My fitting story

[mr3856a]

Well, I've been meaning to write this post for a few days now, I just haven't gotten around to it. After having had my iron shafts fitted about a month ago and my driver shaft and hybrid shafts fitted (and my 3-wood shaft aligned) this past week, I can say this unequivocally to any of you who are more than just completely casual golfers: getting fitted is the best thing you can do for your game.

There is a shop here in North Myrtle called Bogeys to Birdies, and several months ago I had Al, the main fitter there, adjust my lofts and lies (I play forged clubs, and hadn't had them checked in 3 years, plus I had never had my wedges bent even though the rest of my irons were 2 up - not real smart). The lie adjustment, particularly in the wedges, made a HUGE difference, and after hearing several of my playing buddies down here rave about having his iron shafts fitted, I decided to go for it about a month ago.

So, I went in for the fitting for the shafts. He had me hit several 7 irons, which if I remember correctly I was swinging at about 85-87 mph. I told Al that I hit a lot of high, floaty fades with no pop as well as pulls, and that I couldn't get my 4-iron off the ground anymore. After I hit a few, he took the club over to the frequency machine (as you can tell, I'm about as mechanically-inclined as my dog, I have no idea what the thing is really called), and Al quickly discovered the problem: my shafts, stamped as S flex's (Dynamic Gold), were actually X flexes. His little chart told him they were for someone with a 7-iron swing speed of around 94.

Slight problem.

He told me that DG's have so much variance in them, if you want to get 10 shafts of the exact same frequency (stiffness), you have to order 100 of them. He recommended Rifle Lite 5.5's. Because I am 3/4's of an inch over, he said a standard weight shaft is much too heavy. He said to me, "You get tired hitting a large bucket, don't you?" When I responded yes, he said, "Well, that's why - not only are they too stiff, they're too heavy."

It was quite an eye opener. I thought 5.5's were pretty weak in terms of stiffness, but he actually told me he rarely gets people strong enough to hit them. Who knows. Anyway, he frequencied out all the shafts so they were the exact same flex, and boy oh boy, what a difference. I've put in a lot of work this winter/spring with a superb teacher down here, and I know my swing has gotten a lot better, but with fitted shafts I get a pop now on my irons I never had before. Now even the bad ones aren't that bad (again, I'm sure a combination of lessons and fitting), and my irons have gotten very, very consistent.

So after that experience, about a week ago I was hitting balls with a friend, who has the same driver I have (Cleveland Launcher, though I have the comp and he has the titanium), but he has the Aldila NV stiff and I had the stock Cleveland Fujikura stiff. I thought it was pretty decent, though I would often be disappointed in the results distance-wise. For a guy with a 105 mph swing speed, I never felt like I got the results I should have. Also, I have the Aldila NV in my 3 wood, and I swear I hit the 3 wood as far as my driver at times. The driver also tended to balloon a lot in the wind.

So, hitting balls side-by-side, I was talking to my friend about the shaft. He took my club in his hands and literally started bending the shaft, and he said, "Dude, this thing is like an A-flex." I took it and compared it to his, and he was right - it was WAY whippier. So I hit his a few times and got a pop unlike anything I had ever gotten out of mine.

So back to Bogeys to Birdies, and back to Al. I had my friends' driver with my as well and my 3 wood, so we could compare all the shafts. He said the launch angle and backspin was good with my stock shaft, but the side spin was way too high - sometimes 1,800 rpm, where it should be under 300.

Next he went to put my stock shaft on the frequency machine, and the shaft was so poorly aligned he couldn't even get a reading off it! "You don't hit this very consistently, do you?" he laughed. I just shook my head. The moral of this story is, as he told me, manufacturers take a head, jam a shaft in it, and out the door it goes - no alignment, no nothing. Aside from variances in (or outright incorrectly marked) flexes, you could take 5 of the exact same drivers off the shelf and hit all 5 of them differently, because if any of them are aligned properly, it's only by accident.

So to try to bring this to an end, he put an Aldila NV in my driver, and I've picked up 20-30 yards (aside from no more blowouts to the right).

Not a bad deal.

