Dynamic Lie in Driver Fitting

[Climbhard]

So Im watching TXG videos on youtube and Im trying to understand what Im seeing.  What does Dynamic Lie have to do with Driver fitting?  They are using a GC Quad and report results like this:

So what does 6.2 or 4.8 mean?  How does that relate to the (assume) 56* lie angle of the driver?  What are they actually measuring?  Is it measuing face angle drop relative to shaft plane?  But since they have the same shaft in all three heads why would that be outside the std. deviation?  Educate me.  Thanks GolfWRX. 

Edited March 18, 2022 by Climbhard
spelling

[Strategery]

Irrelevant. TXG is generating their own industry with FUD. Hook? Increase lie angle.

[getitdaily]

From foresight themselves:

 

"The lie of the club is the way the club compares to the ground through the hitting area. This is a dynamic measurement, and it is relative to the ground plane. A negative number means the club is “toe down” at impact, while a positive number means the club is “toe up.”"

 

So 6.2 dynamic lie means the club was delivered toe up 6.2 degrees.

[Adam C]

Don't worry about the club head data from a GC4. If you actually start to calculate numbers, you will quickly realize it's completely inaccurate. Ball speed seems to always be very consistent, head data = junk.

[MFBach]

25 minutes ago, getitdaily said:

So 6.2 dynamic lie means the club was delivered toe up 6.2 degrees.

I typed this response and then deleted it because I don’t like the way they present the measurement in regards to their other numbers. If they’re going to present dynamic lie as a +/- from static, why not do the same with dynamic loft, or vice versa?
 

It’s probably because most golfers looking at these numbers are used to digesting that dynamic loft number, and maybe not so much with dynamic lie… but if you’re looking at shaft deflection and launch conditions, you’re probably capable of understanding a dynamic lie of 62.2*. 
 

It probably doesn’t matter much anyway and I have no idea how accurate it is, but for some reason, their inconsistent data presentation bothers me. 

Edited March 19, 2022 by MFBach

[JCAG]

Not to pick on a particular device but no swing analyzer can measure all the data they are presenting. Some of it has to be based on an algorithm (computation). As an example, if the ball is being hit into a net/screen, it does not know how/where the ball landed. It can only "best guess" via an algorithm. Take them with a grain of salt.

 

I say when being fit on a "machine" be sure to hit your present equipment for a comparison. No gain, no sale.

[Matts816]

On 3/18/2022 at 8:15 PM, Adam C said:

Don't worry about the club head data from a GC4. If you actually start to calculate numbers, you will quickly realize it's completely inaccurate. Ball speed seems to always be very consistent, head data = junk.

Head data is junk? As compared to what? Foresight data is extremely accurate, best in the industry, if you know what you’re doing, I do and TXG certainly does. 

[Adam C]

1 hour ago, Matts816 said:

Head data is junk? As compared to what? Foresight data is extremely accurate, best in the industry, if you know what you’re doing, I do and TXG certainly does. 

I am sure you do. Try doing the math when they show you launch angle vs AoA and dynamic loft and you will quickly see numbers don't add up. Better yet just go look at some of those TXG videos impact locations on the face, then come back and tell me how accurate they are.

[Climbhard]

Okay so it’s lie angle relative to the ground. I understand that so 6° would presumably be a hooked face of impact. 

Edited March 20, 2022 by Climbhard

[Matts816]

13 minutes ago, Adam C said:

I am sure you do. Try doing the math when they show you launch angle vs AoA and dynamic loft and you will quickly see numbers don't add up. Better yet just go look at some of those TXG videos impact locations on the face, then come back and tell me how accurate they are.

No pissing match here bud. It reads the data by the placement of the fiducials/dots/stickers. Depending on how you place them, how accurate and how far apart, it influences where it shows strike location, dynamic loft, dynamic lie, path, face to path…. There are algorithms with all of these systems to a point, Foresight is the best at it. Do you use any of the systems? Why on earth would the best players in the world use them…..

[Adam C]

9 minutes ago, Matts816 said:

No pissing match here bud. It reads the data by the placement of the fiducials/dots/stickers. Depending on how you place them, how accurate and how far apart, it influences where it shows strike location, dynamic loft, dynamic lie, path, face to path…. There are algorithms with all of these systems to a point, Foresight is the best at it. Do you use any of the systems? Why on earth would the best players in the world use them…..

The ball data is excellent. That is why you would use it. Head data not so much. I'm not trashing them, as they are as accurate as any LM out there. I also fully understand the complexity of capturing those measurements. However that does not change the fact that the numbers are often wrong and the fact that you can see that in TXG videos for example where they know how the system works, just further proves that.

All that is to say I don't recommend using that when determining lie angles.

[dokex]

The driver's lie angle is almost irrelevant, because of the low lofts involved.

[Stuart_G]

15 hours ago, dokex said:

The driver's lie angle is almost irrelevant, because of the low lofts involved.

 

Yes, the impact of the lie being off is low - but not because the loft is low.     The amount of lateral offline error from the lie angle being off does not really change much as the loft changes through the whole bag.

