We match your driver to your favorite club


       There is One “best” Golf Shaft Flex  For Each Player

   Almost all ads for golf clubs extol the advantages of new head design technology. (Click on the tab  on the above menu marked Iron Heads or Driver Heads for debunking of such ads). In the ads, the role of the shaft in club performance is treated as a generic component ranked below the head, club length, swing weight and grip in importance. But several articles appearing in golf magazines in the early 1980’s cited game improvements ascribed to matching shafts to player’s swings. I decided to measure the importance of shaft flex on shot distance and direction control.

   In order to separate the effect of the the shaft flex from all the other club design parameters, I constructed 30 six  flex-test 6-irons with the same club head model, grip and swing weight but with a shaft flex difference of  around 3 cycles per minute (CPM), just 1/7th  of a letter flex.  These test irons were used to span the 90 CPM range from L to Xsiff  starting at 240 CPM up to 330 CPM.   







      Information shown in these charts will never be published in golf magazines tody, because their advertisers wouldn’t profit from it. But once in awhile, an article sneaks by the censors like this one printed a long time ago in the February 1987 issue of Golf Digest. In answer to the question; “How would an amateur determine his best flex?” David Graham claimed  “The best way to do this is to build a set around a favorite club’s shaft flex. I don’t believe 1 percent of golfers are playing with proper shaft flex and the shaft is 98 percent of a golf club for hitting more consistent shots”. David Graham never mentioned exactly how to assure other clubs in a set matched the favorite, but I figured out how to do it.


A favorite Club contains all the information needed to find the best flex for a driver

   I noticed two interesting facts after an hour long in-person  test to determine a player’s best flex. Every  player who had with a favorite club, tested to the same shaft frequency as the frequency of his favorite club. Secondly, comparing handicap improvement between players with driver re-shafting to those re-shafting only their irons, the driver had much more impact than any other club and perhaps all the other clubs combined. This is probably due to the fact that it is hit more often and driver miss-hits run the score up more than miss-hits with other clubs.

    My approach to shaft flex fitting  shown in the tests above suffers from two drawbacks. It is accurate but time consuming. More importantly, it requires the physical presence of the player being fitted. This is where the Internet comes in.  It provides the opportunity to contact players on a global scale so that their driver flex can be based on information derived from a their favorite club. This can be accomplished without the physical presence of the player and thereby replaces the in-person flex test described above. I have tried this short-cut fitting method locally and it is effective, as the testimonials describe. Your favorite club, any club longer than an 8 iron, can be used as a model for a perfectly fitted driver. I need the club at my shop to extract the weight, swing weight, flex(frequency), shaft bandwidth and flex profile and grip model and size, all of which need to be copied.

    Now I am offering folks located around the country, who do not have access to our flex test facility, the opportunity to mail his, or her, favorite club, along with the offending diver specifications, to us and we will send back a matching driver shaft along with the favorite.

                                  Your driver may become your favorite!    

  The chart on the left is the summation of the yardage difference between the best and worse flexes of 100 tested players besides Lucien. It illustrates the impact that the shaft flex has on distance. Not only is the average 14 yard difference much higher than expected, but many players had very large differences, as the chart on the left illustrates. Whoever said that shaft flex doesn’t matter is proven to be dead wrong. As the chart to the left shows, the smallest difference between any player’s best and worst flex is 5 yards and the largest is 23 yards!


   Of course not everyone is playing with  their worse or their best flex. Half of those tested in the above sample, had their own clubs with them  to compare to the test clubs. Only 8  of them, 15%,  are playing  with their best flex.(See the 8 players plotted on the vertical axis).

    The average player is losing 9 yards with his 6 iron. A few are losing much more. This data supports the oft-cited suspicion that nearly 90 % of players are playing with miss-fitted clubs, or we should say, their miss-fitted shafts.

Players with various handicaps were tested by hitting 3 shots with each 6-iron whose flexes separated by only 3 CPM. Lucian’s test is shown on the left. He hit only 20 test clubs. His best flex was revealed to be 302 CPM. It is evident from the chart that 3 CPM why increments of only a few CPM are necessary to identify the best flex. Also note that his very high swing speed would suggest that he swing Xstiff shafts according to  industry dogma. Fexes above and below 302 CPM reduce his average shot length by about 15 yards. Who said that flex does not matter? Wouldn’t you want to play with the 302 flex in your 6 iron, if you were Lucian?


Shows yards lost between best flex and present club flex Shows distance achieved between worse and best flex Plot of 6 iron shot distance for player hitting flexes from L to XS