A Technical Discussion and Report on Adjustable Hosel/Adjustable Sole Piece Drivers in the Modern Go

[johnnythunders]

Just got an email from Tom Wishon with a link to the article title above.

 

Wow, as usal Tom tells it like it is. Bravo!

 

Not sure I can post it here but I'm sure the article will be posted soon.

[stg113]

I'm not sure why it can't be posted here, so I attached the link. I read the whole thing, and wow. I'm sure this will cause a bunch of debate and of course many will say Mr Wishon is either biased or doesn't know what he is talking about. I hover the driver at address so I have no use for any of these "adjustable" drivers anyway.
[url="http://wishongolf.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/adjustable-hosel-drivers.pdf"]http://wishongolf.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/adjustable-hosel-drivers.pdf[/url]

[rybo]

Somehow in the real world when you actually use these products and set the clubs to different settings the ball flight changes. Wonder why that happens?

[MadGolfer76]

Boom.

This should be epic.

edit: 10 to 1 odds it gets taken down or locked before the end of the night.

[scottvw13]

I don't dispute his findings one bit, but if you think Mr. Wishon is 100% free of bias, then you are naïve. He wants to sell clubs just as much as any of the OEM's.

Truth is, this is a thinly disguised piece of marketing material for his own products. And there is absolutely nothing wrong with doing that. TW needs to make a living too.

[Fourmyle of Ceres]

Well as someone who does not rest the driver on the ground, this article explains how some of the adjustable drivers I tried are creating effective loft changes. The Covert, 910d2 and my G25 (which presumably works like the Anser) all seem to have a very large loft angle as measured by Tom's "Green Machine" method. But they also have very open face angles which I no doubt manipulate back to more or less square when addressing the ball. The various settings to one extent or another open the face angle to a greater or lesser extent, causing me to manipulate the loft accordingly in my squaring up of the clubhead at address. It works fine for me but seems it would not work at all for someone who always addresses the ball in whatever position the sole happens to throw it when rested on the turf.

[sui generis]

[quote name='scottvw13' timestamp='1365537764' post='6794975']
I don't dispute his findings one bit, but if you think Mr. Wishon is 100% free of bias, then you are naïve. He wants to sell clubs just as much as any of the OEM's.

Truth is, this is a thinly disguised piece of marketing material for his own products. And there is absolutely nothing wrong with doing that. TW needs to make a living too.
[/quote]

The beauty of science (unlike marketing) is that you can do similar measurement tests for yourself. Perhaps you'd be willing to publish your results here, too.

Or, you can sit around throwing rocks.

[stealthrt91]

Pshhh, Tom's the man. This just makes me feel better about gaming my non-adjustable Tour Burner TP still

Excellent research Tom

[TNGolfer8]

[quote name='rybo' timestamp='1365537332' post='6794907']
Somehow in the real world when you actually use these products and set the clubs to different settings the ball flight changes. Wonder why that happens?
[/quote]
Tell us, Rybo. Tell us what's really going on and who has it right and who doesn't.

[Fourmyle of Ceres]

One can agree with every word Tom Wishon says and every number he measures while still pointing out that he is not totally without a business interest in the topic. True enough I suppose. That said, I for one find it hard to see any way in which spending 100 hours or so preparing this article is going to pay off in Wishon Golf's bottom line. If he wanted to devote a few weeks to marketing I'm sure he could find more effective ways than hunching over an Auditor machine documenting the exact mechanism of a bunch of other people's clubs. I'm pretty sure he wrote it because he thinks he clearing up a poorly understood bit of marketing gobbledegook. One can hardly blame him for the fact that it's other brands and not his own that obfuscate the situation with their own self-interested spin. If he thought Wishon drivers were being misleadingly marketed I'm sure he'd say so...

[scottvw13]

[quote name='sui generis' timestamp='1365538609' post='6795107']
[quote name='scottvw13' timestamp='1365537764' post='6794975']
[size=4][b]I don't dispute his findings one bit,[/b][/size] but if you think Mr. Wishon is 100% free of bias, then you are naïve. He wants to sell clubs just as much as any of the OEM's.

