Tipping a straight in Project X taper shaft, then installing at standard length?

[BenKeeney]

How does say trimming a Project X 5.0 taper shaft by 6/16" effect stiffness, std. length cut weight, & swing weight? Thanks in advance for comments. Ben

[Nessism]

You would need to be uncommonly sensitive to notice tipping like that.  

[BenKeeney]

Possibly @Nessism, however my question was about the detailed effects of tip trimming on a Project X taper shaft. I am wanting to build a Project X 5.0 to play "in between" a Project X 5.0/5.5. I have read from @Howard_Jones that tip trimming a Project X taper shaft by 6/16 or 3/8 will increase the CPM/FCM by 0.2 or to 5.7 on the FCM Rifle scale. Not sure how the std. length cut weight and effect on swing weight will impact that 5.7 FCM Rifle number. Ben

Edited April 25 by BenKeeney
add more detail

[Howard_Jones]

2 hours ago, BenKeeney said:

How does say trimming a Project X 5.0 taper shaft by 6/16" effect stiffness, std. length cut weight, & swing weight? Thanks in advance for comments. Ben

Plus 2-3 CPM, no change of net cut wgt if net cut length is the same, no measurable change of SW value
(PX Balance point as uncut is 50.13% up from the tip, or 49.87% down from the butt, we dont get closer to the mid than this)

[BenKeeney]

Thanks @Howard_Jones good info! Looking at a mixed Titleist T200/T150 set. So it sounds like if the total hosel depth is 2.5" for those irons? then at a finished D3 SW I should have an "in betweener" flex of about FCM Rifle 5.7-5.8. Ben.

[Howard_Jones]

14 minutes ago, BenKeeney said:

Thanks @Howard_Jones good info! Looking at a mixed Titleist T200/T150 set. So it sounds like if the total hosel depth is 2.5" for those irons? then at a finished D3 SW I should have an "in betweener" flex of about FCM Rifle 5.7-5.8. Ben.

Total hosel LENGTH, (insert plus BBGM) might be 2.5", while insert is most likely 1.25", never 2.5"

IF you like to keep weight like it is,and avoid those about 1.5 grams added when hard stepping, then this becomes a option, slightly softer than HS1, and a flex about the middle of PX5.0 and PX5.5

[Nessism]

Tipping a 5.0 by 3/8" won't make the shaft play 5.7-5.8.  @Howard_Jones would know more.  

 

Regarding "total hosel depth is 2.5".  What is this in reference to?  

 

Edit: Howard posted while I was typing...

 

Edited April 25 by Nessism

[Howard_Jones]

2 minutes ago, Nessism said:

Tipping a 5.0 by 3/8" won't make the shaft play 5.7-5.8.  @Howard_Jones would know more.  

 

Regarding "total hosel depth is 2.5".  What is this in reference to?  

 

People mix up PX labels with FCM labels all the time, and i dont think using FCM labels makes sense, so i prefer to use their OG labels, and say PX5.0 will play like PX 5.3, that gives a better picture of reality since 3/8" is not enough to become like HS1 where we could say PX5.0 will play like PX5.4

Edited April 25 by Howard_Jones

[BenKeeney]

Thanks again @Howard_Jones! Yes, I mean't to say a 2.5" hosel LENGTH since you've stated in the past that's the hosel LENGTH that the Project X shaft standard flex was designed for. Curious, if the hosel LENGTH is say less or more by a 1/4", how does that effect the flex? Ben.

[Howard_Jones]

21 hours ago, BenKeeney said:

Thanks again @Howard_Jones! Yes, I mean't to say a 2.5" hosel LENGTH since you've stated in the past that's the hosel LENGTH that the Project X shaft standard flex was designed for. Curious, if the hosel LENGTH is say less or more by a 1/4", how does that effect the flex? Ben.

RIFLE FCM use those hosel specs as a base line, due to its EI profile where the butt section is SILLY stiff, compared to most other shaft models, including Project X

Imagine this (extreme case)
Iron #1 has a BBGM of 1.25" like typical players irons has
Iron #2 has a BBGM of 2.25"...

We cut both to play to the same play length, but do they become "equal"?

NO

Shaft #1 will have 1 inch longer butt section than shaft #2, making Shaft #1 as much as 7 CPM stronger than shaft #2, even if shaft 2 is net 1 inch shorter....all due to the silly stiff butt section.

Project X, has a butt section who more or less follows the intended flex slope, so if its longer or shorter, does not really matters, butt section is still the stiffest part of the shaft, so with PX models, but not stronger than the flex slope for going longer is. 

INSERT is a different ball game, most but far from all iron models has a insert of 1.25"
IF insert is deeper, it will be like tip trimming away that part, since whats down in the hosel dont bend, so more of the tip thats inserted, the stronger it will play and vice versa.

So hosel specs (BBGM) does NOT matter much for PX, but is very important for RIFLE FCM
Insert dept is equally important for both.

RIFLE FCM as EI profile looks like this...progressive stiffer all the way on the butt side
(longer butt, stiffer shaft)


Project X is more or less like DG X100, it "flattens out" so it ends up on the flex slope it should have, if butt side is shorter or longer, unless we go VERY long butt side, then it becomes weaker
(we normally cut off 2.25 to 2.75 of the butt section down to "standard" play length)



SO, PX models in general, dont change in flex due to BUTT length, but does change when we change tip length.

Edited April 26 by Howard_Jones

[BenKeeney]

@Howard_Jones very helpful response! I will now refer to Project X labels vs. Rifle FCM labels as you suggest when discussing Project X iron shafts going forward. Thanks for the explanation regarding the impact on stiffness when inserting a Project X shaft in a hosel bore depth greater/less than 1.25". Ben.