Who is going to build a shorter driver based on Wishon article?

[mickeytbones]

I play a tour issue Superdeep at 44" with a Nunchuk.

The thing is a fairway finding beast. If I am shorter with this driver, I don't notice it. And, I never hit it left.

[Ri_Redneck]

[quote name='Sean2' timestamp='1389587177' post='8450279']
[quote name='Kadin 25' timestamp='1389579564' post='8449623']
[quote name='Sean2' timestamp='1389577963' post='8449449']
[quote name='Kadin 25' timestamp='1389572434' post='8448897']
[quote name='Sean2' timestamp='1389568832' post='8448583']
[quote name='Kadin 25' timestamp='1389564838' post='8448201']
If you are going to opt to trim a driver down rather than getting one built to spec (if you have the means I recommend you give it a try, you won't be disappointed)

Just a thought on cutting down an existing driver...

When cutting down an existing driver, is this matter of what swingweight do you go for when you cut down a club. Some try to duplicate the swingweight they had at the longer length. That often times makes the headweight "feel" to be too heavy, especially if they cut 1" or more off the existing driver. So when cutting an inch or more, a nice rule of thumb is to experiment with a swingweight that is lower than what you had before at the longer length and take it from there to hunt for that point where you can feel the head enough during the swing but not too much.

I see time and time again players who chop an inch off their driver and adjust the swing weight back to the original spec and often more times than not, they are not happy with the out come.

So keep in mind... going lower or just experiment until you get the "feel" right, don't get too caught up in numbers.

Hope that helps a little....Kadin
[/quote]

Don't know enough about making the SW adjustment, which is one of the reason's I've been hesitant to cut down my existing driver (besides what I've already articulated). Gripping down seems to be the easiest solution, though maybe not the most efficient.
[/quote]Sean you don't have to know anything about swing weight. Just add some lead tape, take a few swings and repeat this process until you can "feel" the head on the driver through the swing. To be honest you don't have to know what the actual swing weight is, that's just a reference point for when you are building.

Just go out and tinker until it feels good.
[/quote]

Where do you put the lead tape, Kadin?
[/quote]Anywhere on the sole of the club will work just fine. Chances are you won't be adding enough to truly effect ball flight anyway.
[/quote]

Thanks!
[/quote]

If you hope to influence draw bias, place the tape near the heel area. Add tape till the weight feels right and then hope for that draw!

BT

[502 to Right]

Square is in a credibility free fall right now.

As they say, "When you are in a hole--stop digging."




Here's a recent photo of Square:

[attachment=2019411:capt.d681cc27136e4e5098492d00b4d923dc.aptopix_alcine_santos_boxing_ryr109.jpg]

[Ri_Redneck]

[quote name='TomWishon' timestamp='1389629354' post='8452107']
[quote name='square' timestamp='1389485681' post='8443525']
You keep asking for it, and with the hope you might learn something, I will continue to reply, for now , anyway.

#1 in the pursuit of distance claims branded OEM's took a path to longer shafts and larger heads.Sadly, the point of diminishing returns (44.5" finished length and roughly 375CC head size) was passed about 10 years ago. The 45" plus length shafts require a unique swing,which in itself is not an issue .However, a player needs to transition his swing from the extra long shaft to the rest of the clubs within the bag, and therein lies the problem. Understanding the diminishing returns of too large a head size is simply a matter of good sense. Too large means too bulky and bulky is never the best fit for good swings.

#2 I can't think of a single successful consumer product which was born from some "test marketing focus group" or "poll results" of any kind. Through the sixties and seventies Karsten Solheim
used his own thoughtful design ideas to create revolutionary, better performing products. And in the early 90's Callaway did the same thing, producing a game changing driver.. No customers asked for these products. It's not the customers job to know what he wants. That is backwards. It is the suppliers job to design and create innovative , great functioning products which the customers never knew they wanted but come to realize they must have.

Tom Wishon, you have a recognizable name within the industry and seem passionate about selling your fit story. My suggestion is to stop thinking about '"focus groups", "consumer polls", "industry meeting panels" , "what people are asking for" , or any of that other stuff. Instead, use your knowledge to create sensible products which best match your fit story. Hope this helps.

[/quote]

I keep asking for it???

#1 - I agree totally that the move of the OEMs to increase driver length from 43-46 over the past 30 yrs is very bad for most golfers. I agree totally that the main reason they have done this is to create more demand on the basis of marketing for more distance. Shoot, I have been writing critically about that for a very long time and offering the scientific proof why it is. If you think you're the one pioneering that criticism, get in line behind the rest of us who have been pounding that point across to golfers for a long time. But get it clear - head size has nothing to do with this. I explained the reasons for the evolution for head size in my last post to your comments.

#2 - If you are running a major golf company and the marketing guys come up to you asking for your OK to spend $10 mill the next year on ads for the R&D dept's next model, I darn well hope you contact the sales guys and get everyone to sit down and do everything you can to determine if the consumers are going to be receptive to whatever that new model is going to be before you sign off on spending big time money to go promote it. And just how are you going to determine if a new model can generate the demand to make the sales you need your company to book for the next year? Your company has to go ask a lot of golfers what they think. There isn't a major product launch in ANY industry that isn't done without a good bit of consumer research because of the money involved and the potential risk to the company.

