Fujikura Audio Chat - Please provide Feedback

[Gxgolfer]

Please provide additonal info/comments in this thread here. Thank You for comments!

 

The MP3 audio file is up. See the thread in the>>>Here

 

 

 

 

Many Thanks to George(Beruo) for transcribing it! If we have any other volunteers, please PM me! I don't know if Beruo can take it for much longer! ;)

 

 

Ryan (golfwrx): Chad, why don’t you start with yourself and introduce the Fujikura team, who you are, and responsibilities. Then we’ll move on to Joe and then we’ll start going through the questions.

 

Chad (Fujikura): I’ll start if off and then let my guys introduce themselves. My name is Chad Embry. I am the National Accounts Manager at Fujikura Composites. I handle the aftermarket distribution through club makers in the U.S. I also handle some of the OEM’s with aftermarket products. I’ve been in the business either as a pro or in the sales side for about 12 or 13 years with various companies. I’ve had pretty much the same responsibilities at most places that I’m at, handling aftermarket affairs. With me today, I have Alex D. and I’ll let him tell you a little bit about himself.

 

Alex (Fujikura): My name is Alex. I am the director of research and development at Fujikura. I’ve been here for almost 8 years. I started here by writing the shaft software that designs all of our shafts on the computer. I’m responsible for an R&D group here for future high-tech products and also a design group that designs the shafts for everyday use and also look after our manufacturing operations in Asia.

 

John (Fujikura): My name is John Hovas. I’m one of two tour reps for Fujikura. We do about 45 weeks a year on the road between the Champions, LPGA, Nationwide, and PGA tours. I also do the price development with testing and the redesigns of shafts.

 

Ryan: We’ll start with a question from one of our users gjones77. He was wondering how Fujikura feels that it can improve over shaft technologies beyond current technologies like nanotubes and how this can help golfers of all ranges from beginners to pros.

 

Alex: I thought that that was a really good question, but my feelings is that nanotubes right now may sound sexy but have not proved themselves to be viable in the application of a golf shaft. What you see is that maybe a lot of the other companies marketing that, but maybe just using that as a marketing tool. It’s not actually performing a function that’s measurable. At Fujikura, we’ve never released something that we didn’t put our heart into and that the technology wasn’t really there, so we’ve passed over this at the time. There are other shaft technologies out there that we are more interested in are more complicated and exotic materials. We’ve implemented some of those in our Rombax, which is a new exotic weave with different weaves mixed together. They are very lightweight, very high performance fabric that has a very unique characteristic in the playability of the shaft.

 

Ryan: So is that the Rombax technology?

 

Alex: Correct

 

Ryan: How is the Rombax technology different than the Triax weave?

 

Alex: It’s similar; it takes it one step further. The Triax is also a very exotic material with an expensive fiber that are woven in three directions, which is a very complicated procedure. What the Rombax does is it takes that Triax weave but adds a second weave as well so you have two weaves working together in one shaft. The secondary weave is a very high-end weave called a “Plain Weave” but again is very high end because of the exotic fibers that we use that have a very low filament count and are woven very tightly and we get a lightweight weave. One of the problems with using weaves is that usually they are heavy and to use them you may show off a good look but sacrifice the performance because of the weight. But what we’ve done with the Triax and now with the 1K weave is that we’ve had to pay more to do it but we’re able to design more exotic shafts without the penalty of high weight and the unique feel and characteristics when using those in combination.

 

Ryan: And those are targeted more toward the higher CC heads? Driver heads?

 

Alex: You could say that. I think it’s got a good playability in all heads. Initially this product was done for irons, then was shown that not only did it work for irons, but worked really well for drivers. It started off as an iron project because of people’s preference and perception that steel has more control and consistency that is greater than graphite when they play it in their irons. So Rombax was first designed to beat that. But when we tried it out in the drivers, it actually performed just as well.

 

Ryan: In what ways has Fujikura looked at bi-matrix shaft technology? I know a couple years ago there some pictures floating around of a steel-tipped shaft with a 757 on top.

 

Alex: That’s something I’m not ready to disclose at this time. I mean we do some R&D but if it’s not ready to be released I really can’t speak about that. We evaluate all technologies and from my personal belief it makes more sense that the tip is steel versus the other way around.

 

Ryan: Is there anyone still using the HKPro110 TourSpec Shaft?

 

Alex: Actually, at this time, no one is currently using the HKPro110. We’ve had moderate success with it with Adam Scott, Tiger Woods [they would] try it for a short time. It’s really a shaft geared towards somebody coming out of steel or someone with a very hard swing from the top. It’s kind of a butt-stiff shaft with a moderate stiff tip so somebody who really loads it quickly from the top would need the mass up toward your hands to create more of a feel like a steel shaft would. Also the weight too, 108 gram shaft is a pretty heavy shaft for graphite.

