Let’s analyze awful data from new shafts!

[theothertomjones]

I tested new KBS C-Taper Lite Reg shafts in my T350 irons (replacing KBS Tour Lite Reg) and I’m pretty shocked at the outcome. 
 

CTL shafts are 10g heavier and a much stiffer/boardier profile and both sets of shafts are standard length. 
 

This was my first range session with the new shafts so please be kind 😆

 

Factors affecting today’s testing:

- It’s freaking hot and humid in N.C.  

- I hit 60 balls before testing (drills, swing timing, etc).

- Range ball quality wasn’t great (Garmin R10 estimated metrics on most shots, instead of measuring the actual shot).

- Fatigue… which is probably a good thing—hitting when you’re tired might be a more realistic assessment of normal performance. 

Conclusion:

Im a newbie at this but from what I can tell 2H and D are ok (not fabulous), irons (AoA) are terrible, and I’m skeptical of carry distance (not sure if it’s the R10 or range balls or me or all the above). Moving up 10g in iron weigh lost me 10-13 mph in swing speed from the KBS Tour Lites. I think this explains poor performance with the longer irons—I can’t generate enough swing speed for the 5i with these shafts. 

In my limited experience it would seem like these iron shafts are definitely not for me (and I need some swing improvements), but I’d like to consult the pros here. 
 

PS the TSR2 hybrid sounds like HEAVEN which is why I hit 10 shots with it. I couldn’t stop giggling at the sound! 😅
 

Edited July 13 by theothertomjones

[gdb99]

If you are really carrying your 7 iron 109 yards, you probably should look at softer lighter shafts than the KBS Tour Lite regular, not stiffer and heavier. 
 

And to add, maybe something with more 

loft. 

Edited July 14 by gdb99

[theothertomjones]

22 minutes ago, gdb99 said:

If you are really carrying your 7 iron 109 yards, you probably should look at softer lighter shafts than the KBS Tour Lite regular, not stiffer and heavier. 
 

And to add, maybe something with more 

loft. 

I normally carry my 7i 140-150. That’s why I was very suspicious about the R10 “estimating” carry. Im not sure if I should return it or not. 
 

On the other hand Im diabetic and had zero energy while taking these shots. 100 balls in 100 degree heat index is no joke. 

[Mr.I302]

So yes the heat is no joke and being a cancer thriver right now I know exactly what that means. I will pose the question why did you feel the need to move to heavier shaft? I have tried to focus on better contact and currently play Dynamic gold 105 R in my I210’s and they seem to be working well for me right now, however I generally prefer a heavier iron shaft.  Good luck and maybe test in the morning when cooler.

[theothertomjones]

9 minutes ago, Mr.I302 said:

So yes the heat is no joke and being a cancer thriver right now I know exactly what that means. I will pose the question why did you feel the need to move to heavier shaft? I have tried to focus on better contact and currently play Dynamic gold 105 R in my I210’s and they seem to be working well for me right now, however I generally prefer a heavier iron shaft.  Good luck and maybe test in the morning when cooler.

So sorry to hear about the cancer but glad to hear you are doing well!

 

My motivation for moving to a heavier shaft was to get the ball flight down. While I don’t have any data for apex of the previous shafts it was clearly too high. Aside from the TL shafts themselves being the highest launch and spin KBS makes. I wanted to take it down just a hair and the CTLs are the next step below the TLs. The R CTLs are 10g heavier than the TL R. 
 

Also, I couldn’t feel the head very well, but I did enjoy how easy the club was to control through the swing path with the TLs. Im used to cavity back heads which are usually much heavier. This hollow body GI head takes some getting used to (which I do enjoy), and the CTL is a very different feel than the TLs. 
 

I think you’re right though. I should probably give the new shafts a month or so before I go back to the TLs. I was ready to take the whole set back to put the old shafts back in yesterday.  I’ll chalk that up to the heat lol!

[IC3BURGH]

This isn't a fun answer, but it probably is the right one.

 

I'm not sure how much shafts/heads/etc can do if you are hitting 5* up on a 7 iron. You need to hit all your clubs more like you do your pitching wedge. You need to improve your delivery because shafts alone are unlikely to get you to hit down 7*+ relative from where you are now.

[Mr.I302]

Thanks for the kind words. I have stage 4 prostate cancer now for 3 years and with my new meds Xtandi and Pluvicto I am doing pretty and enjoying every day golfing or not. I’m only looking forward and not looking back.

