Should have been .370 across the board

[Stuart_G]

44 minutes ago, rbpwrx said:

 

but we already know that, as a matter of simple rudimentary physics, that *all else being equal* a larger-diameter shaft is going to have more torsional stiffness than one of smaller diameter.

 

Therefore, I am taking it as a *given* that torsional stability increases, as a rule, with diameter (compare any FW and HY shafts OF the same make, model, flex, and weight, and there is generally a 1.0* reduction in torque as you step from .335 to .370).

 

While true, as you mentioned, everything else is never going to be equal when it comes to comparing .370" .350" and .335" shaft tip designs.   In fact, we can safely say that they are specifically designed differently because of the different tip diameter.  So the question really should be,  "how well can they compensate for the smaller tip size with other design decisions?"

 

As I mentioned before, I don't think the published torque values are really telling us anything important for multiple reasons (possibly different measurement methods or even different design intents due to the different club type).    A better comparison would be between .350" and .335" driver shafts.

 

50 minutes ago, rbpwrx said:

But the significance is: you can get the same performance from less material.

 

True.  In fact that's why .350" tips used to be more common for stock shafts - they were more economical.    But advances in manufacturing techniques or advances in shaft design have likely made that difference much less significant to the point where they don't even bother with .350" tip designs any more.   I can't say for sure, but I doubt it's enough to really make a difference in weight - or we'd likely be seeing more .350" tips in the ultra-light shafts.

 

 

[rbpwrx]

32 minutes ago, ode said:

Understood....and wanting to point out to others who are looking on and may experiment with this that you'd need a raw shaft to start with....and

I've read through the plethora of threads started by @rbpwrx re: torque🙃

 

I've done this experiment but for a different reason.  Wishon hybrid shafts are .335 so I've tried as historically I've used a heavy weight shaft and the red, black and white hybrid shafts offer ability to try that out.  I also use a much heavier head then standard so the expiriment went OK as I matched head weight of fwy head and trimmed to the corresponding hybrid the shaft called for or soft stepped as needed.  As it relates to this thread the Wishon torque ratings are not likely to OP standards😉

 

Sorry for the plethora! I'm a little obsessed 🙂

[rbpwrx]

Not a true test, b/c it's only hybrid length, and it's 29*f here in MA and feels like -29*f, but I stuck a 90g Diamana D+ X-flex in a Titey 917F head, and gonna go hit a few ice balls. That D+ always felt way too soft to me, so curious if the lighter head 'stiffens' it up. 2" more length in future tests will of course change swing weight, flex, and torque yet again.

[rbpwrx]

9 minutes ago, Stuart_G said:

 

While true, as you mentioned, everything else is never going to be equal when it comes to comparing .370" .350" and .335" shaft tip designs.   In fact, we can safely say that they are specifically designed differently because of the different tip diameter.  So the question really should be,  "how well can they compensate for the smaller tip size with other design decisions?"

 

As I mentioned before, I don't think the published torque values are really telling us anything important for multiple reasons (possibly different measurement methods or even different design intents due to the different club type).    A better comparison would be between .350" and .335" driver shafts.

 

 

True.  In fact that's why .350" tips used to be more common for stock shafts - they were more economical.    But advances in manufacturing techniques or advances in shaft design have likely made that difference much less significant to the point where they don't even bother with .350" tip designs any more.   I can't say for sure, but I doubt it's enough to really make a difference in weight - or we'd likely be seeing more .350" tips in the ultra-light shafts.

 

 

I suspect the economics of a single standard for wood shafts outweighs any marginal difference in materials requirements.

[rbpwrx]

OK, three words: Ho. Lee. Crap.

 

I wasn't expecting much. It's cold, body's tight, balls are like rocks. But first three swings with the hybrid-shafted 3W, straight down the middle, 220 carry (my normal hybrid), one fade, one straight, one draw (on purpose, even), landing within yards of each other.

