golfrewind.com

ONEPUTT -

The information you got is incorrect when it comes to irons..

You and TT are right that getting a measurement butt clamped in a 5" clap will only tell you the frequency at the butt.,,,nothing else.

We do shaft profiles here daily...this is done to do exactly as you and TT said...which is by reading the shaft at specific beam lengths it will tell me how dense the material is at every location, which in turn will tell me how the shaft will perform...it will tell me what kind of load the shaft will deliver, type of kick point, consistency and torque...etc.

However, (and this is what you are overlooking) is that when doing a set of irons, they are all part of the same set...the performance of the shafts being all the same, profile the same and will perform the same...thats why they're "a set".

Knowing that the shafts perform consistently already, the only thing left is to assemble them so they slope correctly (weight and frequency) and weight each club individually to achieve a 1.3 SW per inch change.

Make sense?

I can understand how a frequency meter would help to build a set of matching irons. where you are using the same shaft in each club. Due to variences is all things. it's normal to assume that each shaft will be slightly different and useing a frequency meter to match thing up makes sense. What I hate to see is some club maker/golf shop. test the clubs in someones bag, and tell them they need all new shafts, based on a frequency meter test of the butt end of the club. I've had this happen three times. and it was a total joke. My irons at the time were built with a set of TT Tri-Gold shafts. I assembled the clubs exactly as instucted by TT, and all the swing weights were dead on. And each time the golf shop said the shaft flex was all over the place, and the only way to fix this was to pull the shafts and replace them with new ones. When I contacted TT about this, I was told that both golf shops were wrong, and that each shaft in the Tri-Gold set is a different design, and a frequency meter test on them is worthless, and not to worry about what the golf shop told me. I may be a bit foolish here, but I'd rather believe TT than a golf shop that wants to charge me $45 per club for new shafts. Especually when the shaft can be purchased for $15 per club. I also don't have a lot of faith in the frequency meter test on a driver. when the only thing they test is the butt end of the shaft.

Can I assume from your post, that you're a believer is progressive swing weights in a set of irons? You mentioned a 1.3 SW per inch change. Would you mind telling me how you set up the SW for a set of irons, and why you do it that way, rather than have all the SW's the same>?

Straight; I looked at the mitchell site, and the frequency meter shown is the type I was commenting on. It only measures the stiffness of the shaft that is inside the clamp. As shown in the photo, it would be only measuring the butt stiffness of that driver shaft.

The way I interpret the use and operation of that tool, is that you clamp the club at the grip, oscillate the entire shaft (quite possibly by pulling on the clubhead and letting it go), and pick up the oscillation frequency of the 'free' portion shaft with the optical sensor shown sitting on the right half of the bench. The oscillation would be constrained at the grip end (as it is during a golf swing, where you 'clamp' the grip with your hands), and the frequency measured represents the free shaft, not the clamped portion of it.

As I mentioned before, this is wrong. The measurement you get with this meter is for the section of the shaft inside the clamp. What the company says about this device is not the truth.
You and TT are right that getting a measurement butt clamped in a 5" clap will only tell you the frequency at the butt.,,,nothing else.
What I just copied from above, tells the real story. The company selling these frequency meters want you to think they measure the whole shaft, but the true is they don't come close. If you still don't believe me, Please contact TT and ask them about this. That's exactly what I did and I posted their reply for you.

In my mind there is a big difference between the statement in black, and the statement in blue. The key difference being the words inside and at. I think this may be the source of confusion. Either mine, or yours!

When I get a moment I may take this up with TT (and other sources) as you suggest. I will post the results. It may be a while before I can get to it ....

Excerpt from the TT website:

I haven't found a phone number for them yet. If anyone knows the TT phone number, please PM me. Thanks!

Straight: That wasn't my wording, I just copied what was posted. Would it make more sense to you if the wording had been "OF THE BUTT", rather than "at the butt? The point is the frequency meter measures the stiffness of the shaft inside the clamp, or you could say at the clamp, either way you want to word it, it means the measurment is for only that section of the shaft, not the entire shaft.
As for contacting TT, why not just email them and ask your question? That's what I did and the information I posted is from their reply.

There is a problem with what you posted above. You can get very different CPM readings depending on if you oscillate the shaft side to side or up and down. This is due to the fact that the shaft is not perfectly made, and will flex differently in different directions. This is why spine alignment is so important with all shafts. Before any CPM reading are taken, the shaft should be spine aligned. Only then will the CPM reading have any meaning. If one was to frequency match a set of iron shafts, and then spine align them, all the work with the freq meter was wasted, and you wouldn't end up with a frequency match set of irons.

Yep, I could try that. I was initially worried that they would just reply with what I already pasted/posted three posts above this one, but I think I will go ahead and ask them to clarify that further.

PS I will PM you with a draft of the email to TT before I send it. Perhaps we can at least agree on how to ask them the question!

I am not disagreeing with that, or with any other imperfections / shortcomings of the frequency measurements in general.

Here's the reply I got from TT on frequency meter testing on clubs.

Sir,

Thank you for the e-mail. First, frequency is ONLY stating what the butt
stiffness is of the section of the shaft that you are clamping (4", 5",
etc.). Also, the Tri-Gold is a unique set where each shaft is almost
it's own separate design in order to provide a higher ball flight in the
longer irons and lower/more penetrating ball flight in the shorter
irons. I would not be concerned with the cpm's that you are getting for
these shafts. It is not determining play or performance of the
Tri-Golds, only butt stiffness.

Thank you for choosing True Temper. Play well!

True Temper Sports/Grafalloy

I have a couple of Cleveland wedges they made for me in the Cleveland Tour Van that have graphite shafts. I like them, and in 4 years, have had no trouble with them. I have both a SW and the Diadic wedge. The lighter shaft gives them a nice heavy-head feeling that I like.

TT is right on a few points...

If you take the CPM's of the butt only and measure the shaft from that point on then you are still missing the "REAL Profile" that others may suggest. I can freq a set with butt clamp profiles all day long and then clamp the tip section (7" or so above the tip) and find various readings. The reason for this is because in order to please the Butt CPM's you have to trim (or not) the tip which effects the tip stiffness more then the butt.... So to say all shafts are equal and the tips come out playing exactly the same if you freq or even "profile" the butt your mistaken.

Only way to come out correct would be to profile the shaft by clamping it in many different places to insure that each position is cpm'ed out in sequence. This would also be hard because now your asking every single shaft to react the exact same when being tipped.

To say that a Freq set is going to be more online then a standard set is correct and to say that a "butt profiled" set is going to be more online then a freq set is correct (but very very minimal change if ANY and is used more as a "SALE" technique then anything). To say that a shaft that is truely profiled will be the MOST accurate is correct and again you are talking about a very small change if any.

If your going to get this done I suggest you make sure you get it done by a trusted clubfitter (someone you know) as many say they do this but I have heard stories of using it as a sales pitch only.

I use it on occasion but mainly freq match sets because of the change in difference is very very small and additionaly cutting is hardly ever needed.

Most cases I use it for a flighted set of irons or when requested.

Hope this helps..

Straightshooter;
Did you ever hear back from TT on frequency meter testing shafts? You were going to post their reply, and I'm just wondering if you have heard back yet. Let me know what you find out, as I'm interested in hearding if you get the same reply as I did last year.