 

It’s smart to give the new shafts a bit more time and I can fully understand your reasoning to change. It could just be a timing thing too.

 

Take care and good luck to all.

[Stuart_G]

First of all, tThe fit of a shaft, particularly an iron shaft, can not be determined in isolation, just looking at the numbers for that shaft.    It must be a comparative test.  How did you hit this shaft compared to an alternative option.

 

Second, the averages are not important but rather the deviation within the group of shots for a particular option.   Shaft fitting is about dispersion, accuracy, shot shape control and even just feel and how that feel might effect confidence.  Maybe in some cases balancing those things with swing speed.   Forget launch, spin and ball height.  That usually

should be left to the head and loft selections.

 

Finally, the results you get hitting several shots - enough to adjust or groove in the swing for the given option - can potentially be unreliable.  On the course, you only get one attempt for any shot.   You need to limit the repetitions before 'resetting' your swing.   Maybe only 2-3 shots with option A, then move on to option B - or back to a few swings with your current gamer before moving on or going back to that club.

 

1 hour ago, theothertomjones said:

while I don’t have any data for apex of the previous shafts it was clearly too high. 

 

By what basis are you making that judgment?   There is a LOT of really bad info out there when it comes to peak height and how irons should be fit for ball height.  Most of it is just BS.   e.g. Rory seems to do OK with a very high ball flight. 

 

Forget height and stick to looking at carry distance and balance that with stopping power on the green.   If you want better stopping power on the green, are you willing to give up distance to get it?  Or if you want more distance, are you willing to give up some stopping power?   When it comes to fitting launch and spin, that's what it really comes down to.  There is no ideal or optimal numbers.  You have to find a balance between those two that works well for you, your swing, and the courses you play.

 

Edited July 14 by Stuart_G

[theothertomjones]

1 hour ago, IC3BURGH said:

This isn't a fun answer, but it probably is the right one.

 

I'm not sure how much shafts/heads/etc can do if you are hitting 5* up on a 7 iron. You need to hit all your clubs more like you do your pitching wedge. You need to improve your delivery because shafts alone are unlikely to get you to hit down 7*+ relative from where you are now.

I totally agree. I think I jumped the gun on breaking out the R10 when im not even used to the shafts yet.  I should have known there would be timing changes, and I definitely shouldn’t try to get numbers at the end of a session. Poor choices on my part all around!

[theothertomjones]

1 hour ago, Stuart_G said:

First of all, tThe fit of a shaft, particularly an iron shaft, can not be determined in isolation, just looking at the numbers for that shaft.    It must be a comparative test.  How did you hit this shaft compared to an alternative option.

 

Second, the averages are not important but rather the deviation within the group of shots for a particular option.   Shaft fitting is about dispersion, accuracy, shot shape control and even just feel and how that feel might effect confidence.  Maybe in some cases balancing those things with swing speed.   Forget launch, spin and ball height.  That usually

should be left to the head and loft selections.

 

Finally, the results you get hitting several shots - enough to adjust or groove in the swing for the given option - can potentially be unreliable.  On the course, you only get one attempt for any shot.   You need to limit the repetitions before 'resetting' your swing.   Maybe only 2-3 shots with option A, then move on to option B - or back to a few swings with your current gamer before moving on or going back to that club.

 

 

By what basis are you making that judgment?   There is a LOT of really bad info out there when it comes to peak height and how irons should be fit for ball height.  Most of it is just BS.   e.g. Rory seems to do OK with a very high ball flight. 

 

Forget height and stick to looking at carry distance and balance that with stopping power on the green.   If you want better stopping power on the green, are you willing to give up distance to get it?  Or if you want more distance, are you willing to give up some stopping power?   When it comes to fitting launch and spin, that's what it really comes down to.  There is no ideal or optimal numbers.  You have to find a balance between those two that works well for you, your swing, and the courses you play.

 

All totally fair points and I really enjoy your perspectives!
 

Personally, I like a high ball flight. When I say the previous shafts were way too high, I meant 3 course pros and a part time club fitter all eyeballed it and agreed I needed to knock the height down. Not that it was a negative, but you could tell the ball flight itself wasn’t optimal. As my old fitter told me high is perfectly fine as long as you have the right spin rate. My S55s with CTaper Stiffs launch pretty darn high but it’s a penetrating high and holds greens, it wasn’t a balloon then drop like it fell off a cliff. 
 

