Interesting comparison Axis1 vs LAB

[Golfingfanatic]

Some interesting videos. Obviously worth pointing out that videos are made by Axis1 and that there is some bias probably.

 

 

 

 

[manVSgolf]

Interesting look there.  I had a couple of Axis1s at one point - I definitely thought they were better than other standard OEMs.

 

Regarding the videos - the point he makes about the LAB opening when the revealer is altered is kind of a moot point - no one is putting with forces applied at those points.  I have to accept the putter as the sum of the parts - because you are using the entire putter while putting, the entire putter should be judged.  

 

Ultimately I’m a LAB Homer, but I respect Axis1 a ton as well - if there was no LAB, I would game Axis1 (and did).  This was an interesting look at things but the skeptic in me asks that if ANY test is altered, it’s going to skew results in some way.  Anyone can paint just about anything in a positive or negative light by asking certain directed questions.  Both putter companies can be proud of their products.

Edited February 29 by manVSgolf
Typo

[MattM97]

So he modified the LAB grip/setup to find a flaw. 

[dmeeksDC]

I don’t believe torque free putters exist unless you’re going to send it out on the green in The Revealer. As soon as a human puts the putter in action it is not torque free, not possible for any person to accomplish. So I skip the whole torque free debate. It doesn’t matter. 

 

I go by which one gets balls in the hole most often in conjunction with how I like to putt. I am not a forward press putter. For me the Axis1 approach to balance is easier to work with when I am putting. There is no adapting, it swings on my line easily. It seems to “track” very well through the stroke. Both great putters but with the Axis1 it is very easy to hit my start line — it does not feel like other putters in that respect — and that’s why I like it. 

[PixlPutterman]

Terrible video, he knows he is being misleading 

[ephmen]

@labgolf has already debunked this video in another thread. If I could find it I would link it here. Kind of pathetic that Axis1 is so desperate as to do this. 

[MattM97]

7 minutes ago, ephmen said:

@labgolf has already debunked this video in another thread. If I could find it I would link it here. Kind of pathetic that Axis1 is so desperate as to do this. 

 

Well when you're competitor is basically crushing the competition and you've done nothing in terms of new models, advertising, sponsorships, etc. The dirty tactics come out to play, they're cheaper too. 

[moostache]

4 hours ago, manVSgolf said:

Interesting look there.  I had a couple of Axis1s at one point - I definitely thought they were better than other standard OEMs.

 

Regarding the videos - the point he makes about the LAB opening when the revealed is altered is kind of a moot point - no one is putting with forces applied at those points.  I have to accept the putter as the sum of the parts - because you are using the entire putter while putting, the entire putter should be judged.  

 

Ultimately I’m a LAB Homer, but I respect Axis1 a ton as well - if there was no LAB, I would game Axis1 (and did).  This was an interesting look at things but the skeptic in me asks that if ANY test is altered, it’s going to skew results in some way.  Anyone can paint just about anything in a positive or negative light by asking certain directed questions.  Both putter companies can be proud of their products.

 

Curious as to what you think LAB does better than the Axis? If anything, with the putters being equal, I prefer the look of Axis over LAB, and I'm struggling with speed control with my Link.1 so I'm debating trying a Mezz or something else.

[txbadger]

9 minutes ago, moostache said:

 

...with the putters being equal, I prefer the look of Axis over LAB....

Its funny you say this.. and goes to show how our tastes can differ wildly.   The irony isn't lost on me given the DF2.1... but I think the Axis1 putters are very visually unappealing.  That hosel and bend in the shaft is just off-putting to my eye but I understand that is part of their magic sauce.      

[manVSgolf]

28 minutes ago, moostache said:

 

Curious as to what you think LAB does better than the Axis? If anything, with the putters being equal, I prefer the look of Axis over LAB, and I'm struggling with speed control with my Link.1 so I'm debating trying a Mezz or something else.

One of the physical differences that was not shown in the video, is that the Axis1 doesn’t stop wherever when twirling it.  The face sits vertically when balanced.  90* from “face balanced”.  So it’s not like Axis1 can do every single thing PLUS.  It’s different.  

