Trying to make sense of the Slot Craze

[braincramp52]

This is a question for someone a lot smarter than me when it comes to clubs. Since the max core is .830 and most all companies max the core out,what benefit does a slot in a club of any kind have if you've already reached the max "springiness" ? How can companies say they have a hotter face when everyone's is physically the same? This doesn't make sense to me so I hope someone can help me out.

[gvogel]

I'll try.

The trick is getting that .830 COR across more of the club face. It is fairly easy to build a club, especially a driver, with a COR at .830 on the sweet spot. But how many of us hit the sweet spot all that often?

So designers are trying many different ways to get larger areas of the club face close to the .830 COR. Slots, different internal face configurations, cup face designs, you name it.

It is also harder to get the high COR on a fairway wood, and that's probably where slots have really helped.

I'm not sure that high COR is important for irons; what you really want is consistency. But TaylorMade is trying to convince us that high COR is good on irons as well. Time will tell on that one.

[MelloYello]

I've played quite a few of Nike's "Compression Channel" clubs in the VR line which were the first modern clubs to feature this sort of technology. What's weird is that I feel I'm almost better off swinging hard and that the more aggressive I swing, the more gains I see in feel, distance and forgiveness from the Compression Channel. I'd almost say that swinging smoothly is inadvisable with these clubs which are supposedly performing better "lower on the face."

I really don't have any input on the Adams and TM stuff which I simply haven't hit.

[MtlJeff]

my opinion from having played clubs with and without is that it's 99.7% marketing gimmick

[playa]

I think it is possible to get a "hotter" face by optimizing flight and spin. I have a Cleveland Classic 310 and it has noticably more roll tha other drivers. Bu in saying tbat I have serious doubts that all tbe bells and whistles on new drivers make them any better especially for amateurs who struggle to put the same swing on it consistently. I have always used glued heads with no gimmicks and I hit it just fine.

[313]

you forgot about the monocoque frame... at least one golf company uses this for design/marketing

at least in theory, the frame that supports the high cor face (say the crown/sole/side walls)... can flex just as the face. perhaps if the frame flexes enough & in sync w the face, it can contribute to an overall spring effect. maybe, it can also be rigid enough to not add to cor w that test, yet with higher forces (w a swing) it will add a little.

i dont know, but its another idea.

[Think293]

I'll start out by saying I'm not really a Taylormade fan. I've never hit a driver/fw wood of theirs that I like and never even tried their recent irons. With that being said, I was at Edwin Watts Saturday and the Speed Blade Demo Iron caught my eye. It looks "cool" without the gimicky look that I usually associate with TM.

My typical miss is thin and I play with Ping G20s. They were the least penalizing irons I demoed when hit low on the face. With a 7 iron, I'd lose 5 or 6 yards when hit a few grooves thin. I don't know if it was the slot technology in the speed blades or something else, but the same mishit didn't result in any noticeable loss of distance. It's obviously not going to get a ball in the air that you top, but that slight mishit doesn't really have any consequence. They didn't really seem any longer than the G20.

- Jordan

[braincramp52]

[quote name='313' timestamp='1382906840' post='8065513']
you forgot about the monocoque frame... at least one golf company uses this for design/marketing

at least in theory, the frame that supports the high cor face (say the crown/sole/side walls)... can flex just as the face. perhaps if the frame flexes enough & in sync w the face, it can contribute to an overall spring effect. maybe, it can also be rigid enough to not add to cor w that test, yet with higher forces (w a swing) it will add a little.

i dont know, but its another idea.
[/quote]


But the face can still only be .830 COR. Even the old Cobra SZ's had 9 points of max COR.

[HighSpeedScene]

[quote name='playa' timestamp='1382905887' post='8065467']
I think it is possible to get a "hotter" face by optimizing flight and spin. I have a Cleveland Classic 310 and it has noticably more roll tha other drivers. Bu in saying tbat I have serious doubts that all tbe bells and whistles on new drivers make them any better especially for amateurs who struggle to put the same swing on it consistently. I have always used glued heads with no gimmicks and I hit it just fine.
[/quote]

What were we talking about again?