 

My caddy was delighted (see photo). She doesn't have the best eyesight, but she can hear them whistling overhead, and she loves when they're in the short grass. Which they were for the next seven swings. And then I got overconfident and yanked one. It was a freaking bomb, but it was left. Had to be at least as far as I normally hit 3W on a good swing.

 

But this thing feels incredibly stable - still flexy, still smooth - but very different from the shaft I had in my hybrid. Even though it's the same damn shaft! Amazing what a little headweight difference will do.

 

Now of course this isn't really a good test of anything, except maybe a shorter fairway wood (definitely considering it). Or a slightly heavier shaft.

 

But I'm convinced that the characteristics of the .370" tip, including lower torque, had everything to do with how well the clubhead followed my hands. Very different from a normal FW experience, for me.

 

I went on to hit at least 15 shots with the club, and only missed one fairway. Last hole, high climbing fade that landed on a dime @220, rolled out a couple yards, second ball a long sweeping draw that landed 240 and rolled out another 20.

 

Very very satisfying results, especially under these conditions. Can't wait to build a 42 inch-er. As always, YMMV! 
 

 

Edited November 30, 2023 by rbpwrx

[ARL67]

Yup, it's the off-season up here -> going down rabbit holes kills time and satisfies curiosities -> I'm all for exploring non-mainstream club-building ideas.  👍

 

^^^ the OP's post above now has me curious .....
 

As mentioned in my previous post,  I have a TSR1 23* 9W head in transit to me and a TSR1 23* Hybrid with Evenflow White 90S is already in my bag.  Also in transit are new uncut EFW 90S Hybrid shafts and a new uncut EFW 75S Driver shaft.  I also have an EFW 65S 5W shaft here.  As I have both "genres" of 23* heads, and a pile of shafts and adapters, I'll do some mixing and matching and see if I discern anything worthwhile.

 

I run out of swing-speed at a certain point and looking to find/build a very reliable club to fit under my driver and above my 23* hybrid.   My 20* hybrid is reliable but really not much longer than my 23* ( I have GC3 at home for data )  -> either 20/23* club is essentially interchangeable for me.  Though I'm more confident with my 23* as the shaft is 3/8" shorter.  

 

So I thought I'd try a lighter and slightly longer FW shaft in my 20* Hybrid head -> lighter hopefully getting me more SS.  So I did make up a 65g FW shaft ( Ping Tour 65 Reg, a leftover sitting around ) with the 20* Hybrid head and playing to 41.25".  It provided the added distance I was after, but reliability was not worth gaming -> maybe I need more reps with that club.  I'm not used to that Ping Tour shaft, so I may cut down my EFW 5W 65S shaft as I'm quite used to the EFW profile, or build up that new EFW 75S I have coming.

 

I'm very used to hitting hybrids throughout the course of a round, so no surprises when I pull it from the bag.  When I used to game FW's ( 3W/4W/5W ) I might only reach for it 1-2 times a round ( greedy for the bit added length ) , so very little confidence when having to execute the swing off the deck.  I'd only reach for them if I had a nice flat stance and a pretty wide open landing zone.  But I'd flub them often enough and come up saying to myself  "you donkey, you shoulda hit a hybrid you greedy ... !  ).  Oh the fun !

 

 

[rbpwrx]

Promising development. So I actually have an 85 TX Tour Green wood and an 85 TX Tour Green hybrid shaft. And two 915Fd fairway heads at 13.5°. So I can set up a legit head-to-head where the only significant variable is the diameter of the tip. On paper, the difference between 2.6* torque and 2.2*. Otherwise, same length, weight, grip, profile. I really am curious how different they feel. Stay tuned, happening tomorrow!

 

 

Edited December 1, 2023 by rbpwrx

[rbpwrx]

12 hours ago, ARL67 said:

Yup, it's the off-season up here -> going down rabbit holes kills time and satisfies curiosities -> I'm all for exploring non-mainstream club-building ideas.  👍

 

^^^ the OP's post above now has me curious .....

 

How do you like those Steelfiber i110s? I've been thinking about one for a 3i...