 

I got used to (and embraced) the looks of the 2.1 but never loved having part of the hosel in front of the ball on the axis 1.  I honestly feel like one could “shank” putts if they got a little

loose.  
 

I had the Umbra and the OG Rose.  The fang part of the OG rose felt a little cheap (everything else felt great though), and the Umbra was an eyesore, even for me who normally doesn’t care about using something weird.  

Axis1 has definitely improved aesthetically over the years and they make a superior product to anything else aside from LAB.  I think they were looking for the same truth as Bill Presse and found a similar but different angle regarding torque.  Again, I respect both companies like crazy for wanting to make a scientifically superior product.  In MY hands, I feel the LABs are superior.  I say this because I started putting significantly better immediately after I switched, even from the Axis1.  But I will put Axis1 over anything else that looks nice but isn’t torque “free”.

 

Edited February 28 by manVSgolf

[moostache]

26 minutes ago, txbadger said:

Its funny you say this.. and goes to show how our tastes can differ wildly.   The irony isn't lost on me given the DF2.1... but I think the Axis1 putters are very visually unappealing.  That hosel and bend in the shaft is just off-putting to my eye but I understand that is part of their magic sauce.      

 

I agree, that hosel joint is UGLY, but I find the same thing with LAB. I like the traditional shape, but I'm still more leaning towards trying a Mezz. To be frank, they're all kind of ugly 😂

[moostache]

12 minutes ago, manVSgolf said:

One of the physical differences that was not shown in the video, is that the Axis1 doesn’t stop wherever when twirling it.  The face sits vertically when balanced.  90* from “face balanced”.  So it’s not like Axis1 can do every single thing PLUS.  It’s different.  

 

I got used to (and embraced) the looks of the 2.1 but never loved having part of the hosel in front of the ball on the axis 1.  I honestly feel like one could “shank” putts if they got a little

loose.  
 

I had the Umbra and the OG Rose.  The fang part of the OG rose felt a little cheap (everything else felt great though), and the Umbra was an eyesore, even for me who normally doesn’t care about using something weird.  

Axis1 has definitely improved aesthetically over the years and they make a superior product to anything else aside from LAB.  I think they were looking for the same truth as Bill Presse and found a similar but different angle regarding torque.  Again, I respect both companies like crazy for wanting to make a scientifically superior product.  In MY hands, I feel the LABs are superior.  I say this because I started putting significantly better immediately after I switched, even from the Axis1.  But I will put Axis1 over anything else that looks nice but isn’t torque “free”.

 

 

Appreciate the input! I recently swapped the grip on my Link to a Garsen rubber pro. Haven't taken it out on the course yet, but hopefully it helps with initial alignment. I prefer fang shapes for that, but have struggled with traditional mallets. That being said, I've heard great things about the Mezz and am definitely interested in trying one out.

[StoutKing]

I have no dog in the fight.  I would like to try a Link when they have an all black model including screws.  That being said it's funny how butt hurt some people are over this.  We are talking about putters to quote Allen Iverson LOL.

[MattM97]

2 hours ago, StoutKing said:

I have no dog in the fight.  I would like to try a Link when they have an all black model including screws.  That being said it's funny how butt hurt some people are over this.  We are talking about putters to quote Allen Iverson LOL.

 

You're new here, just wait and see what people get butt hurt over on WRX. It will shock you at first then be normal after. 

[Phabs]

8 hours ago, dmeeksDC said:

I don’t believe torque free putters exist unless you’re going to send it out on the green in The Revealer. As soon as a human puts the putter in action it is not torque free, not possible for any person to accomplish. So I skip the whole torque free debate. It doesn’t matter. 

 

I go by which one gets balls in the hole most often in conjunction with how I like to putt. I am not a forward press putter. For me the Axis1 approach to balance is easier to work with when I am putting. There is no adapting, it swings on my line easily. It seems to “track” very well through the stroke. Both great putters but with the Axis1 it is very easy to hit my start line — it does not feel like other putters in that respect — and that’s why I like it. 