 

Ryan: Following up on that; there’s a lot of tour guys out there or at least we’ve seen a lot of tour usage of the Speeder 757 it’s probably still a very popular shaft on tour. Joe are you still there?

 

Joe Kwok: Yes, I’m here.

 

Ryan: From Oakie, he said that you turned him onto a BW65 shaft for his driver. He said he loved every aspect of the shaft, the feel, the control, and the workability. He was curious as to what complemented this shaft in either the fairway wood or hybrid.

 

Fujikura: The BW shaft is a good shaft for somebody with kinda quicker hands that maybe needs to have the head lag a little bit behind the ball. It will enable the head of the club to catch up to his hands. A lot of load characteristics—how somebody loads the club will [determine] the kind of shaft that suits them. Somebody who is a late load will need something a little bit softer in the tip but not as butt stiff to allow the head to square up. And the TW is a similar profile to the Speeder 757. The 757 has a softer butt section than the TW does.

 

Ryan: So is the TW series actually the next generation of the 757?

 

Fujikura: Not necessarily, no. It’s an extension of the ZCOM series, which has multiple fitting zones that they’ve developed. Those fitting zones each fit one 3 zone, B M T.

 

Ryan: Can you explain that, that was one of the questions that a lot of people have, what exactly is B, M, T when you look at a Fujikura shaft.

 

Fujikura: Well, the B-zone, like the BW shaft we were talking about, has a butt-end bend. If it’s a butt-zone that means the butt-end bends the most, the softest part of the shaft. Compared to the rest of the shaft, if it’s a B-zone, the butt is the softest. If it’s an M-zone, it’s the middle, M stands for the middle and the middle has more bend that’s going on. Then the T-zone, it’s the tip—the tip has more bend in it. So depending on the type of swing you have, you may fall under the T, M, or the B.

 

Joe: Those affect the tip also?

 

Fujikura: Correct, and there was a question somebody asked about what those charts are that they see on the shaft with the B, M, and T. Those are curvature charts, curvature meaning that if you see a portion of that graph spike up, that’s the softer part, with B being the butt, M being the middle, and T being the tip. And Jon can talk more about what kinds of players fit into those kinds of categories.

 

Ryan: Sorry to derail you John, it’s just that the B, M, T is a very critical thing that I think a lot of people have misnomers against or don’t really know what it means.

 

John: Well, we’ll start with the T-zone. T-zone is kind of considered for advanced players with quicker hands, players who swing through impact quickly, hard hitters with inconsistent ball flight, beginners and intermediate players with poor center-hit rate and players with problems getting the ball up into the air. Now that’s because the tip is the softest part of the section so will enable the head to get up and launch the ball higher after impact.

 

Fujikura: And the butt is a lot stiffer so will allow everything to stay pretty stable close to your hands for very fast swings.

 

John: Now for the M-zone. It fits Players with compact and quick swings, players who have inconsistent ball striking, players who want to increase clubhead speed, and players who want to obtain good follow throughs. Now, that’s due to the midsection. Now you can feel the head accelerating quicker because the midsection is a little bit softer, it will accelerate through faster and also square the head up to the ball. Now for the B-zone, swingers who hit slowly, players with considerable hooks and pull hooks, players who swing through from the top, players whose weight remains on the right foot upon impact, advanced players who want to swing freely.

 

Ryan: Do you guys have any examples of what shafts would fit each [category], like what shaft exemplifies the B, M, T, like what shaft exemplifies the B?

 

Fujikura: One of our most popular shafts on tour, the S.I.X. is considered to be in the B-zone.

 

Ryan: And what about the T and the M?

 

Fujikura: The T-zone, like the Speeder 569 is a good example of the T-zone, and for the M-zone a Speeder 757.

 

Ryan: Is there one zone that fits the Tour player more than the average user, or is it really going to be across the zones?

 

Fujikura: You know, it’s really going to be across the boards. The Speeder 757 is the most popular shaft that we have on tour right now, but a close second is S.I.X. So it would be hard to distinguish one zone for the majority. That’s why Fujikura Japan designed the zone system, to fit multiple players, multiple swing types.

 

Fujikura: That’s true, because the general public has so many different swing types and we’re trying to capture as many as we can by offering a variety of shafts and trying to get some kind of system for which shaft you may better fit into and optimize that golfer’s performance. But on tour, we’re also seeing a variety of shafts. They also have different swings and different shafts will perform better for them.

 

Ryan: So you recommend people to go to their authorized dealer and see their swing and fit them to their proper shaft?