Needless to say, the difference in having fitted clubs and off-the-rack is just unbelievable. Unless you are just lucky enough to get the right flex or a club with the shaft aligned properly, you're literally just guessing. It may be an S-flex, it may not. It may be aligned, it may not. And I guarantee you that in your iron shafts, you have a variance in flexes that would probably surprise you (ever wondered why you have a favorite iron?). Now my 4 iron performs just like my pitching wedge.

Granted, this whole ball of wax cost me round about $600, but if you are a serious, avid golfer who is intent on improving, you are foolish not to get fitted.

[Wazmankg]

$600 huh... I have no complaints with my irons. I can hit them all pretty well up though my 5. The 4 is a little iffy, but it stays in the bag over the 9 wood. No complaints with my FWs either. One thing that's troubled me is that I do not get the carry that I think I should with my driver relative to my other clubs. I hit my 7 iron 155, my 7 wood 200 off the deck and that's just taking my normal swing. But it's unusual for me to fly my driver(R5) more than 225-230. I think I may get it checked out.

[mr3856a]

Originally Posted by Wazmankg

$600 huh...

Yeah. I had to tighten the belt a little bit, but I know in the long run it's going to pay huge dividends.

I was the same way with my driver - I just wasn't getting out of it what I thought I should have. I am now

[JPsuff]

(sorry, hit the wrong key)

[JPsuff]

Originally Posted by mr3856a

Al quickly discovered the problem: my shafts, stamped as S flex's (Dynamic Gold), were actually X flexes. His little chart told him they were for someone with a 7-iron swing speed of around 94.

I'm not trying to disparage Al or take anything away from your fitting experience, but telling difference between an "S" shaft and an "X" shaft is more than just labels.

True Temper Dynamic Gold "R" and "S" flex shafts have a total of 11 steps in the shaft while True Temper Dynamic Gold "X" flex shafts have 10.

While it's entirely possible to have an "R" flex and an "S" flex misidentified because of improper labeling (even though there's more to it than that), it is impossible to mistake an "S" flex for an "X" flex just because it was mis-marked and a good clubfitter should know that.
Also the "too heavy" comment is puzzling since an X-100 shaft and an S-300 (two of the most common shafts installed) are identical in weight (both an uncut 130 grams). Interesting.

As far as matching the shafts and their alignments are concerned, I have no issues with that nor do I have any issues about his thoughts on manufacturers as well. I just found those two remarks odd is all.

Just an observation



-JP

[mr3856a]

Originally Posted by JPsuff

I'm not trying to disparage Al or take anything away from your fitting experience, but telling difference between an "S" shaft and an "X" shaft is more than just labels.

True Temper Dynamic Gold "R" and "S" flex shafts have a total of 11 steps in the shaft while True Temper Dynamic Gold "X" flex shafts have 10.

While it's entirely possible to have an "R" flex and an "S" flex misidentified because of improper labeling (even though there's more to it than that), it is impossible to mistake an "S" flex for an "X" flex just because it was mis-marked and a good clubfitter should know that.

He took the actual frequencies of the shafts; they were labeled S and on the frequency chart they came out as X-flexes. He's more clever than the average bear

Originally Posted by JPsuff

Also the "too heavy" comment is puzzling since an X-100 shaft and an S-300 (two of the most common shafts installed) are identical in weight (both an uncut 130 grams). Interesting.

Well, DG S-400's weigh 130 grams, plus they were 1/2 over, making them slightly heavier. The Rifle Lites check in at 112 grams at standard length and mine are 3/4's over. So they are 18g lighter - give or take 15% - and I certainly notice the difference.

[JPsuff]

Originally Posted by mr3856a

He took the actual frequencies of the shafts; they were labeled S and on the frequency chart they came out as X-flexes. He's more clever than the average bear

I know what you're saying, but all I'm saying is that when it comes to "S's" and "X's" the number of steps is the most obvious difference. I can buy a roll of "S-300 or S-400" labels and put them on any shaft I choose, but the shaft itself "is what it is" regardless of how it's labeled.



Well, DG S-400's weigh 130 grams, plus they were 1/2 over, making them slightly heavier. The Rifle Lites check in at 112 grams at standard length and mine are 3/4's over. So they are 18g lighter - give or take 15% - and I certainly notice the difference.

