Equipment Modding Question for a Newbie

Re: Equipment Modding Question for a Newbie

Postby turn » Tue Aug 08, 2017 12:07 pm

40+ ounce clubs? This is going to be EPIC!
turn
 
Posts: 22
Joined: Wed May 07, 2014 7:33 pm

Re: Equipment Modding Question for a Newbie

Postby eth14dev » Wed Aug 09, 2017 7:18 am

Hi Lag,

Thanks for clearing up the issue. Yes, then I definitely misunderstood your pricing structure. Thanks for offering such a great price despite all the work!

Looks like I will have the funds ready to go in about 2 weeks or so, around August 24, give or take a few days. In the mean time, I will go look up what the shipping cost, for sending the apex would be from my local UPS. What address or P.O. Box should I get an estimate for? Checked the equipment price link you provided to the relevant thread and could not find an address or prefered method of payment, and was wondering what was the safest way to get the payment to you?

Thanks again for clearing up the cost issue, and also being willing to just do the set whether it be 2-PW, SW, or 1 included.
Hope you have a good day.
eth14dev
 
Posts: 38
Joined: Mon Jul 31, 2017 1:21 pm

Re: Equipment Modding Question for a Newbie

Postby eth14dev » Wed Aug 09, 2017 7:35 am

Hey Turn,

Ya preferably 40+ oz! :lol:
If possible while still maintaing the right swing weight balance. As mentioned got the idea from baseball. One thing I have learned throughout the years is there seems to be a similar trend in baseball as in golf. One could argue that the modern MLB player or Pro Golfer has better fitness and athleticism, with all there practice, sports psychologists, personal trainers, etc. However, despite the "better" conditions we have not been seeing the super ball strikers in the same level of the players of 1930-1960 in golf, nor the guys who can easily hit .300+ while hitting 30+ HR that often in the MLB anymore (of course without the use of PED's). There are some, so I not trying throw a giant overarching generalization, but in my opinion the number of players in golf and baseball that hit both for accuracy and power (when they need it) in g
eth14dev
 
Posts: 38
Joined: Mon Jul 31, 2017 1:21 pm

Re: Equipment Modding Question for a Newbie

Postby eth14dev » Wed Aug 09, 2017 9:06 am

...gone down, not because people are trying less hard, or not as dedicated (some may argue the work ethic has gone up), but rather because something about the the technique has changed and as a result the equipment was adapted to the changed technique which prompted more technique change and the equipment responded until the reasonable limit was pushed too far (in my opinion). Back in the 1900-1950 using 34-45oz bats in baseball was not uncommon, their technique allowed them. Ironically Ted Williams, is often credited to proving that a lighter bat is better, but even he used a bat that would be considered heavy today: something like 33-35oz, if memory serves me right. I think what he proved is everyone needs to have properly fitted equipment. The right weight based on the swing speed of the individual, and that is largely, in my opinion, affected by technique. A similar trend, I think has occurred in golf which in turn has changed the nature of the game. The difference being in baseball the major change has been in the bats getting shorter and lighter with thinner handles, but the bat is still a wooden bat at the MLB level. At the lower levels like little league and college the technological changes got to the point where there was such a significant gap between the performance of the composite bats and the wood bats, that they actually had to put restrictions on the equipment, which many people did not like, but I believe was a good move because it really made players rethink how they can play their best: improve technique. I think a similar issues that was seen in lower level baseball has been observed in golf minus the right amount of equipment regulations. I am not saying we should stifle the game for the weekend player, but that there is a balance to be considered.

So figured, why not use the heaviest golf clubs I can comfortably handle without a significant loss in speed (the speed also being recovered as my technique improves), and seeing as I am short and already need to and want to use clubs that are way shorter than today's standards, found out that the heavier weights are not an issue.
If I used longer, my desired club specs would be different: for example, a 40oz 42" wood will subjectively "feel" lighter than a 34oz 46" wood (when all other specs are equal), but of course swing weight will affect this "feel" too.