But but marketing said so! 

[Phabs]

6 hours ago, moostache said:

 

I agree, that hosel joint is UGLY, but I find the same thing with LAB. I like the traditional shape, but I'm still more leaning towards trying a Mezz. To be frank, they're all kind of ugly 😂

Agreed both putters look like pretty awful.  Lab tried to make a less ugly blade and it still came out like Quasimodo 

[vman]

I’ve never twirled a putter when I putt, although I’m sure twirling has its place. Also don’t your hands negate the torque. I mean it doesn’t take a lot of pressure. Putting is all about read, start line and speed. Just ask the best like Crenshaw, Roberts, Stricker, Woods…all with torquing putters. Don’t get me started on shafts.😂

[MattM97]

16 minutes ago, vman said:

I’ve never twirled a putter when I putt, although I’m sure twirling has its place. Also don’t your hands negate the torque. I mean it doesn’t take a lot of pressure. Putting is all about read, start line and speed. Just ask the best like Crenshaw, Roberts, Stricker, Woods…all with torquing putters. Don’t get me started on shafts.😂

 

Your hands still feel the torque when putting, some like more some like less. It doesn't magically disappear when putting. 

[vman]

1 hour ago, MattM97 said:

 

Your hands still feel the torque when putting, some like more some like less. It doesn't magically disappear when putting. 

What even if you’re using a LAB or an Axis?😉

[MattM97]

14 minutes ago, vman said:

What even if you’re using a LAB or an Axis?😉

 

If they have little to no torque to begin with then you won't feel torque in your hands. 

 

Hard concept to understand? 😉😉

[5hort5tuff]

Axis1 makes a video saying their putter does X well...they show LAB doing what they believe it doesn't do as well as their putter...how is this any different than the original Lab revealer video? They take common putters and show how they are inferior...

 

Everyone here has their own opinions on torque and the absence of torque, but there are some points you can't argue with.   LAB has done the best job I've ever seen marketing their putters. They make videos to explain how to use their putters...they encourage you not to try it once and drop the putter.  They explain how to change your setup and move the ball etc etc.  they do their best to get a product in your hands and keep using their putters.  They have introduced more visual appealing models and offer both RH/LH.  Axis 1 doesn't do any of these things. 

 

Now...it is a bit interesting that so many social media golf influencers are using LAB putters now...and it has truly transformed their putting instantly.  I also find it interesting that the people on tour using the LAb are mostly Broomstick. At upright angles......which seems to minimize the positive effects of torque free putting. 

 

Just do your own testing and comparisons and make your own decisions before buying. 

Edited February 29 by 5hort5tuff

[SwingMan]

Try the putters, see what works. Avoid biased performances.

[ephmen]

23 hours ago, 5hort5tuff said:

Axis1 makes a video saying their putter does X well...they show LAB doing what they believe it doesn't do as well as their putter...how is this any different than the original Lab revealer video? They take common putters and show how they are inferior...

 

Everyone here has their own opinions on torque and the absence of torque, but there are some points you can't argue with.   LAB has done the best job I've ever seen marketing their putters. They make videos to explain how to use their putters...they encourage you not to try it once and drop the putter.  They explain how to change your setup and move the ball etc etc.  they do their best to get a product in your hands and keep using their putters.  They have introduced more visual appealing models and offer both RH/LH.  Axis 1 doesn't do any of these things. 

 

Now...it is a bit interesting that so many social media golf influencers are using LAB putters now...and it has truly transformed their putting instantly.  I also find it interesting that the people on tour using the LAb are mostly Broomstick. At upright angles......which seems to minimize the positive effects of torque free putting. 

 

Just do your own testing and comparisons and make your own decisions before buying. 

Mickelson using a DF 3 conventional this week in Jeddah

[5hort5tuff]

8 hours ago, ephmen said:

Mickelson using a DF 3 conventional this week in Jeddah

Is he still playing professional golf? Jkjk.

