New and Improved Shaft Chart

[Howard_Jones]

From Tom Wishons numbers on PXi (link above) they look like this when we put them together


PXI -- 36 - 31 - 26 - 21 - 16 - 11 (inches from tip)
6.5 - 215- 259 -310- 395- 541- 904
6.0 - 216- 258 -308- 391- 536- 895
5.5 - 209- 249 -298- 375- 514- 849
5.0 - 202- 240 -287- 364- 498- 822

According to Toms numbers, the upper butt on PXi 6.5 and 6.0 is "equal" (36 / 31 from tip)

[greenadam21]

[quote name='smoky25' timestamp='1311024749' post='3402198']
Howard Jones asked me to help him post his new and improved shaft chart. Enjoy. Click the chart to enlarge.
[/quote]jAwesome information thanks for posting!

[nova6868]

PXi is just not very stiff... according to this data even the 6.5 appears a tad softer than DG S300:

PXi 6.5 - 215 - 259 - 310 - 395 - 541 - 904
s300 - 222 - 260 - 314 - 401 - 571 - 962

[DNice26]

Hey guys, thinking of buying some MP64s with C-tapers from Mizzy but they don't offer the S+ flex. My 6 iron SS is about 94mph and my driver SS is about 110-115. I currently have the S+ flex in my MP68s and I seem to like them.

Question: If I have to choose stiff or X from Mizzy, what should I do? X, soft stepped OR Stiff, hard stepped? Any thoughts????

[JB lefty]

[quote name='Howard Jones' timestamp='1356627710' post='6123963']
From Tom Wishons numbers on PXi (link above) they look like this when we put them together


PXI -- 36 - 31 - 26 - 21 - 16 - 11 (inches from tip)
6.5 - 215- 259 -310- 395- 541- 904
6.0 - 216- 258 -308- 391- 536- 895
5.5 - 209- 249 -298- 375- 514- 849
5.0 - 202- 240 -287- 364- 498- 822

According to Toms numbers, the upper butt on PXi 6.5 and 6.0 is "equal" (36 / 31 from tip)
[/quote]
DO you have the numbers for the PX flighted for a comparison?

[Howard_Jones]

@Jb Lefty

Sorry, i dont have it complete since i have been to lazy to update my Wishon shaft profile software to get PXI included, and the numbers used here on WRX for PXI miss the butt CPM itself on PXI, but if you can live a few days without until i get an update, they look like this : ( PX 5.5F is not in the DB, all PXI misses BUTT CPM ), and since i dont use the same "std" as Tom Wishon, i dont want to putt my own number into it, to make it look OK, it will not be...

http://peecee.dk/upload/view/398357

[JB lefty]

[quote name='Howard Jones' timestamp='1358484162' post='6250571']
@Jb Lefty

Sorry, i dont have it complete since i have been to lazy to update my Wishon shaft profile software to get PXI included, and the numbers used here on WRX for PXI miss the butt CPM itself on PXI, but if you can live a few days without until i get an update, they look like this : ( PX 5.5F is not in the DB, all PXI misses BUTT CPM ), and since i dont use the same "std" as Tom Wishon, i dont want to putt my own number into it, to make it look OK, it will not be...

[url="http://peecee.dk/upload/view/398357"]http://peecee.dk/upload/view/398357[/url]
[/quote]
Thank you for that. The PXI really does appear to be soft compared to the standard and flighted px shafts.

[CoVertStaff13]

[quote name='DNice26' timestamp='1358360471' post='6240283']
Hey guys, thinking of buying some MP64s with C-tapers from Mizzy but they don't offer the S+ flex. My 6 iron SS is about 94mph and my driver SS is about 110-115. I currently have the S+ flex in my MP68s and I seem to like them.

Question: If I have to choose stiff or X from Mizzy, what should I do? X, soft stepped OR Stiff, hard stepped? Any thoughts????
[/quote]

[CoVertStaff13]

KBS C-Taper Stiff = 6.2 FCM

C-Taper S+ = 6.7 FCM

C-Taper S HS = 6.5 FCM

C-Taper X SS 2x = 6.6 FCM

C-Taper X SS = 6.9 FCM

So the closest you'll get to an S+ from Mizzy is a C-Taper X SS 2x, but the best answer lies in ball flight. The S+ is a 125g shaft, the X SS 2x is 130g, and the S HS is 120.... So if you're looking for slightly higher ball flight, go with S HS @ 120. If you'd like slightly lower ball flight, go with the heavier X SS 2x.