I have dispersion numbers from my session, but I think everyone would agree the iron data is pretty worthless at the moment until I get used to the new shafts. I also need to dedicate a session to shot tracking instead of it being an end of session curiosity. 
 

I’ve been reading around on the driver and hybrid numbers and they look pretty optimal even when exhausted so I’m fairly confident I have the right shafts in those clubs. I really regret not trying Titleist sooner. Their TSR2 driver in particular is so much better than the Ping setups I’ve games in the past. Im also impressed by the hybrid, though the shape of it takes some getting used to compared to the Ping G410 I was gaming. The ball flight suits my eye so much better. 
 

I’ll work on getting the swing right with the new iron shafts, then get the launch monitor out when I’m fresh and take a look at the numbers. 
 

You guys are awesome and thanks for the help!

Edited July 14 by theothertomjones

[rsballer10]

4 minutes ago, theothertomjones said:

When I say the previous shafts were way too high, I meant 3 course pros and a part time club fitter all eyeballed it and agreed I needed to knock the height down. Not that it was a negative, but you could tell the ball flight itself wasn’t optimal. 

Stuart will chime in about "optimal" but long story short it doesn't exist. 

 

13 minutes ago, theothertomjones said:

I have dispersion numbers from my session, but I think everyone would agree the iron data is pretty worthless at the moment until I get used to the new shafts. I also need to dedicate a session to shot tracking instead of it being an end of session curiosity. 

Not so much get used to the new shafts, but maybe don't swing in 100 degree humid weather with a health condition 🙂 perhaps report back with more 'typical' numbers. 
 

[IC3BURGH]

11 minutes ago, theothertomjones said:

Personally, I like a high ball flight. When I say the previous shafts were way too high, I meant 3 course pros and a part time club fitter all eyeballed it and agreed I needed to knock the height down. Not that it was a negative, but you could tell the ball flight itself wasn’t optimal.

 

Did your delivery numbers before the shaft change look anything like they do now? If they are different, how did they change? I almost suspect that the only reason the ball height is lower is because you lost speed with the heavier shafts. Maybe I'm wrong!

 

I'm belaboring the point, but emphasis is needed. I'm really not convinced you are hitting the ball too high because of any shaft choice. You are hitting the ball too high because you are hitting up on the ball. You are launching a 7 iron at almost 30*. LPGA players (a few mph faster) average launch a 7i at 19*. If you go from +5* AoA to -3, you will get your launch to 22*, which is probably a decent number at your speed. You'll end up with so much more pop from that change. It'll be easier for you to access the back of the ball (ballspeed up), you'll gain some spin, and you will definitely gain distance. 

 

Now if I have to discuss shaft choice, I'm putting you in 70-90g shafts. With that said, it may not make one bit of difference without changing delivery. This is not a club issue at the moment.

[Stuart_G]

54 minutes ago, theothertomjones said:

All totally fair points and I really enjoy your perspectives!

 

Glad to hear it.

 

54 minutes ago, theothertomjones said:

All totally fair points and I really enjoy your perspectives!
 

Personally, I like a high ball flight. When I say the previous shafts were way too high, I meant 3 course pros and a part time club fitter all eyeballed it and agreed I needed to knock the height down. Not that it was a negative, but you could tell the ball flight itself wasn’t optimal.

 

Sorry, none of that holds any weight with me.   There is little in terms of standardized or validated curriculum that is used in training fitters and even PGA pros about fitting.  What's out there is usually passed on from person to person by word of mouth - mentor to mentee.  And bad info gets passed around just as much as the good info.  Not to mention all the wide range of opinions and information online.   On top of that, most don't have either the training or discipline to really evaluate the validity of the ideas floating around.

 

And there is no such thing as optimal ball flight with irons.   The only time it might be an issue is for some one who is unable to control their trajectory when playing into the wind - but that's not really an equipment problem.

 

But regardless, flight issues with irons is actually largely a swing issue.  Sure the equipment can be used to tweak it a bit but there are limits to what it can do.  Sometimes equipment changes (both shaft weight and swing weight or really head weight or even stiffness feel) can be used to "encourage" a change in release timing for some people.  But it can commonly be accompanied by negative side effects it if it takes the player away from their natural swing tendencies.  It's also not something that always has much longevity.  Sometimes it does but sometimes as the player gets used to the new weight or stiffness feel, it's not uncommon that they will regress back to their natural release tendencies.  That's why it's better to stick to things like dispersion and consistency and shot shape control.   It doesn't mean it's not possible to get those changes from the equipment, just that it's not very reliable or dependable way to do it.