 

 

[joostin]

That was my suggestion to Axis1 in a post a few months ago - for them to bring a fair competitive point to LAB regarding grip axis torque.  After all, LAB seems to be killing it while Axis1 is hanging onto Justin Rose.  Given my thread was the only place you’ll find that analysis, it seems Luis Pedraza took it to heart.  (I think that deserves a thank you complimentary gift Axis1 Rose, and a competitive test putter from LAB, right? 😉).

 

His execution was clumsy though.  Then Sam Hahn from LAB did a rebuttal video but completely missed the point about grip axis torque; he still bypassed the grip when adjusting his Revealer.  And now everyone’s up in arms! 🤺

Regarding the grip axis, because a grip forces our hands to align with its axis, the hands will see torque around that grip axis.  So yes, the LAB press grip will induce torque at the hands just because the head CG is off the grip axis.  How much?  Let's calculate it from the equation from my thread:

 

T = head weight (mass*gravitational acceleration) * cosine (lie angle) * distance of head CG from grip axis

 

Assume a 350g head; 70° lie; CG 1" behind the grip axis.  Don't know actual specs but close enough for a calculation.

 

T = .350kg * 9.8m/s² * cos(70) * .0254m

= .0298 N-m

= .022 lbf-ft "foot pounds"

 

Yup we’re not talking about a whole lot of torque here, but the heavier the weight and/or the further back the CG, the higher the torque.

 

However, throw a normal non-press grip on that LAB putter, and this torque goes away.  Btw any forward press already induces a torque, even with Axis1, as you’ll see below.

As for the speed they’re swinging the Revealers, LAB will probably win that battle every time.  Head CG needs to be aligned with the shaft axis for the head to not flop around.  With Axis1 I’d imagine by design their putters really are “zero torque" with that CG/axis alignment.  However, because they use a bent shaft, that will always introduce more variance in the actual build.  Rotate it a tiny bit off and the CG is no longer perfectly inline with the shaft/grip axis.  LAB with its straight shaft will not have any significant build error, so it’ll be closer to perfect every time.

I like what Axis1 and LAB are doing.  They’ve identified a variable that can be removed.  However here's one thing that no one's addressing:  Zero torque is the basis for the companies’ advantage over others.  But… has anyone measured this torque (static and dynamic) at the hands during the putting stroke?  Quantified torque in any way?  Data analysis?  Proven how much total torque is reduced at the hands with their putters?  Nope.  You’d need data from an array of sensors on the grip.  It’s a technical “problem” they’re solving, but from an engineering view there’s no technical data of the problem nor supporting the solution.  All other clubs are non-zero torque.  Are they all problems?  We all already adapt to non-zero torque clubs.  How much grip torque reduction can be quantified as significant?

Sure, people swear to their putters, and some are doing great at the highest levels. Placebo or not, results are results.  That’s great for business, tour adoption, etc., but since the claims of technical torque advantage have no technical torque analysis backing, let’s see an actual torque study from companies making claims about their torque advantages.  All we have is the LAB Revealer that, smartly, makes most other putters look pretty inferior as they flop around.  What they're doing is great, and LAB's marketing and word of mouth influence seems terrific, but as the forerunners of putter "tech", let's back the anecdotal evidence and Revealer tests with real data-driven torque analysis.  We're in a data analytics world now.

Here’s the other thing.  There are multiple types of torque that exist at the hands.  Torque exists on multiple axes, not just around the shaft axis or grip axis, which is all they really can zero out.  Because the companies claim “no torque", everyone seems led to believe that torque is a singular thing that these companies have “solved" and zeroed out.  Not true.  There’s torque around the grip (static and dynamic).  That's the torque they can get to zero.  But then there’s torque from a face on view; torque from a DTL view; applied rotational torques when swinging the club and rotating the face; and torque on off-CG impact with the ball.  These torques are all there, and they will always be.  “This putter has no torque" is very much a false statement to anyone that understands the physics 101.