 

Fujikura: Yeah, with the launch monitor you’re looking for all the characteristics that would create a fit; ball spin, headspeed, ball velocity, launch angles. There’s multiple factors that go into fitting a player into a shaft. There’s also the flight involved too, what does the player want to do with the shaft and with the head. Does he want to launch it higher or does he want to keep it lower. Does he have too much spin, does he hit it left, hit it right. There’s quite a bit of variables involved in fitting a player to a shaft.

 

Ryan: Ok, that’s a pretty good segue way into this next question that I have. From one of our users Hipcheck. In the previous few years we’ve seen several golf equipment innovations including composite crown woods, high MOI putters and many clubs with moveable weights. These are all fairly easily marketed to the golfing public. New clubs are sexy and have broad appeal, shafts are a different story. The average golfer does not stare at his club and say, “Look at this shaft.” The golfing public largely is unaware of how a proper shaft, the engine of the club can help your game by leaps and bounds. What will Fujikura do to help Joe Golfer become more informed? I’ve seen the Fujikura B, M, T system on the Japanese site, but this is virtually non-existent in the U.S. market. Is there a strategy that Fujikura U.S. is going to do to market the product more in a way that is easier for the average golfer to understand, or are they just going to point them to their local club builder and their partners through the OEM channels and raise awareness.

 

Fujikura: Well, that’s a good question. That’s in large part how we do market it. Obviously it’s a very complex thing, fitting someone into a shaft and it’s not an exact science so by steering the average Joe, as you put it, into one of our club makers he can get on a launch monitor. That is becoming a lot more prevalent nowadays, in fact I would say in a couple years, as a club maker if you don’t have some kind of launch monitor equipment, you’re going to be pretty outdated and that’s where you’re going for shaft advice. Marketing shafts to the average golfer, who we’ll consider to be an 18-20 handicap is a tough thing to do because they’re just trying to get the ball around. They look at a brand new head as being the technology they need, and I think with companies like TaylorMade introducing the REAX TP products and the REAX non-TP products, they’re taking a large step in promoting to the general public that shafts are an important choice and an important game-improvement method to help along the average golfer. So it’s tough to market to the average golfer that plays 8-10 times a year as opposed to the people who are on your website that play 2, 3 times a week, that equipment is a very important thing, that we need to start getting them into different shafts for different swings or different players.

 

Joe: I think what Chad is trying to say is that the more consistent you swing is the easier it is for club makers to fit them.

 

Chad: Absolutely, and the more benefits you get out of it. Just an 18-20 handicap, if you don’t have a good grasp of where your clubhead is through impact, the inconsistencies that are in a swing, it’s hard to say that one shaft is going to be good for you because on any given day, you could be hooking, you could be slicing, you could be hitting grounders, you could be popping them up. So with that information for a club maker it’s really tough to dial someone in to say “This shaft’s gonna knock 6 or 7 strokes off your game.” Whereas if you do have a good grasp of where your game’s at and where your head is through impact it’s a lot easier to make a suggestion for something that would improve your game.

 

Ryan: In Japan there seems to be these Fujikura fitting centers. One of the posters, shoe295 is wondering if one day in the not too distant future if they would have a shaft demo days or demo centers like that where there’s a variety of set-ups. Obviously this is cost prohibitive but [a place] where they could come and get fit, and try a bunch of different shafts on launch monitors and things like that, or is that market still not as big as it is in Japan?

 

Fujikura: Well yeah, and I think Japan takes shafts to a whole other level quite honestly, and we do the best we can. To be honest, in conjunction with the OEM’s, there are certain demo days in certain areas that get that ability to try different shaft/head combinations. Now, imagine Fujikura going out, especially partnering up with the likes of Cleveland and TaylorMade and Titleist and Callaway, and trying to come up with all of the heads that we need in different loft combinations and shafts, and flex, it is very cost prohibitive. And it’s a very tough thing to do, so in working with these OEM’s and their tour vans that go out to demo days at ranges and golf courses there is a small sampling that you can do out there. But as the years go by I think you’ll see the mobile fitting centers get more and more popular and there’s a few companies out there kind of on the cutting edge of the mobile fitting center that will be going to more places and kind of broadening the horizons of what you can demo on ranges.

 

Ryan: (Something) talking about the REAX and Rombax technologies (something) how does that apply to people with lower swing speeds or senior golfers? Is there a product like that, like a ZCOM MW54, is there going to be more variety or what direction is that going to go?

 

Fujikura: Can you ask me that question again? I’m sorry.

 

Ryan: The REAX and Rombax technology right now, is there going to be a version that will fit slower swing speeds, like senior golfers, things like that?