And finally, regarding your suggestion for me to use my knowledge to create sensible products - now I know for sure you have never done any research before making such a statement.

Let's make a little list of what all the current OEM companies' are marketing in their golf club technology today as their own original design technology . . . . .

1. Adjustable hosel devices to change lie, face angle, loft - that was a technology I had the pleasure of first conceiving and creating in 1995 for Golfsmith in a set of woods called the AHT (for Adjustable Hosel Technology) . The OEMS didn't do their versions until 2011.

2. High COR fairway woods - In 2004 my company first hit the COR maximum in a fwy wood in a model called the 515GRT. The OEMs did not figure out how to do that until 2010.

3. High COR irons - In 2000 I designed a set of irons for Golfsmith with the name Snake Eyes Fire Forged 2000 which were the first high COR iron ever created. The OEMs didn't get around to figuring that out for several years later.

4. High COR hybrids - I had the pleasure of designing the first high COR hybrids in the game in 2005 with a model for my company called the 785HF - and it was not just your usual long iron replacement hybrids for all golfers but a full set of hybrids with high COR all the way to the PW so less skilled players could benefit too. I think it was around 2010 that the OEMs figured out how to increase the COR of a hybrid.

5. Draw Bias/Fade Bias Weighted Drivers - Had the real pleasure of doing the first heel weighted driver head for a draw bias with the late and very great Elmore Just of Louisville Golf in a laminated maple head back in 1987. Then I had the kick of doing that in a metal wood driver for the first time in a model called AccuCore50 for Golfsmith in 1995. Took a while after that for the OEMs to come up with their first versions of a heel or toe weighted driver head for creating more draw or fade capability.

6. MIlled Face Wedges - you can go all the way back to 1988 and find a design I did for Dynacraft called the CNC 1000 which was a full iron set in which not just the wedges' faces were milled for the first time ever for more spin, but all the irons in the set had milled faces for more spin too.

That's just a few of the design firsts that I have had the fun and pleasure of figuring out before any other golf company did their version. So Square, I have been there and been doing just what you suggest and thought you would like to know that. And in case you don't believe me, here is a link that lists most of these design firsts so you can continue to learn yourself - [url="http://wishongolf.com/technology/design-firsts/"]http://wishongolf.co...esign-firsts/ [/url]

in the end though, well beyond the design firsts, I really have had the fun of being the first person to really figure out how golf clubs do and do not perform for different golf swing characteristics - and then sharing every bit of what I learn in my books and on forums like this. So the next time you want to label someone as not using their knowledge to create sensible products which best match their story - think a little more first before you make such a statement.

TOM
[/quote]

LOL! Touche!!

BT

[square]

Congratulations on your design firsts, participation on industry panels, authored books and papers etc...
However, as far as your current driver offerings, i don't believe the 2 current Wishon Golf models do a good job of supporting your "shorter driver length is better" fit story. Specifically, you could use at least one model in the 400 to 430 CC size range. And , on that design include 3 or 4 screw weight ports. That is my suggestion to you, which you have repeatedly refuted. It's your business and you can run it as you see fit, but please don't accuse me of not having "thought" about my suggestions before proferring them.
Furthermore, another suggestion I have, albeit unsolicited, is to create some finished driver club demonstration inventory. If you like 44" length and 11* loft then assemble some new Wishon Golf 415 driver heads with a couple of different shaft weights, for example one 70 gram, and one 80 gram, and distribute that demo inventory to some of your highest volume accounts. Let those fitters easily put your "fit story" into players hands. As far as I know none of the major branded OEM fitting carts offer demo inventory in the 43" to 44' finished driver length. Striking a finished club well, seeing the performance benefits, does resonate (with the player) better than simply talking about it. You could be the first in the industry to make readily available well balanced, finished 43" to 44" drivers, This would likely help your Wishon brand gain consumer recognition and sales revenues. Hope this helps.

[quote name='TomWishon' timestamp='1389629354' post='8452107']


in the end though, well beyond the design firsts, I really have had the fun of being the first person to really figure out how golf clubs do and do not perform for different golf swing characteristics - and then sharing every bit of what I learn in my books and on forums like this. So the next time you want to label someone as not using their knowledge to create sensible products which best match their story - think a little more first before you make such a statement.

TOM
[/quote]

[sailfishchris]

Spiralock......check! Multiple shafts......check! Shafts of varied length's and frequency's........check! Multiple loft heads with open and closed faces......check! Ability to change head weights......check! Most Wishon fitters have what you asked for.....just sayin'

[profsmitty]

[b]Seems to me that a return to bi-lateral civility might be in order. We encourage good natured and informative debate. However, personal attacks are not going to be tolerated. I am going to remove one post because it is somewhat inflammatory. In the spirit of cooling down the heated rhetoric in this topic, I think it is justified.

Thanks to all who are upholding this standard.[/b]

[TomWishon]

[quote name='square' timestamp='1389636018' post='8452727']
i don't believe the 2 current Wishon Golf models do a good job of supporting your "shorter driver length is better" fit story. Specifically, you could use at least one model in the 400 to 430 CC size range. And , on that design include 3 or 4 screw weight ports.