Truth is, this is a thinly disguised piece of marketing material for his own products. And there is absolutely nothing wrong with doing that. TW needs to make a living too.
[/quote]




The beauty of science (unlike marketing) is that you can do similar measurement tests for yourself. Perhaps you'd be willing to publish your results here, too.

Or, you can sit around throwing rocks.

[/quote]


Let me start by pointing out the section of my post that I highlighted.

Secondly, I was just pointing out that TW 100% has a reason to publish this "scientific" study. He sells non adjustable drivers. Does that make him biased? Absolutely. Does that disprove his findings? Absolutely NOT.

As for my personal findings, I would be happy to post my findings.

Spending 10+ hours on trackman on an outdoor range with a covert and covert tour, I have hit multiple shots in every setting possible, and found the adjustable hosel to perform as advertised. I cannot speak to the specifications, but I can tell you that in the 12.5 setting, the ball launched higher than the 11.5 setting, which launched higher with more spin that the 10.5 setting, etc.

Further, the shot shape (draw, straight, fade) was very similar when changing loft, but not face angle.

again, I have no idea what the actual loft and face angle is at the different settings, but the driver performed as advertised.

Personlly, I could care less about the actual loft versus the stamping on the hosel or the sole. All I know is that I can dial my launch conditions without changing shot shape, which is what Nike advertised.

[scottvw13]

[quote name='Fourmyle of Ceres' timestamp='1365538917' post='6795165']
One can agree with every word Tom Wishon says and every number he measures while still pointing out that he is not totally without a business interest in the topic. True enough I suppose. That said, I for one find it hard to see any way in which spending 100 hours or so preparing this article is going to pay off in Wishon Golf's bottom line. If he wanted to devote a few weeks to marketing I'm sure he could find more effective ways than hunching over an Auditor machine documenting the exact mechanism of a bunch of other people's clubs. I'm pretty sure he wrote it because he thinks he clearing up a poorly understood bit of marketing gobbledegook. One can hardly blame him for the fact that it's other brands and not his own that obfuscate the situation with their own self-interested spin. If he thought Wishon drivers were being misleadingly marketed I'm sure he'd say so...
[/quote]

So TW spent 100 hours writing this out of the goodness of his heart?

[Fourmyle of Ceres]

No I think he spent the time to make a point. Just like I'm spending 75 seconds typing this to make a point. I'm not claiming the point is makes is counter to his business interest. Just saying that it's hard to see how publishing this article is any great, cunning plan to double the number of Wishon Golf drivers he sells. The simplest explanation is that he actually does believe every word he wrote, because he has no reason to make stuff like this up. I do doubt that the person writing a typical piece of Taylor Made Golf's marketing [I]bumpf[/I] thinks he's writing anything other than balloon juice.

[Fourmyle of Ceres]

P.S. And just to make my own opinion clear, what he reports here explains (fairly) clearly exactly my own observations about adjustable drivers. Said observations do not comport with the things Taylor Made, Ping and Titleist say about their own adjustable drivers. It seems perfectly obvious from examining the clubs in question that the loft angle [i]per se[/i] ain't changing a lick when you turn that collar. So I had concluded the only loft change possible is the indirect one caused by the player squaring a relatively closed or open clubhead. So the fact is, what Tom found fits my own poorly informed and possibly prejudiced conclusions. Naturally that makes me think he's shooting straight!

[scottvw13]

[quote name='Fourmyle of Ceres' timestamp='1365540291' post='6795331']
No I think he spent the time to make a point. Just like I'm spending 75 seconds typing this to make a point. I'm not claiming the point is makes is counter to his business interest. Just saying that it's hard to see how publishing this article is any great, cunning plan to double the number of Wishon Golf drivers he sells. The simplest explanation is that he actually does believe every word he wrote, because he has no reason to make stuff like this up. I do doubt that the person writing a typical piece of Taylor Made Golf's marketing [I]bumpf[/I] thinks he's writing anything other than balloon juice.
[/quote]

I completely understand that.