Also, sorry for the poor writing in the above post, I usually proof read after I get all my thoughts down, and then edit, but accidentally hit "submit" instead of preview and ran out of time to delete and repost or edit.
eth14dev
 
Posts: 38
Joined: Mon Jul 31, 2017 1:21 pm

Re: Equipment Modding Question for a Newbie

Postby k2baloo » Wed Aug 09, 2017 5:37 pm

40 ounces would be unplayable. Are you aware what 3 woods normally weigh? You're going to need to add about 26 ounces (more for modern clubs)

You'll probably hit the ball about 150 yards with that kind of club (I'm being generous). You'd be better off hitting a 7 iron 150 than a ridiculously heavy 3 wood.

Anyway, feel free to go for it, I just fail to see the logic on why that would work.
k2baloo
 
Posts: 784
Joined: Wed May 15, 2013 5:43 pm

Re: Equipment Modding Question for a Newbie

Postby LesMurray » Thu Aug 10, 2017 8:56 am

k2baloo wrote:40 ounces would be unplayable. Are you aware what 3 woods normally weigh? You're going to need to add about 26 ounces (more for modern clubs)

You'll probably hit the ball about 150 yards with that kind of club (I'm being generous). You'd be better off hitting a 7 iron 150 than a ridiculously heavy 3 wood.

Anyway, feel free to go for it, I just fail to see the logic on why that would work.


I think it would be difficult to find a shaft that wouldn't flex too much with that kind of weight. Short irons are probably no issue but anything more than a 6 iron you are probably going to have to find some kind of way to stiffen the shaft. When the best players in the world rarely hit drivers that weighed more than 15 oz. (and that was with tipped XX shafts) you are going into uncharted territory.

It takes a lot of strength to close the face on clubs that weigh just an ounce or two more than today's irons I hope you are a world-class strong man or you are going to be aiming so far left to play the push right (a la Trevino).

Interesting to see your findings.
User avatar
LesMurray
 
Posts: 1073
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 5:32 pm
Location: Burbank, CA

Re: Equipment Modding Question for a Newbie

Postby eth14dev » Thu Aug 10, 2017 1:51 pm

Hey K2 and Les,

Thanks for your thoughts. Also for your concerns. Both you guys are trying to help me make the right decisions, and I really appreciate the supportive community here at ABS.

Overall, I don't doubt that there is a chance for this to be a bad idea, but I definitely want to at least give it a go. Worst comes to worse, just make some more adjustments to the equipment to lighten it once I tried the super heavy clubs. I think that is the great advantage of tinkering, rather than just buying off the rack.

Also, as mentioned I am more concerned about lie angles and offset at this point, so I plan to deal with weighting once I get the shafts replaced with x-stiff since the shafts will need to be removed at that point, and it will make the whole endevour more streamlined, so the weight thing will be for the future.


Les,
As for how to use the clubs and work the face properly, I must admit the answer to my thinking is a very long explanation as it requires me to explain my background thoughts, which can be very technical and dry reading, so apologies for this. But, I hope you will be okay. If not you can stop reading here as I want to just express my gratitude to both of you.

I am not new to golf, fairly new to the classic swing, a newcomer to the ABS forum, and a newbie at club modification techniques as I do not have the tools or the training to work with metal. (Plus the idea of club mods was not something I thought much of until about a year ago)

I am not at this moment an official ABS student, but have a high respect for for Lag and the system he is teaching. I had been learning of the classic swing before I first stumbled on ABS in 2016 when I was doing research into the classic equipment. Lag's system and ideas became a confirmation that this golf swing was the right path. So, I have been snooping around here as a guest for a while now. At the time, I tried to force my modern equipment to work, but now have hit a point in the swing change process that requires at least the offsets to be removed and the lie angles set up correctly. Finally, took the plunge to join the forum and ask help from the Lag and the Agbay because I knew since 1.5 years of snooping around the abs forums that he was one of the few that could do these types of adjustments well since he was approaching it from both the mechanical and player perspectives not just as an engineer.

As for what I believe. What intrigued me about the best golf swings, my favorites being Hogan and Nelson, is that while still susceptible to human error, it greatly reduced the chances of mistake simply for the reason that there swing (not completely, but) in a large part the issues of timing and face manipulation out of the equation when really playing. Not that they were not thinking of these things, but that there swings were built to withstand it cracking from pressure.