 

Fujikura: As Alex touched on earlier, it’s just kind of an extension of our Triax material and the Speeder 569 in particular is a fantastic shaft for seniors and slower swingers. Again, you have to understand that it is a very high-end product that’s more built kind of what we touched on before, for your lower handicap players and that they get the complete benefit from the full Rombax material. That doesn’t mean that we won’t make a softer, easier-to-hit, higher ball-flight Rombax shaft in the future. But again, this is going to be our first launch in the U.S. market with this product where we’re coming in with a 75, a 65, and a 55 gram product and as time goes on, I’m sure with the success of that product, then we’ll come out with a little softer, lighter version that will be more user friendly to senior and average players.

 

Ryan: That’s great to know, I think that’s one thing that Fuji offers, is such a wide-range of shafts, they have a product for everybody.

 

Fujikura: That’s right, and you know Speeder was initially meant for a stronger player. It’s got a pop to it, and a snap that you feel, and for some people it may actually feel a little harsh, but the stronger players, they really prefer to get that kind of distance and the control.

 

Ryan: Is there any more detail or information; is that actually the difference between Triax from Rombax? For people who hit the Rombax and the Triax, they say that Rombax feels like a tighter, more lively shaft. But it’s hard to translate technology into what you’re actually experiencing.

 

Fujikura: Let’s explain the difference between the two because they are different and you can’t really lump them together. Triax is a material that is exclusive to Fujikura in using golf shafts. It’s a 3-directional weave, there’s fibers in 3 different directions. And for a lot of these shafts like the Speeder, it goes the full length of the shaft and like I said it gives you that kind of a pop and it feels a little bit dead. But it gives you that kind of an energy transfer and some efficiency when you make impact and that usually separates the distance from control for the feel most players are looking for . Now the Rombax, the different technology which utilizes some Triax material but it combines it with another material as well. And what it did was, it’s trying to mimic almost, a steel cross in terms of having some consistency all around the shaft and in multiple directions. Some people may complain about graphite consistency and Rombax was something to come out and counter that. Do you have anything to add on Rombax and how it compares to Speeder?

 

Fujikura: Well yeah, actually the whole deal about Triax was to stop the ovalization of the shaft through the impact and that steadies your head through impact. And how it did that was by having more directional fibers that make the shaft, so going to the Rombax we’re almost just adding an additional directional fiber which does it even more so. So we’re cutting down even more on the ovalization and on our website, fujikuragolf.com you can see some of these technologies in illustrated form to kind of show you how it stops that. Traditional graphite shafts use 2-directional fiber graphite, so as you can see it kind of morphs up from 2 or 1-directional graphite in 2 different ways; it morphs up from 1-directional, to 3-directional, to 4-directional. So just a continuation of keeping your shaft more in round through the impact area, which steadies the head, and gives you more centeredness in contact and translates into longer and straighter shots.

 

Ryan: It seems like Rombax came along to answer competitors that were seen to be getting a lot more play, Diamana and Graffaloy. Is this basically an attempt to grab more tour players back to Fujikura?

 

Fujikura: Absolutely not. At Fujikura, we think that the shafts that they’ve come out with recently are basically to combat our dominance on the tour for the last 5 years. We’ve been the #1 driver shaft, err, the #1 shaft period on the PGA tour for the last 5 years despite the advertising you see from other companies. This year we’re off to our biggest start on the tour and have absolutely blown our competitors away every single week this year, in part due to the Rombax. How we look at it is continuing our technological advances in the graphite shaft industry to maintain our number one status in golf on the graphite shaft side. In fact, some of the other competitors that we have out there really almost mimic some of our EI curves on our products. So we almost look at them as making what they make now to combat what we already have. So we’ve taken it one step further and we’ve gone and one-upped our competitors and now we’re saying, “come get us again,” because we continue to stay on top with the technology we have and this Rombax shaft proves it. This year alone the 757 in particular has been copied a lot by a lot of our competitors. But you can’t copy a certain feel you get with the tri-weave, the combinations of the Triax, the combinations of this new bi-weave that we have in the Rombax. The feel and the characteristics of those is way beyond just the EI curves and we’re trying to separate ourselves and lead the industry.

 

Joe: That’s my experience as a club maker. A lot of people keep asking me if we can install a shaft in a certain head and copy the exact number and specs of a certain shaft. And I kept on telling them, “Yes, you can copy the number, you can copy the specs, you can copy everything, but you cannot copy a feel.”

 

Fujikura: And that’s all derived from the material, and we as a company continue to use the best materials in the market, and that in part is what you get. It’s like you say Joe, you can come out with a lot of shafts that are 2.5 torque, midhigh kickpoints, and 75 grams depending on how you measure these numbers. But that doesn’t make it the same shaft, and again because we have some materials that no one else can use in this industry, you can try to mimic the product, but in the end when you get down to it and put it in the player’s hands, it just doesn’t do the trick. And again, that’s why you see on the PGA tour that we continue to be the number 1 shaft of choice.