All I am saying is that while TW is writing a piece of marketing material, he is actually using science to make his points, as opposed to some ad exec writing a club is x yards longer than last years club.

If you notice, TW writes many articles that discredit major OEM products. Even some products that he does not market (i.e. shafts).

Again, there is nothing wrong with that what so ever. I am simply stating my opinion.

[scottvw13]

[quote name='Fourmyle of Ceres' timestamp='1365540562' post='6795385']
P.S. And just to make my own opinion clear, what he reports here explains (fairly) clearly exactly my own observations about adjustable drivers. Said observations do not comport with the things Taylor Made, Ping and Titleist say about their own adjustable drivers. It seems perfectly obvious from examining the clubs in question that the loft angle [i]per se[/i] ain't changing a lick when you turn that collar. So I had concluded the only loft change possible is the indirect one caused by the player squaring a relatively closed or open clubhead. So the fact is, what Tom found fits my own poorly informed and possibly prejudiced conclusions. Naturally that makes me think he's shooting straight!
[/quote]

Clearly we are both motivated by the same experiences, because while I cannot speak for those OEM's, I 100% must say that the Covert has performed exactly how Nike claimed it would.

[Fourmyle of Ceres]

I hit a Covert into a launch monitor and it was definitely acting like a 12-degree type driver on the "12.5" setting. Maybe you are, like myself, an exception to Tom's assumption that nearly everyone swings a driver in exactly the orientation that it rests upon the ground. It is the strong emphasis on that assumption that is my one quibble with Tom's article. FWIW, I also found that a "9.5" Ping G25 driver hits about like a 12-degree ought to. I'm pretty sure that's because, as Tom's measurements found on the "10.5" Anser, the actual loft is at least 2-3 degrees above what's marked on the sole. Which is taking a good thing bit too far, eh Ping? But I hit the poo out of my "9.5" driver even with my 90mph swing which makes it hard to get too indignant about a) the "9.5" engraved on the sole or b) whatever it would measure in a Green Machine when I'm not swinging it.

[greens hit]

I am Greenshit and I approve Wishon's message.

[stealthrt91]

I think there are two sides to this. Sure, TW did prove (through his finding of course) that the specs are not what is advertised.

But then there are the people that could care less. They will buy these adjustable drivers, and adjust them to whatever works for them. In other words... "8* loft" might as well say "Setting A" and "2* open" might as well say "Setting 1"... if the buyer finds that the driver set to Setting A/Setting 1 delivers the results that they wanted then they can care less about whether or not the details in the setting are true.

I'm not trying to play devils advocate, I have been a long time customer of TW. I am just trying to think of ways that this would rub certain golfers the wrong way and others could honestly not care. Personally, I'm an inbetweener. Yes, I would want to adjust the clubs to get my desired results but when I get them, I personally would like to know what my true settings are for reference. Others may not care for thee details after having the club adjusted to what works for them.

[greens hit]

The bottom line is, the only way you can change the loft in any driver by changing the hosel angle is by hovering the clubhead and squaring the face by twisting the shaft. There is no such thing as an independent loft/face angle change.

[I_HATE_SNOW]

Kudos to Mr. Wishon. Anyone argueing had better have the data to support their positions.

I also hover the driver, own a 910 D2, and have never noticed any difference from the settings. Now I know why my 9.5° driver hits it so high!

[rybo]

[quote name='TNGolfer8' timestamp='1365538667' post='6795125']
[quote name='rybo' timestamp='1365537332' post='6794907']
Somehow in the real world when you actually use these products and set the clubs to different settings the ball flight changes. Wonder why that happens?
[/quote]
Tell us, Rybo. Tell us what's really going on and who has it right and who doesn't.
[/quote]

I didn't say I know why it happens, I only stated that when you change settings there are visible differences in ball flight between the settings. These clubs do work. If you've ever had the opportunity to try different settings with one of these adjustable heads on a Trackman then you know there is no doubt they work.