....and remember, we want to play the most flexible shaft we can still control. (dispersion over length)
Hope this helped. GL

-Lama

[DNice26]

[quote name='Tha Lama' timestamp='1358740338' post='6268269']
KBS C-Taper Stiff = 6.2 FCM

C-Taper S+ = 6.7 FCM

C-Taper S HS = 6.5 FCM

C-Taper X SS 2x = 6.6 FCM

C-Taper X SS = 6.9 FCM

So the closest you'll get to an S+ from Mizzy is a C-Taper X SS 2x, but the best answer lies in ball flight. The S+ is a 125g shaft, the X SS 2x is 130g, and the S HS is 120.... So if you're looking for slightly higher ball flight, go with S HS @ 120. If you'd like slightly lower ball flight, go with the heavier X SS 2x.

....and remember, we want to play the most flexible shaft we can still control. (dispersion over length)
Hope this helped. GL

-Lama
[/quote]

Thanks, everything I thought of, just wasn't sure if there was something else to consider.

Quick question: I have not played DG shafts in forever. How does the Tour Issue S400 compare with the C-Taper S+ in terms of feel and performance?

Many thanks!

[smellysell]

Thanks for the great reference!

[Carolina89OK]

Great reference!

[mgoelz]

[quote name='Tha Lama' timestamp='1358740338' post='6268269']
KBS C-Taper Stiff = 6.2 FCM

C-Taper S+ = 6.7 FCM

C-Taper S HS = 6.5 FCM

C-Taper X SS 2x = 6.6 FCM

C-Taper X SS = 6.9 FCM

So the closest you'll get to an S+ from Mizzy is a C-Taper X SS 2x, but the best answer lies in ball flight. The S+ is a 125g shaft, the X SS 2x is 130g, and the S HS is 120.... So if you're looking for slightly higher ball flight, go with S HS @ 120. If you'd like slightly lower ball flight, go with the heavier X SS 2x.

....and remember, we want to play the most flexible shaft we can still control. (dispersion over length)
Hope this helped. GL

-Lama
[/quote]

Thanks for posting, I had a similar question!

[CoVertStaff13]

[quote name='DNice26' timestamp='1358780010' post='6269961']
[quote name='Tha Lama' timestamp='1358740338' post='6268269']
KBS C-Taper Stiff = 6.2 FCM

C-Taper S+ = 6.7 FCM

C-Taper S HS = 6.5 FCM

C-Taper X SS 2x = 6.6 FCM

C-Taper X SS = 6.9 FCM

So the closest you'll get to an S+ from Mizzy is a C-Taper X SS 2x, but the best answer lies in ball flight. The S+ is a 125g shaft, the X SS 2x is 130g, and the S HS is 120.... So if you're looking for slightly higher ball flight, go with S HS @ 120. If you'd like slightly lower ball flight, go with the heavier X SS 2x.

....and remember, we want to play the most flexible shaft we can still control. (dispersion over length)
Hope this helped. GL

-Lama
[/quote]

Thanks, everything I thought of, just wasn't sure if there was something else to consider.

Quick question: I have not played DG shafts in forever. How does the Tour Issue S400 compare with the C-Taper S+ in terms of feel and performance?

Many thanks!
[/quote]

DG S400 = 6.1 FCM @ 132g
KBS C-Taper S+ = 6.7 FCM @ 125g

Vastly different shafts with night and day feel & performance. The KBS Tour X (ss 1x), which, (in FCM) are the same as the C-Taper S+, just 5g heavier @ 130g, but when we add "feel" to the equation, sutlties (like 5g) go out the window. I find the C-Taper to be a more stable shaft, through impact, than the KBS Tour, but prefer the Tour because If it's feel. Conversely I think the DG S400, although more similar in design (stepped vs. stepless), to the KBS Tour, is more like the C-Taper in its' rigidity, ball flight and feel.

I'm sorry I can't be more definitive, but numbers are numbers, feel is subjective, and making a blanket statement based on opinion, is, not only misleading, but arrogant. Find a local fitter with a decent reputation, (if you're close to CT, I can reccomend the best) and hit them all. It's the only way to know for sure, how much (or little) something like "feel" will factor into performance.

Let me know how you make out....GL.