 

https://www.tutelman.com/golf/design/lie1.php

 

[Howard_Jones]

36 minutes ago, Stuart_G said:

 

Yes, the impact of the lie being off is low - but not because the loft is low.     The amount of lateral offline error from the lie angle being off does not really change much as the loft changes through the whole bag.

 

https://www.tutelman.com/golf/design/lie1.php

 

Its correct that 1* off on lie, give plus minus the same offline measurement for all clubs in the bag (2.0 to 3.2 yards the driver is 2.5 yards), but the importance / effect of it, is why we dont care about 1-3* off for a driver, (2.5-7.5 yards off target), while for a short iron or wedge, 2.5-7.5 yards to the side of the flag is not good enough. The offline factor is about the same for all clubs, the importance is different due to distance vc scoring clubs.

[Stuart_G]

6 minutes ago, Howard_Jones said:

while for a short iron or wedge, 2.5-7.5 yards to the side of the flag is not good enough. The offline factor is about the same for all clubs, the importance is different due to distance vc scoring clubs.

 

For better players, I agree.  But it get's a bit less important as the ability of the player to aim accurately in the first place degrades.  At some point, the "noise" of their own inconsistencies will outweigh by far the "error" from the lie being off.    But just because it lowers the significance,  that's not a reason to avoid adjusting the heads if one finds the lie angle to be off.  Every little bit helps.

Edited March 22, 2022 by Stuart_G

[Howard_Jones]

1 minute ago, Stuart_G said:

 

For better players, I agree.   It get's less important as the ability of the player to aim accurately in the first place degrades.  At some point, the "noise" of their own inconsistencies will outweigh by far the "error" from the lie being off.    But just because it lowers the significance,  not that that's any reason to avoid adjusting the heads if one finds the lie angle to be off.  Every little bit helps.

Since most drivers of today has a adjustable hosel for lie angle, i would for sure use it, and get lie angle as neutral as possible, by combining hosel adjustments with the sharpie/ball marker test until i have found the most neutral setting for lie.

[JJgolfwrx]

On 3/18/2022 at 6:57 PM, Climbhard said:

So Im watching TXG videos on youtube and Im trying to understand what Im seeing.  What does Dynamic Lie have to do with Driver fitting?  They are using a GC Quad and report results like this:

So what does 6.2 or 4.8 mean?  How does that relate to the (assume) 56* lie angle of the driver?  What are they actually measuring?  Is it measuing face angle drop relative to shaft plane?  But since they have the same shaft in all three heads why would that be outside the std. deviation?  Educate me.  Thanks GolfWRX. 

 

For most drivers, the grooves / lines on the face are pitched upright (~2* degrees). If you mark the dots on the face per Foresight's recommendations which is parallel or in-line with the groove / lines, the lie angle will read ~2 degrees more upright. For example, Epic Max - RPG 462 M5+ dynamic lie angle is 5.5 degrees. The actual lie is closer to 3.5 degrees. If you are wondering, 4-6 degrees upright for dynamic lie is normal and as long as the ball-flight is good there is nothing to worry about.

 

P.s. face angle will also effect lie angle readings. A more closed face (negative reading) will read less upright...a more open face (positive reading) will read more upright.

Edited March 31, 2022 by JJgolfwrx

[Krt22]

7 minutes ago, JJgolfwrx said:

 

For most drivers, the grooves / lines on the face are pitched upright (~2* degrees). If you mark the dots on the face per Foresight's recommendations which is parallel or in-line with the groove / lines, the lie angle will read ~2 degrees more upright. For example, Epic Max - RPG 462 M5+ dynamic lie angle is 5.5 degrees. The actual lie is closer to 3.5 degrees. If you are wondering, 4-6 degrees upright for dynamic lie is normal and as long as the ball-flight is good there is nothing to worry about.

Good info here. I for awhile have questioned TMs stock 56* lie angle when every tour head is measured at 59-60. I can see how they are intentionally building them toe-up and labeling/marking them otherwise to appease the "this thing is gonna hook" crowd

[Climbhard]

Thanks!

 

[hammergolf]

3 hours ago, Krt22 said:

Good info here. I for awhile have questioned TMs stock 56* lie angle when every tour head is measured at 59-60. I can see how they are intentionally building them toe-up and labeling/marking them otherwise to appease the "this thing is gonna hook" crowd

The fct sleeve lowers the lie angle by 2* when inserted to the head, so 59* becomes 57* at the standard setting when the adapter is inserted.

[zacharya]

I disagree that the lie angle is irrelevant. Don’t most of the adjustable adapters use lie angle to create desired launch conditions? For example my TSi3 on D3 is money while A1 is push fade city. 

[Stuart_G]

9 hours ago, zacharya said:

 For example my TSi3 on D3 is money while A1 is push fade city. 

 

Try A2.  That will tell you how much of that is the lie angle and how much is the face angle change.

 

But you're right, 100% irrelavent is very rare.    If anything can change what the player sees at address or feels during the swing, there is a potential for the  effect on the results to be greater than it might be in theory or for a robot test. 

 

It's best to say it's not all that significant for a large percentage of ams.