly affect club head speed.  Please provide ONE instance where a person swung a heavier shaft even 3 mph slower.  

 

Here is a test to show just how little small changes have to club performance. 40 grams and almost 11 swing weight points had very little effect on his literal numbers. He should have detected differences in the clubs but it wasn't affecting his output as they were all too similar even though it was perceived to be a "huge" change.  If I were conducting this experiment I would have added an "uncomfortable" amount until I was sure that we had found diminishing returns and then worked back from there. I say that because if he was still able to maintain most of his speed. Adding weight to the club only benefits the golfer because they will lever it better as mass it added but speed lost will be minimal. If you added 40 more grams and only gave up another 1/2 mph of speed but gained ball speed then you would be headed in the right direction for sure but the problem is that most stop at adding 10 grams which is likely insignificant because it isn't operating near a limit.  If adding and manipulating 40 grams had no major effect on the clubs performance, then how can 2 to 4 grams added be of significance.  And he is swinging at 120 mph and is creating way more force than most. 40 grams of mass created a grand total of 1.4 mph of speed loss and the largest swing weight change created no loss of speed.  My argument would be that no parameter was push far enough to find the limit of performance. 

 

 

 

[Tommyj]

I'd be fairly happy if I bought an iron set from any OEM that had less than a 1 point variation across all irons and agree with others comments about not compensating for the additional weight of a midsize grip.

What prompted you to check the specs, are the clubs not performing?

[bnperrone]

2 hours ago, Righty to Lefty said:

No it shows that there isn't a massive difference between men's and women's clubs as you state and when measured at the highest levels the women are more efficient with those particular clubs.  The caveat is that if you increased the weight of men's clubs you would almost certainly see an increase in their efficiency but the problem is that many think that speed equals leverage, and it doesn't.  Women pros lever the ball better than male ones because the weight of the club is a larger percentage of their total strength. 30 grams simply isn't a massive amount of weight and this is proven by the fact that no one's swing speed falls off a cliff from hitting a a 40 gram shaft compared to a 70, 80, 90, or even a 100 gram shaft more than a couple mph at most.  It would take much more mass added to the club to significantly affect club head speed.  Please provide ONE instance where a person swung a heavier shaft even 3 mph slower.  

 

Here is a test to show just how little small changes have to club performance. 40 grams and almost 11 swing weight points had very little effect on his literal numbers. He should have detected differences in the clubs but it wasn't affecting his output as they were all too similar even though it was perceived to be a "huge" change.  If I were conducting this experiment I would have added an "uncomfortable" amount until I was sure that we had found diminishing returns and then worked back from there. I say that because if he was still able to maintain most of his speed. Adding weight to the club only benefits the golfer because they will lever it better as mass it added but speed lost will be minimal. If you added 40 more grams and only gave up another 1/2 mph of speed but gained ball speed then you would be headed in the right direction for sure but the problem is that most stop at adding 10 grams which is likely insignificant because it isn't operating near a limit.  If adding and manipulating 40 grams had no major effect on the clubs performance, then how can 2 to 4 grams added be of significance.  And he is swinging at 120 mph and is creating way more force than most. 40 grams of mass created a grand total of 1.4 mph of speed loss and the largest swing weight change created no loss of speed.  My argument would be that no parameter was push far enough to find the limit of performance. 

 

 

 

Ever considered dispersion and/or consistency? Ever hit a club well trying it out but just hated the way it felt?

 

All your sources and irrelevant tests and data points don't address anything that truly matters. The speed you're so concerned about means nothing without center contact and repeatability.

 

And yes, I can tell the difference between 2 SW points on my irons and wedges when I dialed them in via headweight. If you can't, you can't. Just stop acting like nobody can tell or can have a preference.

 

At least you've finally acknowledged that female golfers themselves create greater efficiency through their swings and using leverage. Initially you gave all the credit to the equipment, so your constant shifting of your own arguments has at least moved in the right direction.

 

Every single thing you say here is just a massive word dump to cover for the fact that it doesn't mean much of anything. You're a contrarian. I get it. Enjoy.

[bnperrone]

2 hours ago, Tommyj said:

I'd be fairly happy if I bought an iron set from any OEM that had less than a 1 point variation across all irons and agree with others comments about not compensating for the additional weight of a midsize grip.

What prompted you to check the specs, are the clubs not performing?

What he didn't state in the original post and said later but gets lost in the post count is that the physical measurements in hand were actually all over the place. Ordered at specific SW across the board, builder provided those specific measures with acceptable tolerances, but the actual measured values were way off.

 

Just clarifying

[Righty to Lefty]

20 hours ago, bnperrone said:

Ever considered dispersion and/or consistency? Ever hit a club well trying it out but just hated the way it felt?

 

All your sources and irrelevant tests and data points don't address anything that truly matters. The speed you're so concerned about means nothing without center contact and repeatability.

 

And yes, I can tell the difference between 2 SW points on my irons and wedges when I dialed them in via headweight. If you can't, you can't. Just stop acting like nobody can tell or can have a preference.