 

Ryan: Is the 757 still number 1? Its been a staple on the Tour for many years.

 

Fujikura: It’s still very popular out there. It is our number 1 shaft in our lineup that we bring out to the tour.

 

Ryan: Is the new Rombax, the new TaylorMade offering number 1 on the numbers count right now?

 

Fujikura: Well, it’s been out there for going on 2 months right now. It hasn’t really had enough time to develop the number 1 status yet but it’s gaining popularity each week. And I would say we’re putting in 5 to 8 more drivers every week. Just at the AT&T we had 60% of the field had our driver shafts. Of that percentage point, 44% had the REAX TaylorMade shaft.

 

Ryan: That’s some good numbers there. So, the 757 is still the fairway wood of choice on the tour?

 

Fujikura: Actually the fairway wood of choice would be the Vista Pro80 and the Pro95. Those are the 2 most popular fairway wood shafts. The two most popular driver shafts would be the 757 and the S.I.X.

 

Ryan: Speaking of the S.I.X. the Prototype 70 never made it into regular production. Any reason why?

 

Fujikura: The Prototype 70 is actually in the current lineup as the Vista Tour70.

 

Ryan: Ah, so just renamed.

 

Fujikura: Yeah, exactly. It was very popular as the black model. Now I don’t know if you mean the Prototype Blue TourSpec, which I believe was a 70 gram S.I.X. design that we came out with. But that product has never made it into the lineup of shafts, and I don’t know if that’s what you meant by that.

 

Ryan: No, I think it was the S.I.X., the prototype, originally.

 

Joe: I think what Ryan probably meant was the 70MP Blue Prototype.

 

Fujikura: Yeah, that was the 70 gram S.I.X. which has never made it into our current lineup.

 

Ryan: Is there any comment on the recently acquired Quadra-action technology from Macgregor and how that might make it’s way into Rombax technology?

 

Fujikura: The Quadra-action uses some of the Triax material in the butt-end of the shaft, and then it’s kinda co-designed with the Quadra-action shaft that Macgregor has designed. We don’t foresee ever using Rombax material in the Quadra-action shaft that we make for Macgregor now, no.

 

Ryan: So that would be a different technology altogether then, it would be a totally different line?

 

Fujikura: Absolutely, but the Macgregor again, that’s a proprietary product for Macgregor, that’s nothing that we would offer in the aftermarket.

 

Ryan: OK, so it’s not going to be something similar to what you did with TaylorMade with the REAX technology.

 

Fujikura: No, not at all.

 

Ryan: OK well, one question I got from one of our posters talking about the restrictions now being placed upon clubheads by the USGA to slow down technology. Do you see that manufacturers are now leaning toward the shaft manufacturers to enhance, are you working more closely together to enhance the numbers. To get more distance, more playability out of the clubs and do you think the USGA might even step in on shaft specs for shafts? Start restricting those?

 

Fujikura (alex): Well, I would say that the USGA has done a lot to already restrict the shafts. There are a lot of things that we’re not allowed to do. Things can’t move on a shaft, shafts have to be concentric about the axis, so there are a lot of limitations already on the shaft. And what we try to do is squeeze out as much as we can and always look at new materials, different construction technologies, different processes, that could push the envelope. I do see OEM’s working with us more closely though, and you see our brand becoming more a part of what you see in the store now. Co-branding with us has become a validation of that shaft and it gives validation to their product line.

 

Fujikura (chad): And there is definitely a move by the OEM’s to do just that as witnessed by the TaylorMade program we have worked out with the new REAX products. They most definitely are seeing the shaft as a frontier that has kinda been left untouched up until now. And just like Alex said, they are working more closely with us, realizing that people are becoming more educated about the shafts they’re hitting. So co-branding with us is a very big thing, and they’re giving us a lot of freedom to make better and better products every year for the new line of heads.

 

Ryan: Do you guys expect to see anything like REAX going into other manufacturers clubs?

 

Fujikura: We’re also an OEM manufacturer. You’ll see us making products that are stock and aftermarket. Those products, we’re working closely with those OEM’s to complement the product as much as we can for the heads.

 

Ryan: Do you guys expect to see anything like the REAX agreement with other manufacturers like Nike or Titleist or anyone like that?

 

Fujikura: That’s a good question Ryan. That’s a hard one to answer. Again, I can only go back to the fact that other manufacturers are all very interested in doing proprietary products with exotic materials for themselves. I can’t say whether or not whether we’ll spread REAX around, I don’t think we will. TaylorMade’s been very good to us in working closely with us, and we’re very good partners with them, but all manufacturers are looking to do more exotic things with their shafts in the future. So you could see other projects that we’d work on with other manufacturers.