[ARL67]

Wow, you are committed to the project with your acquisition of 2 identical heads and those Tour Green shafts !

 

I've been using SF i110cw and i95cw for many years now,  no desire to go back to steel.  Though I have a set of Edel SMS arriving soon with C-Taper Lite Regulars for bag #2, so might stick with those and see I how I feel about revisiting steel.  I always have a set of SF on hand in case I have a re-shafting emergency. 😁

 

 

[rbpwrx]

10 minutes ago, ARL67 said:

Wow, you are committed to the project with your acquisition of 2 identical heads and those Tour Green shafts !

 

I've been using SF i110cw and i95cw for many years now,  no desire to go back to steel.  Though I have a set of Edel SMS arriving soon with C-Taper Lite Regulars for bag #2, so might stick with those and see I how I feel about revisiting steel.  I always have a set of SF on hand in case I have a re-shafting emergency. 😁

 

Already had the heads and shafts! Tour Green 105TX was one of my favorite shafts, so I went on a buying spree a couple years ago. Not as good in the woods. Handy now, though!

[rbpwrx]

Alrighty. There's a significant weight difference (about 10g, hybrid shaft is heavier, partially b/c I had to extend it 1"), and I was wrong about the heads being identical - one is 15* and one 13.5* I put the heavier head on the heavier shaft to keep swing weight similar, but will switch them around during testing. Also, graphics are about 3" higher on the wood shaft, which may be normal, or it may indicate tipping of the hybrid, which was an eBay pull. I believe the 3W was new, and I probably tipped it 1". Anyway, looking forward to this afternoon - it's a balmy, muddy 43*f here in western MA!

 

[grochol17]

On 11/29/2023 at 4:28 PM, rbpwrx said:

But I'm convinced that the characteristics of the .370" tip, including lower torque, had everything to do with how well the clubhead followed my hands. Very different from a normal FW experience, for me.

 

This could easily be the placebo effect... you've posted a ton in various threads about how you need low torque and now you've convinced yourself that a .370 tip is better, so I'm not surprised you're hitting good shots with that set up.  The only way to know for sure that the low torque and/or tip size is making the difference is to do a blind test where you don't know which shaft you're hitting and then you can objectively compare the results.  Unfortunately there's just no way for you to do that... even your Aldila Tour Green experiment doesn't qualify because you've already noted that there are visible differences between the two shafts, so you'll always know which one you're swinging.

[rbpwrx]

43 minutes ago, grochol17 said:

This could easily be the placebo effect... you've posted a ton in various threads about how you need low torque and now you've convinced yourself that a .370 tip is better, so I'm not surprised you're hitting good shots with that set up.  The only way to know for sure that the low torque and/or tip size is making the difference is to do a blind test where you don't know which shaft you're hitting and then you can objectively compare the results.  Unfortunately there's just no way for you to do that... even your Aldila Tour Green experiment doesn't qualify because you've already noted that there are visible differences between the two shafts, so you'll always know which one you're swinging.

 

True. But. I've played many shafts I had no idea of their torque rating (my OG gamers for years for example, ACCRA SC M5s), and kept coming back to a few that just 'felt good,' and only discovered much later that they were especially low in torque. Which just makes sense, growing up on steel - not particularly stiff (my old X100 woods feel like licorice now), but notable low TQ. Anyway, I think it's not confirmation bias at this point, but just confirmation. It's been 30 years figuring this out. I'm only sharing in case it helps someone else with similar experience. Mostly interested now in the balance between flex profile and the low TQ I like. Really love the VS Proto, but the bend point is low. Similar to some of the ACCRA line. Looking for TQ down around 2* but a more linear flex with a slight bias toward higher BP. That seems to be a unicorn. Still looking.

[Puttersaurus Rex]

I am sure you are aware the fairway and hybrid shafts have different raw lengths, weights, and balance points.  The Tour Greens will not be an Apples to Apples comparison.  Power to you for experimenting and trying out of the box ideas though!

 

In regards to other low torque shafts, have you tried UST ProForce VST Black 75 (2.5 torque), 85 (2.0), 95 (2.0) shafts? 

