Modern clubhead - LynnBlakeGolf Forums

Modern clubhead

The Bag Room

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 10-07-2010, 10:53 AM
HungryBear HungryBear is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 759
Modern clubhead
The old science designed a club head for less wind resistance.
The promotion of Hogan "speed slot" was an example of the theory of the day.
Todays heads are very large with expansive face area. Would seem to hold "lots" of wind.
What are the facts and the Numbers that support them?

The "old" British ball was 1.62 in min. diameter standard.
They are now 1.68 min?(I think).
I recall palmer getting 25-30 yards more carry with the driver in The Open. (With Persimmon I will note.)
When did the standard change?

The Bear

Last edited by HungryBear : 10-07-2010 at 10:57 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 10-07-2010, 12:16 PM
jkpassage's Avatar
jkpassage jkpassage is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Noblesville, Indiana
Posts: 14
Along with Bear's questions, I would also be curious if anyone can uphold or debunk the claims of Jack Hamm with the "old" Hammer driver and his new Hammer X? The infomercials seems to claim that his drivers not only produce less wind resistance, but also can pick up speed in the down swing? Hot air or truth?
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 10-07-2010, 08:27 PM
JerryG JerryG is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Lake Elmo, MN
Posts: 597
Originally Posted by jkpassage View Post
Along with Bear's questions, I would also be curious if anyone can uphold or debunk the claims of Jack Hamm with the "old" Hammer driver and his new Hammer X? The infomercials seems to claim that his drivers not only produce less wind resistance, but also can pick up speed in the down swing? Hot air or truth?

I believe way too much marketing is designed to sell product rather than reveal truths. When viewing these ads, one needs to have a good crap detector.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 10-07-2010, 09:25 PM
innercityteacher's Avatar
innercityteacher innercityteacher is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 1,900
Speaking of drivers...
Originally Posted by JerryG View Post
I believe way too much marketing is designed to sell product rather than reveal truths. When viewing these ads, one needs to have a good crap detector.
I had a very weird driver filled with cork! It was like hitting a marshmallow! And the ball seemed to sink into the club forever.

Getting back to the bigger and faster question, I'm not a physics guy, but I did buy a used Adams Speedline driver for $80 at Golfsmith.

Regular flex, 9.5 degree, and it has given me a little more carry (10 yards) and more roll (10 yards) when swinging.

But I know this old guy in MN, Jerry, he bought a Titlist driver and he payed $$$$ for it and he hits the crud out of it while hitting! He is a stud! And he has nice friends and a great family. His golf guy, Kevin is very good, too.



YBGF
__________________
HP, grant me the serenity to accept what I cannot change, the courage to change what I can, and the wisdom to know the difference. Progress and not perfection is the goal every day!
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 10-07-2010, 10:36 PM
O.B.Left O.B.Left is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 3,433
Originally Posted by HungryBear View Post
The old science designed a club head for less wind resistance.
The promotion of Hogan "speed slot" was an example of the theory of the day.
Todays heads are very large with expansive face area. Would seem to hold "lots" of wind.
What are the facts and the Numbers that support them?

The "old" British ball was 1.62 in min. diameter standard.
They are now 1.68 min?(I think).
I recall palmer getting 25-30 yards more carry with the driver in The Open. (With Persimmon I will note.)
When did the standard change?

The Bear
I remember the old British ball , yes it went further but it also cut through the wind, which might have been its chief advantage..........A friend of mine swore they putted better but I dont know about that, maybe.

I say we all go back to them. Golf would be easier.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 10-08-2010, 12:50 AM
cometgolfer cometgolfer is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 309
I think there's something to the head size thing. I'm under the impression that some manufacturers are scaling back to a head closer to 400 cc's due to the wind resistance "issue". I don't have the numbers but it makes some sense.

Personally I can't stand the modern drivers and continue to use a 385cc head size. Monster heads and light shafts produce way too much "downstroke blackout" but all the big equipment manufacturers continue to convince the golfing public that they can provide a bigger sweetspot if you're willing to part with 400 large. When will people realize that a sweetspot is just that.... a spot, and it's NOT the size of a quarter as some advertisements profess.

cg
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:44 PM.


Design by Vjacheslav Trushkin, color scheme by ColorizeIt!.