Furthermore, another suggestion I have, albeit unsolicited, is to create some finished driver club demonstration inventory.
[/quote]

Supporting a shorter length is better story is ONLY, ONLY, ONLY about giving the clubmakers and golfers enough headweight addition capability in addition to the usual things one does to enhance all the shot performance elements for COR and off center hits, etc. We do that better than ANY company with our 919 and 739 driver head models which have a very great weight addition capability compared to 99% of the other driver heads out there. Supporting a shorter length in your design philosophy has NOTHING to do with head size. Head Size has everything to do with "how many want something like that" or "how many could be convinced to try something like that." Nothing else.

The fact you want a smaller size to go with a shorter length is your opinion based simply on a psychological perception as you look down on the club. And that's fine if you feel that way for you and your game because satisfying perceptions is as important for a golfer as satisfying all technical fitting requirements too. But you seem to have it in your head that there are technical reasons or science based reasons for using a small head size with a shorter length, and I can quite assure you there are not.

The main reason I cannot (and yes I say [b]cannot[/b], I do not say [b]will not[/b]) bring out a smaller size driver head is because right now that would be a BAD investment for our money to do that. As a responsible business owner, I cannot spend $25,000 on new driver head tooling dies or the additional money on production inventory to manufacture a model that has no chance of selling enough units to make such expenditures worthwhile. And there is no way we could influence enough golfers or clubmakers to buy enough smaller size drivers these days to make such development expenditures worthwhile because plain and simple, not nearly enough golfers yet want a smaller size driver to make the investment become a smart business decision FOR ANY COMPANY.

I think it's fine if you personally want a smaller size driver to go with a shorter length. But you're in a small minority with that opinion so you likely are going to have to wait until a million or more other golfers begin to share your desire before you see much happen in the way of any supply for your demand. Companies do not like to beat their heads against brick walls trying to sell things that the majority of people do not want.

Geez, I already spend enough time beating my head against a brick wall trying to get golfers to think about being professionally custom fit rather than to keep buying their clubs off the rack in pro shops or big box golf stores that cannot even come close to offering professional full specs fitting. I don't need to beat my head against another brick wall trying to get golfers to think about using a smaller size driver because there is no functional, scientific reason for any golfer to change to a smaller size driver other than simply a psychological reason. And apparently neither do the vast majority of the other golf club companies since you are not seeing any move down in driver head size these days.

Suffice to say, it probably will happen simply because trends change and golfer's perceptions change too. So just keep patient as I am sure one of these years enough golfers will begin to voice a desire for a smaller size driver head that the companies will hear it and respond to meet any new demand with enough supply.

TOM

[trhode]

[quote name='square' timestamp='1389636018' post='8452727']
Congratulations on your design firsts, participation on industry panels, authored books and papers etc...
However, as far as your current driver offerings, i don't believe the 2 current Wishon Golf models do a good job of supporting your "shorter driver length is better" fit story. Specifically, you could use at least one model in the 400 to 430 CC size range. And , on that design include 3 or 4 screw weight ports. That is my suggestion to you, which you have repeatedly refuted. It's your business and you can run it as you see fit, but please don't accuse me of not having "thought" about my suggestions before proferring them.
Furthermore, another suggestion I have, albeit unsolicited, is to create some finished driver club demonstration inventory. If you like 44" length and 11* loft then assemble some new Wishon Golf 415 driver heads with a couple of different shaft weights, for example one 70 gram, and one 80 gram, and distribute that demo inventory to some of your highest volume accounts. Let those fitters easily put your "fit story" into players hands. As far as I know none of the major branded OEM fitting carts offer demo inventory in the 43" to 44' finished driver length. Striking a finished club well, seeing the performance benefits, does resonate (with the player) better than simply talking about it. You could be the first in the industry to make readily available well balanced, finished 43" to 44" drivers, This would likely help your Wishon brand gain consumer recognition and sales revenues. Hope this helps.

[quote name='TomWishon' timestamp='1389629354' post='8452107']


in the end though, well beyond the design firsts, I really have had the fun of being the first person to really figure out how golf clubs do and do not perform for different golf swing characteristics - and then sharing every bit of what I learn in my books and on forums like this. So the next time you want to label someone as not using their knowledge to create sensible products which best match their story - think a little more first before you make such a statement.

TOM
[/quote]
[/quote]

Again, you are severely mis-informed. MOST Wishon fitters, including myself, are already able to fit and demo clubs at variable lengths, weights, MOI's, face angles and lofts.

[Mr Fade]

[quote name='TomWishon' timestamp='1389638588' post='8452973']

...giving the clubmakers and golfers enough headweight addition capability...

TOM
[/quote]

Just a question here please Tom, you say that the only player who can benefit from a long driver (45.5-46") is one with a smooth transition, great skills etc. Which player type would benefit from a short driver (43-44") but with a light swing weight? Most golfers seem to use heavy heads and heavier shafts when building a shorter driver. My 44" experiment ended up at C3.5 because of a light head and shaft and regular grip weight. What category of golfer would fit to that driver, in theory of course. Many thanks in advance, always enjoying EVERY post you make!