[313]

i believe cor is measured using a machine that basically drops a metal arm/ball onto the face & pops out a measurement on a computer. it isnt done under high force, as with a club/ball contact at speed. so maybe the face will respond, but less so with the entire clubhead. thats my interpretation of the test.

it would seem (to me) that the test is discounting higher forces & body flex. maybe the extra body flex can contribute back a little, during a real swing with a real ball, at full speed. again, my interpretation of the marketing.

[Rebel420]

Not arguing that the true COG point or sweet spot on ANY club is by definition of a point, infinitesimally small. With that said, traditional clubs, when a ball is struck within an area the size ranging from the diameter of a pencil eraser to a quarter will suffer negligible loss of distance. Game improvement clubs with the hotter faces, try to maximize this area by not only having max COR at the sweet spot, but over more of the face. This and the high MOI (resistance to twisting) are what we call "forgiveness". The slot technology is designed to make the leading edge of the club respond to the same flex forces that act upon the center of the face, effectively extending the "sweet spot" (or should I say, perceived sweet spot) lower on the face, adding more forgiveness for THIN shots. The improved slot in the SpeedBlade over the RocketBladz extends that thin shot forgiveness further out toward the heel and toe. When applied to fairway woods and hybrids, the slots give the appearance of hotter face, as these clubs are more likely to be picked thin than dug in and hit fat.

For those who don't hit thin, by all means I can understand how you could see the slots as a gimmick....for those who do miss thin, it's great. Thin a shot with a blade, then thin a shot with a SpeedBlade or Rocketbladez...better yet, try it with cold, hard range balls in 40* weather... Tell me you can't tell the difference. Not only will the shot be punished less, but your hands will be punished less also

[bmpnugls]

In terms of COR value, isn't it only drivers which are handcuffed with the .830 limit/restriction? Hence the reason so many 3 woods are being used nowadays as a viable driver substitute off the tee (A la Phil!).

If so, then I can see where "gimmicks" such as 'slots' etc could help "milk" that extra little amount of COR in fwy woods and hybrids (and possibly long irons). But I'm sure the key 'driver' for the 'slot technology' and related 'gimmicks' is to achieve a higher COR value across more face area providing greater forgiveness.

[coops]

Most irons are not at maximum COR ( and don't really need to be, let's face it)

There have been various models available for many years that can maximize the iron face COR - think Wishon designed a set, Epon amongst others, mostly by using thin spring/ 'carpenter' style steel faces mounted onto the separately produced body section.

Casting a slot is a lot cheaper way to achieve the same ends... and most importantly allows for maximum marketing bullsh@t.

ps good point above, though, about the sweetspot being extended a bit downwds to the leading edge.

[I_HATE_SNOW]

Marketing genius, nothing more.

[Nessism]

So as we all know, flex within the face increases COR. For a club like a driver that has a large face, it's easier to create this flex though thickness variation within the face itself compared to smaller clubs like fairway woods, hybrids and irons. I think the slot design is pretty ingenious, because it increases design freedom by creating another way to allow the face to flex, which is of particular importance with these small faced clubs. No doubt there is some "slot technology" marketing going on, but I can certainly imagine that a good designer could legitimately put the design methodology to good use.

[Rebel420]

[quote name='dirtyboy' timestamp='1382964616' post='8067943']
Marketing genius, nothing more.
[/quote]
Please cite any scientific data that disproves that the slots do not aid in essentially expanding the "perceived sweet spot" down toward the sole of the club. Preferably, data that shows the ball speed on thin hits with identical clubs (except one with slots and one without).

I will agree that the slots so little to nothing for perfectly struck shots (i.e. Dead center of the sweet spot), but to say its only marketing when talking about "thin shot forgiveness and feel" has never really tried clubs like this to compare. Like I said. Hit a few hard range balls in 40*f weather, and make sure to thin a few. Tell me you can't feel the difference.

