Quantcast
Misinformation Damascus steel's value to golf - Page 2
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 22

Thread: Misinformation Damascus steel's value to golf

  1. #11

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Top of Georgia
    Posts
    1,218
    OK well it that regard your stainless steels can be split into two categories, ferritic and austenitic. Or in simpler terms magnetic and nonmagnetic. The ferritic (magnetic) grades like the AEBL you mention respond to heat treatment. The austenitic (nonmagnetic) steels like 304 do not respond to heat treatment. That may be why you can't find someone to do it.

    -AJ

  2. #12
    The hardness doesn't effect the vibration. Vibration is controlled by the elastic modulus which remains the same regardless of heat treatment. Therefore you could go as hard as you want without changing the vibration.

  3. #13
    Senior Member Lucretia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Isle of Lucy
    Posts
    1,615
    OK, not a golfer, but it sounds like he's talking about changing the metal of the head, and the rest of the club stays the same. The affect of hardness would be to change the frequency composition of the energy input into the club when it hits the ball, which determines the excitation of the club and its dynamic response. Softer materials produce lower frequency excitations, harder materials higher frequencies. That said, looking at different steels I'd say the difference would be negligible and difficult to even measure. For modal analysis testing purposes, to get different excitation profiles a "hard" tip will be metal, a "soft" tip will be rubber--I just don't see that there would be a big energy difference as a result using different steels, assuming the heads are geometrically identical.

    OP, for "vibration", are you talking about how the club feels in your hand? The weight of the head will probably have more effect than the material used.

    I wouldn't say the elastic modulus "controls" vibration. The elastic modulus is related to, and can be derived from, the dynamic properties of the material. Two materials with different elastic moduli have different resonant frequencies, but the elastic modulus doesn't "control" it. Instead it is a measurement of material's inherent characteristics.
    Now is not the time to bother me. And it's always now. Wiley Miller

  4. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by Lucretia View Post
    OK, not a golfer, but it sounds like he's talking about changing the metal of the head, and the rest of the club stays the same. The affect of hardness would be to change the frequency composition of the energy input into the club when it hits the ball, which determines the excitation of the club and its dynamic response. Softer materials produce lower frequency excitations, harder materials higher frequencies. That said, looking at different steels I'd say the difference would be negligible and difficult to even measure. For modal analysis testing purposes, to get different excitation profiles a "hard" tip will be metal, a "soft" tip will be rubber--I just don't see that there would be a big energy difference as a result using different steels, assuming the heads are geometrically identical.
    I'm not sure where to start with my response. You're confusing many things together, and using some terms I'm not familiar with, i.e. frequency composition. Bottom line, you're confusing stiffness and hardness. Elastic modulus is a measure of stiffness.

  5. #15
    I went and did some double checking and as I thought most professional players on the tour prefer some sort of Stainless steel. Some are cut by CNC and the face is deep milled. Some are polymer inserts. While some play carbon putters most do not because professional greens are much faster and steel seems more crisp IMO. Think that is why a majority of amateur players prefer carbon because greens are slower and it is forgiving on mishits away from the sweetspot. Honestly, I haven't been able to tell much difference on paper the differences in the stainless steals used are negligible. Putter makers like Scotty Cameron (Titleist) have patented phrases such as "German Stainless Steel". Their putters are better because they don't use American Stainless steel but someone did a comparison of the two steels and found them to be identical. Saying he used German SS allowed him to charge 3x his normal crazy price and rabid golf fans paid it. As this has become more controversial he has said in response that his putters have a better steel and feel because he double anneals his steel. I am not expert but isn't that redundant or over kill. He is the one who came out with a limited damascus putter, made 27, and charged $15,000 each. I put the picture below. It doesn't look damascus to me but maybe I'm worng. I got called Mr. Thomas' shop and was surprised to get to talk to him myself and he was the nicest guy. I think he has had more than few golfers or club manufactures call about his SS Damascus and quickly get off the phone when they find it cost prohibitive. That did not surprise me because as I stated previously they would rather find inexpensive material to make look nice so they could sell their customers on how it outperforms putters made with the same material. I'm not lying when I say golfers actually argue on message boards about whether German Stainless steel is better than American Stainless steel. I have been talking to Lee and Ken from Xenon Golf, who left a big company to start their own custom shop and he seemed interested to talk with Mr. Thomas. Hope the guys at Xenon get in touch with Mr. Thomas so they too can become better educated on the best metals to use. As far as I know SS is preferred by club builders because of its ease in machining. Maybe the guys at Xenon will be interested in casting it is something the no one does currently as far as I know. Just wanted to thank Mr. Thomas for taking the personal time to talk to me and y'all for having the patience to answer some of these simple questions. I positive sure now as I had suspected that most of the metals golfers are overcharged for are basically the same but are marketed to convince them that they are somehow better and the damascus being used in some putters is poorly created or not damascus at all. I still love the look of Mr. Thomas stainless damascus and think it would be incredible after being heat treated. I will be more than happy to pay a premium for something I know is a special metal and that is painstakingly hand crafted. $1000 for a one of kind putter with steel forged by hand and milled by a craftsman beats 27 factory made ones that cost $15,000. Here is that crazily priced putter. This can't be true stainless damascus can it? I misspoke he sold them for $19,000 and called his damascus the highest grade of any steel possible. Of course now you can't find any information on his site. Thanks again.