Lama-

[DNice26]

Last question, does FCM really make a large impact on feel and performance? I tried the CTapers in X straight in and they seemed quite a bit stiffer than my S+ shafts straight in. So if i go X ss2x, will they actually feel like my S+ shafts?

[jaskanski]

[quote name='DNice26' timestamp='1359210910' post='6302175']
Last question, does FCM really make a large impact on feel and performance? I tried the CTapers in X straight in and they seemed quite a bit stiffer than my S+ shafts straight in. So if i go X ss2x, will they actually feel like my S+ shafts?
[/quote]

FCM is only a relative comparison of shaft flex - the more similar the shaft you're comparing, the more FCM can be relied upon for comparison.
Feel and performance doesn't really fall into the scope of FCM, but what I can say is that KBS are quite clever in how they categorise their shafts between flexes - it truly is an integrated flex and weight system. In other words, even though the X-flex is softstepped twice to get nearer the flex of S+, is still remains heavier and stiffer - retaining the overall qualities of the X-flex shaft. If you want the feel of the S+ shaft, you must use the S+ shaft.

[Howard_Jones]

[quote name='trhode' timestamp='1359208482' post='6302013']
[quote name='Howard Jones' timestamp='1345104041' post='5481192']
@dcforuk

RIFLE or FCM flex has some BASE numbers, but CPM value change when we go longer or shorter
BASE is 43.00" with a Swing weight of D3

FCM 5.0 = 250 CPM
FCM 5.5 = 255 CPM....
FCM 6.0 = 260 CPM

If this club was 40 long, then the CPM value would raise with 4.3 CPM for each 0.5 or 8.6 for each inch
so at 40 : ( 3 x 8.6 = PLUS 25.8 )

FCM 5.0 = 250 + 25.8 = 275.8
FCM 5.5 = 255 + 25.8 = 280.8
FCM 6.0 = 260 + 25.8 = 285.8

IF SW value is other than D3, then CPM follow 1:1
Lower SW gives higher CPM so at D2 - ADD 1 CPM
Higher SW gives lower CPM so at D4 - Substract 1 CPM

Its all math, but this numbers is measured with a 2.5 inch clamp. If a 5.0 inch clamp is used, we can add 17 CPM (average)

EDIT : To early in the morning, gave you the wrong base length :-)
[/quote]
[b]Are using a 255g tip weight on this?[/b]
- NO this is play ready clubs without grips measured with a 2.5 inch clamp, and conversion to 5 inch clamp using 17 is no good to use in this matters. Only if you know the shafts from measure them with both clamps, you can trust the conversion number you come up with for that shaft model.

[b]Also, using this as a base measurement and goal cpm, I'm getting conflicting numbers in regards to the manufacturers suggested tip trimming.[/b]
[b]It seems that the target frequency, say 292cpm for a 37.5", only trims about an inch as opposed to the 3.5" suggested. What am I doing wrong?
Thanks.[/b]

What shafts and heads, play length and SW value, and what flex is your target ?, not CPM
What clamp do you have ? Do you have a calibration shaft for your CPM reader ?
[/quote]

[trhode]

[quote name='Howard Jones' timestamp='1359220675' post='6302889']
[quote name='trhode' timestamp='1359208482' post='6302013']
[quote name='Howard Jones' timestamp='1345104041' post='5481192']
@dcforuk

RIFLE or FCM flex has some BASE numbers, but CPM value change when we go longer or shorter
BASE is 43.00" with a Swing weight of D3

FCM 5.0 = 250 CPM
FCM 5.5 = 255 CPM....
FCM 6.0 = 260 CPM

If this club was 40 long, then the CPM value would raise with 4.3 CPM for each 0.5 or 8.6 for each inch
so at 40 : ( 3 x 8.6 = PLUS 25.8 )

FCM 5.0 = 250 + 25.8 = 275.8
FCM 5.5 = 255 + 25.8 = 280.8
FCM 6.0 = 260 + 25.8 = 285.8

IF SW value is other than D3, then CPM follow 1:1
Lower SW gives higher CPM so at D2 - ADD 1 CPM
Higher SW gives lower CPM so at D4 - Substract 1 CPM

Its all math, but this numbers is measured with a 2.5 inch clamp. If a 5.0 inch clamp is used, we can add 17 CPM (average)

EDIT : To early in the morning, gave you the wrong base length :-)
[/quote]
[b]Are using a 255g tip weight on this?[/b]
- NO this is play ready clubs without grips measured with a 2.5 inch clamp, and conversion to 5 inch clamp using 17 is no good to use in this matters. Only if you know the shafts from measure them with both clamps, you can trust the conversion number you come up with for that shaft model.