I have to admit during my first read through of the article I was surprised to see a wooden club head being referenced. Times have changed but some seem to be stuck in decades past and products long obsoleted. Sort of like trying to play an ipod with a phonograph!

Like some others have stated, this article seems to be just another article in a line of many recently that have not held any of the OEM's in a good light. Now I like Tom, have purchased most of his books, have an account with him and built and played many of his clubs. But he is just one of many talented individuals in the industry. And there are many within the golf industry that are just as knowledgeable that hold different opinions then Tom. Good, bad or indifferent this is real!

[rybo]

[size=5][size=4]Is anybody else bothered by the statement on pg 6?[/size][/size]

[size=5]The sole position for proper face angle and loft measurement was very carefully determined by allowing each driver to sit flat on its sole on a flat surface in the proper lie position and carefully noting the exact area of contact with the flat surface in the face to back plane of the sole. [u]The point of contact on the sole was marked and duplicated for each measurement. [/u][/size]

[size=5][size=4]How can the same point on the sole be used if the head is moving around? Each setting has it's own set of contact points. In the case of the R1 if the 8* loft setting is used then the 3* closed setting on the button is to be used for a neutral face setting. Compare 8* loft contact point with the 12* loft contact point (12* loft on hosel and 3* open setting on the button for neutral) and most definitely the contact points will be different.[/size][/size]

[size=5][size=4]Here are two pics of the R1 without a shaft. One pic is with the button fully extended and the other with the button fully retracted. Clearly the contact points are different.[/size][/size]

[Singapore Joe]

[quote name='scottvw13' timestamp='1365540779' post='6795413']
[quote name='Fourmyle of Ceres' timestamp='1365540291' post='6795331']
No I think he spent the time to make a point. Just like I'm spending 75 seconds typing this to make a point. I'm not claiming the point is makes is counter to his business interest. Just saying that it's hard to see how publishing this article is any great, cunning plan to double the number of Wishon Golf drivers he sells. The simplest explanation is that he actually does believe every word he wrote, because he has no reason to make stuff like this up. I do doubt that the person writing a typical piece of Taylor Made Golf's marketing [i]bumpf[/i] thinks he's writing anything other than balloon juice.
[/quote]

I completely understand that.

All I am saying is that while TW is writing a piece of marketing material, he is actually using science to make his points, as opposed to some ad exec writing a club is x yards longer than last years club.

If you notice, TW writes many articles that discredit major OEM products. Even some products that he does not market (i.e. shafts).

Again, there is nothing wrong with that what so ever. I am simply stating my opinion.
[/quote]

If I'm allowed to jump in... To me Tom Wishon is very much like certain boutique high end audio equipment manufacturers. Huge amount of expertise and very true to their ideal of "pure audio" and rather disillusioned with the big companies out there. Goes without saying that I hold both Mr. Wishon and his audiophilic counterparts in the highest esteem.

There are several claims (both golf and high end audio) that are vague at best. And yet these claims are pushed to the max by huge marketing machines. And this is when it comes to the credibility of the arguments. Yes, it is quite possible that Mr. Wishon has his own business interests in mind writing this and other articles he has written to this forum. Or maybe this is his own independent research as part of his R&D which he just wants to share with the community is there are many golfers out there who are interested but who have no means of obtaining such data otherwise.

Whatever it is, it does not remove the fact that this article is based on sound measurements which anybody out there can go and reproduce to see whether the claims indeed hold. Meanwhile, I find that it is easy to believe what is written in this article.

We can question the motives of Mr. Wishon to publish this article. But if we disagree with the content and findings, then we have to start questioning the assumptions (e.g. the grounding of the club head when setting up - this is already starting to take place in this discussion) or the methodology used (the way drivers are measured on the green machine).

Furthermore, there are subjective experiences which go contrary to the article. That is quite possible but it does not disprove the measurements. There may, for example, be something else that was not captured by the measurements that causes the changes.