 

 

54 minutes ago, theothertomjones said:

I think everyone would agree the iron data is pretty worthless at the moment until I get used to the new shafts. 

 

I wouldn't exactly agree. Sure the numbers aren't helpful but IMO - the fact that there is a need to "get used to it" by itself is a pretty good indication that it isn't a good fit.    The whole point of a fitting is to fit the equipment to you,  not fit you to the equipment.  The game is hard enough as it is, don't make it worse by adding the need to fight with your equipment.

 

 

Edited July 14 by Stuart_G

[theothertomjones]

6 minutes ago, Stuart_G said:

 

Glad to hear it.

 

 

Sorry, none of that holds any weight with me.   There is little in terms of standardized or validated curriculum that is used in training fitters and even PGA pros about fitting.  What's out there is usually passed on from person to person by word of mouth - mentor to mentee.  And bad info gets passed around just as much as the good info.  Not to mention all the wide range of opinions and information online.   On top of that, most don't have either the training or discipline to really evaluate the validity of the ideas floating around.

 

And there is no such thing as optimal ball flight with irons.   The only time it might be an issue is for some one who is unable to control their trajectory when playing into the wind - but that's not really an equipment problem.

 

But regardless, flight issues with irons is actually largely a swing issue.  Sure the equipment can be used to tweak it a bit but there are limits to what it can do.  Sometimes equipment changes (both shaft weight and swing weight or really head weight or even stiffness feel) can be used to "encourage" a change in release timing for some people.  But it can commonly be accompanied by negative side effects it if it takes the player away from their natural swing tendencies.  It's also not something that always has much longevity.  Sometimes it does but sometimes as the player gets used to the new weight or stiffness feel, it's not uncommon that they will regress back to their natural release tendencies.  That's why it's better to stick to things like dispersion and consistency and shot shape control.   It doesn't mean it's not possible to get those changes from the equipment, just that it's not very reliable or dependable way to do it.

 

 

 

I wouldn't exactly agree. Sure the numbers aren't helpful but IMO - the fact that there is a need to "get used to it" by itself is a pretty good indication that it isn't a good fit.    The whole point of a fitting is to fit the equipment to you,  not fit you to the equipment.  The game is hard enough as it is, don't make it worse by adding the need to fight with your equipment.

 

 

A lack of standardized and validated curriculum is not evidence of what is or isn’t optimal flight for any particular profile of person of swing. Trackman has put some great data out there. Different people produce a range of numbers and trajectory differently. 
 

Insofar as getting used to shafts Im not sure I agree. I used to swing CTaper 120 stiffs. There’s no way I could swing them today because back then I was a well practiced super caster of the club. I hit 500-700 balls a week and was playing 2-3 rounds a week. 
 

I’ve reset/retaught my swing entirely since then. I had to get used to the TL shafts I had as does everyone else. Everyone’s body learns when to relax and contract their muscles in a golf swing, when and how to generate power, and how that power is distributed when in different profile shafts. 

 

“Natural tendencies” are learned and refined from training. People can revert to bad habits if they aren’t committed to changing them, and changes become natural (ie “muscle memory”) for a variety of reasons. This is fundamental skill development in every sport. 

[Jc0]

7 hours ago, IC3BURGH said:

This isn't a fun answer, but it probably is the right one.

 

I'm not sure how much shafts/heads/etc can do if you are hitting 5* up on a 7 iron. You need to hit all your clubs more like you do your pitching wedge. You need to improve your delivery because shafts alone are unlikely to get you to hit down 7*+ relative from where you are now.

 

Are these numbers even physically possible? I know what it said but I have trouble believing someone can get a positive 5 angle of attack hitting an iron off the ground without skulling the hell out of the ball. I feel like the club would have to be in the ground and bounce up to get that. 

[theothertomjones]

5 minutes ago, Jc0 said:

 

Are these numbers even physically possible? I know what it said but I have trouble believing someone can get a positive 5 angle of attack hitting an iron off the ground without skulling the hell out of the ball. I feel like the club would have to be in the ground and bounce up to get that. 

i agree. And this is where we have to remind ourselves that most of these numbers were “estimated” by the Garmin instead of “measured”. 
 