[deck]

[quote name='square' timestamp='1389636018' post='8452727']
Congratulations on your design firsts, participation on industry panels, authored books and papers etc...
However, as far as your current driver offerings, i don't believe the 2 current Wishon Golf models do a good job of supporting your "shorter driver length is better" fit story. Specifically, you could use at least one model in the 400 to 430 CC size range. And , on that design include 3 or 4 screw weight ports. That is my suggestion to you, which you have repeatedly refuted. It's your business and you can run it as you see fit, but please don't accuse me of not having "thought" about my suggestions before proferring them.
Furthermore, another suggestion I have, albeit unsolicited, is to create some finished driver club demonstration inventory. If you like 44" length and 11* loft then assemble some new Wishon Golf 415 driver heads with a couple of different shaft weights, for example one 70 gram, and one 80 gram, and distribute that demo inventory to some of your highest volume accounts. Let those fitters easily put your "fit story" into players hands. As far as I know none of the major branded OEM fitting carts offer demo inventory in the 43" to 44' finished driver length. Striking a finished club well, seeing the performance benefits, does resonate (with the player) better than simply talking about it. You could be the first in the industry to make readily available well balanced, finished 43" to 44" drivers, This would likely help your Wishon brand gain consumer recognition and sales revenues. Hope this helps.

[quote name='TomWishon' timestamp='1389629354' post='8452107']


in the end though, well beyond the design firsts, I really have had the fun of being the first person to really figure out how golf clubs do and do not perform for different golf swing characteristics - and then sharing every bit of what I learn in my books and on forums like this. So the next time you want to label someone as not using their knowledge to create sensible products which best match their story - think a little more first before you make such a statement.

TOM
[/quote]
[/quote]

If you know anything about Tom and his company you would know instead of adding weight ports (which you need like 20grams to do anything to move COG) Wishon has a hosel that can open and close by bending, fitted to the player based on his need. Also this can be done by not manipulating loft of driver. Which right now, no OEM offers OTR or in their fittings.

[TomWishon]

[quote name='Mr Fade' timestamp='1389642395' post='8453351']

Just a question here please Tom, you say that the only player who can benefit from a long driver (45.5-46") is one with a smooth transition, great skills etc. Which player type would benefit from a short driver (43-44") but with a light swing weight? Most golfers seem to use heavy heads and heavier shafts when building a shorter driver. My 44" experiment ended up at C3.5 because of a light head and shaft and regular grip weight. What category of golfer would fit to that driver, in theory of course. Many thanks in advance, always enjoying EVERY post you make!
[/quote]

In theory, that would be a golfer with a relatively smooth transition and downswing accleration who has more of an over the top outside in path tendency, possibly also with a little more upright swing plane, probably with a clubhead speed not much over 85-90mph.

But here's the kicker on this which is REALLY IMPORTANT TO UNDERSTAND.

You refer to a swingweight of C3-C4 as being a very light swingweight, conveying the thought that you would not feel the presence of the head very much at all. C3-C4 at 45" length most definitely would be a VERY head LIGHT feel during the swing. But C3-C4 at 43" is in NO WAY anywhere near to as much of a head light feeling as it would be for a longer length.

This right here is the downside of the current swingweight scale. Golfers who hear the term "SCALE" want to automatically think that the swingweight scale is just like a weight scale that measures ounces, grams, pounds, kilos, etc. Meaning that the golfers want to think that any swingweight measurement means a specific amount of head feel in the club no matter what. Golfers want to think that if they had a 45" driver with a 55g shaft and 55g grip at D2, that would be the same swing feel as a 43" driver with a 75g shaft and 45g grip at D2. And it is NOT that way because of the fact that the swingweight scale is NOT AN ABSOLUTE WEIGHT MEASUREMENT SCALE.

Think of it this way. C4 at 43" becomes D0 if you do nothing more than to lengthen the club by one inch to be 44". And it becomes D6 if you lengthen it to 45". Now the length does affect this feel for sure. So you cannot say that your C4 at 43 has the same head feel as the D6 would at 45". But you can definitely say that C4 at 43" is a heckuva lot more headweight feel than C4 would be at 44" or 45" or any other longer length than 43".

So in reality, you are not really playing with that light of a swingweight at the 43" length, when you understand this matter that swingweight is not like grams or ounces or pounds. 10 lbs of feathers is still the same heft feel when you lift it up as 10 lbs of lead. But C4 (or any other swingweight) at 43" is NOT the same heft feel as C4 at any other length.

This happens to be an area where MOI matching of clubs as an alternative to swingweight matching can step in to be much more of that "this is my actual weight feel measurement" for any combination of lengths, shaft weights, grip weights, headweights.

TOM

[Fourmyle of Ceres]

Finally, someone (TOM) has laid it all out clearly. I've been babbling on for months trying to get that idea across, to zero success.

The reason all of this has always seem crystal clear to me is probably because I am soooo this golfer, as he describes.

[quote]In theory, that would be a golfer with a relatively smooth transition and downswing accleration who has more of an over the top outside in path tendency, possibly also with a little more upright swing plane, probably with a clubhead speed not much over 85-90mph.[/quote]

I can swing 90-91mph if I sit there banging 30-40 balls into a net with the driver. On the golf course I suspect I make a lot of 85mph-ish swings. Pretty upright, no lag/release to speak of. But about the over-the-top thing...

If I swing a 46" driver I'll just drag it OTT. But if I swing a 46" driver that's had 2" hacked off and 15g of lead tape applied I will swing it even more OTT. The shorter length buys me some leverage to really give it a good yank.