Many of Wishon's articles seem to go against the OEMs but I'm not sure whether it is so much against the products themselves (with the possible exception being the manufacturing tolerances) or the way the OEMs make their marketing claims. Yes, Mr. Wishon is critical of, say, misleading and confusing shaft labelling but that does not contain a claim about the quality of the shafts themselves.

[Fourmyle of Ceres]

It doesn't take a Wishon with 35 years in the industry to recognize that most golf equipment marketing spiel is taking the consumer for a credulous numbskull. The fact that it works speaks much more negatively about the consumer than the marketeer IMHO.

[Singapore Joe]

[quote name='rybo' timestamp='1365545692' post='6795927']
[size=5][size=4]Is anybody else bothered by the statement on pg 6?[/size][/size]

[size=5]The sole position for proper face angle and loft measurement was very carefully determined by allowing each driver to sit flat on its sole on a flat surface in the proper lie position and carefully noting the exact area of contact with the flat surface in the face to back plane of the sole. [u]The point of contact on the sole was marked and duplicated for each measurement. [/u][/size]
[/quote]

I read that as a statement to ensure that the clubhead was positioned in the green machine so that it points to the exact same direction, i.e. not that the exact same spots are touching the ground but that whatever touches ground touches it at the same plane. But now that I think of it, saying that means that there can be no difference in the face angle as the club head itself does not change.

[TomWishon]

[quote name='scottvw13' timestamp='1365540071' post='6795309']

So TW spent 100 hours writing this out of the goodness of his heart?
[/quote]

No, I did it because I did invent the first adjustable hosel device for changing lie and face angle of woods back in 1995 and from that work, I knew without a doubt that changing the angle of the shaft into the head cannot change loft, but it will change face angle and lie angle. So I did the report because with all these companies claiming they could change the loft with their adj hosel devices, I had to know for myself if they did or did not - and if the modern devices could allow the stated specs to be achieved.

That's all I wanted to know.

TOM

[TomWishon]

[quote name='Singapore Joe' timestamp='1365546570' post='6795985']

I read that as a statement to ensure that the clubhead was positioned in the green machine so that it points to the exact same direction, i.e. not that the exact same spots are touching the ground but that whatever touches ground touches it at the same plane. But now that I think of it, saying that means that there can be no difference in the face angle as the club head itself does not change.
[/quote]

Wish you were in my shop so I could show you easily in person what is so hard to express clearly in words. LIKE IT IS DONE IN EVERY SINGLE CLUBHEAD PRODUCTION FACTORY IN THE WORLD, the sole touch point is duplicated for each head for each adjustable measurement so you can see the effect of the change of the angle of the shaft into the head as dictated by the rotation of the hosel device.

I assure you that the methods for positioning the heads in the gauge are precisely how all driver heads are measured for loft, lie and face angle by every clubhead production factory in the industry.

TOM

[TomWishon]

[quote name='rybo' timestamp='1365545692' post='6795927']

[size=5][size=4]Here are two pics of the R1 without a shaft. One pic is with the button fully extended and the other with the button fully retracted. Clearly the contact points are different.[/size][/size]
[/quote]

RYBO

YOU CANNOT FIND THE PROPER SOLE TOUCH POSITION FOR A DRIVER WITHOUT A SHAFT OR MANDREL INSERTED INTO THE HEAD. You cannot do that just letting the head itself sit on its own. If you had the chance to ask anyone with many years of head design experience how long it took them to learn the nuances of proper head positioning for accurate specs measurement, you would hear that it takes many many hours with many many different types of heads.

This is one reason why some years ago I was asked by two of the largest clubhead production factories to teach their QC and toolmakers how to properly measure head specs so they could see if their people were doing this the right way. I can assure you that one of these two factories that asked me to teach this to their people is one of the three factories that have made all Taylor Made driver head models since 2006.

TOM

[MadGolfer76]

29 replies in this thread and no one knows what to say. I love it.