Golf club design claim: Fact or BS?

[Iamme]

In my todays Sunday 4-25 newspaper's insert called "SmartSource Magazine" (one of those several page coupon clip-out thingies), there was a full page ad in there (opposite the full page ad for Oreck vacuum cleaners) about this revolutionary new driver. It is called "The Hammer". Ya gotta love the name. :)

Quote from ad: " The shape of the golf club creates a low pressure pocket behind the club face. The lack of resistance is what allows the club to literally tear through the air in front of the club. This effect is what increases club head speed by up to 25%. Everybody knows that club head speed is a major factor in long drives. Get the club to move faster, and your drives will go further."-Dr. Mike Kearns, Ph.D. Biomechanics.

Ummmm...correct me if I'm wrong (I'm sure you will), but doesn't a created vacuum or low pressure >behind< a moving object cause drag? That's what I always thought. But THEY claim that this low presure pocket...well, read the paragrapgh above again, if need be.

Now the manufacturer also claims that the club head is enormous and has a huge sweet spot. AND they also say that the club face is made out of this revolutionary steel called Zolex, which is twice as light as Titanium and and transfers more energy back to the golf ball, "making titanium obsolete", they say.

Well, I can by into the Zolex bit, but not the low presure bit.

Oh.. I had the advantage to see the picture of the club. Here is what it looks like: Imagine a conventional looking faced driver that is like 4 inches tall! Then picture the top of the club head angling not only back for several inches, but angling downward. The whole club head has a triangular look to it (when viewed from the side), because of this. It is like a tear drop, only without the rounded front. Since the front club face is flat, you would think that this club is NOT aerodynamic. That there indeed would be this low pressure plocket. But how on earth would this INCREASE the clubhead speed. They actually claim in the ad that the clubhead will feel that it is going on the downswing by itself! Well, I would more suppose one would get that feeling if the club were lighter; NOT because or what the good doctor above said.

So...who are the physics experts amongst us?

[Skeptical Greg]

Any pros using it ?

If so, whom, and to what end ?


Ever hear " The proof is in the pudding ... " ?;)

[Matabiri]

Originally posted by Iamme
AND they also say that the club face is made out of this revolutionary steel called Zolex, which is twice as light as Titanium and and transfers more energy back to the golf ball, "making titanium obsolete", they say.

You're not going to be able to make any steel which is less dense than titanium, unless it's full of bubbles.

[Brian the Snail]

Is this it:

http://www.sccgolfinc.com/

" The shape of the golf club creates a low pressure pocket behind the club face. The lack of resistance is what allows the club to literally tear through the air in front of the club. This effect is what increases club head speed by up to 25%. Everybody knows that club head speed is a major factor in long drives. Get the club to move faster, and your drives will go further."

Fluid mechanics can be pretty counter-intuitive at times, but I don't see how this would work. As you say, if you have a lower pressure at the back, then there should be a drag force.

And by the way, I tried googling for "Mike Kearns", but couldn't find someone of that name with a PhD in biomechanics. Although there's a Michael Kearns who's a professor of computer science.

[stingy get]

I have to say, that with my (limited) experience of aerodynamics I agree about the low pressure area causing drag.

The point of using a 'teardrop' shape is to prevent the boundary layer separating - this leads to low drag. Put a flat face on a teardrop = instant separation = no point in using the teardrop!

[The Don]

A fully teardrop shaped driver would probably be a little tricky to use.

[exarch]

I thought drivers were already teardrop shaped to begin with? (As opposed to putters for instance).

I think there's more energy lost in not hitting the ball optimally than there is in reduced speed due to drag forces. It's all about the "sweet spot" (that area of the club face which transfers the maximum amount of force to the ball).

No amount of space-age technological advances will make up for a lousy swing if you ask me. Better to invest in lessons.

[jimlintott]

There are plenty of gizmos and gadgets in the golf world. This one seems awfully cheap at $150 bucks. A very good shaft will cost considerably more and the shaft is really the engine of the club. I didn't believe this until I turfed my $150 driver for a $600 Titlelist driver. The difference was night and day.

A really, really fast swing is 120 mph. The average hacker swings in the 80 mph range. I don't know how much drag is really created at those speeds and I think you are right about the vacuum increasing drag.

If the face is more resilient than the current titanium drivers it will surely exceed the c.o.r. rules and be non-conforming.

[patnray]

I've seen this add in all the golf magazines in the last couple of months. I also questioned the arguement that a vacuum behind the head would decrease resistance and increase swing speed, although I am not an expert in fluid dynamics. I didn't read deep enough to see the claim about steel that's lighter than titanium. I'd like to see them demonstrate that... I'm sure they will sell some clubs though - golfers love gimmics.

I agree that lessons are a far better investment. Even if their claims for this club were true, I doubt I could tell the difference with my swing...

[stingy get]

If the shape were effective, i.e. no separation, then the effect on drag would be beneficial.

Unfortunately, an aerofoil shaped object travelling in a circular arc, (hence possibly an angle of attack to the oncoming air) at between 80 - 120mph. As someone else said - it might be a bit difficult to control, or even hold onto.