Hogan in one of his books even mentions says, "to try and control the face is folly." That did not make sense to me the first time I read it, having grown up with the modern swing. It was not until deep study into the swing that it made sense.

(Not that I am perfect at this yet, but I will explain my thoughts. I don't claim to be right, I just hope to expand on the discussion with the topics you mentioned).

My dad started teaching me golf around 1999ish, so around when I was 6-7. He tried to teach the modern swing (which at the time I did not know there was a difference.) This over the next 5-6 years devolved from quality father-son time to massive amounts of frustration. I always felt super tired, sore, stiff after a range session and woke with a headache the next day. I super sliced the ball every time and the ball would balloon upwards and go nowhere.

Without going into indepth details, point is I walked away from golf aroud the age of 13-14. This changed about a year and a half ago. Somewhere around late 2014, noticed there was this renewed interest online for the classic era golf starting to hit the mainstream. Up until that point, I was taught it was a niche thing. A lot interest in the swing of Hogan was being circulated on the internet, which opened me up to the great players of the past. Funny how I could have learned golf for 6 years, and I never heard of names such as Hogan, Nelson, Snead, Locke, Thompson, Palmer, etc.

I was taught growing up that all the great players past and present did the exact same thing. After really studying the swings of the past through 2015 by video and reading the classic books (without myself going to the range) came to the conclusion that the swing pre 1970 and especially during the. 1920-1960 swing was not the same thing as the swing of today.

In December of 2015 it was the first time in a longtime I asked my dad to go out to the driving range together, and that I wanted to work on what I believed was a better swing. He encouraged me a lot, (he too had started to make major swing changes during the period where I quit golf and we decided to help each other get better) and one and half years later we are now able to go to the range for and hour two and have a great time. Plus, I don't claim to have mastered anything as of yet, but the greatest difference is I don't feel tired or sore even after hitting an entire large bucket by myself. Not least my lower back does not feel like it has been forcibly twisted with a monkey wrench. Also, when I mess up I know why and what to work on. Practice is actually fun, now because it is not some bewildering mystery which leads to frustration.

The break through moment (December 2015) in my research came when I read in 5 Lessons where (paraphrased) Mr. Hogan mentions that the back elbow (right for me) stays bent through impact and that both arms are never really straight at the same time throughout the swing with the exception of perhaps a split second in the beginning of the follow through when the right elbow finally releases from being connect to the body, but immediately afterwards, the left arm begins to bend as the right arm "fully"straightens into the finish.

This combined with the famous Shell's Wonderful World of Golf Video where he says to let the lower body go first and the idea of supination which ironically to me feels like I am bending my right wrist back rather than bowing out my left wrist since I am a very right side dominate person (hand, eye, leg), made it all click.

The modern swing taught the exact opposite of this, so when I started to practice these moves over the last 1.5 years, I have come to certain conclusion:

Pick the type of Leveraging:
This has to do with the infamous plane. I believe now that the golf swing is not an up and down U type motion. The swing goes around the body at a slight tilted angle. Like a baseball swing, but as if the batter leaned over to go for a dropping 12-6 curveball.

Now to define the plane: it is not a giant board, by my definition, that one must rub their arms against and never allow them to come off. Rather it is a 3 dimensional space that the path of the club shaft and arms will travel along being defined by where the arms and club are in relationship to the body, and the this plane will shift, change, and tilt depending on which type of swing a golfer uses. But for the sake of not making this giant post into a College Thesis length, I would just like to share one aspect of my opinions regarding the leveraging of the club and how it interacts with the "plane".

In terms of the the way the club travels. There are 2 ways to make this work which comes down to more a matter of preference.

1 Plane: easier for most to do even with some limitations in flexibility at the sacrifice of a negligible amount of power on average in comparison to the 2 plane, but when done right, will by no means be a weak shot. But face manipulation can be a concern if the motor skills are not tuned in yet through constant developed practice. Timing is subconscious as our brains are good at this type of hand eye coordination thing.

