Back to the future??? Fun hypothetical with Vintage drivers and launch monitors…..

[hammergolf]

Just a fun what if, but wouldn’t it have been cool if there were launch monitors in the wooden driver age to see which brand, insert material, and shaft provided the best ballspeed, lower spin, and best dispersion?  Would love to hear opinions or theories of what would have been the best performers.

[Swingingk]

I agree.  I'd love to see a good ball striker do serious testing of well maintained vintage woods.  Not one of those "Watch a pro hit a wooden driver!" videos where a player is recorded whacking some junker from a range barrel, but rather a quality vintage wood with the right shaft and grip for the tester.  I'm guessing a property fit early Mac with nice wood and a fiber insert would do some amazing numbers in the hands of a good player with the right shaft.  Treat it just like a modern fitting and mate whatever shaft - steel or modern graphite - is the right one for the tester.  Yeah... I'd love to see that.

[The Aspidistra in the Hall]

Which ball are we talking about, vintage or modern....or both?

My guess with a modern ball might be a 2 wood with 43 inch shaft...MacGregor of course.

[hammergolf]

It would have to be an era correct ball.

[Stephen8802]

We can do that now, why wonder? I bought a monthly pass to my Rec center simulator and every time I go I bring 3 or 4 different persimmon drivers with me. it has been tons of fun and one of the better things I have done.
 

I’m surprised at how little difference there is in distance, not surprised that there is a difference in consistency. All consistently average in the 250s for me, but some reach into the 260s more frequently. Later persimmon with bigger heads, like the Kool Cat, average about 5-10 yards more, and with higher spikes, and some set up better for me and I hit more fairways. It wouldn’t have mattered much to me in the 80s because I didn’t have hundreds of clubs to test, but it is cool to get data. But in the end, I had enough data back then to know the most important thing, which drivers find the short grass more. 
 

 

[hammergolf]

49 minutes ago, Stephen8802 said:

We can do that now, why wonder? I bought a monthly pass to my Rec center simulator and every time I go I bring 3 or 4 different persimmon drivers with me. it has been tons of fun and one of the better things I have done.
 

I’m surprised at how little difference there is in distance, not surprised that there is a difference in consistency. All consistently average in the 250s for me, but some reach into the 260s more frequently. Later persimmon with bigger heads, like the Kool Cat, average about 5-10 yards more, and with higher spikes, and some set up better for me and I hit more fairways. It wouldn’t have mattered much to me in the 80s because I didn’t have hundreds of clubs to test, but it is cool to get data. But in the end, I had enough data back then to know the most important thing, which drivers find the short grass more. 
 

 

Awesome! Would love to see the data from your sessions.

[Binson]

The Vintage Golfer on YouTube has added Trackman in his reviews for the last few months. Interesting stuff

[elwhippy]

Be good to see them hit a 1990s Wood Brothers or Mizuno Pro model. Forget the old heads, these were as good as persimmon got. 

[NRJyzr]

On 8/21/2023 at 1:04 PM, Stephen8802 said:

We can do that now, why wonder? I bought a monthly pass to my Rec center simulator and every time I go I bring 3 or 4 different persimmon drivers with me. it has been tons of fun and one of the better things I have done.
 

I’m surprised at how little difference there is in distance, not surprised that there is a difference in consistency. All consistently average in the 250s for me, but some reach into the 260s more frequently. Later persimmon with bigger heads, like the Kool Cat, average about 5-10 yards more, and with higher spikes, and some set up better for me and I hit more fairways. It wouldn’t have mattered much to me in the 80s because I didn’t have hundreds of clubs to test, but it is cool to get data. But in the end, I had enough data back then to know the most important thing, which drivers find the short grass more. 
 

 

 

We have X-Golf facilities near me.  Some friends are regular visitors, we hit them a couple times over winter.  Later in the winter, I started going there in lieu of range time, every so often.

 

And, I would bring the occasional older driver, including my Ping Zing Blonde.  It was interesting seeing the results with the Zing.

 

Great fun. 😁

 

[84425]

I wonder if Trackman would give more info than the old clubmakers had for knowledge? Knowledge which may not have been as available to the recreational golfer as trackman numbers are though. 
 

I am always impressed with the knowledge someone like Dave Wood shared on the clubs he’s made and what the effects were for the player. Changes that went further than adding 1,5 degrees of loft or opening/closing clubface by x percent and changing to shaft xyz. 
 

Sometimes i think someone like Dave Wood or anyone at MacGregor/Wilson/Hogan could make minute changes to a club to get it to specs of any player without depending on 100 different types of shafts and adjustable heads. 
 

plus, i think most players in the past picked their driver based on feel and what gave them most confidence. Even if it did not provide them with the absolute bedt numbers (a driver that went 5-10 yards further but didn’t feel/look right didn’t go in the bag. 