But give me a driver that's around 44-1/2" but weighs no more than 310g or so (with a standard grip) and it's like magic. I smooth out the beginning of the downswing, let the club drop into a good path and make a decidedly in-to-out swing. I've seen it on video. Amazing for a lifetime OTT swinger. Now I still tend to hold on and hit the odd push here or there but I'll also hit some high draws.

For years I was shortening drivers then weighting them up to D1, D2, whatever. Couldn't understand why going shorter just made me pull the ball more solidly. Once I tried a driver that was shorter but NOT reweighted up to 330g+ it was a revelation. In fact I'd imagine I could swing a 310g 43-1/2" driver real well if such a thing were in my hands. But 44-1/2" at 310g is working great.

[J_Tizzle]

I'm not building anything because of an article, however, I've been playing a 45" driver that I grip down on about 1" (I've always done that). I struggled with drivers of this length until I got a heavier shaft. I had been playing the 50g Miyazaki's but put a 70g (75g actual weight) Aldila NL in play and my consistency has improved greatly and I'm planning to make a G20 this spring with the same approach (probably looking at a 75-85g V2 as it is one of my all time favorite shafts between 44" - 45").

I'm looking forward to going back and reading Tom's posts.

[SeekonkHolen1]

[quote name='square' timestamp='1389636018' post='8452727']
Congratulations on your design firsts, participation on industry panels, authored books and papers etc...
However, as far as your current driver offerings, i don't believe the 2 current Wishon Golf models do a good job of supporting your "shorter driver length is better" fit story. Specifically, you could use at least one model in the 400 to 430 CC size range. And , on that design include 3 or 4 screw weight ports. That is my suggestion to you, which you have repeatedly refuted. It's your business and you can run it as you see fit, but please don't accuse me of not having "thought" about my suggestions before proferring them.
Furthermore, another suggestion I have, albeit unsolicited, is to create some finished driver club demonstration inventory. If you like 44" length and 11* loft then assemble some new Wishon Golf 415 driver heads with a couple of different shaft weights, for example one 70 gram, and one 80 gram, and distribute that demo inventory to some of your highest volume accounts. Let those fitters easily put your "fit story" into players hands. As far as I know none of the major branded OEM fitting carts offer demo inventory in the 43" to 44' finished driver length. Striking a finished club well, seeing the performance benefits, does resonate (with the player) better than simply talking about it. You could be the first in the industry to make readily available well balanced, finished 43" to 44" drivers, This would likely help your Wishon brand gain consumer recognition and sales revenues. Hope this helps.

[quote name='TomWishon' timestamp='1389629354' post='8452107']
in the end though, well beyond the design firsts, I really have had the fun of being the first person to really figure out how golf clubs do and do not perform for different golf swing characteristics - and then sharing every bit of what I learn in my books and on forums like this. So the next time you want to label someone as not using their knowledge to create sensible products which best match their story - think a little more first before you make such a statement.

TOM
[/quote]
[/quote]

Square,

While I can appreciate your point of view, I'm not sure that the tone that you are choosing to convey your thoughts are helping you plead your case. In fact, I would say your replies make you sound kind of like a ...

[Mr Fade]

[quote name='TomWishon' timestamp='1389643327' post='8453435']
[quote name='Mr Fade' timestamp='1389642395' post='8453351']
Just a question here please Tom, you say that the only player who can benefit from a long driver (45.5-46") is one with a smooth transition, great skills etc. Which player type would benefit from a short driver (43-44") but with a light swing weight? Most golfers seem to use heavy heads and heavier shafts when building a shorter driver. My 44" experiment ended up at C3.5 because of a light head and shaft and regular grip weight. What category of golfer would fit to that driver, in theory of course. Many thanks in advance, always enjoying EVERY post you make!
[/quote]

In theory, that would be a golfer with a relatively smooth transition and downswing accleration who has more of an over the top outside in path tendency, possibly also with a little more upright swing plane, probably with a clubhead speed not much over 85-90mph.

But here's the kicker on this which is REALLY IMPORTANT TO UNDERSTAND.

You refer to a swingweight of C3-C4 as being a very light swingweight, conveying the thought that you would not feel the presence of the head very much at all. C3-C4 at 45" length most definitely would be a VERY head LIGHT feel during the swing. But C3-C4 at 43" is in NO WAY anywhere near to as much of a head light feeling as it would be for a longer length.

This right here is the downside of the current swingweight scale. Golfers who hear the term "SCALE" want to automatically think that the swingweight scale is just like a weight scale that measures ounces, grams, pounds, kilos, etc. Meaning that the golfers want to think that any swingweight measurement means a specific amount of head feel in the club no matter what. Golfers want to think that if they had a 45" driver with a 55g shaft and 55g grip at D2, that would be the same swing feel as a 43" driver with a 75g shaft and 45g grip at D2. And it is NOT that way because of the fact that the swingweight scale is NOT AN ABSOLUTE WEIGHT MEASUREMENT SCALE.

Think of it this way. C4 at 43" becomes D0 if you do nothing more than to lengthen the club by one inch to be 44". And it becomes D6 if you lengthen it to 45". Now the length does affect this feel for sure. So you cannot say that your C4 at 43 has the same head feel as the D6 would at 45". But you can definitely say that C4 at 43" is a heckuva lot more headweight feel than C4 would be at 44" or 45" or any other longer length than 43".