 

At least you've finally acknowledged that female golfers themselves create greater efficiency through their swings and using leverage. Initially you gave all the credit to the equipment, so your constant shifting of your own arguments has at least moved in the right direction.

 

Every single thing you say here is just a massive word dump to cover for the fact that it doesn't mean much of anything. You're a contrarian. I get it. Enjoy.

That is all I'm considering is dispersion and consistency when I make my statements. I don't care how a club looks or feels so long as it performs.  I don't care what the "standard" in the industry is as that is what led me to go and figure out what I liked in a club and that involved constantly making myself uncomfortable. When a club performs I don't care how it feels or looks because the performance is paramount and Trumps all other factors in my opinion.  

 

Please provide your evidence of what truly matters than. Please show me how you've dialed in your equipment so well that a couple grams of weight made the performance of your club fall off a cliff as I would be very very interested to see it. You pretty much just want to insist that you are correct without pushing forward anything backing it up but it's all good because soon this will be common knowledge just like the ball flight laws so it's all good. 

 

I acknowledged from the beginning that women pros lever the ball better than men but how can that be as men on average are twice as strong and leverage is derived from strength.  The only factor that is similar between men and women golf pros is the equipment.  The equipment is simply better fit for the needs of a woman given her level of strength, then they are for a Man.  If the weight of the clubs were increased then I am certain that you would see the men hit the ball more efficiently.  The problem most don't make don't go far enough in testing to truly find the limit of performance.  

 

Anyone who goes against the grain is initially seen as contrarian in the beginning.  How do you think the people that were going against the statements of the greatest to play the game who were giving out bad information about the ball flight laws felt?  Early on I'm sure they were told they where crazy and such...until the knowledge became mainstream. I'm sure if we were to have a conversation you would come out of it with a very different opinion on things. I would welcome that.  I don't claim to be some golf God or have the "secret' or anything like that because often what you will find is that the answers that you are looking for are in plain sight. Do you really think that I am putting out this information to try to hurt the golf games of people that I don't even know?  I am not selling anything...or some b.s. swing method or whatever.  I say that to say this....in a nutshell don't be afraid to step out of your comfort zone in regards to getting your clubs set up and expanding your knowledge on the game as you will never know where you ah ha moment will come from.  If something seems against the grain then you should really question and dive deeper because forward progress doesn't come from following the crowd, it comes from standing out from the crowd i.e. Elon Musk, Steve Jobs, Jeff Bezos, among others.  

[bnperrone]

16 hours ago, Righty to Lefty said:

leverage is derived from strength.

So incredibly, patently false, and this is why I don't really need to discuss this with you. Better leveraging neutralizes a lower strength (regardless of whether the stronger party is a man or a woman, child or adult). 

 

16 hours ago, Righty to Lefty said:

men on average are twice as strong

Just a ridiculous statement. And you're asking me where I get my data?

 

16 hours ago, Righty to Lefty said:

You pretty much just want to insist that you are correct without pushing forward anything backing it up

I've tried heavier and lighter than what I use now. I've tried longer and shorter as well. I've tried other swingweights, as well as static and progressive SW flows. Single-length irons are intriguing but I haven't tried it and don't feel like spending the money to do so. I've considered professional expert fitting results, launch monitor data, on-course info, consistency, feel, physical exertion/pain/overuse, etc. 

 

Oh, but all I need to do is swing clubs that are twice as heavy and everything will be better? 

 

[Righty to Lefty]

5 hours ago, bnperrone said:

So incredibly, patently false, and this is why I don't really need to discuss this with you. Better leveraging neutralizes a lower strength (regardless of whether the stronger party is a man or a woman, child or adult). 

 

Just a ridiculous statement. And you're asking me where I get my data?

 

I've tried heavier and lighter than what I use now. I've tried longer and shorter as well. I've tried other swingweights, as well as static and progressive SW flows. Single-length irons are intriguing but I haven't tried it and don't feel like spending the money to do so. I've considered professional expert fitting results, launch monitor data, on-course info, consistency, feel, physical exertion/pain/overuse, etc. 

 

Oh, but all I need to do is swing clubs that are twice as heavy and everything will be better? 

 

All I'm saying is test the clubs and find the limit for you personally and don't accept industry standard because we are all unique in our needs.  No one knows what they like in a club until they test and find out what they don't like.  I added 60 grams of weight to my driver and it doesn't even register on the swing weight scale and it simply works for me and that is what matters. I hope everyone finds what they are searching for in their equipment and in their golf games.  R to L. 

[cglynn]

With all this discussion of swing weight, and whether it matters or not, shouldn't the real conversation be about MOI, because that's the actual scientific principle SW is trying to describe?

 

And, I am not trying to excuse shoddy work (which, being as all the clubs listed by the OP are within 1 point of one another, and all within 1 point of the desired D1 SW....the work seems pretty reasonable to me) but isn't the reality of the situation  if the clubs play well, they play well.  And if they play well, they should be used?