 

Ryan: Yeah, the REAX 55, 65, and the 75, how do these shafts compare in terms of launching

 

Fujikura: OK, the 65, 75, 55 are all similar profiles. They’re all more of a, we’ll go back to the M-zone, for instance. They’re very similar to a 757 profile, a little softer in the midsection, kind of stiffer in the butt and tip sections, be able to create your headspeed, so very similar feel to a 757 but all the characteristics of a Rombax.

 

Fujikura: Typically what you’ll see with the lighter shafts is you’ll get a little bit of a higher ball flight but only because of the weight fluctuations, but I think they’ll all be pretty similar in ball flight. You’re not going to see a large change from the 75 to the 55 in terms of ball flight like you would from a Speeder 952 to a Speeder 569.

 

Ryan: What zone basically? We were talking zones earlier, are there going to be spread out over different zones, or really in the M-zone?

 

Fujikura: We’re keeping inside the M-zone. That’s not to say that further down the line wouldn’t offer something, not necessarily classified as a “B” because it is a different product, but more or less like a B and more or less like a T. So you might see something down the road that launches a little higher, and conversely a little lower.

 

Ryan: Another often-asked question 0.335 versus 0.350 tip. Advantages, disadvantages if there is any, and does Fujikura offer, how come they don’t offer any more 0.350 tip type shafts?

 

Fujikura: Well, I can tell you basics. OEM’s had gravitated toward 0.350 tips a lot due to durability. You get a little bit stronger tip section and when you’re dealing again, with the mass market, your average golfers and higher handicappers, there’s not a consistent pattern on the sweet-spot of the club, if you know what I mean. So you get a lot more breakages. As far as feel, you know John would probably be better equipped to answer that. I know a lot of the tour guys play 0.335’s probably for the feel effect. But I think a major reason why the manufacturers went to 0.350 was because of durability issues.

 

Ryan: Fujikura themselves though, on the aftermarket shaft don’t seem to have a lot of the 0.350 tip variations. Most of them are the 0.335. Is there a particular reason for that, or is it that just what the market bears in the U.S.?

 

Fujikura: Well, I think that we’ve always been known as a little bit better players’ shaft and it supplies a little bit more feel as we’ve come to discuss. I think players appreciate that, better players appreciate that and quite honestly if using a shim, we’ve made, I’ve seen tons of clubs made here, at Fuji and obviously on tour they don’t do it as much, but for your average player on down using a 0.015” shim isn’t that big of a deal. But yet you still maintain the feel of the 0.335 tip shaft.

 

Ryan: So Fujikura’s position is that you can just throw a 0.335 shaft into a 0.350 head and its easier to just shim it?

 

Fujikura: Absolutely.

 

Ryan: Another oft-asked question, I’m sure you get this a lot, is the Speeder by Titleist, the Titleist Speeders, the T-Speeders. Now we hear they use a little Speeder technology in the shaft. What is the difference of a T-Speeder versus a Pro95?

 

Fujikura: Well, I’ll take the Titleist Speeder, in particular . . . it’s tough because it is a proprietary product for that company and being proprietary it’s something we don’t get a lot of technical information on nor are we free to give it.

 

Fujikura: The main difference though, is that the original Speeder 757 has about a 2.5” parallel. And because Titleist has a bore-thru and they really loved the Speeder 757, they really came to us and said, “Develop something that we can use in our heads that have a much longer parallel to go through.” And when it does go through like that, the Titleist, the performance changes quite a bit because you’re no longer shafting in the same position as you would a regular kind of head as with that bore-thru. And so we did some design changes to that to accommodate their requirements and we called that the Speeder for Titleist.

 

Fujikura: And yes, it does use Triax material and it is full-length Triax material, it does utilized the technology, and it is a very, very good product.

 

Ryan: It does, and it is, I mean, one of the best, standard OEM shafts out there.

 

Fujikura: Absolutely. And they were really one of the first to come and use great technology in a stock product from an OEM company, kind of what started the revolution of moving on getting better performing shafts for off-the-rack clubs.

 

Ryan: Help me out here, on tour John, [do] tour players use the 2” parallel or the 4”?

 

Fujikura: Again, it goes back to which heads they’re using, as far as using the 4” parallel section. Now they can, if a shaft is outside the 4” parallel section, they can fit the 2.5” parallel into a Titleist head. Now, we designed the ZCOM shafts with a 4” parallel section for that purpose. Now that 2” section added on to that shaft so it’s a 48” length and you can adjust that shaft to fit into a blind-bore and just cutting off the 2” off the tip. And there is a preference towards the 2.5” tip section now, even for Titleist.

 

Ryan: So there is definitely a manufacturer preference even over the head preference.