See, I'm not understanding the "slightly heavier" part. True Temper iron shafts (assuming parallel tip shafts), are all manufactured at 41 inches and and as you say an "S-400" weighs 130 grams (actually it should be 134 grams), so that means that the shaft is 41 inches and 134 grams.

That can't change.

Whether you trim them 1/2-inch longer, or 1-inch shorter or hard-step them, or soft-step them, they all start out as 41-inch-long, 134 gram shafts, so no matter how they're set up, they can't weigh more than they did when you got them.

Yes, a shaft, let's say for a 7-iron, trimmed 1/2-inch longer than standard will weigh more than the same shaft trimmed to normal length for the same club but it can't weigh more than its raw weight, so I'm not understanding how it can be "heavier".

Even your new Rifles. If they start out as 112 gram shafts, then that's as much as they can ever weigh regardless of how they're trimmed. I'm not saying that one shaft is better than another, all I'm saying is that no shaft can weigh more - once it's installed - than it did when it was purchased.

And yes, there is quite a difference in feel as well as clubhead speed when you go from a heavy shaft in the 130 gram range to a lighter shaft in the low one-teens and I would expect that you can swing them a bit faster and the fatigue-factor is reduced as well.
I was just puzzled by "Al's" comment about fatigue referring to your original shafts actually being "X's" instead of "S's" because their weights are virtually identical, so that even if you had the "correct" shafts installed, they'd weigh the same.


-JP

[mr3856a]

Originally Posted by JPsuff

See, I'm not understanding the "slightly heavier" part. True Temper iron shafts (assuming parallel tip shafts), are all manufactured at 41 inches and and as you say an "S-400" weighs 130 grams (actually it should be 134 grams), so that means that the shaft is 41 inches and 134 grams.

That can't change.

Whether you trim them 1/2-inch longer, or 1-inch shorter or hard-step them, or soft-step them, they all start out as 41-inch-long, 134 gram shafts, so no matter how they're set up, they can't weigh more than they did when you got them.

Yes, a shaft, let's say for a 7-iron, trimmed 1/2-inch longer than standard will weigh more than the same shaft trimmed to normal length for the same club but it can't weigh more than its raw weight, so I'm not understanding how it can be "heavier".

Even your new Rifles. If they start out as 112 gram shafts, then that's as much as they can ever weigh regardless of how they're trimmed. I'm not saying that one shaft is better than another, all I'm saying is that no shaft can weigh more - once it's installed - than it did when it was purchased.

And yes, there is quite a difference in feel as well as clubhead speed when you go from a heavy shaft in the 130 gram range to a lighter shaft in the low one-teens and I would expect that you can swing them a bit faster and the fatigue-factor is reduced as well.
I was just puzzled by "Al's" comment about fatigue referring to your original shafts actually being "X's" instead of "S's" because their weights are virtually identical, so that even if you had the "correct" shafts installed, they'd weigh the same.


-JP

We're getting confused here. He didn't say I was fatiguing because they frequencied out to an X and not S as marked, he said I was fatiguing because the shafts were too heavy. He said when you have a shaft that is a half-inch over, you should go with a lighter shaft, because a standard weight shaft will be too heavy with the extra length. The S-400's are by your count 22 grams heavier than the Rifle Lites. One hundred and thirty-four grams is heavier than 112 grams. I don't know what the misunderstanding is.

Originally Posted by JPsuff

Yes, a shaft, let's say for a 7-iron, trimmed 1/2-inch longer than standard will weigh more than the same shaft trimmed to normal length for the same club

That's the entire point - because the shafts are a half-inch longer than standard, they are heavier than the same shaft a half-inch shorter (and mine needed to go even longer when he fit me, which would have made them heavier still with another quarter inch added on). Therefore if you're going to have clubs that are 3/4's of an inch over standard length, you need to go with a lighter shaft, otherwise they'll be too heavy. It's like swinging a baseball bat that's too heavy for you - you get one the same length, only lighter. Problem solved.

This is why I'm a little confused, you say you don't understand the comments, yet you explain the answers perfectly.