 

To clarify here are some of the types of torque at the hands:

The static torque below (green rotation arrow) they can get to zero (and so can toe-up putters btw):

The dynamic torque below (green rotation arrow, T equation circled) they can get to zero (and so can face-balanced putters):

Any applied torque from active rotation of the hands (green rotation arrow, τ equation circled) here is not zero:

This torque below cannot be zero unless the head CG is directly below the hands.  Any forward press will present torque here when the putter is off the ground:

Both these dynamic torques below (T=F*d and τ=I*α) applied by the golfer cannot be zero, ever:

For τ=I*α, I = MOI of the whole club.  α = angular acceleration at the start of the backswing 

This torque below cannot be zero unless the head CG is directly below the hands, which is never:

Any off-CG strike cannot be zero torque:

[Btw, look how the shaft is angled slightly away from the head CG on this Axis1 picture.  That means the bent shaft was rotated a little off when installed, and you'll see a not-so-great Revealer test.]

 

I'm not even including torques at transition in the backswing, but you get the point.  Torque exists, in multiple ways, with any putter.  They can only zero out torque around the shaft or grip axis (via zero moment arm distances by placing head CG inline with the shaft or grip axis).  The other torques are still there.

 

Personally I'm more interested in high MOI for putters (my giant Cure models in signature), but here's hoping Axis1 and @labgolf consider DM-ing me for complimentary putters to persuade my own choices in the spirit of wrx 🍻.

Edited March 2 by joostin

[manVSgolf]

55 minutes ago, joostin said:

That was my suggestion to Axis1 in a post a few months ago - for them to bring a fair competitive point to LAB regarding grip axis torque.  After all, LAB seems to be killing it while Axis1 is hanging onto Justin Rose.  Given my thread was the only place you’ll find that analysis, it seems Luis Pedraza took it to heart.  (I think that deserves a thank you complimentary gift Axis1 Rose, and a competitive test putter from LAB, right? 😉).

 

His execution was clumsy though.  Then Sam Hahn from LAB did a rebuttal video but completely missed the point about grip axis torque; he still bypassed the grip when adjusting his Revealer.  And now everyone’s up in arms! 🤺

Regarding the grip axis, because a grip forces our hands to align with its axis, the hands will see torque around that grip axis.  So yes, the LAB press grip will induce torque at the hands just because the head CG is off the grip axis.  How much?  Let's calculate it from the equation from my thread:

 

T = head weight (mass*gravitational acceleration) * cosine (lie angle) * distance of head CG from grip axis

 

Assume a 350g head; 70° lie; CG 1" behind the grip axis.  Don't know actual specs but close enough for a calculation.

 

T = .350kg * 9.8m/s² * cos(70) * .0254m

= .0298 N-m

= .022 lbf-ft "foot pounds"

 

Yup we’re not talking about a whole lot of torque here, but the heavier the weight and/or the further back the CG, the higher the torque.

 

However, throw a normal non-press grip on that LAB putter, and this torque goes away.  Btw any forward press already induces a torque, even with Axis1, as you’ll see below.

As for the speed they’re swinging the Revealers, LAB will probably win that battle every time.  Head CG needs to be aligned with the shaft axis for the head to not flop around.  With Axis1 I’d imagine by design their putters really are “zero torque" with that CG/axis alignment.  However, because they use a bent shaft, that will always introduce more variance in the actual build.  Rotate it a tiny bit off and the CG is no longer perfectly inline with the shaft/grip axis.  LAB with its straight shaft will not have any significant build error, so it’ll be closer to perfect every time.

I like what Axis1 and LAB are doing.  They’ve identified a variable that can be removed.  However here's one thing that no one's addressing:  Zero torque is the basis for the companies’ advantage over others.  But… has anyone measured this torque (static and dynamic) at the hands during the putting stroke?  Quantified torque in any way?  Data analysis?  Proven how much total torque is reduced at the hands with their putters?  Nope.  You’d need data from an array of sensors on the grip.  It’s a technical “problem” they’re solving, but from an engineering view there’s no technical data of the problem nor supporting the solution.  All other clubs are non-zero torque.  Are they all problems?  We all already adapt to non-zero torque clubs.  How much grip torque reduction can be quantified as significant?