 

Fujikura: Yes. Again, with a 4” parallel there is a lot of design complexities because you don’t want that tip to get too soft. The longer the parallel, the softer it is so to counter that you’ve got to use different materials, and you may not see it but they’re in there.

 

Joe: Basically from a standpoint of the club maker, Fujikura provides 48” to give more room for a club maker to fit into a certain head design. So we have more variety of thinking what we have to do for a certain design of head. That’s what it is.

 

Ryan: Speaking about the head then, how has the evolution of the hybrid into the market playing a bigger part of the game? How does Fujikura see the market for shafts to match those types of heads?

 

Fujikura: The 904 is the shaft that is strictly designed for hybrids. All the characteristics that you look for stability of the tip section of the tip, the lower torque, the stability in the tip, the higher kick point to kind of get those shots a little flatter, not so much that they’re ballooning in the air.

 

Ryan: So is the 904 and the Banzai, are the same in the B,M,T range and what are they going to come in at, like a B?

 

Fujikura: Um, yes the 904 would be in the B-zone. Now, the Banzai is a different style of shaft, that’s going to fall into the M-zone. Now that shaft was designed for the purpose of getting the ball into the air a little bit easier for the average player. It’s a little stiffer in the butt and the tip with a weaker midsection, so it will get the ball up into the air a little easier than the 904 would.

 

Ryan: Interesting. Let me broaden this out a little bit, but also in that vein; what’s the launch characteristics?

 

Fujikura: Your Tour Platform would definitely be in the low tip, or the highest launch category. You know, the ZCOM 54, the Vista Pro50 and 60 would fall into the high-launch category. Your mid-launch would be like the midway Speeder shaft, like the 757, 652. The lower launch would be your Pro95, Vista Tour70 and 60. Actually on that point, there was a question from ProLite and NV65 in our category would match those two shafts and that would be the Vista Tour70 or 60 depending on which weight factor you like.

 

Ryan: Is there any chance of seeing the 660TR ever coming to retail? Speaking about those shaft characteristics.

 

Fujikura: Well that’s actually. . . a lot of our tour shafts, Chad will promote on every quarterly basis and that shaft is one that is very popular on tour and would be one that Chad would promote sometime this year

 

Fujikura: As far as coming to market, you know it’s really tough. I know that sites like yours promote obscure or hard to get shafts out there and as much as we would like to carry the kind of inventory that Japan does, we’re limited by space, we’re limited by a confusion factor. If you have 7 60 gram Speeders, it’s kind of hard to differentiate amongst novice golfers or average golfer how they differentiate. And even to some guys that know a lot about shafts, I mean hell, it’s confusing to some of us sometimes. So right now we have the 652 which does very well for us and is fairly similar to the 660, but the 660 is, as John put it, very popular on tour and it is a possibility that you guys might see that shaft come to market in the U.S. at some point.

 

Ryan: We’ve been seeing a lot, you know . . . there’s been a lot of talk lately, because we’ve seen stuff from Vijay using some graphite irons. Is Fujikura looking at that in the U.S. more, especially in the Vista Pro irons, is there going to be a new product using the Rombax technology. I know in Japan they have Rombax irons, but is that a market in the U.S. that is being looked at or even on tour?

 

Fujikura: Most definitely. We think that graphite irons really is the next frontier for graphite. You’re right, not a lot of guys use it, it takes a guy like Vijay to put them in play with some consistency to show that even the top players in the world can gain the consistency shot-in, shot-out with graphite iron shafts, and it’s something we’re definitely looking at. We will come out in the U.S. actually, with a launch of the Rombax wood shafts with the compatible iron shafts and we will also come out with a new E-series shaft in the 60 and 80 grammer as well, probably in mid-April sometime. So there will be 3 new iron shafts offerings from Fujikura real soon.

 

Ryan: Are you guys going to concentrate on the Seniors’ and the Ladies’ tour. Is that going to be a target along with the PGA. Trying to take advantage of the higher-skilled players and those tours using that type a product?

 

Fujikura: At the current moment, we don’t really promote our irons on tour basically for the cost factor involved. It’s such a huge expense to bring graphite shafts out onto the tours. Iron shafts, you usually go through 4 or 5 sets before you find the right ones, that’s 4 of 5 shafts that you just went through. It’s a huge cost factor involved and I could possibly . . . we could think about that in the future but right now, I don’t think we will.

 

Ryan: Now I know we’re coming up to the end of the hour here, but let me squeeze in just one more question and then we’ll wrap things up. Putter shaft technology in Japan you got, I believe the 110, and the 100, you’ve even got a TourSpec version. Now UST’s got the Frequency-Filtered one. Is there going to be opportunities that you guys are going to explore in the putter shaft market?