From the DL view. Set the arms away from the body (will vary between individuals) so they are straight and already at the level of the shoulder plane and pivot around the access of the shoulder while allowing the arms to straighten to like they were address at impact, with the exception that the weight will be shifted into the front side from the initial part of the downswing at the transition. So that at impact the arms are straight but shaft lean is introduced due to the shift in weight.

The reason why I think of this as a "one plane" swing is because in 3D space it starts on a plane angle and tries to stay there. The best way, in my opinion, one can see this is from the DL view. A line can be set up through the club shaft that will go straight through the arms and through the shoulder joints at address and the backswing, downswing, impact, and follow-through will not deviate all that much or at all from this initial shaft plane line we established at address. Subtle variations may exist but it the swing path will clearly follow this line. A hallmark of this type is that there is quite a gap between the hands and the hips at impact. When done correctly with the right footwork and weight shift, it can be very effective. I also think it is the more intuitive way of swing because most of want to reach out toward the ball and have the arms straighten when we don't think about it. If you give a 6 year old a golf club and say to hit the ball, without giving to much technical information, this is what they will instinctively try and do. It tends to have a neutral to upright plane

This is what I believe Moe Norman did, as well as Chi Chi Rodriguez.

2 Plane: more difficult for most but when done correctly will allow more leveraging at the cost of potentially having difficulties squaring the face (hooked or slice) if one does not understand how to properly execute the shift in the plane on the downswing. If one does, this one potential downside is completely negated. Potentially a little more power on average in comparison to the 1 plane.

From the DL view if a line is drawn through the shaft, the shaft plane is set at address and optimally it will be somewhere go through the natural waist a little high or low is okay depending on individual body type. But a 1 plane swing executed on this plane where the elbows stick to the sides and the club is swung around super flat will work, but may be lacking in power, although it maybe repeatable and accurate if done well.
(Can't recall any classic pro that swung like this. Not saying there aren't any just a rare type of swing: waist one plane vs shoulder one plane.)

The solution is simple for additional leverage, after the initial takeaway through the natural waist plane (the deep inside takeaway) bring the the club and the arms up to what would be the shoulder plane. (There is a video on youtube where Hogan demonstrates this.) Then at the top of the back swing shift the weight to the front side, then after bracing on the front begin the pivot with the lower body and when the arms start to move back down they will naturally want to get dragged down, but since they are now on the shoulder plane and the initial address was on the plane of the waist, if one swings from here our subconscious mind will instinctively know we will swing to far outward due to the centrifugal forces at play. So the solution is to bring the arms and shaft back down to the plane of the natural waist, during the downs swing. This is accomplished by allowing the back elbow to tuck in the early part of the down swing back to the established plane of the natural waist while still holding the wrist cock which will prevent an early cast (this motion will cause a natural "laying off" of the club). It is important to note the elbow must tuck into a point inbetween the slight inside of the side of natural waist and the belly button. The optimum spot will vary depending on body type but the elbow must not be allowed to slot on the side OF THE HIPS because this when combined with a very aggressive weight shift and or pivot will cause the elbow to slide back behind the body and get stuck and them the only way to recover is to stall the hips and swing over the top, or even if on can maintain their elbow on the side of the hips, unless the ball is aimed off the back heel, which causes it's own problems in the full swing if the head gets that far in front of the ball, the typical result will be that the swing bottoms out too early resulting in fat shots or the opposite depending on the placement of the ball. Plus, it will encourage cast and flip even with good lower body action as the club will have extreme difficulty getting in front of the head when looked from the face on view.

So, continuing once the the club is fully back on the plain of the natural waist on the initial downswing, one can pivot hard since the weight is already transferred and braced on the left. (I believe to Mr. Hogan it felt like he was using his right knee).