[JPsuff]

Originally Posted by mr3856a

We're getting confused here. He didn't say I was fatiguing because they frequencied out to an X and not S as marked, he said I was fatiguing because the shafts were too heavy. He said when you have a shaft that is a half-inch over, you should go with a lighter shaft, because a standard weight shaft will be too heavy with the extra length. The S-400's are by your count 22 grams heavier than the Rifle Lites. One hundred and thirty-four grams is heavier than 112 grams. I don't know what the misunderstanding is.




That's the entire point - because the shafts are a half-inch longer than standard, they are heavier than the same shaft a half-inch shorter (and mine needed to go even longer when he fit me, which would have made them heavier still with another quarter inch added on). Therefore if you're going to have clubs that are 3/4's of an inch over standard length, you need to go with a lighter shaft, otherwise they'll be too heavy. It's like swinging a baseball bat that's too heavy for you - you get one the same length, only lighter. Problem solved.

This is why I'm a little confused, you say you don't understand the comments, yet you explain the answers perfectly.

Well, the whole heavier/lighter argument is very subjective because other factors are in play when it comes to clubweights. A longer club feels heavier because its center of gravity is moved more towards the clubhead, so that additional 1/2-inch of shaft length makes the club feel heavier unless the swingweight is adjusted to move the center of gravity back towards the grip. But the actual weight of the 1/2-inch long section of shaft only weighs about a gram or so. By comparison, a dollar bill weighs about a gram and so does a standard-issue office-style paper clip.

In fact, if you play with swingweights, you can actually make a 7-iron with a DG shaft "feel" lighter than the same clubhead fitted with a Rifle light shaft, even though the Rifle shaft weighs about 15% less than the DG shaft.

As far as the confusion goes, what "Al" said led me to believe that he was pointing out that the "X" shafts (not only being too stiff) also caused more fatigue because they were too heavy as opposed to what should have been a "S" shaft. But I can see how that entire statement can be read another way wherein "Al" is actually saying that DG shafts "in general" are too heavy, so maybe I'm misinterpreting that.



-JP

[mr3856a]

Originally Posted by JPsuff

As far as the confusion goes, what "Al" said led me to believe that he was pointing out that the "X" shafts (not only being too stiff) also caused more fatigue because they were too heavy as opposed to what should have been a "S" shaft.

Nope. He was pointing out that the shafts were too heavy, period. Regardless of this and that, the fact of the matter remains that I now have clubs 20 grams or so lighter than the ones I had before, and where I used to get tired slapping 150 balls, I don't now.

That's the be-all and the end-all of it.

[JPsuff]

Originally Posted by mr3856a

Nope. He was pointing out that the shafts were too heavy, period. Regardless of this and that, the fact of the matter remains that I now have clubs 20 grams or so lighter than the ones I had before, and where I used to get tired slapping 150 balls, I don't now.

That's the be-all and the end-all of it.

10-4


-JP

[OnePutt]

I can't see how your clubs being 1/2 inch longer would be a factor. If a 41 inch shafts weights 130 grams, that's comes to 3.17 grams per inch. Which means a club that is 1/2 inch longer is going to weigh a whole 1.585 grams more than a standard length club. I really don't believe anyone would ever notice the difference. That little ferrule at the top of the hosel will weigh about 3 grams, so 1.5 grams is nothing. What I can understand is how going to 115 gram shafts would be noticable, and could help with fatigue.

What I really dis-agree with is all this stuff about frequency meters and measuring shaft stiffness. The reason I mention this is the fact that frequency meters only measure the stiffness of the butt end of the shaft that is clamped in the meter. It doesn't measure the other 90 percent of the shaft. While it's nice to know what the butt stiffness of a shaft is, it really does'nt mean a whole lot compared to what the stiffness of the entire shaft is. A frequency meter is very handy for building a matched set of irons, when you have 10 or so clubs to build with the same model of shaft. But it does very little when it comes to measuring the stiffness of the entire shaft in a single club.

[mr3856a]

All I can tell you is, this guy builds clubs, fits, does shafts, etc. for a living. All the mini-tour players come to him (the best player on the Grand Strand Tour owns the shop), all the club pros, all the equipment junkies - Al's the guy everyone goes to.

