Frequency chart-Free. Give it about a minute to download.
frequency chart
Printable View
Frequency chart-Free. Give it about a minute to download.
frequency chart
I have it downloaded, but do not understand what it does?
Just gives you a ball park figure for different flexes. For example 297 cpms at 39 inches woulb be real close to a regular flex. It won't be much use if you don't a frequency meter with a 5 inch clamp. In the industry all frequency matched sets go up by about 4 cpms per club. The set you are contemplating would have 297 across the set.
The "industry" would then say that Robert's 297 cpm set and my 301's are NOT matched.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chieflongtee
So sets that all have the same frequency are mismatched and sets that are all different in frequency are all matched.
Is that like saying that a 45" driver cut at 265 cpm's with a REGULAR shaft, another at 265 with a STIFF shaft and a third at 265 with an EXTRA STIFF shaft, are all mismatched because the labels are different? Crazy world we live in.
Robert. Did you click on the 2nd tab at the bottom.?
yes, if I understand it, an A-Flex driver at 43" would have a cpm of 247.5, an A-Flex 5-iron at 38" would have a cpm of 285, right?
Right on the money Robert.
The chart above has a frequency difference between flexes of 20 cpm's. I use a chart where the difference is 11 or 12 cpms. If both of these charts were to start (L flex) at the same frequency for the same given length, then the "X flex would be 32 to 36 cpm's higher on one over the other.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chieflongtee
Regardless, in the evolutuon of shaft fitting, we have learned that if three golfers arrive at the ball at 100 mph, that each of the three needs a shaft of a different flex, because of how they swing. A fast transition needs a much stiffer butt flex, a 'pause at the top golfer' needs a much more flexible butt frequency, and the other somewhere in between. And this does not even consider their release position which will strongly influence the tip section frequency, but is not even considered in a frequency chart.
While this idea in now being popularized and recommended by Tom Wishon, it was first introduced to us more than a decade ago by Howard Butler of True Temper, at a club makers symposium in Toronto, when he launched his Determinator device.
The other thing to consider is that the force most golfers apply at the start of the downswing, is the same for all clubs, therefore, should the butt stiffness not be the same for all clubs? The extra weight of the shorter irons is balanced by their shorter length. Obviously, one can see why I am an advocate of single frequency clubs. Single frequency clubs eliminate the huge differences in what is classified as an "R" or and "S" flex.
I have two sets of irons, one made with "R" flex shafts and one made with "S" flex shafts, and yet all have a butt frequency of 301 cpms. So what flex do I play? My clubs are truly frequency matched, while other frequency matched sets are matched, mismatched sets.
[quote=BC MIST;150254]That is why the PCS have the EQUALIZER system.Quote:
The chart above has a frequency difference between flexes of 20 cpm's. I use a chart where the difference is 11 or 12 cpms. If both of these charts were to start (L flex) at the same frequency for the same given length, then the "X flex would be 32 to 36 cpm's higher on one over the other
Do all clubs bend at the same point in a single frequency matched set?Quote:
The other thing to consider is that the force most golfers apply at the start of the downswing, is the same for all clubs, therefore, should the butt stiffness not be the same for all clubs? The extra weight of the shorter irons is balanced by their shorter length. Obviously, one can see why I am an advocate of single frequency clubs. Single frequency clubs eliminate the huge differences in what is classified as an "R" or and "S" flex.
quote]Quote:
I have two sets of irons, one made with "R" flex shafts and one made with "S" flex shafts, and yet all have a butt frequency of 301 cpms. So what flex do I play? My clubs are truly frequency matched, while other frequency matched sets are matched, mismatched sets.[/
Ever tried a lower frequency on long irons?
I don't know. Do all clubs bend at the same point in a sloped set?Quote:
Originally Posted by Chieflongtee
No. My 301 cpm, 39.2" 4 iron plays in the "R" flex range on the Kaufman chart. I have tried softer drivers while experimenting, but not irons. Why should I go lower?Quote:
Originally Posted by Chieflongtee
Cause your driver is in the 260's
One company claims that their shafts doQuote:
Originally Posted by BC MIST
Curvature matched
Does Wishon's software provide profile on steel shafts?
The frequencies that I use are based on being tested at Swing Sync and converting Eric's 3" clamp results to my 5" clamp.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chieflongtee
The irons were fairly soft, giving me the feel that I like. His recommendation for the woods was obviously stiffer, relatively speaking. More in the "stiff" range.