[b]Also, using this as a base measurement and goal cpm, I'm getting conflicting numbers in regards to the manufacturers suggested tip trimming.[/b]
[b]It seems that the target frequency, say 292cpm for a 37.5", only trims about an inch as opposed to the 3.5" suggested. What am I doing wrong?
Thanks.[/b]

What shafts and heads, play length and SW value, and what flex is your target ?, not CPM
What clamp do you have ? Do you have a calibration shaft for your CPM reader ?
Hey Howard, thanks for the reply. Please disregard the second half of that post as I was a dumbass and made a stupid rookie mistake.
I made a chart based on this formula and laminated it for easy reference. I can post it if anyone would like it.
Thanks again.
[/quote]
[/quote]

[trhode]

So, please check my math.

Using 43" @D3 and an FCM of 5.0, I have a standard length 6 iron, 37.5", coming out to 297cpm using a 2.5" clamp.
Head weight was 266g.

[Howard_Jones]

Head weight does not matter when we got a hole club and the SW value is known, and your numbers is just fine

Here is 2 charts for FCM using a 2.5 inch clamp and SW value D3

Club length 40 to 46
http://peecee.dk/upload/view/344981/full

Club length 34 to 40 - Headers is "std" club lenght for irons for quick reference
http://peecee.dk/upload/view/399726/full

[trhode]

[quote name='Howard Jones' timestamp='1359434329' post='6319853']
Head weight does not matter when we got a hole club and the SW value is known, and your numbers is just fine

Here is 2 charts for FCM using a 2.5 inch clamp and SW value D3

Club length 40 to 46
http://peecee.dk/upload/view/344981/full

Club length 34 to 40 - Headers is "std" club lenght for irons for quick reference
http://peecee.dk/upload/view/399726/full
[/quote]

This conversion is just for Rifle correct?

I am currently dealing with KBS, and working on converting their numbers to actual frequencies.
Their reference is 39" (3 iron) @ D2 = 3.5, 4.5, 5.5 for R flex, S flex, X flex respectively.
I wish they would give a target cpm number as well, just so you know your in the right starting place and not 3 cpm's off!

[Howard_Jones]

Yes those charts is for RIFLE shaft who got a slope of 4.3 CPM for each club shorter
- There is several charts out there who tries to convert the letter flex system L.A.R.S.X to FCM but for several reasons it does not work, simply because you need to know how much stronger they should go for each 0.5 shorter, and that slope is not equal, and some shafts was never made to be judged this way, so only numbers from experience can be used.

On of this charts got a slope for only 7.3 CPM for each inch, but if we use it for Dynamic Gold, it want match up. Depending on the clamp you are using, you will find DG to have a slope of 4.4 w/2.5" to 5.3 w/5.0" (my own notes) and 1 set i remember well is a set of 4-LW made by using DGX100 soft stepped twice. They play from FCM 6.2 in the #4 iron, up to 7.0 in the #9 iron, so at first it looks crazy, but its not. Its just that DG got a steeper CPM slope, so when we judge DG to the FCM system, we must use a average number for the hole set.

Im not dealing with KBS shafts, but the man behind should be known for most of you. He is son of the man behind RIFLE, and Kim Braly him self is the father of the original Project X, and now KBS Tour and KBS C-Taper, so he knows the FCM system better than most of us, and if he refers to FCM, then we should expect his shafts to have a flex slope like the FCM system, but i cant confirm that. The KBS number in my chart is collected from KBS webpage, adjusted by 1 CPM down since KBS uses D2 and Rifle/FCM is D3.

When it comes to the general opinion about Letter flex VS FCM, it seems to be something like this
(MID level so S flex at 5.5 goes from 5.0 (soft to flex) 5.5 MID S, to 6.0 (strong to flex)

3.5 = A / Senior / Lite
4.5 = R flex
5.0 = Firm / Uniflex
5.5 = S flex
6.0 = S+
6.5 = X
7.5 = TX

Again, this is NOT a standard or anything, its just my opinion about how it all looks, and many seems to look at this the same way, and since there is no standards, we might use it as we like, and my way is the above, but i also split it down to 1 CPM to make a better understanding of where we are flex wise. My chart for Letter flex VS FCM (Full version) looks like this, and i guess there is no chart like this, since its pointing out strong or weak to flex, by using Plus or Minus CPM from MID level.