[harold baines]

[quote name='Rebel420' timestamp='1382970884' post='8068273']

Please cite any scientific data that disproves that the slots do not aid in essentially expanding the "perceived sweet spot" down toward the sole of the club. Preferably, data that shows the ball speed on thin hits with identical clubs (except one with slots and one without).

[/quote]

you do remember that things such as... painting the clubhead white.... "expanded the perceived sweet spot" as well....

c'mon man... do you really think the club is bending like a sponge in that slot?
really, from a design standpoint... the slot is actually making the face stiffer and less spring like due to the additional metal that's in there perpendicular to the face (the short sides of the slot, acting like an I- beam)

[Nessism]

[quote name='harold baines' timestamp='1382972418' post='8068393']
[quote name='Rebel420' timestamp='1382970884' post='8068273']
Please cite any scientific data that disproves that the slots do not aid in essentially expanding the "perceived sweet spot" down toward the sole of the club. Preferably, data that shows the ball speed on thin hits with identical clubs (except one with slots and one without).

[/quote]

you do remember that things such as... painting the clubhead white.... "expanded the perceived sweet spot" as well....

c'mon man... do you really think the club is bending like a sponge in that slot?
really, from a design standpoint... the slot is actually making the face stiffer and less spring like due to the additional metal that's in there perpendicular to the face (the short sides of the slot, acting like an I- beam)
[/quote]

Now harold, how do you know that slot doesn't allow the face to flex? Unless we have access to the design data we are just guessing eh?

[Rebel420]

[quote name='Nessism' timestamp='1382972986' post='8068441']
[quote name='harold baines' timestamp='1382972418' post='8068393']
[quote name='Rebel420' timestamp='1382970884' post='8068273']
Please cite any scientific data that disproves that the slots do not aid in essentially expanding the "perceived sweet spot" down toward the sole of the club. Preferably, data that shows the ball speed on thin hits with identical clubs (except one with slots and one without).

[/quote]

you do remember that things such as... painting the clubhead white.... "expanded the perceived sweet spot" as well....

c'mon man... do you really think the club is bending like a sponge in that slot?
really, from a design standpoint... the slot is actually making the face stiffer and less spring like due to the additional metal that's in there perpendicular to the face (the short sides of the slot, acting like an I- beam)
[/quote]

Now harold, how do you know that slot doesn't allow the face to flex? Unless we have access to the design data we are just guessing eh?
[/quote]
The point is, this has been used by at least 2 OEM for close to 3 years now and none of the other OEM have challenged it. If it was all hype, and could be proven, it would be a fast way to knock your biggest competitor out of the game.

Is the sped slot through the sole any different than the slot behind the face on the Mizuno MP54? That slot is to increase forgiveness around the face, now if that slot went all the way through the sole, wouldn't it be fair to say its also increasing the lower strike forgiveness? The a slot tech is no more of a stretch to believe than perimeter weighting.

Again, these OEMs have provided stats and figures based upon robotic testing. And I would find it hard to believe that they could have been bluffing this for so long without a challenge. So by all means, if someone has proof, robotic testing data or anything other than their own biases, please share. I would love to be proven wrong.

[trumb1mj1]

I thought the slot was marketing mumbo jumbo until I thinned my first RBZ 4w and still got some height and carry. I think it helps for this scenario.

[harold baines]

[quote name='Nessism' timestamp='1382972986' post='8068441']
[quote name='harold baines' timestamp='1382972418' post='8068393']
[quote name='Rebel420' timestamp='1382970884' post='8068273']
Please cite any scientific data that disproves that the slots do not aid in essentially expanding the "perceived sweet spot" down toward the sole of the club. Preferably, data that shows the ball speed on thin hits with identical clubs (except one with slots and one without).