[rbpwrx]

20 minutes ago, Puttersaurus Rex said:

I am sure you are aware the fairway and hybrid shafts have different raw lengths, weights, and balance points.  The Tour Greens will not be an Apples to Apples comparison.  Power to you for experimenting and trying out of the box ideas though!

 

In regards to other low torque shafts, have you tried UST ProForce VST Black 75 (2.5 torque), 85 (2.0), 95 (2.0) shafts? 

Yes, I'm aware, but was the best I could do with what I had in the shop (and pretty much the best you can do if you're trying to compare FW to HY shafts).

 

And yeah, I know the VTS Shafts, they are on my shortlist to try, looking forward to the black in 2.0* 80g, just haven't found an affordable enough one yet!

 

I actually really like the feel of UST stuff, crisp and snappy. Have an Elements Chrome 65 TX I like a lot. It's sort of a generic feel, but good generic. 👍

[HeadCovered]

3 hours ago, rbpwrx said:

Alrighty. There's a significant weight difference (about 10g, hybrid shaft is heavier, partially b/c I had to extend it 1"), and I was wrong about the heads being identical - one is 15* and one 13.5* I put the heavier head on the heavier shaft to keep swing weight similar, but will switch them around during testing. Also, graphics are about 3" higher on the wood shaft, which may be normal, or it may indicate tipping of the hybrid, which was an eBay pull. I believe the 3W was new, and I probably tipped it 1". Anyway, looking forward to this afternoon - it's a balmy, muddy 43*f here in western MA!

 

 

Man, you are da man!!!! 

 

Thanks for doing it for us. Love seeing all this.

 

Let us know how you do.

 

 

 

[ARL67]

I have a RIP Alpha Red Eyes 80S  ( from the Titleist 910 days ) and it is 2.2 torque. 

[rbpwrx]

1 hour ago, ARL67 said:

I have a RIP Alpha Red Eyes 80S  ( from the Titleist 910 days ) and it is 2.2 torque. 

 

Yup, I put a 70X red eyes in a Yonex 380 9* (so cool you can get all this 'cutting-edge' gear from 10 yrs ago for almost nothing - thanks for being so fickle, golfers! Definitely keep putting more work into your gear than your swings!)(Pot, kettle.)
I found it even more tight in flex than torque. Really firm. Think I prefer the opposite. Aldila tends to overcook flex. Same with the Protopype 80X I have in FW.

[rbpwrx]

OK, results:

 

Well, the two clubs are pretty different. I was trying to do blind, so kept them on the ground behind me, tried to look at only the grass or the grip, but could feel the weight difference immediately. 10-12g is apparently a lot.

 

Still, tried to put exactly the same swing on them. First shots with the wood shaft were a couple hooks. First with the hybrid was a stripe long, then a flare.

 

That showed me the difference immediately. The hybrid was WAY more stout. (I had never played this shaft before, was in my backlog of bargain TGs off the 'Bay, this one from the dad of a college player who evidently tipped it a LOT, b/c it was hard to elevate w/ almost no kick. I could imagine with a 20g heavier hybrid head it would feel great. But the 3W head wasn't enough to activate it. I had to swing strong, and up on it, like with my chopped down OG Blue. Super firm.)

 

Anyway, so I gave up on swinging them the same. Shafts were too different. With a stronger swing on the hybrid, it was super stable and I could send it. If I quit on the swing, right miss. (One thing I love about a really stable shaft is how hard you can go after it. Helped that I was also bagging my short stack of X7s. Matching feels.)

 

The wood was just a regular 3W, like my others. TX tipped an inch. Make a good, balanced swing and don't rush it, the kick elevates and sends it.

 

(The Diamana-shafted 40" 3W above was better than either, by a lot. Smoother shaft, shorter, a little heavier + light head = magic. Couldn't miss with it.)