I still don't understand your "Cause your driver is in the 260's." Are you suggesting that the woods and the irons should have the same frequency? Even SFM clubs don't do that.
Rifle blanks and some True Temper shafts.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chieflongtee
If only April can come around:-) Now Wishon and others treat woods and irons as 2 different animals. My take on the 260 cpms driver was only to raise concerns/questions . Let's assume that you have a modern set of irons at 301 and that it is the perfect frequency for you(although who is to say that 301 is better for you than 296)Your length spread is 3 inches from the longest iron to the shortest(from 36 to 39) . Then for some unknown reason you pick a set of woods with a frequency 4 flexes lower than your irons. Where is the logic in that may I ask? And since we are on the topic I think too little is said about what goes on behind the scene(i.e your thoughts on the golf course) .In the end it all comes down to chipping and putting and I have never heard anyone talking about putter frequency nor chipping frequency. As we know the shaft is flexed very little when chipping. Food for thought.Quote:
Originally Posted by BC MIST
Lyle. See Dave T's take on frequency. It is only an opinion. Whatever works for the golfer is my take but nothing is set in stone.
flatline
Andre and Lyle, you have some fascinating conversations, I must say! I would just love to sit with the two of you over a beer, and talk club making...
I have really enjoyed the DaveT quotes.
Don't need a freezer in Calgary:) what else are going to do in the winter time?:lmfaoQuote:
Originally Posted by rhh7
Do you have a link to Dave's opinions?Quote:
Originally Posted by Chieflongtee
I failed to mention above that the 260 cpm driver recommendation was based on a 3" clamp. I try to make my drivers in the high 240 cpm ranges at 46".
Actually, it was Eric Cook at Swing Sync who made this recommendation. and I simple converted the numbers to my FA.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chieflongtee
Somewhere there is a logical explanation as to why woods have a lower frequency than the irons and if I find it I will pass it on. Keep in mind that just because it is logical does not mean that it is correct.
I agree that what/how a golfer thinks on the golf course greatly determines his scoring outcome. Being a Clear key advocate (non golf thought thinking) versus swing key thinking, I have experienced the huge benefit and am completely convinced that conscious golf thoughts while playing, ruin scores. Chipping and putting greatly determine scores as over 60% of the game is inside 100 yards and on the putting green. The frequency of the short irons may seem unimportant when it comes down to less than 100 yard shots. However, as I prefer contact feedback from my clubs, I prefer more flexible shafts. With my current swing speed the scholars would recommend STIFF shafts for me, but with the single frequency matched clubs that I have the short irons are quite flexible giving me the feel that I like. My more flexible than normal clubs don’t miss shots, I do.
Ironically, Eric Cook does frequency match putters and I can see perhaps why. A slow, smooth stroke golfer would likely prefer a softer tipped putter shaft while hitter type stroke (short and fast) would likely like a stiffer tipped shaft. I am not sure how much this would affect club face position, however, if you are an Utely, screen door advocate, it may be something that should be considered, as the putter face definitely opens and closes relative to the line. For those of us who employ and Pelz, straight back and straight through stroke, the stiffness of the shaft cannot affect the club face position, only the feel.
I still say, “Find a head that looks good, a shaft and a grip/grip size that feels good, and take lessons (from someone who teaches a simple, fundamentally correct swing, versus one that looks like your favourite a TV pro, unless it is Trevor Immelman.)
Thanks for the lnk.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chieflongtee
a. He never did answer your question.
b. He dismissed Eric's research without knowing anything about it or him.
Following is a couple of back and forths between Tom Wishon and I about this very subject.
Tom,
I would like to know why golf clubs have traditionally been butt frequency matched on a constant slope of about 4 cpm's per club. This same question that I posted on another forum yielded answers of enhanced feel and consistency, softer short irons would have a higher trajectory, and clubs get stiffer to make the swingweights match. In my simple, non-scientific mind, a softer short iron shaft would enhance feel, more than a stiffer one.
I built a set of 550 C's and M's last spring that all had the same butt frequency. I averaged just over 14 GIR on our 6400 yard course indicating good consistency and would label this set the best I have ever had. Why? The feel of the short irons was wonderful. Was it the softer shaft or the forged head? I have asked this question to some local clubmakers and they look at me like i have just asked the dumbest question ever, but none of them can give me a satisfactory answer.