 

Fujikura: Yes we are, definitely. I think that’s another avenue that is possibly going to start growing dramatically. The putter shafts, you know the head weights you can actually create a little heavier heads, have a little bit more feel down at the bottom, or vice-versa. How you roll your balance point on the graphite shaft which is capable with graphite unlike steel. Steel you’re kinda fixed into one stock shaft. There’s so much more versatility with a graphite shaft for a putter.

 

Fujikura: We actually have some putter shafts available right now to special club makers in the charter dealer network that we have for retail now

 

Ryan: So that should be available at your local dealer, Fujikura charter dealer?

 

Fujikura: Absolutely, I believe it’s the PT110. We had it out briefly last year, it’s still an expensive material that we use for those and are still getting over the hump of a guy coming in and reshafting his putter for $200 as opposed to getting a brand-new putter for $200. So there are some limitations to the market we can reach for this but it’s a fantastic putter shaft and we’ve even had some guys toying with it last year, I believe at the Master’s if I’m not mistaken, John could probably elaborate on that a little more.

 

Fujikura: Yeah, it was actually Ernie Els and Justin Rose. Justin Rose actually played it for a few events, but there have been a couple PGA tour players that have used it.

 

Ryan: Well, I know you guys have to jet off here. We really appreciate that you guys have spent time with us and hopefully we can do this again when there’s more time for you guys to allow. We’ll get more people in here hopefully too, but I’m sure we’ll get a lot of reaction off of this. I think you guys are just losing out to the Olympics, I think. Either that or Desperate Housewives, I don’t know.

 

Fujikura: Well, that really stoked our ego Ryan, I appreciate that. Desperate Housewives huh?

 

Ryan: Yeah, exactly! Any questions in particular, any two questions that piqued your interest out there that’s going to get these guys information on how to get those prizes out to them.

 

Fujikura: Let’s see here. I’ll tell you, there were a lot of good questions Ryan. It’s an informative group. It’s so tough to narrow this down, but I guess we’ll have to make a quick one here. Guys? (talking amongst themselves, and various voices answer). The looking at new technologies with the nano, that was an interesting question . . . the gjones question about the nanotubes.

 

Ryan: Yup, that was a good one.

 

Fujikura: I was interested in the question about now that the USGA is looking at heads and capping heads, and are the shafts limited as well. I think we responded that the shafts are definitely increasing in popularity.

 

Fujikura: And then k2, the question regarding what Alex had just touched on—seeing how head companies are being capped by the USGA, what kind of shaft technologies are going to be happening out there.

 

Ryan: OK, great. We’ll notify k2 and gjones. I’ll forward to you their addresses Chad.

 

Fujikura: Fantastic. Go ahead and just email me and we’ll take care of them, no problem. We want to thank you guys for having us on. You guys can always go to our website, fujikuragolf.com and there’s a question there to ask question. If any of the members have more questions, I’d be glad to answer them and get whoever the expert is to answer them, so feel free to give us emails.

 

Ryan: I guess I’ll leave the last word to Joe there, I don’t know if he’s still on the line. (he is) Any parting shots for Chad and the Fujikura guys?

 

Joe: No. We all work in the same boat.

 

Ryan: Well we appreciate you guys. Hopefully we’ll be able to get together and do this again soon.

[HipCheck]

This is excellent guys. Fantastic listening to this. Much more interesting than a transcript.

 

Top notch top notch! ;)

[K2_2]

That was very cool ;) Being an amateur golfer (even if you are competitive) I doubt that most people would ever get a chance to ask questions and recieve feedback from that group of guys without having something like this set up. I think the level of detail that the were able to present was fantastic; if they put that much info on their website, the 'average golfer' would probably loose a bit of interest wading through everything.

 

As for the specifics that they addressed, I'd have to go through the file again, but its really interesting to hear about the differences between the Japanese and US markets, although not unexpected. I guess I'm happy that the market is there, as there is an obvious 'trickle down' effect from the high end stuff that is more common in Japan. With fewer people in the US having an interest in that level of equipment, I can undertand that they can't stock every single shaft available in Japan just to have it sit around for the year. So, lets order more shafts, okay?

 

As for the more technical aspects, the explanation of the technical differences between the models was very, very helpful, and probably saved me asking Joe alot of annoying questions later on ;) I will have to go back and listen t a few parts of the chat again. The question about nanotechnology, and the response were really interesting. I actually did some policy work on nanotech ~ 5 years ago, alot of the techniques and science are part of traditional science and engineering disciplines... its just a sexy name for studying properties at small scales, and using those studies for improved product characteristics (whether the products are biosensors, materials, whatever). One thing that I heard again and again was that simply having a 'nano material' where there MIGHT be SOME degree of control of the structure on this small scale does not mean that the product will be any better. While I realize that marketing is important, it is nice to hear that Fujikura is focussing on research that produces results.