[b]3.5 = A / Senior / Lite[/b]
3.6 = A+1
3.7 = A+2
3.8 = A+3
3.9 = A+4
4.0 = R-5
4.1 = R-4
4.2 = R-3
4.3 = R-2
4.4 = R-1
[b]4.5 = R flex[/b]
4.6 = R+1
4.7 = R+2
4.8 = R+3
4.9 = R+4
[b]5.0 = Firm / Uniflex[/b]
5.1 = S-4
5.2 = S-3
5.3 = S-2
5.4 = S-2
[b]5.5 = S flex[/b]
5.6 = S+1
5.7 = S+2
5.8 = S+3
5.9 = S+4
[b]6.0 = S+[/b] (or S+5)
6.1 = X-4
6.2 = X-3
6.3 = X-2
6.4 = X-1
[b]6.5 = X[/b]
6.6 = X+1
6.7 = X+2
6.8 = X+3
6.9 = X+4
7.0 = TX-5
7.1 = TX-4
7.2 = TX-3
7.3 = TX-2
7.4 = TX-1
[b]7.5 = TX[/b]
7.6 = TX+1
7.7 = TX+2
7.8 = TX+3
7.9 = TX+5

Again, the FCM system was made by RIFLE for use with RIFLE shafts, no others, and there is NO standard for letter flex codes, and bottom line is, this is "only" a small part of the shaft, so it does not give the hole picture of flex. The reason i made a chart like mine, is the customer demand for a letter code, and if the shaft is strong or weak to flex, who is indicated with a plus or minus value. I DONT expect others to use my chart like this since this is MY way of judging this, and this might be judged otherwise from others, so dont make this "official" in any terms. I gave it to you, just to show you how i judge this, nothing else.

[trhode]

[quote name='Howard Jones' timestamp='1359463521' post='6320755']
Yes those charts is for RIFLE shaft who got a slope of 4.3 CPM for each club shorter
- There is several charts out there who tries to convert the letter flex system L.A.R.S.X to FCM but for several reasons it does not work, simply because you need to know how much stronger they should go for each 0.5 shorter, and that slope is not equal, and some shafts was never made to be judged this way, so only numbers from experience can be used.

On of this charts got a slope for only 7.3 CPM for each inch, but if we use it for Dynamic Gold, it want match up. Depending on the clamp you are using, you will find DG to have a slope of 4.4 w/2.5" to 5.3 w/5.0" (my own notes) and 1 set i remember well is a set of 4-LW made by using DGX100 soft stepped twice. They play from FCM 6.2 in the #4 iron, up to 7.0 in the #9 iron, so at first it looks crazy, but its not. Its just that DG got a steeper CPM slope, so when we judge DG to the FCM system, we must use a average number for the hole set.

Im not dealing with KBS shafts, but the man behind should be known for most of you. He is son of the man behind RIFLE, and Kim Braly him self is the father of the original Project X, and now KBS Tour and KBS C-Taper, so he knows the FCM system better than most of us, and if he refers to FCM, then we should expect his shafts to have a flex slope like the FCM system, but i cant confirm that. The KBS number in my chart is collected from KBS webpage, adjusted by 1 CPM down since KBS uses D2 and Rifle/FCM is D3.

When it comes to the general opinion about Letter flex VS FCM, it seems to be something like this
(MID level so S flex at 5.5 goes from 5.0 (soft to flex) 5.5 MID S, to 6.0 (strong to flex)

3.5 = A / Senior / Lite
4.5 = R flex
5.0 = Firm / Uniflex
5.5 = S flex
6.0 = S+
6.5 = X
7.5 = TX

Again, this is NOT a standard or anything, its just my opinion about how it all looks, and many seems to look at this the same way, and since there is no standards, we might use it as we like, and my way is the above, but i also split it down to 1 CPM to make a better understanding of where we are flex wise. My chart for Letter flex VS FCM (Full version) looks like this, and i guess there is no chart like this, since its pointing out strong or weak to flex, by using Plus or Minus CPM from MID level.