[smashdn]

11 minutes ago, 84425 said:

I wonder if Trackman would give more info than the old clubmakers had for knowledge? Knowledge which may not have been as available to the recreational golfer as trackman numbers are though. 

 

I think a club fitter and probably more importantly the player or coach could interpret the ball flight that then becomes trackman info.  After all, that is what trackman and the others are essentially doing, analyzing ball flight and strike characteristics to turn it into a value.

 

My example would be back spin.  We know when we hit a shot that balloons too much and one that has just the right amount of back spin to keep it climbing but not sacrifice distance by going too high.  Trackman just turns that observation into a value.  It is the short-cut if you will to a trained eye and experience.

 

The eyes and ears of the player and coach are replaced with the ability of the technology to give you that distinct value.

 

I don't think you can visually see smash factor.  I don't have a deep understanding of it but know it is a calculated value and is some expression of efficiency of strike.  A player may know when they have "crushed one" but they can't quantify it with a value.

 

---

 

There was a facebook post the other day regarding Hogan, his "secret," his fighting off the hook and his clubs.  I would be curious to know what a modern teacher would have done with Hogan when he was fighting the hook (provided of course he would have allowed such).  Would he have ended up with a driver that was famously set at 5* open or would there have been a swing change to prevent the need for such clubs?  I wonder how much the clubs would have been fit to his swing and how much more his swing would have been altered with modern knowledge and numbers.

[84425]

Smash factor shows the relation between clubhead speed and ball speed: if your clubhead speed is 100mph and you hit the ball with a 1.50 smashfactor, your ball speed will be 150 mph. Smashfactor therefore shows how effective you hit the ball. 
Due to technical limitations the maximum smash factor you can generate with a driver is 1.5, for a 6 iron it’s just below 1.4. So if you have a 100 mph clubhead speed and a ballspeed of 140 mph, then you’re not hitting it very well. 

 

I’ve never seen Hogan’s clubs in person but have read conflicting reports of his clubs. Some say they were super heavy, very flat and open. While others report slightly heavier, flat but otherwise ‘normal’. Driver with little if any roll and bounce. 

[bcstones]

6 hours ago, smashdn said:

 

I think a club fitter and probably more importantly the player or coach could interpret the ball flight that then becomes trackman info.  After all, that is what trackman and the others are essentially doing, analyzing ball flight and strike characteristics to turn it into a value.

 

My example would be back spin.  We know when we hit a shot that balloons too much and one that has just the right amount of back spin to keep it climbing but not sacrifice distance by going too high.  Trackman just turns that observation into a value.  It is the short-cut if you will to a trained eye and experience.

 

The eyes and ears of the player and coach are replaced with the ability of the technology to give you that distinct value.

 

I totally agree....when this post was first put up "... wouldn’t it have been cool if there were launch monitors in the wooden driver age to see which brand, insert material, and shaft provided the best ballspeed, lower spin, and best dispersion?, I thought about responding w/a simple "NO, not cool at all" Didn't MacGregor create the "Iron Byron"to test golf clubs some 60 - 70 years ago? Didn't Titilest create some kind of machine so they could see the effect on the balls they made some ~80 years ago? FN in the late 1970s or so, used high speed photography to catch the impact of ball on club face (<.025 sec if memory serves).
I'm an old coot duffer...."spin rate", "clubhead speed", "trajectory", "smash factor" - that is all techno-gobblygook to me.

 

A good instructor or coach who would work w/me & my swing as it is (and out doors either at the club range or a golf range alone), to improve my game is worth far more than any simulator time (I do realize that up north in winter, simulators do have their place, I also remember some 30+ years back when I lived in the Twin Cities, there were domed structures for tennis & golf ranges, which are probably gone now). All this techy stuff gives you bits & pieces of information,.that goes thru some kind of computer program, to give you that outcome of speed, spin, smash, what have you. All I gotta say is, if that stuff is going thru your mind every swing, I'm surprised you can hit the ball at all. The other thing is that, of the simulators I've seen, is that they are indoors...no data on ambient temp, relative humidity, wind speed & direction, time of day - all of which have direct impact on your ball flight that is not taken into account of computer program (unless of course, there is out there some multi-tens-of-thousands $$$ simulator). I just don't see the infatuation w/simulators....


 

 

[hammergolf]

3 hours ago, bcstones said:

I totally agree....when this post was first put up "... wouldn’t it have been cool if there were launch monitors in the wooden driver age to see which brand, insert material, and shaft provided the best ballspeed, lower spin, and best dispersion?, I thought about responding w/a simple "NO, not cool at all" Didn't MacGregor create the "Iron Byron"to test golf clubs some 60 - 70 years ago? Didn't Titilest create some kind of machine so they could see the effect on the balls they made some ~80 years ago? FN in the late 1970s or so, used high speed photography to catch the impact of ball on club face (<.025 sec if memory serves).
I'm an old coot duffer...."spin rate", "clubhead speed", "trajectory", "smash factor" - that is all techno-gobblygook to me.