So in reality, you are not really playing with that light of a swingweight at the 43" length, when you understand this matter that swingweight is not like grams or ounces or pounds. 10 lbs of feathers is still the same heft feel when you lift it up as 10 lbs of lead. But C4 (or any other swingweight) at 43" is NOT the same heft feel as C4 at any other length.

This happens to be an area where MOI matching of clubs as an alternative to swingweight matching can step in to be much more of that "this is my actual weight feel measurement" for any combination of lengths, shaft weights, grip weights, headweights.

TOM
[/quote]

Many thanks Tom! Educational as always, really appreciated! I am used to my custom fitted driver, 45.25" 312g at D1. According to your post, my experiment, 44" 301g at C3.5 (give or take because of my limited ability to do the sw math) might have a head weight feel pretty similar to my regular driver?

Unfortunately, I have a wide inside out swing, a bit Matt Kuchar like, with a 95-100 mph. The experiment might not turn out perfect then… still, I really like a lighter feel. Not sure the results will be better and the transition and tempo might get totally out of hand, but thats what experiments are for!

Thanks Tom! Still enjoying my 560mc irons, going on year 5 with them! Oh, and the 949mc 4 wood is untouchable. No experiments there, just pure custom fitting.

[TomWishon]

[quote name='Mr Fade' timestamp='1389646859' post='8453747']

Many thanks Tom! Educational as always, really appreciated! I am used to my custom fitted driver, 45.25" 312g at D1. According to your post, my experiment, 44" 301g at C3.5 (give or take because of my limited ability to do the sw math) might have a head weight feel pretty similar to my regular driver?

Unfortunately, I have a wide inside out swing, a bit Matt Kuchar like, with a 95-100 mph. The experiment might not turn out perfect then… still, I really like a lighter feel. Not sure the results will be better and the transition and tempo might get totally out of hand, but thats what experiments are for!

Thanks Tom! Still enjoying my 560mc irons, going on year 5 with them! Oh, and the 949mc 4 wood is untouchable. No experiments there, just pure custom fitting.
[/quote]

No, this relationship between length and headweight feel and swingweight is NOT linear. It's more progressively non linear. And a bit complicated. Short answer is that if we have to talk swingweight instead of MOI, the same headweight FEEL you get at D1 on a 45.25" length would be more like C7 to C8 at a length of 44" as long as the shaft weight was the same.

Glad to hear my "boys" are still behaving in your bag! I am headed into year 7 with my 560s in my own set!! Lost about 3mph iron speed this past year (age) so I am starting to cast my eyes on the higher COR model 771's for a way to get my distance back up there and then some!! HA!

TOM

[Sean2]

Tom, what about "outliers"?

I'm 6'5" in my stocking feet with relatively short arms. When I set-up with a 44-inch driver I feel like I'm holding a hybrid with a very large head. As to fairway woods I like TM, not only because they perform, but because of the added length. Anything shorter and I feel like I'm squatting down too much. One fitter told me a 46-inch driver for me is like a 43.5 to 44.0 inch driver for most golfers.

Thank you,

Sean

[theothertwo]

I have a back-up Titleist 907D2 at 44.5", my friends say it's the best driver for me but I get bored with all my equipment so I rotate clubs.

[TomWishon]

[quote name='Sean2' timestamp='1389655836' post='8454591']
Tom, what about "outliers"?

I'm 6'5" in my stocking feet with relatively short arms. When I set-up with a 44-inch driver I feel like I'm holding a hybrid with a very large head. As to fairway woods I like TM, not only because they perform, but because of the added length. Anything shorter and I feel like I'm squatting down too much. One fitter told me a 46-inch driver for me is like a 43.5 to 44.0 inch driver for most golfers.

Thank you,

Sean
[/quote]

Comfort most certainly has to play a role in length fitting. Despite the fact longer means more difficulty in controlling the club during the transition and downswing, if you really have the feeling of being uncomfortable in the set up position with the 44" driver, then you have to go longer for comfort. Admittedly it is rare for even tall golfers to feel like they have to bend over more or crouch more with a 44" driver length because one tends to see more tall people with longer arms. But no question you cannot be forced into a situation of discomfort over the ball because that ends up bringing about more problems with swing consistency.

TOM

[Ri_Redneck]

[quote name='Sean2' timestamp='1389655836' post='8454591']
Tom, what about "outliers"?

I'm 6'5" in my stocking feet with relatively short arms. When I set-up with a 44-inch driver I feel like I'm holding a hybrid with a very large head. As to fairway woods I like TM, not only because they perform, but because of the added length. Anything shorter and I feel like I'm squatting down too much. One fitter told me a 46-inch driver for me is like a 43.5 to 44.0 inch driver for most golfers.

Thank you,

Sean
[/quote]

My Dad (74) is in the same boat and play his driver at 48", 3w at 45", 5w at 44" and his irons are +2". He never had the lies adjusted. He has a VERY slow smooth tempo though. SS I would guess is around 95mph.