[b]3.5 = A / Senior / Lite[/b]
3.6 = A+1
3.7 = A+2
3.8 = A+3
3.9 = A+4
4.0 = R-5
4.1 = R-4
4.2 = R-3
4.3 = R-2
4.4 = R-1
[b]4.5 = R flex[/b]
4.6 = R+1
4.7 = R+2
4.8 = R+3
4.9 = R+4
[b]5.0 = Firm / Uniflex[/b]
5.1 = S-4
5.2 = S-3
5.3 = S-2
5.4 = S-2
[b]5.5 = S flex[/b]
5.6 = S+1
5.7 = S+2
5.8 = S+3
5.9 = S+4
[b]6.0 = S+[/b] (or S+5)
6.1 = X-4
6.2 = X-3
6.3 = X-2
6.4 = X-1
[b]6.5 = X[/b]
6.6 = X+1
6.7 = X+2
6.8 = X+3
6.9 = X+4
7.0 = TX-5
7.1 = TX-4
7.2 = TX-3
7.3 = TX-2
7.4 = TX-1
[b]7.5 = TX[/b]
7.6 = TX+1
7.7 = TX+2
7.8 = TX+3
7.9 = TX+5

Again, the FCM system was made by RIFLE for use with RIFLE shafts, no others, and there is NO standard for letter flex codes, and bottom line is, this is "only" a small part of the shaft, so it does not give the hole picture of flex. The reason i made a chart like mine, is the customer demand for a letter code, and if the shaft is strong or weak to flex, who is indicated with a plus or minus value. I DONT expect others to use my chart like this since this is MY way of judging this, and this might be judged otherwise from others, so dont make this "official" in any terms. I gave it to you, just to show you how i judge this, nothing else.
[/quote]

Thanks again Howard! I just needed a bit of confirmation that KBS wasn't following the Rifle Slope. As club builders, I think the main thing is, we are all trying to speed up our building process as much as possible. Having different charts for manufacturers speeds up the building process, which in turn, makes for happier customers. Time is money!

[bullrambler]

[quote name='smoky25' timestamp='1311024749' post='3402198']
Howard Jones asked me to help him post his new and improved shaft chart. Enjoy. Click the chart to enlarge.
[/quote]

Like others on the site I appreciate the chart that you spent so much time putting together. For me it seems like the easiest comparison to readily deal with is the DG shafts.
Q 1. I was wondering if the finished shaft with the grip installed, like a 5 iron finished at 38 inches, with a S-300ss (or S-400ss)has a slight increase or decease in swing-weight...? I would be using a midsize grip with two wraps of tape.
Q.2. While most people might want to keep their Swing Weight somewhere near D-2, I've always preferred a heavier swing-weight of somewhere close to D-6. I've found that a heavier club for me gives me a more deliberate swing so that I prevent myself from "chasing the ball". In my younger days i used DG X100, but am now between a DGR and DGS.
Your thoughts would be greatly appreciated...!

[Howard_Jones]

I would not rush it at all, and if you look at different opinions to Club speed for the same shaft, you will find that even the same flex strength does not give the same answers for who they should be used by.

Lets take a few examples of shafts familiar for most of us, Dynamic Gold, and compare Club speed area recs, between Tom Wishons shaft profiling software, and Jeff Summits shaft charts for DSFi.
- CS FCM = Club speed as if this was a RIFLE shaft with this FCM value - Medium swing
PS! Hireko uses the term Fast or Slow swing, so to get a compare to Wishon #. Fast swing = Low club speed - Smooth = High CS

Shaft - FCM - CS CFM - Wishon Low - Wishon High - Hireko Low - Hireko High - Hireko DFSi

DGR300 - 4.8..........78............70-------------80.....................80------------90......................78
DGS300 - 5.8..........88............65-------------80 (error).........89------------99......................86
DGX100 - 6.8..........98............80-------------90.....................92-----------102.....................89

Both Tom Wishon and Jeff Summitt knows what there is to know about shaft specs and measuring them, so who shall we trust when they are not online in club speed area on the most sold steel shaft ever made ? My answer is, trust them both when it comes to shaft specs, but since there is a human involved, the player, let him decide what feels right for him and his personal preferences, and assist yourself in the jungle by using a launch monitor, and background specs provided from both this sources.

Non of us knows what preferences the next customer who calls have for feel of flex, and since flex is just as much a feel matter (early release), as it is to meet a club speed and swing need, stay open minded to what might be right on all club specs, and you will be surprised whats the best options sometimes.