[/quote]

you do remember that things such as... painting the clubhead white.... "expanded the perceived sweet spot" as well....

c'mon man... do you really think the club is bending like a sponge in that slot?
really, from a design standpoint... the slot is actually making the face stiffer and less spring like due to the additional metal that's in there perpendicular to the face (the short sides of the slot, acting like an I- beam)
[/quote]

Now harold, how do you know that slot doesn't allow the face to flex? Unless we have access to the design data we are just guessing eh?
[/quote]

you don't need design data

look at how small the slots are, and how much metal has been added to create the slot... there's a lot of metal that has to be added to a clubhead in order to create that slot... and all that added metal doesn't make it more flexible.

if anything, the added metal and weight from creating the slot, moves the CG of the head and that's really what changes things rather than some mythical flexing

[harold baines]

[quote name='Rebel420' timestamp='1382973994' post='8068537']
[quote name='Nessism' timestamp='1382972986' post='8068441']
[quote name='harold baines' timestamp='1382972418' post='8068393']
[quote name='Rebel420' timestamp='1382970884' post='8068273']
Please cite any scientific data that disproves that the slots do not aid in essentially expanding the "perceived sweet spot" down toward the sole of the club. Preferably, data that shows the ball speed on thin hits with identical clubs (except one with slots and one without).

[/quote]

you do remember that things such as... painting the clubhead white.... "expanded the perceived sweet spot" as well....

c'mon man... do you really think the club is bending like a sponge in that slot?
really, from a design standpoint... the slot is actually making the face stiffer and less spring like due to the additional metal that's in there perpendicular to the face (the short sides of the slot, acting like an I- beam)
[/quote]

Now harold, how do you know that slot doesn't allow the face to flex? Unless we have access to the design data we are just guessing eh?
[/quote]
The point is, this has been used by at least 2 OEM for close to 3 years now and none of the other OEM have challenged it. If it was all hype, and could be proven, it would be a fast way to knock your biggest competitor out of the game.

Is the sped slot through the sole any different than the slot behind the face on the Mizuno MP54? That slot is to increase forgiveness around the face, now if that slot went all the way through the sole, wouldn't it be fair to say its also increasing the lower strike forgiveness? The a slot tech is no more of a stretch to believe than perimeter weighting.

Again, these OEMs have provided stats and figures based upon robotic testing. And I would find it hard to believe that they could have been bluffing this for so long without a challenge. So by all means, if someone has proof, robotic testing data or anything other than their own biases, please share. I would love to be proven wrong.
[/quote]

the "standing wave" in the Xhot stuff is basically the same thing as the slots in TM clubs

added weight down low and close to the face

[I_HATE_SNOW]

[quote name='Rebel420' timestamp='1382970884' post='8068273']
[quote name='dirtyboy' timestamp='1382964616' post='8067943']
Marketing genius, nothing more.
[/quote]
Please cite any scientific data that disproves that the slots do not aid in essentially expanding the "perceived sweet spot" down toward the sole of the club. Preferably, data that shows the ball speed on thin hits with identical clubs (except one with slots and one without).

I will agree that the slots so little to nothing for perfectly struck shots (i.e. Dead center of the sweet spot), but to say its only marketing when talking about "thin shot forgiveness and feel" has never really tried clubs like this to compare. Like I said. Hit a few hard range balls in 40*f weather, and make sure to thin a few. Tell me you can't feel the difference.
[/quote]

LOL, scientific data and a golf club? You have got to be kidding! Do you really believe the 17 yards more crap? I seriously doubt that the integrity of the face is changed by having a slot close to it, maybe if it was full of compressed Nitrogen or had a tensioned string to keep the head from flexing? (Zevo Compressor) or a double face, these are just different ways to sell clubs.

[chrisday83]

[quote name='harold baines' timestamp='1382981935' post='8069227']
[quote name='Nessism' timestamp='1382972986' post='8068441']
[quote name='harold baines' timestamp='1382972418' post='8068393']
[quote name='Rebel420' timestamp='1382970884' post='8068273']
Please cite any scientific data that disproves that the slots do not aid in essentially expanding the "perceived sweet spot" down toward the sole of the club. Preferably, data that shows the ball speed on thin hits with identical clubs (except one with slots and one without).

