METAFLEX CBT SHAFT TEST AT KIGOS The MetaFlex driver shaft manufactured by Special Joy Co. was tested at KIGOS (Korea Institute of Golf and Science), a government-funded independent third-party testing facility, using a state-of-the-art swing robot and GC Quad launch monitor. The shaft was measured and analyzed for its claims of improved golf shot performance with the driver. In particular, the shaft testing aimed to determine the characteristics of the MetaFlex golf shaft by analyzing how it behaves and performs both in its static state (EI profile) and dynamic state (golf swing), and to determine the amount of left/right dispersion(+/-) from the center line under controlled uniform conditions of a swing robot. The results, data, pictures, and videos herein and attached were witnessed by KIGOS head researcher Mr. Kim Gwang-hyuk, Mr. Jung Yong-ho, general manager of GolfMechanix Korea, and James Chang, editor-in-chief of a Korean golf equipment review website. TEST PARAMETERS To establish a baseline of data for comparison, a raw uncut Vent** TR Blue 5s (TR shaft) was analyzed by GolfMechanix Shaft EI Machine (See attached EI profile). A brief summary of specs includes measurement of 59 grams, 250cpm, and measured torque of -4.44 (company website states 3.3 TQ) Of the MetaFlex shafts, the closest in weight was the CBT 6H shaft at 58.5 grams (See attached EI profile). A brief spec summary includes measurements of 203cpm, and measured torque of -6.73 (company website states 5.0 TQ) (NOTE) Well-known EI profile method is 3-point bending test to check the stiffness of particular sections from butt to tip. GolfMechanix EI machine is a cantilever method and it is specialized for measuring major shaft characteristics such as frequency, torque, spine, bending curve and surface evenness(taper ratio), etc automatically. Among these characteristics, frequency and torque are the typical specs that even weekend golfers can imagine the difference of feeling. And a small difference in stiffness between spine point and weak point means that it is able to bring more consistent shot results regardless of the spine direction. CLUBHEAD, SHAFT, ROBOT SETTINGS Both TR shaft and MetaFlex 6H shaft was set to driver build length of 45.5” with TRS2 driver head at 9-degree loft at standard neutral setting (UniFit adapter). Fresh batch of ProV1x (2023) golf balls were used to collect the data. The baseline club head speed was set at 95mph and the clubface path was calibrated to deliver the club head at an attack angle of 0 degrees. The swing robot was also calibrated to consistently impact the center of the clubface. After carefully calibrating the swing robot as above, both the TR shaft and MetaFlex 6H shafts were fitted to the TSR2 driver head. The swing robot executed a total of five drives with each driver/shaft at 95mph (see values for TR shaft and MetaFlex 6H on the datasheets down below). TR SHAFT 5s – SWING DATA SUMMARY Swing robot was set to +7mph higher at a total of 102mph (see values for TR shaft +amp on datasheet), and a total of five swings were executed at the faster speed to measure the Offline deviation to the left of the center line (depicted in negative number). The resulting average dispersion to the left of the center line was recorded at -17.2 meters (18.81 yards). Swing robot was then set to -7mph slower at a total of 88mph (see values for TR shaft -amp on data sheet), and a total of five swings were executed at the slower speed to measure the Offline deviation to the right of the center line (depicted in positive number). The resulting average dispersion to the right of the center line was recorded at +15.3 meters (16.73 yards). For TR shaft, the average dispersion was measured to be a total 32.5 meters (35.54 yards). METAFLEX 6H – SWING DATA SUMMARY Swing robot was set to +7mph higher at a total of 102mph (see values for MetaFlex 6H +amp on the datasheet), and a total of five swings were executed at the faster speed to measure the Offline deviation to the left of the center line. The result showed no dispersion to the left of the center line, but an average +9.2 meter (10.06 yards) dispersion to the right of the center line. Swing robot was then set to -7mph slower at a total of 88mph (MetaFlex 6H -amp on datasheet), and a total of five swings were executed at the slower speed to measure the Offline deviation to the right of the center line (depicted in positive number). The resulting average dispersion to the right of the center line was recorded at +13.3 meters (14.54 yards). For the MetaFlex 6H shaft, the average dispersion was measured to be a total of 13.3 meters (14.54 yards). OBSERVATIONS In comparing the average total dispersion of the two shafts in a dynamic motion state of a golf swing, the MetaFlex 6H shaft yielded a much smaller dispersion value of 13.3M (14.54Y) compared to total average dispersion of 32.5M (35.54Y) for its counterpart TR shaft. Of more importance, despite the increased +7mph clubhead