If you are a club maker, take notes all the time, both when you do a fitting, and when you work with clubs.
Make comments on your customers, so when you read their files later, you remember the player, his swing, his faults and strengths, and keep a record of your launch monitor files. Your "office" can never be to good.

and....NEVER trust any club, shaft, club head or grip to be what the label say it is, unless you have a hand picked club head.
Treat every club, and every club component, even ferrules, as a separate object to measure and control before assemble and treat every set like a object of its own. Club making is NOT mass production where cut and glue as fast as possible is what brings food on the table and new customers to your door. QUALITY fitting, and Club making is what does, and its much funnier to be able to take your time and enjoy making the clubs you just sold.

About shaft specs.
Tom Wishon and Jeff Summit kind of fill inn the gap of each other where Tom Wishons Shaft profiling software is next to endless in numbers of shafts, and you get both butt cpm, and 6 other zones on the shaft, while Jeff Summit kindly offer us for free, his PDF files who contain the old fashion way of measure flex by tip and butt deflection.

Il PM Wishon about the strange club speed area for S300 who must be a error of some sort, but it does not matter much since i guess most of this Software¨s users is more interested in the zone specs data for compare, than club speed range :-)

[Howard_Jones]

[quote name='bullrambler' timestamp='1359479524' post='6322141']
[quote name='smoky25' timestamp='1311024749' post='3402198']
Howard Jones asked me to help him post his new and improved shaft chart. Enjoy. Click the chart to enlarge.
[/quote]

Like others on the site I appreciate the chart that you spent so much time putting together. For me it seems like the easiest comparison to readily deal with is the DG shafts.
Q 1. I was wondering if the finished shaft with the grip installed, like a 5 iron finished at 38 inches, with a S-300ss (or S-400ss)has a slight increase or decease in swing-weight...? I would be using a midsize grip with two wraps of tape.
Q.2. While most people might want to keep their Swing Weight somewhere near D-2, I've always preferred a heavier swing-weight of somewhere close to D-6. I've found that a heavier club for me gives me a more deliberate swing so that I prevent myself from "chasing the ball". In my younger days i used DG X100, but am now between a DGR and DGS.
Your thoughts would be greatly appreciated...!
[/quote]

Please remember how Dynamic Gold is made and sorted to sub flexes.
Dynamic Gold is a "Double wall" Premium shaft where its not only the visual stepping who makes the shaft profile and flex, its also a variable wall thickness tech involved.

The S Flex series, S200, S300 and S400 was all meant to be S300, but some turned out a bit skinny so they got the label S200, while some became a bit fat and got the label S400. Since shaft thickness vary, we never know for sure why the S200 shaft became to light, or where weight is missing, and for S400 we never know where the extra weight ended up.

Thats why we can see strange butt CPM readings telling S200 is 1 CPM stronger than S300, and that S400 is 4 CPM stronger than S300. It all depend on the shafts they got at hand, and they might vary from "average" both ways. In my charts i treat them as 2-3 CPM up or down from 300.

Im not sure where we go with SW with stepping, but soft stepping makes you loose a small amount of shaft weight, since we end up cutting of 0.5 from butt for each step, while a hard stepped set becomes a bit more heavy, since we must use 0.5 more shaft butt then as standard. I cant recall weight pr. inch tip side and butt side so i dont have a number at hand.

Build up tape weight average 2.1 grams for each layer, and on the scale it steal 1/3 SW point
New Decade std VS Mid = minus 2.1 SW point on the scale
Midsize plus 2 layers will in sum take almost 3 SW point when you put the club on the scale

[bullrambler]

Ok Howard I can see that - best case scenario may be to use the DGS 300 and go from there. I had an opportunity to stop at a Nevada Bob's golf shop and hit some new:
[size=4][color=#333333]Callaway Razr Muscle Back irons with the Rifle Flighted 6.0 [/color][/size]at standard length and lie. I[size=4] like the feel of the shafts but having only tried the 6 iron with tape on the sole and face. The tape indicated that the lie was 1* too flat for me, and I was hitting close to center. And it being the dead of winter in Canada, I know I can do better.(lol) Yet I felt like I was trying to make minor adjustments to work with the 6.0 Flighted shaft. It did not fee too shift, and swing speed was fairly consistent at 86 MPH. And the monitor was showing 200+ yards. Who knows how accurate the monitor is. This is why I mentioned the possibility of SS a DGS shaft. As it does feel and play differently then a Rifle Flighted. But the Flighted shaft feels less harsh to me. Ideally it would be nice to try all the shafts that spec out in my "zone" but that is unlikely. Everyone wants consistency and it's challenging to decide the ideal shaft (and weight) that will play the best for one's own specifications.[/size]