[mantan]

[quote name='trhode' timestamp='1389639038' post='8453017']
[quote name='square' timestamp='1389636018' post='8452727']
Congratulations on your design firsts, participation on industry panels, authored books and papers etc...
However, as far as your current driver offerings, i don't believe the 2 current Wishon Golf models do a good job of supporting your "shorter driver length is better" fit story. Specifically, you could use at least one model in the 400 to 430 CC size range. And , on that design include 3 or 4 screw weight ports. That is my suggestion to you, which you have repeatedly refuted. It's your business and you can run it as you see fit, but please don't accuse me of not having "thought" about my suggestions before proferring them.
Furthermore, another suggestion I have, albeit unsolicited, is to create some finished driver club demonstration inventory. If you like 44" length and 11* loft then assemble some new Wishon Golf 415 driver heads with a couple of different shaft weights, for example one 70 gram, and one 80 gram, and distribute that demo inventory to some of your highest volume accounts. Let those fitters easily put your "fit story" into players hands. As far as I know none of the major branded OEM fitting carts offer demo inventory in the 43" to 44' finished driver length. Striking a finished club well, seeing the performance benefits, does resonate (with the player) better than simply talking about it. You could be the first in the industry to make readily available well balanced, finished 43" to 44" drivers, This would likely help your Wishon brand gain consumer recognition and sales revenues. Hope this helps.

[quote name='TomWishon' timestamp='1389629354' post='8452107']
in the end though, well beyond the design firsts, I really have had the fun of being the first person to really figure out how golf clubs do and do not perform for different golf swing characteristics - and then sharing every bit of what I learn in my books and on forums like this. So the next time you want to label someone as not using their knowledge to create sensible products which best match their story - think a little more first before you make such a statement.

TOM
[/quote]
[/quote]

Again, you are severely mis-informed. MOST Wishon fitters, including myself, are already able to fit and demo clubs at variable lengths, weights, MOI's, face angles and lofts.
[/quote]

If only it was that easy to find a good fitter. I live the the 4th biggest metro area in the country and they are scarce.

The 560MC irons and 949MC 4-wood were two of the all time best golf purchases I ever made. I regret selling them both to this day. But until it gets easier to purchase them, they will just be fond memories.

[farmer]

OT, but Wishon makes FW's with no bulge, so they are the same loft top to bottom. Why not drivers with the same tech? NOT CRITICIZING, just curious.

[Cwebb]

[quote name='Sean2' timestamp='1389655836' post='8454591']
Tom, what about "outliers"?

I'm 6'5" in my stocking feet with relatively short arms. When I set-up with a 44-inch driver I feel like I'm holding a hybrid with a very large head. As to fairway woods I like TM, not only because they perform, but because of the added length. Anything shorter and I feel like I'm squatting down too much. One fitter told me a 46-inch driver for me is like a 43.5 to 44.0 inch driver for most golfers.

Thank you,

Sean
[/quote]

A lot of it can be "optical illusion" and feel, based on what we're used to. Many of us are used to long length drivers, because that's what is 'stock',...so we handle and demo a lot of that length.

Much of this can be overcome in a relatively short time with fitting, improved results, and a little bit of time to get used to looking at and feeling something new and different

Anybody can use 43-44" club, if it's fit right, without having to squat down or use a different posture. Doesn't mean it's the best length for you. Have to test to find out

[neilc]

[quote name='farmer' timestamp='1389760308' post='8463483']
OT, but Wishon makes FW's with no bulge, so they are the same loft top to bottom. Why not drivers with the same tech? NOT CRITICIZING, just curious.
[/quote]

It is roll not bulge

reduced roll means the loft is almost constant

Bulge is horizontal curviture,Roll is vertical

[tommy89]

[quote name='TomWishon' timestamp='1389725602' post='8459711']
[quote name='Sean2' timestamp='1389655836' post='8454591']
Tom, what about "outliers"?

I'm 6'5" in my stocking feet with relatively short arms. When I set-up with a 44-inch driver I feel like I'm holding a hybrid with a very large head. As to fairway woods I like TM, not only because they perform, but because of the added length. Anything shorter and I feel like I'm squatting down too much. One fitter told me a 46-inch driver for me is like a 43.5 to 44.0 inch driver for most golfers.

Thank you,

Sean
[/quote]

Comfort most certainly has to play a role in length fitting. Despite the fact longer means more difficulty in controlling the club during the transition and downswing, if you really have the feeling of being uncomfortable in the set up position with the 44" driver, then you have to go longer for comfort. Admittedly it is rare for even tall golfers to feel like they have to bend over more or crouch more with a 44" driver length because one tends to see more tall people with longer arms. But no question you cannot be forced into a situation of discomfort over the ball because that ends up bringing about more problems with swing consistency.

TOM
[/quote]

This is me. I'm 6'2" with monkey arms and anything but 44.5" or less feels so wrong. I like to get everything close and tight. I'm just not comfortable swinging with what feels like it should be used for doing pole vault.