 

A good instructor or coach who would work w/me & my swing as it is (and out doors either at the club range or a golf range alone), to improve my game is worth far more than any simulator time (I do realize that up north in winter, simulators do have their place, I also remember some 30+ years back when I lived in the Twin Cities, there were domed structures for tennis & golf ranges, which are probably gone now). All this techy stuff gives you bits & pieces of information,.that goes thru some kind of computer program, to give you that outcome of speed, spin, smash, what have you. All I gotta say is, if that stuff is going thru your mind every swing, I'm surprised you can hit the ball at all. The other thing is that, of the simulators I've seen, is that they are indoors...no data on ambient temp, relative humidity, wind speed & direction, time of day - all of which have direct impact on your ball flight that is not taken into account of computer program (unless of course, there is out there some multi-tens-of-thousands $$$ simulator). I just don't see the infatuation w/simulators....


 

 

I would just be interested in seeing were there ballspeed differences between different inserts? We’re some manufacturers CG placement different then others leading to different launch/spin conditions? Where some brands more forgiving at different strike locations? Not so much fitting questions, but to see if there was a performance difference between brands or inserts.

Edited August 25, 2023 by hammergolf

[smashdn]

11 hours ago, hammergolf said:

I would just be interested in seeing were there ballspeed differences between different inserts? We’re some manufacturers CG placement different then others leading to different launch/spin conditions? Where some brands more forgiving at different strike locations? Not so much fitting questions, but to see if there was a performance difference between brands or inserts.

 

I would almost guarantee it.  I cannot divorce the shaft differences easily but there is a ton of difference in how the several of my drivers "behave."  I have tried several of the "known brands" just to try and find one that really speaks to me.  The one I hit best is a Mac.  I play with a Hogan the most.  But I also picked up a Cobra, a Penna and some Powerbilts along the way.

 

Some have backweights.  No telling what sort of weighting under the sole plates.  I have added lead tape to the Hogan.  No doubt they all have slightly different lofts, roll and bulge.  Plus factor in that even within those brands you have different models and across the years different densities of wood available to use.  It is no wonder when a player found a driver (or other wood) that they liked they kept it for a long time.

 

Go to a modern tour van today and they can "erector set" you two drivers that measure identically.  A really good club fitter and shaper back in the day could get close but I doubt they ever produced two clubs that were identical to the point where someone like Jack couldn't find a minute difference between them.

 

 

In regards to trackman (and other brand monitors), they give you discrete data.  Some people have minds who need that for their confidence.  It is one thing to visually see and feel a ball flight or strike, but those monitor things quantify it for you.  Not only give you confidence to confirm the club but also give you a quick reference for the variability of your own swing.  early "slips" in your swing may manifest themselves as 100rpm spin changes that you won't perceive via feel or see in ball flight but could be early indicators that your swing is getting a little loose, before it completely heads off the rails.

[hammergolf]

1 hour ago, smashdn said:

 

I would almost guarantee it.  I cannot divorce the shaft differences easily but there is a ton of difference in how the several of my drivers "behave."  I have tried several of the "known brands" just to try and find one that really speaks to me.  The one I hit best is a Mac.  I play with a Hogan the most.  But I also picked up a Cobra, a Penna and some Powerbilts along the way.

 

Some have backweights.  No telling what sort of weighting under the sole plates.  I have added lead tape to the Hogan.  No doubt they all have slightly different lofts, roll and bulge.  Plus factor in that even within those brands you have different models and across the years different densities of wood available to use.  It is no wonder when a player found a driver (or other wood) that they liked they kept it for a long time.

 

Go to a modern tour van today and they can "erector set" you two drivers that measure identically.  A really good club fitter and shaper back in the day could get close but I doubt they ever produced two clubs that were identical to the point where someone like Jack couldn't find a minute difference between them.

 

 

In regards to trackman (and other brand monitors), they give you discrete data.  Some people have minds who need that for their confidence.  It is one thing to visually see and feel a ball flight or strike, but those monitor things quantify it for you.  Not only give you confidence to confirm the club but also give you a quick reference for the variability of your own swing.  early "slips" in your swing may manifest themselves as 100rpm spin changes that you won't perceive via feel or see in ball flight but could be early indicators that your swing is getting a little loose, before it completely heads off the rails.

Somehow this thread went off track and became about launch monitors. I was only wanting to use the initial ball data to see what different models, inserts, and designs had on performance. I’ll lock. It down since it seems that’s offended some here.