speed from the established baseline, the MetaFlex 6H shaft did not deviate to the left at all. This result was unexpected to all witnesses as the shaft behaved unlike any other shafts ever tested at KIGOS past and present. Although actual swing data was not recorded, the MetaFlex 6H shaft was also tested at 110mph and 115mph speeds with the swing robot in an attempt to discern whether the increased speeds would cause the ball to deviate left. The recorded videos showed that even at faster speeds, the amount of deviation decreased between 0 and +2 meters (2.2Y) to the right of the center line. Kim Gwang-hyuk and Jung Yong-ho both stated that they had never witnessed such results, as the conventional wisdom based on countless prior shaft testings showed that as speed increases, the shots tend to deviate further left. The unexpected results seem to support the manufacturer’s claims of increased shot performance of the MetaFlex shaft with its proprietary Carbon Bending Technology (CBT). By focusing on a shaft’s behavior characteristics in the dynamic setting (actual golf swing), the manufacturer says the shaft has been modified and improved to provide better not only tighter dispersion, but also improve on attack angle, carry distance, and less deflection (drooping) of the club head – all factors that act upon the club at the point of impact. Given that the EI profile has shown MetaFlex shaft to be much softer than TR shaft in both flex (203cpm versus 250cpm) and torque (6.73 versus 4.44), the results of significantly less dispersion was all the more surprising. Furthermore, the manufacturer adds that despite the softer shaft profile, the MetaFlex shafts also feel and play much firmer during the swing (dynamic state) than what the soft EI profile (static state) suggests. Furthermore, the manufacturer adds that despite the softer shaft stiffness, the MetaFlex shafts also feel and play much firmer during the swing (dynamic judgment) compared to its shaft specification(static judgment) such as CPM or torque. Again, if this is true, it is in line with the manufacturer’s claim of having engineered the shaft to behave in a whole new way during the actual swing. This claim of a firmer feel at impact belies the actual soft EI profile/stiffness, but cannot be tested/proven by the swing robot, as it is not capable of analyzing or comparing the subjective category of “feel.” This enigmatic data (or observation) can only be determined by actual human golfers, and remains relegated to an individual’s perceived senses of how firm the shaft feels and plays during the actual swing. In an unofficial video, the two testers Kim Gwang-hyuk and Jung Yong-ho can be seen waggling the club and marveling at how much firmer the shaft feels despite the soft EI profile/stiffness. After hitting dozens of driver shots with the same MetaFlex 6H/TSR2 driver on GC Quad, both remarked that the shaft felt even firmer still upon actual swing, and compared the feel of the MetaFlex 6H shaft to that of a conventional 6s shaft. They were surprised that a 203cpm shaft can feel like that of a much firmer (260~280cpm) shaft. Both testers attempted to “turn over” the club head to produce a hook on purpose, and barring outright missed shots, were unable to do so. CONCLUSIONS Based upon the official test and data results from KIGOS Institute, it is the opinion of both the head researcher and general manager of GolfMechanix Korea that MetaFlex shafts and its CBT technology do indeed produce an unusual dispersion characteristic, not seen previously in any other shaft testing. The resulting data from the swing robot test can be interpreted to help certain golfers significantly decrease the area of dispersion, and help to avoid left misses (for right-handed golfers). Although more tests will be needed, initial test data and results seems to indicate that the MetaFlex 6H shaft is unusual in that it does not follow the expected outcome of Speed-Accuracy trade-off that all other golf shafts exhibit. The unexpected firmer feel at impact despite the soft EI profile/stiffness and flex were attested by both, but no official data could be derived due the limitations of the current measurement tools. Other dynamic data such as launch, attack angle, carry distance, and club tilt axis at impact can also be interpreted to be more favorable relating to shot performance, including this particular test of comparison with the TR shaft. The MetaFlex shafts can be beneficial to higher-speed elite golfers and tour-level professionals to decrease the risk of losing shots to the left (for right-handed golfers) when properly fitted. The result of not having to deal with the left-misses alone can be deemed an incredible advantage. The manufacturer’s claim of using CBT technology to dial in any shaft to tighter tolerances, thereby producing shafts to suit any specific golfer swing styles and speeds, further opens the door for near-endless customization possibilities of their shafts.