[trhode]

[quote name='mantan' timestamp='1389747564' post='8461905']
[quote name='trhode' timestamp='1389639038' post='8453017']
[quote name='square' timestamp='1389636018' post='8452727']
Congratulations on your design firsts, participation on industry panels, authored books and papers etc...
However, as far as your current driver offerings, i don't believe the 2 current Wishon Golf models do a good job of supporting your "shorter driver length is better" fit story. Specifically, you could use at least one model in the 400 to 430 CC size range. And , on that design include 3 or 4 screw weight ports. That is my suggestion to you, which you have repeatedly refuted. It's your business and you can run it as you see fit, but please don't accuse me of not having "thought" about my suggestions before proferring them.
Furthermore, another suggestion I have, albeit unsolicited, is to create some finished driver club demonstration inventory. If you like 44" length and 11* loft then assemble some new Wishon Golf 415 driver heads with a couple of different shaft weights, for example one 70 gram, and one 80 gram, and distribute that demo inventory to some of your highest volume accounts. Let those fitters easily put your "fit story" into players hands. As far as I know none of the major branded OEM fitting carts offer demo inventory in the 43" to 44' finished driver length. Striking a finished club well, seeing the performance benefits, does resonate (with the player) better than simply talking about it. You could be the first in the industry to make readily available well balanced, finished 43" to 44" drivers, This would likely help your Wishon brand gain consumer recognition and sales revenues. Hope this helps.

[quote name='TomWishon' timestamp='1389629354' post='8452107']
in the end though, well beyond the design firsts, I really have had the fun of being the first person to really figure out how golf clubs do and do not perform for different golf swing characteristics - and then sharing every bit of what I learn in my books and on forums like this. So the next time you want to label someone as not using their knowledge to create sensible products which best match their story - think a little more first before you make such a statement.

TOM
[/quote]
[/quote]

Again, you are severely mis-informed. MOST Wishon fitters, including myself, are already able to fit and demo clubs at variable lengths, weights, MOI's, face angles and lofts.
[/quote]

If only it was that easy to find a good fitter. I live the the 4th biggest metro area in the country and they are scarce.

The 560MC irons and 949MC 4-wood were two of the all time best golf purchases I ever made. I regret selling them both to this day. But until it gets easier to purchase them, they will just be fond memories.
[/quote]

You don't have to be a club builder to purchase Wishon products. Just call them.

[TomWishon]

[quote name='neilc' timestamp='1389770830' post='8464003']

OT, but Wishon makes FW's with no bulge, so they are the same loft top to bottom. Why not drivers with the same tech? NOT CRITICIZING, just curious.

[/quote]

Because it doesn't work. Been there tried it in prototypes as I was experimenting with roll variations back in 2003-2004. You can greatly REDUCE the roll radius on drivers and from that make the ball flight be more consistent, but you cannot eliminate it entirely to make a vertically flat roll.

The reason is because of the much taller face height of drivers vs for fwys and hybrids, coupled with the fact the CG is much farther back from the face in the driver. The vertical gear effect on a driver is a LOT greater than on smaller fwys and hybrids. It just so happens if you make a vertically flat driver, hitting the ball high on the face just makes the ball flight dive down more and kills the potential carry.

What I've found in my continued work on this over the years is that a vertically flat fwy and hybrid is totally fine and works very well to make ball flight shape more consistent up and down the face, but with a driver you need to have at least a 20" to 24" vertical roll radius to keep the ball flight good, but then to kick in to make the ball flight more consistent up and down the face. And a 20" roll is a LOT different in terms of its effect on loft at the top and bottom of the face than the usual 10" roll that so many of the other companies continue to use year after year on their drivers.

It's not a HUGE, Oh My GAWD difference but it is a difference that better players over a few weeks of play will notice in terms of "hmm, I sure feel good about how consistent my ball flight shape is with the driver." That sort of thing.

TOM

[TomWishon]

[quote name='mantan' timestamp='1389747564' post='8461905']

If only it was that easy to find a good fitter. I live the the 4th biggest metro area in the country and they are scarce.

The 560MC irons and 949MC 4-wood were two of the all time best golf purchases I ever made. I regret selling them both to this day. But until it gets easier to purchase them, they will just be fond memories.
[/quote]

Are you talking about DALLAS/FT WORTH? There are a few pretty darn good clubfitters there that I know personally. Let me know what area of the metroplex you live in and I would be glad to look and see who I know might be closer to your area.

TOM

[Sean2]

[quote name='TomWishon' timestamp='1389725602' post='8459711']
[quote name='Sean2' timestamp='1389655836' post='8454591']
Tom, what about "outliers"?

I'm 6'5" in my stocking feet with relatively short arms. When I set-up with a 44-inch driver I feel like I'm holding a hybrid with a very large head. As to fairway woods I like TM, not only because they perform, but because of the added length. Anything shorter and I feel like I'm squatting down too much. One fitter told me a 46-inch driver for me is like a 43.5 to 44.0 inch driver for most golfers.

Thank you,

Sean
[/quote]

Comfort most certainly has to play a role in length fitting. Despite the fact longer means more difficulty in controlling the club during the transition and downswing, if you really have the feeling of being uncomfortable in the set up position with the 44" driver, then you have to go longer for comfort. Admittedly it is rare for even tall golfers to feel like they have to bend over more or crouch more with a 44" driver length because one tends to see more tall people with longer arms. But no question you cannot be forced into a situation of discomfort over the ball because that ends up bringing about more problems with swing consistency.

TOM
[/quote]

Thanks for your reply. It gives me a bit of piece of mind as I don't want to try to "force" myself into something I really am not comfortable with. I've tried "shorter" fairway woods, and I've gripped down to 44-inches with a driver. Everything just feels way out of whack.

Thanks again Tom. :-)