    http://http://www.golfdiscussions.co...?topic=32093.0

  6. #16
    I was going to say there is a definite difference from carbon, to stainless, to copper. I go by Brinell and Rockwell results but I am new to learning about all of this but metallurgy is fascinating to me. I dont think you are wrong shaft and grip will change it a little but what I am looking for is the how crisp the ball comes of the face. There are differences however slight between these materials. What gets crazy is when golfers actually convince themselves there is a difference between German Stainless steel or American Stainless steel. I have also been bothered by custom club makers claiming they have damascus steel and it is the grade of steel possible. It turns out they are using carbon damascus or worse regular stainless that is somehow etched or colored to poorly mimic the contrasts. No one that I have seen has used stainless steel damascus or if they if it is rare. I think, especially if heat treated it perform tremendously and look amazing. Like I posted it would probably cost $1,000 hand made from steel to putter but that is nothing compared to the $19,000 people paid for that stupid Scotty Putter. I maybe stepping outside of my extremely limited knowledge and please dont hesitate to tell me I am way off but I think feel of carbon steel vs stainless has something to do the ductility of the steel based on the carbon content of the steel.

  7. #17
    correcting second sentence above

    *bothered by club makers who overcharge for damascus clubs and claim it is the highest grade of steel possible

  8. #18
    Like I said, hardness values are not what you should look at.

  9. #19
    Engorged Member
    El Pescador's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    1,904
    Scotty Cameron put together a Titleist Del Mar II with a Mokume Gane insert made from copper, bronze, and nickel silver for me when I caddied for him in the late 90's. Felt just like a soft copper insert. Good luck with the putter.
    "So you want to be a vegetarian? Hitler was a vegetarian and look at how he turned out."

  10. #20
    Senior Member Lucretia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Isle of Lucy
    Posts
    1,615
    Quote Originally Posted by Larrin View Post
    I'm not sure where to start with my response. You're confusing many things together, and using some terms I'm not familiar with, i.e. frequency composition. Bottom line, you're confusing stiffness and hardness. Elastic modulus is a measure of stiffness.
    mea culpa--responded before coffee. Testing jargon is to use a soft tip or a hard tip on your hammer, you are correct regarding stiffness vs hardness . And it doesn't sound like it's the vibration of the club that's the issue, rather it's the nature of the collision between ball and head of club.


    WARNING: Boring nerdly stuff ahead

    As far as frequency composition goes...this is an oversimplification and the units aren't correct, but:


    put a force gage between the ball and putter, and the resulting force when you hit the ball will look something like this:

    Name:  Force.jpg
Views: 28
Size:  11.2 KB

    When you look at a garbled up waveform like you get from the force gage, you can recreate the waveform by adding sine waves of varying amplitudes and frequencies:


    Name:  AddingWaveforms.jpg
Views: 126
Size:  98.7 KB

    Perform a Fourier transform on the signal from the force gage, and you basically get a graph of amplitude vs frequency of the sine waves required to recreate the force you've measured.


    Name:  FFT.jpg
Views: 28
Size:  12.6 KB


    Why do we care? Because the golf club based on its geometry and materials will resonate at particular frequencies. If your Fourier transform of the force shows large amplitudes at these frequencies, the golf club will respond and vibrate more energetically.


    Now here's a tricksy bit--the effective force with which you hit the ball turns out to be the square root of the area under the curve after the Fourier magic has been performed--regardless of the shape of the curve. You can have a narrow band of frequencies with high amplitudes, or a very broad band of frequencies with low amplitude RESULTING FROM THE SAME EFFECTIVE FORCE. So by materials selection and geometries it is possible to "tune" the club so that the resonant frequency of the club does not occur at a maximum excitation frequency and vibration in the club will be minimized. Or vice versa. In general a stiffer material at the impact point will result in a narrower band with more high frequency components and a less stiff material will give you a wider band with lower frequencies--a "tink" vs a "thud".

    But is sounds like that's not what the question was after all, so feel free to ignore everything I just said.
    Now is not the time to bother me. And it's always now. Wiley Miller

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •