Harrison Shotmaker

Harrison Shotmaker

Joined: January 13th, 2001, 8:30 am

September 4th, 2011, 5:51 pm #1

Quote
Like
Share

Joined: August 16th, 2005, 10:50 am

September 4th, 2011, 8:01 pm #2

They report good results. One is a low capper, one is about a 12.
I have not been out with them to see. Then again, the low capper liked the Nunchuk, till he didn't.

The Shotmaker shoots a hole in the "clubhead on a string" theory.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: January 1st, 1970, 12:00 am

September 4th, 2011, 8:42 pm #3

they provide proof. I heard nothing in their product introduction video that made such a claim.

I think it unlikely that their device is defying basic physics. 'Cold fusion' got a lot a lot more press before the claims were proved false

Peter
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: August 16th, 2005, 10:50 am

September 4th, 2011, 9:18 pm #4

How can gear effect, for example, be reconciled with the string theory?

There is a dwell time of the ball on the face, and actions and reactions happen during that time, however short. The string theory is useful in explaining some things about golf shot physics, but it is sort of a KISS explanation of what happens.

Harrison says the Shotmaker reduces shaft deformation during the ball dwell time, and that it has no effect on the shaft prior to that. I have no way to prove or disprove their claim. I've seen their videos which show it, but whatever. But if true, the only way it can change the dispersion is if the string theory is not quite 100% correct. Same with gear effect, which absolutely does exist, and requires dwell time and something more solid than a string to work.

Maybe I'm trying to apply (or test) the string theory over-broadly. That's the way I've always seen it presented, though. Broadly.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: January 1st, 1970, 12:00 am

September 4th, 2011, 9:32 pm #5

the club head behaves as a 'free body' for the duration of impact. 'String theory' is something completely different.

Gear effect only works because the club head acts as a free body during impact.

The Shotmaker intro video makes a number of claims but none of them have to do with the club head NOT acting as a free body. The vibrations and the bending of the shaft as a result of impact are things that happen after the ball has left the clubhead. During the time of impact there is no time for the shaft to respond and that has not only been demonstrated by peer reviewed science but is in fact part of every golf companies product work.

Peter
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: October 11th, 2001, 7:22 pm

September 4th, 2011, 9:54 pm #6

if it tests better and they have the data...then they do and that is that. If players are improving their ball striking by 25% fairways hit after it is in there, so what about strings and free bodies and such.

So what?

Kevin



Never quit til you have a swing you'll never forget!
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: August 5th, 2002, 5:38 pm

September 4th, 2011, 11:05 pm #7

Regards,
Bob
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: January 1st, 1970, 12:00 am

September 5th, 2011, 2:04 am #8

if it tests better and they have the data...then they do and that is that. If players are improving their ball striking by 25% fairways hit after it is in there, so what about strings and free bodies and such.

So what?

Kevin



Never quit til you have a swing you'll never forget!
the fact that it improves performance is all that matters. That is fine but speculation that the source of that improvement is from overcoming basic physics should be challenged whether it comes from the inventor or from any other source. While it may work that is not how/why it works.

Peter
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: January 1st, 1970, 12:00 am

September 5th, 2011, 2:43 am #9

there is an interesting point. The insert is installed apx 8" away from the tip of the club. The chief engineer said that if it was installed closer than about 6" to the tip it would change the playing characteristics of the shaft. the fact that it is not intended to interfere with the club head to shaft interaction makes me think that the 'stabilization' of shaft bend to which he refers in the product intro video is actually akin to what you get from spine aligning a shaft or perhaps like what you get with a filament wound shaft. He never mentions 'spine' or any other words that might imply spine aligning but this is not a surprise since the OEM golf industry does not offer spine alignment to consumers.

When the idea of spine alignment was tested years back there were no quantifiable performance improvements recorded; instead there was a double blind study where golfers were given 3 clubs with different spine alignments and asked to designate their favorite. There were clear results in this study favoring particular spine alignments. This causes me to wonder if this product has the same positive impact if the shaft has been spine aligned.

Peter
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: January 13th, 2001, 8:30 am

September 5th, 2011, 2:48 am #10

I thought of that also. The shotmaker is recommended by Golf Lab and they are experts at spine aligning so maybe it also improves spine aligned shafts. I will e-mail Leith Anderson and ask him.

Regards, Herbert
Quote
Like
Share