While you have already done so much work on some shaft comparisons, It would be good to have all the various "big player" shafts showing the weight of the shaft for each iron, and it's frequency. Standard length would be fine. With an explanation of how each shaft is designed to feel or preform like. There has been little or no discussion on the comparison of DG, Dynalite, and TT lite. If I have it correct I would see them in the following way: DG - high bend point; Dynalite - low bend point and TT lite - Mid bend point. I've played all of these shafts at one time or another so I understand how each one "feels". I always go back to the DG because I find the stiffer feel to work's better for my swing tempo because I feel like the other True Temper shafts feel like they are "dipping" and toe seems to go down more then the DG. I don't swing as fast as I did a couple of decades ago, but I still have the same deliberate swing, but slower. The True Temper shafts I've mentioned all have there own step pattern and shaft weight, and they perform differently from each other.



[size=4]My (long winded) point here is that if the shaft weight for all the Rifle shafts were listed, according to the corresponding iron, and the type of Rifle shaft, we might garner some additional information that could help someone who is trying to determine if he/she may choose a Rifle Flighted over a Rifle Project X, Or a PXi. I know some of us here have arrived at that conclusion, but I haven't. What I've read so far doesn't approach the comparison in this fashion. Personally to me, the Project X feels stiffer then the Flighted. I have no how there weights or bend points differ if all of them were installed in the same iron. With the Rifles, I have no idea if shafts of the same design (ie Flighted, PXi or Project X) create a consistent SW throughout the set. Or, whether it's based on the notion of frequency, where SW has little effect on a set of irons, but frequency does.[/size]


On a closing note - Is it not appropriate to say that a DG shaft is designed as a "flighted" becaseu the way the steps progress through a set. Each shaft either gets stiffer as one goes from long iron to a short iron...? Like, from the 3 iron to the PW.

Appreciate you comments...!

[bullrambler]

Not intending to hog this thread... There was a time when True Temper made two high bend point shafts. One was a Dynamic shaft with a black and chrome colored sticker; This was later replaced with a purple, black and chrome shaft sticker. These were not weight sorted, and a club make could sort them by weight if he wanted to do so for his customers. They were less expensive.

Then there was the Dynamic Gold shafts which were weight sorted from R-100, R-200, R-300, R-400, and R-500 each shaft went up in weight. And the Stiffs had S-100 to S-500 and the Extra Stiff (X) shafts that were sorted in the same fashion, but I don't remember of they went up to X-500.

I suppose demand and profit margins may have meant the True Temper simplified the weight separation, and may have eliminated the Dynamic shaft and focused on the DG. Most here are familiar with the Corresponding flexes, and weights. It would seem that there are fewer options now, and this may be due to demand.

I always thought that as the number of the flex went down, from R-500 to R-100 meant that the shafts were lighter, and softer as the number got lower. I often wondered if the placement of the Last Step of the each shaft in it's designated flex, was a tad closer or farther away from the hosel. I'm referring to in the Regular flex, if the R-500 fit closer to the hosel then the R-100, byt remained within the flex designation of Regular. I thought the same for the Stiffs in the S-100 to the S-500 and the X-Stiffs X-100 to the X-500. But it seems like it was just the weight of the shaft and it did not reflect where the last step finished in proximity to the hosel. Meaning that they were designed for the step to finish in the same location (within it's flex range), in proximity to the fit in the hosel. Had there been a slight difference in where the shaft-fit finished into the hosel. That would have made more sense, and may have eliminated the need to SS or HS a given shaft flex, to arrive at another softer or stiffer flex. The weight difference within a flex range may have been more of a feel thing, because it would have had a minor effect on the SW.

Anyways, if you have a thought or two on this scenario, your comments are always appreciated.

[TahoeDust]

This thread is full of interesting data. I have been hitting S300 shafts for years and am making the move to a PXi shaft with a little less stiff. I was thinking 5.5, now I am not sure.

[mwmilk123]

i am thinking about playing a PXI 6.5 soft stepped twice at 1/4" over standard. 38.25" 5 iron(callaway). the last time i tried regular project x 5.5 1/2" over standard, which was also a 38.25" 5 iron(titleist), the shafts played stiffer. is it known that PXI will do the same?