Sure, people swear to their putters, and some are doing great at the highest levels. Placebo or not, results are results.  That’s great for business, tour adoption, etc., but since the claims of technical torque advantage have no technical torque analysis backing, let’s see an actual torque study from companies making claims about their torque advantages.  All we have is the LAB Revealer that, smartly, makes most other putters look pretty inferior as they flop around.  What they're doing is great, and LAB's marketing and word of mouth influence seems terrific, but as the forerunners of putter "tech", let's back the anecdotal evidence and Revealer tests with real data-driven torque analysis.  We're in a data analytics world now.

Here’s the other thing.  There are multiple types of torque that exist at the hands.  Torque exists on multiple axes, not just around the shaft axis or grip axis, which is all they really can zero out.  Because the companies claim “no torque", everyone seems led to believe that torque is a singular thing that these companies have “solved" and zeroed out.  Not true.  There’s torque around the grip (static and dynamic).  That's the torque they can get to zero.  But then there’s torque from a face on view; torque from a DTL view; applied rotational torques when swinging the club and rotating the face; and torque on off-CG impact with the ball.  These torques are all there, and they will always be.  “This putter has no torque" is very much a false statement to anyone that understands the physics 101.

 

To clarify here are some of the types of torque at the hands:

The static torque below (green rotation arrow) they can get to zero (and so can toe-up putters btw):

The dynamic torque below (green rotation arrow, T equation circled) they can get to zero (and so can face-balanced putters):

Any applied torque from active rotation of the hands (green rotation arrow, τ equation circled) here is not zero:

This torque below cannot be zero unless the head CG is directly below the hands.  Any forward press will present torque here when the putter is off the ground:

Both these dynamic torques below (T=F*d and τ=I*α) applied by the golfer cannot be zero, ever:

For τ=I*α, I = MOI of the whole club.  α = angular acceleration at the start of the backswing 

This torque below cannot be zero unless the head CG is directly below the hands, which is never:

Any off-CG strike cannot be zero torque:

[Btw, look how the shaft is angled slightly away from the head CG on this Axis1 picture.  That means the bent shaft was rotated a little off when installed, and you'll see a not-so-great Revealer test.]

 

I'm not even including torques at transition in the backswing, but you get the point.  Torque exists, in multiple ways, with any putter.  They can only zero out torque around the shaft or grip axis (via zero moment arm distances by placing head CG inline with the shaft or grip axis).  The other torques are still there.

 

Personally I'm more interested in high MOI for putters (my giant Cure models in signature), but here's hoping Axis1 and @labgolf consider DM-ing me for complimentary putters to persuade my own choices in the spirit of wrx 🍻.

Your middle school-level analysis does not

impress me 🤥🤓

[joostin]

7 minutes ago, manVSgolf said:

Your middle school-level analysis does not

impress me 🤥🤓

😆.. Sorry for the novel and math everyone.  These technical analyses are impossible to keep short trying to do the topic justice.  Just look at Tutelman's site.

[5hort5tuff]

More analysis in that post than the revealer has ever provided. Great work Joostin.

 

The best quote in your post "All we have is the LAB Revealer that, smartly, makes most other putters look pretty inferior as they flop around.  What they're doing is great, and LAB's marketing". 

Edited March 2 by 5hort5tuff

[agolfman]

Good analysis @joostin.  I’m with you…I have two Cure putters and I’m just defaulting to high MOI as a way to solve the same. I think when data is eventually available as you cite, we’ll all conclude the same thing. I guess we’ll have to wait that out. Until then, we’re all going to watch the revenge of the ugly putter shapes start to win the day. 

[Liveonce]

Have tried numerous LABs—switched to an Axis.1, found my forever putter. Looks better, feels better, sounds better than LAB. Speed control much easier. Really having a lot of fun with it. Agree with the others regarding torque—you can torque the LAB putters too and hit pulls, pushes etc. I know let the putter swing yada yada.