Verdict: loved the stability of the hybrid shaft in the FW head. Gonna snag something a touch smoother, in raw length (probably CK Blue or Rogue Black, 80TX, both bargains on the Bay. Set myself a $40 limit on components I've pretty much been sticking to, unless a steal comes along in something fancier). Will update when I build the new one.

Thanks to everyone for the adapter-interchangeability tip, esp ARL67 and Valtiel. Makes this experiment SO much easier. Onward!

 

Edited December 1, 2023 by rbpwrx

[ARL67]

So I was playing around with my TSR1 9W 23* FW head, with both Titleist EFW 65 5W shaft ( shortened from stock 5W length), and EFW 90S Hybrid shaft, both playing to within 1/4" playing length.  I have several weights for the TSR heads so I can dial in optimal swing-weight.  I preferred, and had better results, with the Hybrid shaft, but I'm sure it has to do with total weight and perhaps the added stoutness of the Hybrid.  Sure, I could go out and buy a heavy FW shaft, but my curiosity has been satisfied.

 

I don't think one could ever do an Apples-to-Apples 0.335 FW and .370 Hybrid shaft comparison as the layups & flex profiles would surely be different.  But at least if gives one an opportunity ( in the case of Titleist FW/Hybrid adapter compatibility ) to try another genre of shafts if they so choose.

[rbpwrx]

5 minutes ago, ARL67 said:

So I was playing around with my TSR1 9W 23* FW head, with both Titleist EFW 65 5W shaft ( shortened from stock 5W length), and EFW 90S Hybrid shaft, both playing to within 1/4" playing length.  I have several weights for the TSR heads so I can dial in optimal swing-weight.  I preferred, and had better results, with the Hybrid shaft, but I'm sure it has to do with total weight and perhaps the added stoutness of the Hybrid.  Sure, I could go out and buy a heavy FW shaft, but my curiosity has been satisfied.

 

I don't think one could ever do an Apples-to-Apples 0.335 FW and .370 Hybrid shaft comparison as the layups & flex profiles would surely be different.  But at least if gives one an opportunity ( in the case of Titleist FW/Hybrid adapter compatibility ) to try another genre of shafts if they so choose.

Excellent! That's +2 for hybrid shaft in fairway head. Who will be next in this highly subjective and unscientific flashmob experiment?

[rbpwrx]

Note: if anyone else tries this, when you take the retaining ring off the hybrid adapter, you can lose the upper adapter cog. Trust me on this. In my case, since I always play C1, a dot of superglue did the trick. Tape of course would also work. 

[rbpwrx]

Update: Just received a Riptide MX 80X 6.5 hybrid, new uncut, and via the adapter trick fit it into a 915Fd 13.5* FW head. Limited sample size of maybe a dozen swings, and it was super cold here in western MA today, everything felt brittle, even the shafts, but MAN that's a great combo. I went straight in, no cutting tip or butt (and a fairway head is @ 20g lighter than hybrid, so the shaft will play stiffer), but it was lasers. Could not get it off line. Managed to make a full swing several times through my 2 gloves and 4 sweaters, and this thing SENT it. Now it may feel like a noodle when the temps pop back up, but the very low torque was evident in the tight dispersion, especially with the lighter head. Can't wait to try it again tomorrow. Really think I'm on to something here (hybrid shaft into FW head to take advantage of lower torque, and relax a little on flex).

 

[rbpwrx]

Actually a pretty informative and pithy vid from TT: 
 

 

[Howard_Jones]

On 11/20/2023 at 4:39 PM, rbpwrx said:

The more I learn about shafts and carbon layups and the balance between torque and flex and profile the more convinced I become that .335 was the WRONG standard for woods.

 

We put this spindly little neck on the end of a stick some guys are swinging over 150mph and try to prevent it from bending and twisting right before a heavy 200g+ end weight.

 

We trashed the one thing that would have made that easy: DIAMETER.

Look at the specs for any hybrid shaft. They are almost uniformly 1.0* tighter in torque than their wood shaft brethren. Same for flex. Most guys report more confidence and better results with their hybrid than their driver. Is that partially due to length? Sure. But I'll bet you anything it also has to do with reduced torque and flex near the tip. Which is almost entire due to tip diameter.