[/quote]

you do remember that things such as... painting the clubhead white.... "expanded the perceived sweet spot" as well....

c'mon man... do you really think the club is bending like a sponge in that slot?
really, from a design standpoint... the slot is actually making the face stiffer and less spring like due to the additional metal that's in there perpendicular to the face (the short sides of the slot, acting like an I- beam)
[/quote]

Now harold, how do you know that slot doesn't allow the face to flex? Unless we have access to the design data we are just guessing eh?
[/quote]

you don't need design data

look at how small the slots are, and how much metal has been added to create the slot... there's a lot of metal that has to be added to a clubhead in order to create that slot... and all that added metal doesn't make it more flexible.

if anything, the added metal and weight from creating the slot, moves the CG of the head and that's really what changes things rather than some mythical flexing
[/quote]

I'm struggling to understand why you think that removing metal from a solid clubhead and inserting a low density polymer in its place would possibly make anything "reinforced".

[Socrates]

While I understand the science and I believe it to be valid, this is how I really view it:
[attachment=1929371:pig.jpeg]

[SatelliteGuy]

I thought the slot was to allow more weight in other places. My R11s goes just as far as any Adams I've hit...

I didnt think it was a distance thing.... Just a forgiveness thing...

I'm probably dumb but there's MO

[Nessism]

[quote name='dirtyboy' timestamp='1382982627' post='8069291']

LOL, scientific data and a golf club? You have got to be kidding! Do you really believe the 17 yards more crap? I seriously doubt that the integrity of the face is changed by having a slot close to it, maybe if it was full of compressed Nitrogen or had a tensioned string[size=5][b] to keep the head from flexing[/b][/size]? (Zevo Compressor) or a double face, these are just different ways to sell clubs.
[/quote]

You realize of course that we WANT the head to flex, not the other way around. Funny thing is that in the past there were a lot of club manufacturers telling us that stiffening the face will lead to distance. Some heads were filled with nitrogen to reduce flexing, some used face reinforcing techniques, etc. Guess this nonsense has created distrust, which is understandable. At any rate, Nike, Adams, and Taylormade have all created clubs with a flex zone off the face so to speak, so I for one believe that it's a viable technique to add flex. Just don't know how effective it is though.

[I_HATE_SNOW]

Adams=Taylormade

I know the face is supposed to deflect, the head is not.

[harold baines]

[quote name='chrisday83' timestamp='1382982745' post='8069305']
[quote name='harold baines' timestamp='1382981935' post='8069227']

you don't need design data

look at how small the slots are, and how much metal has been added to create the slot... there's a lot of metal that has to be added to a clubhead in order to create that slot... and all that added metal doesn't make it more flexible.

if anything, the added metal and weight from creating the slot, moves the CG of the head and that's really what changes things rather than some mythical flexing
[/quote]

I'm struggling to understand why you think that removing metal from a solid clubhead and inserting a low density polymer in its place would possibly make anything "reinforced".
[/quote]

I'm talking about FW's.. and you're talking about irons

re-irons...if you really think you're so strong that you're compressing a slot....full of plastic..... you're entitled to your incorrect opinion
how deep is that slot.... and how far back from the face is it on those irons.. c'mon...

[enduro]

This thread has predictably turned into yet another TM bashing session.

The slots on the Adams and TM FW heads [u][b]are[/b][/u] designed to allow body flex according to their literature. Basically , increasing COR without affecting face durability..

Yes, the distance claims are outlandish, realistically only the highest swingspeed players are seeing much difference. A reasonably unbiased 2012 FW test on another website did have the RBZ as the longest 3w. But, it only tested 2 -5 yards longer on average, basically an insignificant distance increase.

Similarly I doubt there are the big gains to be had from the Xhot that many are claiming, but thats another thread in itself.

For me, the biggest issue is turf drag from the slots on the RBZ and Adams clubs so I dont use them. I'll gladly trade a few theoretical yards off the tee for better playability from fairway .