It would seem to me that if the time from the top of the backswing to impact is constant from club to club, that having all clubs the same frequency would be best.
In town, we have Eric Cook from Swing Sync,(Iso Vibe Inc.) who has been building single frequency, MOI matched clubs for over 20 years. This concept flies in the face of the traditional slope, so are there any reasons, related to physics, as to why single frequency is inferior?
SHADOW:
When it comes to offering variations in any of the assembly specifications of a shaft, there is no right or wrong, there is only the perception of the golfer as to whether they think it is right or wrong FOR THEM.
There is no question that much of what we have in the area of shaft to shaft relationships within a set is handed down from "tradition". Tradition has said that as long as all clubs in the set are going to be a different progressive length and built to a similar swingweight, that means the headweights have to increase progressively as well from low to high loft to do that. Thus someone along the line decided that the shafts should be trimmed progressively as well, so that ONE measurement of the shafts' stiffness will progress as well.
Over the years, this is what golfers have gotten used to in terms of the bending feel of each individual club compared to the other. Now, it is also a fact that probably 90%+ of the golfers have NO CONCEPT of what the bending feel "FEELS LIKE" in irons especially. So for any of these golfers, altering the progression of shaft stiffness may or may not get them to a point where they notice anything - for some it may open up a whole new world of feeling in the club and that might be positive for them, and from that give them a new sense of rhythm and timing that makes them more consistent.
On the other hand, for other golfers that change in the bending feel might bring with it a loss of confidence just simply because it is "different". At the end of the day, each clubmaker has to develop his/her own sense of these things so that they can decide if and when they might wish to try this for a golfer. In my personal experience I have found that single frequency iron shaft fitting is something that won;t cause a negative response from higher to semi-low handicap players, if you allow me to generalize on swing mechanics by handicap. The players I have found who tend not to like it seem more to be those with a more aggressive tempo, more aggressive back to downswing transition and a much later release of the wrist-cock on the downswing. These players also tend to have a little more capability to FEEL the shaft in the swing - and for them, I have found more often than not that they start to associate a lack of control with the feeling of more bending in the shorter shafts in the iron set.
So in the end, don;t approach this as a right or wrong thing - look at the golfer and their swing type and make the decision from there.
TOM
Thank you for your thorough answer.
The norm that I use when assembling clubs is that a rapid acceleration from the top type golfer gets the traditional 4 cpm or so difference between clubs, whereas, with smooth swingers, I will decrease the difference. Many of the latter have expressed that they enjoy the softer feel of the short irons, but maybe it's all in their head.
Interestingly, I reshafted irons for two of my golfing partners, both extremely long hitters, (115 to 120 mph driver ss) with handicaps of 1 and +1. For the one who has a very fast acceleration from the top and tremendous lag, the difference between clubs was 5 cpm's, while with the other, the longer hitter of the two, who has an Ernie Els smooth type swing, I made all the frequencies the same, at his request. Both love the clubs and both feel that they are more accurate now than with the stock shafts that were in the off the rack clubs(Hogans, Titleists) that they bought. The latter golfer had had previous experience with single frequency matched shafts and liked soft short irons, while the former like his short irons with "no wiggle in them."
Shadow:
it sounds from your post here that you have a pretty good common sense awareness of when to and when possibly not to do this in your shaft installation. Sounds good to me then!!
TOM
Thanks Lyle. You don't need to convince me. I have played both and I like the feel of the flatline better.
Thanks to Lyle and Andre, your posts have done so much to educate me.
For my new set of irons, I wanted to be close to a flatline frequency, but concluded that my lag and acceleration might be a problem. So what I did was to cut the shaft manufacturer's recommendation in half.
For the 5 iron the tip trim chart called for 2.0 inches, I trimmed 1.0 inches. The chart called for each shorter club to have an additional tip trim of 0.5 inches, I used an additional 0.25 inches.
I am also going to MOI match them as closely as I can.
Do the #'s and flex assume grip on or grip off?Quote:
Originally Posted by Chieflongtee
grip off with 5" clamp, 5 iron head weighs 256 grams, frequency was 311 cpm's, which equates to about a 5.3 flex at 37.50 inches