And the important things is that the elbow must firmly remain embedded into a point half way between the side of the torso and the center (belly button) even through impact causing the arm to be bent between an angle of about 90-120 degrees depending on body type, when contact is made with the ball as this will one, give the most efficient transfer of energy. (A boxer with a strong under arm hook keeps the elbow bent then releases well after contact with the punching bag, the jab is much weaker as it makes contact with full extension as the arm begins to deccelarate). Two, it will ensure that manipulation of the face is not required as it will take the issue of arm or wrist manipulation in order to square the face a nano second before impact out of the equation since the club has been squared to the ball early in the downswing and by keeping the elbow anchored to the torso, the only thing the golfer must do is pivot and allow the arms to come along for the ride - a true body swing. Also, if the player properly bows out the the front wrist (or in my case bend back the back wrist which will cause the same thing) early in conjunction with the tucking in of the elbow, they don't have to worry about the face opening or closing (IF THEY HAVE THERE EQUIPMENT PROPERLY FITTED!) as the face should be set square to the ball very early in the downswing. They just need to pivot and can trust that the face will make correct contact with the ball.

This is why I believe we see some of the greats that had accuracy and power like Hogan, Nelson, Snead, Nicklaus, De Vicenzo, etc. have very bent arms at impact and even post impact for a little while. And they seemed to have effortless power because they could swing freely since they did not have to worry about manipulating the face.

I know, one could still say that they did not use 40+ oz clubs, but again that came from the baseball side of me. Swinging with a proper two plane swing where the elbow is kept attached to the body and well bent through impact allows one to use very, very heavy equipment (not that one has too, but one can) because most of the the weight is held up by the momentum of the swing. The 2 plane swing method described above is very similar to the golden era baseball swing of the 1920-1940 when players like Ruth, Gehrig, Foxx, Greenberg, Traynor, Hornsby, Dickey, Klein, Ott, Simmons etc. played for high average and power despite wielding tree trunk bats of 35"-38", with handles varying from 1"-2" in diameter (yes the handles not mentioning the barrels), and bat weights ranging from 35oz-48oz, and this was during the era of the fireball pitchers like Gomez, Dean, Feller, Johnson, Newhouser, Grove, etc.

The type of swing where the arms are locked onto the body allow for players of both baseball and golf to use equipment much much heavier than they think they can because we are using the entire body to hold up the club, during the take away, downswing, and initial post impact follow through. The same way it is difficult to hold a heavy moving box if we try to just bend over and lift it with our arms fully extended vs squatting and sticking out elbows to our bodies bent and then lifting with the whole whole body using the momentum of us standing up to help. At the points where the elbow detaches at the top of the back swing and finish, the moment of the swing will cary the weight. Similar to how when I was a kid when playgrounds used to have those spinning table things with handle bars. Most of my friends would be towards the middle, and the a few of us would start turning it around from the outside, until it go to sufficient speed, then we would jump on and huddle around the middle and momentum would actually speed us up, and occasionally on of us would make our way outside and only have to tap our foot very lightly on the ground occasionally to keep the momentum going. In the same way. When the golf or baseball swing is done right, moment holds up like what feels to me 90% of the weight and the leveraging of the full body (not just the arms) the remaining 10%. The key is that the movement has to have a clean flow and no stall. The minute there is a stall, the club will feel like a lead weight tied one's leg in water. Which is why I want to try baseball weight equivalent golf clubs. Also, I have used one of those weighted training clubs that said 40+ oz. I remembered trying to lift them when I was like 8 thinking it was ridiculous. But now that I am obviously grown and they were not made for kids, and am using a body leverage swing, it was amazing how light it felt in the hands. Just like my 40+oz baseball bat. So even if it does not end up working for real gaming clubs, still want to at least try it.

But on another note, if one is not using the right technique and is trying to employ a two plane swing incorrectly, heavy clubs will be unplayable for the golfer who exhibits the one potential problem of the two plane swing. That is if one does not understand how the arms interact with the body on the backswing and downswing sequences.

So to recap we are at the top of the back swing and we just shifted into the front side. But, as we turn, (even with normal weighted clubs) if we do not know the fact that we are swinging on a much higher plane than the one we had address consciously, our subconscious will still know that we would swing over and out and hit the ball with the heel if we just swing from there, so our instincts take over and close the gap by either leaning back, standing up or both (early extension) which will bring the club more in from a stiff angle: thereby closing the discrepancy gap (which is why we see many people today pro and weekend player alike impacting the ball with the club shaft significantly higher than the plane that was established at address).