He said it, I believe it, most strongly evidenced by the fact that I'm hitting the best iron shots of my life, and everything he mentioned about the clubs being too heavy and too stiff has turned out to be true in terms of no more blocks/pulls, I can hit my long irons again and I can hit two large buckets - 300 balls - and still go play 9 holes. I used to get tired through half a bucket.

I'll take Al's word for it.

[mr3856a]

Originally Posted by OnePutt

The reason I mention this is the fact that frequency meters only measure the stiffness of the butt end of the shaft that is clamped in the meter.

Just as a side note, I inquired about this particular point this evening, and it just plain ain't true - it's not possible to get the frequency of one part of a shaft forsaking the rest of it. The shaft has a frequency as measured by the frequency meter, and that goes for the entire length of the shaft measured.

[Bulls9999]

I'm no expert in frequency measurements, but looking at the picture below, what you say makes sense. From my intuitive reasoning, the frequency determined in this manner would likely be a combination of butt, mid-section, tip-section frequency (as these are the common different sections often referred to in shafts).

Curious, if you clamped the club in reverse, could you not get the frequency of just the butt end?....or clamp it way down toward the tip to get the tip end?

Also, would frequency be changed if tested with vs. without a grip? (if grip extends well beyond the point it is clamped)?

[img] http://www.tutelman.com/golf/measure...FM_overall.jpg [\img]

Originally Posted by mr3856a

Just as a side note, I inquired about this particular point this evening, and it just plain ain't true - it's not possible to get the frequency of one part of a shaft forsaking the rest of it. The shaft has a frequency as measured by the frequency meter, and that goes for the entire length of the shaft measured.

[JPsuff]

.


Frequency measurements are another one of those things that require another thing to go with it in order for them to have any relevance like Space / Time. (You can't have space without time, nor time without space).

Just putting a shaft in a frequency analyzer without first "spining" it is essentially pointless. I'm no big fan of spining, but it does have its merits. All metal shafts are welded together and thus have a spine and like most welded objects, the weld itself is often stronger than the material it joins and as such, the weld will be stiffer than the body of the shaft.

So it stands to reason that if you're going to measure shaft frequency, you should do so with the weld (spine) of each shaft oriented in the same position for each reading. Then those shafts need to be installed into the clubhead with the spine oriented in the same direction (whatever that may be) for each clubhead. Otherwise, the whole frequency matching idea goes out the window.



-JP

[Bulls9999]

JP...is that true of rifle shafts too, i.e., that they are welded? Just curious, as I don't know.

On non-rifle shafts, are you talking about welding the little sections to each other, the section 'steps' seen on True Temper shafts?.... because the term 'spining' sounds like the welded edge should be lengthwise down the club, like a spine.

Originally Posted by JPsuff

.

. All metal shafts are welded together and thus have a spine and like most welded objects, the weld itself is often stronger than the material it joins and as such, the weld will be stiffer than the body of the shaft.


-JP

[OnePutt]

I didn't make up what I posted on frequency meters. I asked the largest shaft maker in the world about them and the things I posted was directly from the reply I got for True Temper. I don't know who you asked, but I'm guessing it was your club maker, not from True Temper. I have also been told the exact same thing by half a dozen custom club makers. They all agree that the meter only measures the stiffness of that section of shaft that is in the clamp. If the clamp is 4 inched wide, and you have a 46 inch driver, the shaft will be about 45 inches long, with one inch or so inside the hosel. That means about 44 inches of the shaft is going to be bending. If you measure only 4 inches on the butt end, you're only measuring about 9 percent of the entire shaft. What about the other 91 percent?

Incase you still don't believe me or what I posted, I recommend you contact TT yourself and ask them. That's exactly what I did, and I'm just passing on what the TT rep sent to me in his reply. If I still have his reply on file, I'll post it so the rest of the members here can have the facts.

[OnePutt]

I just read JPsuffs post and the next one by Bulls. First thing is, all shafts will have what is referred to as a spine, not just steel shafts. And second, the spine is not the same as the weld where the sheet metal is welded together. The spine can be in an entirely different location on the shaft. And NO, steel shafts are not welded at each of the steps. The steps are just where the shaft changes to a different diameter. The only weld runs along the entire length of the shaft.