Im debating whether or not I should return it because it is a $600 launch monitor. 

[Stuart_G]

16 hours ago, theothertomjones said:

A lack of standardized and validated curriculum is not evidence of what is or isn’t optimal flight for any particular profile of person of swing.

 

True but it does mean that blindly taking anyone's word for it - no matter what position they hold or how long they've been doing it - can get you bad advice and lead to bad decisions.

 

16 hours ago, theothertomjones said:

Trackman has put some great data out there. 

 

Yes they have. But that's actually as much of the problem as anything else.   It's very common for that data and information that they put out to be frequently mis-interpreted.   There are lots more but the classic example is using the TM tour averages as some type of valid target for a fitting and believing that they are some kind of ideal or optimized numbers.  The number of people coming here to the forum asking about equipment advice trying to achieve those numbers - or even telling stories about how their fitter was trying to hit those numbers is mind boggling.

 

16 hours ago, theothertomjones said:

 I had to get used to the TL shafts I had as does everyone else. 

 

Another common misconception.   It's true that what we feel from the club can (for some people more than others) contribute to aspects of how we control our swing.  And it is a learned relationship.   We're not born with any natural swing tendencies.  But still many of those tendencies can be deeply ingrained and they are not as easy to change as most people think.   I know many people that have spent months and even more than a year "trying to get used to" an equipment change before giving up and going back to something that works without needing any adjustment.   More importantly, there is no good reason to switch to a shaft that goes against those tendencies.  If you want to make some small tweaks to the launch/spin - just have the  lofts bent.   If you need to make bigger changes to the swing, it's much more effective and reliable to address the swing changes directly with the equipment you're already used to than it is to rely on equipment feel changes to do it for you.

 

But that's not saying some people can't make it work - I'm just trying to show you the easiest path to what you seem to be looking for.   But of course it's your journey and your choice.   As long as you enjoy the process that's all that counts.

 

 

Edited July 15 by Stuart_G

[Hawkeye77]

The session was clearly flawed in terms of expecting anything reliable from the results so why try to take anything significant from it?

 

Now it's down to arguing with some good information that would likely be helpful to you moving forward in trying to test or compare clubs.  

 

I'd give up the self-fit bit and go see someone that can provide real and useful metrics and go from there.

[theothertomjones]

5 hours ago, Hawkeye77 said:

The session was clearly flawed in terms of expecting anything reliable from the results so why try to take anything significant from it?

 

Now it's down to arguing with some good information that would likely be helpful to you moving forward in trying to test or compare clubs.  

 

I'd give up the self-fit bit and go see someone that can provide real and useful metrics and go from there.

You’re right about the session. Bit of a knee jerk reaction on my part. 
 

Not sure I want to give up on the self fitting. I’ve got time and the money to do this, and I’ve spent a lot of time around fitters who use various approaches to fitting, much like swing coaches who teach different methods of swings.
 

I got burned by a club fitter for about 10 years who fit me really well once or twice, then did nothing but sell me the next evolution of gear and debunked 1970s methods instead of helping develop my game—it’s a trust that will never be repaired. 
 

Sure, I’ll make mistakes with my own equipment, or get frustrated with the process from time to time, but I’ll walk away knowing what’s BS and what’s not (for my own swing and performance). 

[bogeypro]

On 7/13/2025 at 1:30 PM, theothertomjones said:

I tested new KBS C-Taper Lite Reg shafts in my T350 irons (replacing KBS Tour Lite Reg) and I’m pretty shocked at the outcome. 
 

CTL shafts are 10g heavier and a much stiffer/boardier profile and both sets of shafts are standard length. 
 

This was my first range session with the new shafts so please be kind 😆

 

Factors affecting today’s testing:

- It’s freaking hot and humid in N.C.  

- I hit 60 balls before testing (drills, swing timing, etc).

- Range ball quality wasn’t great (Garmin R10 estimated metrics on most shots, instead of measuring the actual shot).

- Fatigue… which is probably a good thing—hitting when you’re tired might be a more realistic assessment of normal performance. 

Conclusion:

Im a newbie at this but from what I can tell 2H and D are ok (not fabulous), irons (AoA) are terrible, and I’m skeptical of carry distance (not sure if it’s the R10 or range balls or me or all the above). Moving up 10g in iron weigh lost me 10-13 mph in swing speed from the KBS Tour Lites. I think this explains poor performance with the longer irons—I can’t generate enough swing speed for the 5i with these shafts. 

In my limited experience it would seem like these iron shafts are definitely not for me (and I need some swing improvements), but I’d like to consult the pros here. 
 

PS the TSR2 hybrid sounds like HEAVEN which is why I hit 10 shots with it. I couldn’t stop giggling at the sound! 😅
 

 

 #1... Slower speeds need height.  You hit everything too lowb for the ball speed being generated. 

 

#2.. improve your delivery with irons.  You hit up more on your irons than you do your driver.  

 

#3.. Shaft won't help any of these.  The head is the biggest factor first.  Then, the shaft is the timing.  

 

#4...piggy back on #3, look at something like Cleveland halo irons.  And with graphite shafts.

[theothertomjones]

22 hours ago, bogeypro said:

 

 #1... Slower speeds need height.  You hit everything too lowb for the ball speed being generated. 

 

#2.. improve your delivery with irons.  You hit up more on your irons than you do your driver.  

 

#3.. Shaft won't help any of these.  The head is the biggest factor first.  Then, the shaft is the timing.  

 

#4...piggy back on #3, look at something like Cleveland halo irons.  And with graphite shafts.

I am told there is a general trend in the industry of moving back toward lighter shafts. 
 

From what I’ve been told from retailers, there was a huge trend of using thicker heavier shafts in the 90s/2000s, and now it seems to be trending the other way around. 
 

Personally I didn’t hate the KBS TLs, and graphite shafts sound kinda fun TBH!

[Stuart_G]

17 hours ago, theothertomjones said:

From what I’ve been told from retailers, there was a huge trend of using thicker heavier shafts in the 90s/2000s,

 

Sorry, not even close to being true.  

[WristySwing]

On 7/16/2025 at 12:22 PM, theothertomjones said:

I am told there is a general trend in the industry of moving back toward lighter shafts. 
 

From what I’ve been told from retailers, there was a huge trend of using thicker heavier shafts in the 90s/2000s, and now it seems to be trending the other way around. 
 

Personally I didn’t hate the KBS TLs, and graphite shafts sound kinda fun TBH!

 

The only shaft that was thicker was the Wilson Fat Shaft. It was not very successful. Wilson keeps trying to make it a thing but it never takes. They re-introduced it again circa 2006/2007 and it was gone again by 2009 or so. Apart from that, Dynamic shafts (which have transitioned into Dynamic Gold) COULD be slightly heavier than the gold, but you are often talking a gram or two at most. I think the heaviest shaft you could get was the X300 at the time which was only marginally heavier than X100. You could argue it was slightly stiffer as well but I'd wager 99.98% of the world would find them similar. There are some parallel blanks that you can get now which are heavier than that still (i.e. X-flex C-Taper .370 tip is 140g), but they are designed to be trimmed so that they come out ~130g when finished meaning they wouldn't be any different than what has become the standard tour weight since probably the 1960s or so.

 

Whoever told you that was likely trying to sound impressive but didn't really understand what they were describing. For instance, I've heard a retail employee tell someone to buy a .350 tip shaft because it was going to be stiffer than a .335 tip in their driver. While technically thicker, it has next to no impact on the flex/feel of the shaft again for 99.98% of people that will ever swing a .335 vs. a .350 tip of the same model.

[theothertomjones]

UPDATE!

 

Guess who has two thumbs and made a bad shaft choice?

 

MEEEEEEEE! 😂😂😂

 

So yeah regardless of the numbers and description, the C-Taper Lites are simply not a good choice for me. I have no idea how I ever played C-Taper 120s. I’m starting to think I got hustled a bit in my fitting way back then. Even the CTLs feel like swinging rebar and it doesn’t match well with my current swing. For the record, demo $-Taper Lite R’s didn’t feel comfortable either. I’m thinking the Tour R or Tour Lite S is a better choice. More data to come, but back to the CTLs—
 

Good news:

- Met with a sports science PT guy who trains golfers (mutual friend of a friend). 

- I’m learning a LOT about myself and my swing. 
- Turns out I’m a sweeper these days, and have developed a narrow swing which better protects my lower back (I have an L3-5 herniation which pinches my sciatic nerve from time to time). So, often times my brain subconsciously protects my body and “ejects” out of the last 20-25% of the swing. What would be a more negative AoA is a positive AoA. 
- I have some exercises and drills to do now to improve. 
- Just dropped the clubs off to have the KBS Tour Lites put back in. Flight may be high but the shafts are 100 times more controllable than the CTLs. I’ll take control over numbers any day, and it will help a lot to sort my swing out. 
 

Bad news: 

- I hit some balls with my 7i when it was NOT 100 degrees outside and I STILL didn’t like the numbers 😇

- SS was 70 mph (10+ mph loss from the Tour Lites) with a BS of 88

- Launch Angle 28 deg with +4 AoA, and Smash of 1.26

- Spin rate was 4600 with an avg apex of 75 feet. 
- Avg carry was 112 and avg distance was 119. 
 

Dispersion wasn’t bad at all, and my miss was a pull hook left. I think a softer profile shaft like the TLs is a better fit. I think 10 mph more ball speed and some slight swing work will get me into a better 130-140 carry range.
 

At now least I know what category of shaft in the KBS line doesn’t work for me. 
 

 

 

Edited July 24 by theothertomjones

[rsballer10]

tinkering is fun and all, but it just seems like this is an exercise in futility. If you are hitting 4-5 up on a 7 iron there isn't a shaft in the world that can correct that. That's how much Rory/Bryson hit up on their driver, on a TEE. That low point needs to be moved FORWARD, which will be the first part of correcting AoA.

 

The loss of 10mph of clubhead speed is a real red flag, but so were the "experts" that recommended a shaft change to hit the ball lower. 

[IC3BURGH]

I think it is very good that you are working on your physical abilities to manage your golf swing. This is a much better rabbit hole for you to go down right now rather than tinkering with equipment.

Edited July 24 by IC3BURGH

[theothertomjones]

1 hour ago, rsballer10 said:

tinkering is fun and all, but it just seems like this is an exercise in futility. If you are hitting 4-5 up on a 7 iron there isn't a shaft in the world that can correct that. That's how much Rory/Bryson hit up on their driver, on a TEE. That low point needs to be moved FORWARD, which will be the first part of correcting AoA.

 

The loss of 10mph of clubhead speed is a real red flag, but so were the "experts" that recommended a shaft change to hit the ball lower. 

Oh my swing needs work no doubt, but the motivation here is was to better understand myself as a golfer. Part of that process is doing your own fact finding for yourself.

 

So, the goal here wasnt specifically to lower AoA—I had these reshafted before I even owned the launch monitor. I had no idea what my AoA was. I was just simply looking for a shaft that, purely based on numbers) better fit my SS, with a lower trajectory, and lower spin. From a numbers perspective I NAILED all 3 of those! 😂 But I (we) learned that I nailed them under totally not-ideal circumstances (+4 AoA). 
 

So, what are the reasons for that AoA? Well… even though sweepers tend to hit upward with longer irons (I assume most other swing types do as well) this is excessive in part due to my own physical limitations. My ball position was very forward, as in driver position forward—it’s part of some drills my teacher has me doing to improve my physical limitations among other things. Also, I wanted to use the same position as the first session in the OP to have consistent variables when comparing session data. Lastly, the profile of this rebar shaft can definitely throw off timing and affect AoA.

 

i agree with your sentiment entirely, but it wasn’t from bad advice from any experts. I simply looked at numbers, made a decision based on shafts I used/liked in the past, and it simply isn’t the right choice for me now. I think there’s a lot of value to what I just learned, and it will help me make more informed decisions in the future. 
 

That being said, the PT friend of a friend mentioned above agreed that graphite iron shafts could very much be a viable solution for me. The Tour Lites are the “easiest” iron shafts KBS makes. A stiff flex could probably knock the height down with minimal impact on spin, and the graphites are intriguing, but I’ll worry about all that later. I think we can all agree the swing needs some improvement first 😇

 

Oh, and if I really want to knock this fitting journey out quickly the Titleist tour van rotates around the local golf courses here monthly. I can just pay $100 and have an answer in a few hours, but I wouldn’t learn as much. 
 

Im hoping that posting about my journey here will help other amateurs understand fitting a bit better. For me personally, I knocked an entire category or two of shafts off the list, so that’s a win. 

 

Edited July 24 by theothertomjones

[theothertomjones]

48 minutes ago, IC3BURGH said:

I think it is very good that you are working on your physical abilities to manage your golf swing. This is a much better rabbit hole for you to go down right now rather than tinkering with equipment.

Hahaha I agree 100%. But I wouldn’t be a GolfWRXer if I didn’t buy random stuff to try and destroy my progress at the same time 😎

[rsballer10]

8 minutes ago, theothertomjones said:

I was just simply looking for a shaft that, purely based on numbers) better fit my SS, with a lower trajectory, and lower spin. From a numbers perspective I NAILED all 3 of those! 😂 But I (we) learned that I nailed them under totally not-ideal circumstances (+4 AoA)

It's not that +4 AoA is not ideal, it's the limiting factor. Understood you don't have a launch monitor, but fitters do 🙂 and most of them are pretty good at identifying what equipment can and can't do. Mine told me my delivery wouldn't work and didn't fit me to a new driver (and he was right)

12 minutes ago, theothertomjones said:

So, what are the reasons for that AoA? Well… even though sweepers tend to hit upward with longer irons (I assume most other swing types do as well) this is excessive in part due to my own physical limitations. My ball position was very forward, as in driver position forward—it’s part of some drills my teacher has me doing to improve my physical limitations among other things. Also, I wanted to use the same position as the first session in the OP to have consistent variables when comparing session data. Lastly, the profile of this rebar shaft can definitely throw off timing and affect AoA.

do you have physical or technical limitations? 

 

Quote

i agree with your sentiment entirely, but it wasn’t from bad advice from any experts. I simply looked at numbers, made a decision based on shafts I used/liked in the past, and it simply isn’t the right choice for me now. I think there’s a lot of value to what I just learned, and it will help me make more informed decisions in the future.

Quote

When I say the previous shafts were way too high, I meant 3 course pros and a part time club fitter all eyeballed it and agreed I needed to knock the height down. Not that it was a negative, but you could tell the ball flight itself wasn’t optimal. As my old fitter told me high is perfectly fine as long as you have the right spin rate. My S55s with CTaper Stiffs launch pretty darn high but it’s a penetrating high and holds greens, it wasn’t a balloon then drop like it fell off a cliff. 

I stand by what I said 🙂 

Quote

That being said, the PT friend of a friend mentioned above agreed that graphite iron shafts could very much be a viable solution for me. I think we can all agree the swing needs some improvement first 😇

100%, nobody is expecting tour pro #'s. But for the irons to do their job, ball first then turf. There's no way around it.

18 minutes ago, theothertomjones said:

Oh, and if I really want to knock this fitting journey out quickly the Titleist tour van rotates around the local golf courses here monthly. I can just pay $100 and have an answer in a few hours, but I wouldn’t learn as much. 
 

Im hoping that posting about my journey here will help other amateurs understand fitting a bit better. For me personally, I knocked an entire category or two of shafts off the list, so that’s a win. 

if anything, I think it's reinforcing the need to find quality fitters and instructors.

[theothertomjones]

16 minutes ago, rsballer10 said:

It's not that +4 AoA is not ideal, it's the limiting factor. Understood you don't have a launch monitor, but fitters do 🙂 and most of them are pretty good at identifying what equipment can and can't do. Mine told me my delivery wouldn't work and didn't fit me to a new driver (and he was right)

do you have physical or technical limitations? 

 

I stand by what I said 🙂 

100%, nobody is expecting tour pro #'s. But for the irons to do their job, ball first then turf. There's no way around it.

if anything, I think it's reinforcing the need to find quality fitters and instructors.

I’m not sure you’re following what’s been said earlier in the thread. 
 

This goes back to the part where I had a very trusted fitter for about 12+ years, who I considered a friend, who I later learned was just manipulating me for sales. Talented fitter—fitter of the year multiple times for multiple brands, but I learned the hard way salesman first, fitter second. That’s why I’m learning how to do this on my own as much as possible. I’m highly skeptical of fitters until further notice. 
 

Physical limitations: L3-5 herniation, replaced left ACL, partially torn right ACL (surgery can’t correct at the moment), slight arthritis in both hips and wrists. I spent 10 years in the military and taught/trained/competed in tae kwon do for 20+ years, bowled competitively for 30 years, plus diabetes so, yeah, my body aches. 

 

The part you quoted about launch being too high was with the old shafts (which are being reinstalled now) and before I had a launch monitor. So we will see what the AoA, spin, and height is next week. 

Edited July 24 by theothertomjones