WHY couldn't all clubs be .370 parallel standard? You could put any shaft in any head, tip any shaft any amount for all kinds of creative gapping, you'd SAVE material and weight just by increasing diameter - i.e. free stability, cheaper shafts. Plus, our woods, particularly driver, would LOOK more meaty and substantial, less whippy, which might give some players more confidence.

There are all kinds of other advantages I can think of. At one point we had a .350 standard. Which at least made a little more sense. But why not keep it simple? ONE standard? One reamer to buy. One size ferrule. Is there ANY reason we made the longest shafts inherently the weakest?!?

 

The 0.350" had a little more resin to protect the shaft from "outside agents", but even if resin does not really change flex or stiffness, it does on the weakest flexes, while its not really a problem to make them strong enough, even for a 150 mph player. This is the reason for why Tom Wishon makes 0.335 hybrid models, where the hosel is stainless steel who can be modified to 0.370 if we want that. 

If the debate was, why does 0.355 Taper tip shaft and hosels still exist for irons and wedges?, i would be ALL IN, and say go 0.370 for all, since 0.355 tapers makes no sense what so ever, its even more expensive to make them, since it demands a step extra in production. (dont mix up constant wgt and descending wgt now, its got nothing to do with my suggestion)

Edited December 22, 2023 by Howard_Jones

[ShortGolfer]

Taper tips may be cheaper to make if you have initial production in overseas and final assembly  and quality control in the USA.

Factor in the cost of making sure the order is exactly what you think you ordered and not have 7 iron shafts labeled as 8 iron shafts.

[Howard_Jones]

1 hour ago, ShortGolfer said:

Taper tips may be cheaper to make if you have initial production in overseas and final assembly  and quality control in the USA.

Factor in the cost of making sure the order is exactly what you think you ordered and not have 7 iron shafts labeled as 8 iron shafts.

Qualy what control?
Even in China, Vietnam, Thailand or where ever you make them, taper tip is 1 extra step in production, and NOT needed, it makes no sense what so ever.

[ShortGolfer]

The idea is that if you make them in a country like China or Vietnam, the additional cost of adding that step is cheap compared to doing it in the United States for final assembly.

 

Customized wedges.  If the wedge shafts are taper tipped in Vietnam and assembled in the USA, the .355 shafts are easily checked upon arrival and stored for later use.

Fixtures could be made so it is obvious when someone accidentally installs something other than a wedge shaft in a wedge head.  Uh, the shaft doesn't fit.  Something is wrong.

 

As I get older I learn ways of avoiding mistakes when I forget stuff.

Edited December 22, 2023 by ShortGolfer

[Howard_Jones]

3 minutes ago, ShortGolfer said:

The idea is that if you make them in a country like China or Vietnam, the additional cost of adding that step is cheap compared to doing it in the United States for final assembly.

 

Customized wedges.  If the wedge shafts are taper tipped in Vietnam and assembled in the USA, the .355 shafts are easily checked and stored for later use.

Fixtures could be made so it is obvious when someone accidentally installs something other than a wedge shaft in a wedge head.

By why use Taper tips at all? Explain the reason for why they are still made?

[rbpwrx]

4 minutes ago, Howard_Jones said:

Qualy what control?
Even in China, Vietnam, Thailand or where ever you make them, taper tip is 1 extra step in production, and NOT needed, it makes no sense what so ever.

Not to mention the ability to infinitely step, soft or hard, deviate from the half inch standard, etc. so that's one point of consensus.

 

But I continue to be struck by how much extra stability you get from mere geometry. Hybrid shaft in fairway head plays was stiffer and straighter. Which means you can go lighter, or softer, to achieve the same "profile" with a 370 tip. Saves material and energy. And no limit to how soft you can go! 
 

I suppose the only danger is in really soft flexes, perhaps there would be a slightly greater chance of shaft breakage right above the hosel. But only if Borgmeyer is swinging it!