You mean like wedges? I should think that would be negligible to non-existent if the club has good grooves and the face is clean.
If the club face is not grabbing the ball well, spin rate will be adversely affected.
You can see the results of a really grippy wedge on a flop shot. Ball hits the green and stops like it has brakes. I love doing those (Was actually one of the few things I did fairly consistently well, last season.)
"America is at that awkward stage. It's too late to work within the system,,,, but too early to shoot the bastards." -- Claire Wolfe
"If we let things terrify us, life will not be worth living." -- Seneca the Younger, Roman Stoic philosopher
"The dominant media is no more ``mainstream`` than leftists are liberals." -- me
For a clean-faced short iron or wedge with respectable grooves, the ball doesn't slide up the face. Instead, the ball compresses to some extent and the club's grooves make brief, but positive contact with the ball. I have 20+ year old TaylorMade Firesole irons. With my 7 iron and shorter clubs, with solid hits, I see definite evidence of the contact on the club face -- the grooves tear into ball covers, leaving small shavings in the grooves. These shavings marks are always round -- they never climb up the club face, nor make a vertical ellipse. I have also tested this with Strike Spray -- a powder spray that clearly shows impact locations on the face.
I haven't found websites which go into to the technical details or physics of why maximum obtainable smash factors are lower with higher-lofted clubs. I do suspect some of the club's forward energy is transferred into spin energy, rather than ball speed. But I also wonder if launch monitors try to measure ball speed on the ground -- essentially the horizontal component -- rather than the ball's absolute launch speed on whatever upward angle that occurs. Regardless of the physics behind smash factor calculations, I know and accept that drivers, 6-irons, and wedges are built for different purposes.
Both work and personal challenges have limited my time for chasing the little white ball. Once a week, I've tried to hit a small bucket of balls at the nearby municipal course during lunch. I always bring my Garmin G80 to monitor club speeds & smash factors. I bring my chart from the second page of this thread to confirm feel vs reality. I bring Strike Spray for when I'm struggling to hit with the center of the club face.
My ball striking consistency is slowly improving. My 18-hole scores are beginning to drop back into the 80's. My drives are becoming more consistent and more accurate. But on the flipside, I'm still making stupid mistakes. Good thing I have a day job.
So....is the $400 Garmin G-80 launch monitor & course GPS improving my game? I think so.
Yep, I noticed it, and so has a somewhat impulsive golfer at our office. He wants to buy it today.
If the R10 does what it purports, then the $2k Mevo+ and the $2k Skytrack have uber serious competition. I feel there needs to be some independent testing against a Trackman and/or GCQuad. Web rumors hint that the R10's radar isn't sophisticated enough to actually track the ball rotation -- rather, the metrics are based on algorithms. Time and testing will tell.
But if the $600 R10 truly measures all those metrics accurately, I'm all over it like white on rice.
|quarter MOA visionary|
I am interested primarily on accuracy and more metrics.
The simulation stuff is no real concern of mine as I don't have anywhere to set it up.
|Powered by Social Strata||Page 1 2 3|