However, a bad side effect occurs the hips stall slightly due to this vertical extension and leaning back which causes the rotation from the shoulders to overtake the hips, combined with the arms dropping due to the stiffening of the attack angle. This causes a moment where the wrists unhinge and the club overcasts. Then, when our subconscious picks up the fact that we will hit the ball fat it leans to the side towards your back hand (excessive lateral side bend: the kind where the spine looks like a reverse J) and the shoulders turn further and while our brains tries to force the face closed with the arms and the wrist. Inevitably all these things come together very sloppy and cause and overtop, massive shank slice. This is how I used to swing when I learned the modern swing.

The hallmark of this poorly executed two plane is that the the arms are straight, but the hips stall right before impact causing the wrists to flip over immediately post impact. And the cause is that due to the misunderstanding of how the body parts interact in relation to each throughout the swing, we do not go from natural waist plane (address to take away) up to shoulder plane (for top of backswing and transition) then back to natural waist plane (for slot, delivery, impact, post impact, initial follow through) and back up to shoulder plane (for late follow through and finish).

Instead if a golfer starts on the plain on the natural waist for address and takeaway, go up to shoulder plane for backswing and transition, and stays on the shoulder plane for the rest of the swing. This type of swing will have difficulty using even any set of clubs consistently irregardless of weight just for the fact that momentum is never used to leverage the club only arms, wrist, and shoulders.

Also another thing also that makes heavier clubs feel light in the hand if the momentum carries the swing from the beginning is if the takeaway is done right with a slight forward press, then rebounding on the the forward press to get the momentum going for the takeaway, but not many see the value in the forward press anymore so neglect to do it. (Also to clarify by forward press, I mean a trigger to get the momentum going, if do properly it will instantly feel like the club becomes unweighted, and though an actual forward press is the most common technique used by the classic swingers, I acknowledge other variations do exist that work equally well.) Same reason why many of the great baseball players mentioned already actually had very big hitches to get the momentum going this also included Ty Cobb, and Ted Williams two of the best high average hitters (and Williams of course hitting for power as well).

So in conclusion, I personally am practicing to master the classic (correct) two plane swing. Have not mastered it yet. But even in the past one and half years, I can really tell and see the differences in results. I still got a ways to go, but it is a joy to tackle each step and I believe from initial experimentations that some crazy ideas (like super heavy clubs) may work, if not, glad I at least tried it to confirm instead of wondering for the rest of my life, but never trying it for fear of it not working. Thanks if you bothered to read all that. Just some of he opinions I have been contemplating the past year and working on every time I go to the range with my dad.
eth14dev
 
Posts: 38
Joined: Mon Jul 31, 2017 1:21 pm

Re: Equipment Modding Question for a Newbie

Postby eagle » Sat Aug 12, 2017 11:03 am

Thanks if you bothered to read all that.


That is interesting. Thanks for posting.
User avatar
eagle
 
Posts: 1144
Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2009 7:34 am

Re: Equipment Modding Question for a Newbie

Postby HB51 » Tue Oct 24, 2017 7:19 am

Question...not sure if right thread...

I have a chance to pick up a set of Hogan Apex very cheap. I can only see a limited pictures but they look like 1999 model in great shape. Unfortunately they have an Apex "1" flex which I believe is "senior".

If I get these I would reshaft with Apex 4 or 5. Does anyone know if the heads would be any different, mainly in headweight compared to a set that would have had a stiffer shaft. I thought at one time club makers would "sort the heads" by gram weight and use the lighter heads in women's and senior flexes.

Thanks in advance....
HB51
 
Posts: 42
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2016 6:06 am

Re: Equipment Modding Question for a Newbie

Postby nfbandon » Wed Oct 25, 2017 12:30 pm

40oz clubs...you have to be trolling. Les is right the shafts couldn't handle that much clubhead weight. Don't hurt yourself.
nfbandon
 
Posts: 895
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 1:03 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Equipment

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest