What's sacrificed when choosing an adjustable club over a non-adjustable one?

[Slab]

In an adjustable club you have additional components such as screws, ferrules, sliders etc and regardless of the material used these will weigh more than a club head made from the same base materials but without the added components

Maybe flawed logic but if you’ve added these things into the club head in various locations what performance or weight distribution aspect has been sacrificed to give the adjustability




edit to add:
Read that back and maybe not explaining myself very well

Take any modern adjustable club (none of which aid the base performance only characteristics to change loft or draw/fade bias) now make the same club with no adjustable components

Without being burdened and restricted by having to factor in the shape, weight and location of these components, the designer will be able to make a better performing club due to the how he can distribute weight and streamline the design

My theory is that this club would outperform an adjustable version, where am I going wrong?

 

[Imurg]

Ping always reckoned they wouldn't go adjustable until the engineers could make the adjustment mechanism light enough to not influence anything else.
Callaway have been using Forged Composite in their heads for years, meaning they can save weight and move weight where its needed. A few others do this too, Mizuno have had carbon crowns for a while.
The engineers are so good at placing the weight where its needed so a few grams at the top of the head/base of the shaft doesn't, I suspect in reality, make a huge amount of difference.

 

[Slab]

Yeah I appreciate it'll be grams but I see shafts from the same manufacturer with a 3 gram difference and we're a breed of people that buy bristle tees for less friction and any number of other gimmicks and features that add a yard here or there. Plus the ultra modern materials would still be available such that a clean componentless club head should invariably add x yards in its performance

 

[USER1999]

I don't think the adjustable drivers will ever be as forgiving as the non adjustable ones, for reasons of weight distribution.

 

[MendieGK]

there is plenty of studies to suggest, that the loft changing mechanism doesnt actually change the loft at all.

 

[turkish]

there is plenty of studies to suggest, that the loft changing mechanism doesnt actually change the loft at all.

Is this because at address we just present the face as the same?

 

[MendieGK]

Is this because at address we just present the face as the same?

I'm not expert, but Tom Wishon is one of the most respected guys in the club building industry.

its a really interesting report - http://wishongolf.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/adjustable-hosel-drivers.pdf

 

[Slab]

I'm not expert, but Tom Wishon is one of the most respected guys in the club building industry.

its a really interesting report - http://wishongolf.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/adjustable-hosel-drivers.pdf

Only skimmed it so far but pretty interesting. The only thing that I don't like is where he talks about loft not changing and 'expecting' the results to show that (the old adage about building a test to meet the expectation etc)

I'll read more later

 

[Region3]

Is this because at address we just present the face as the same?

From how I understand it - which could be wrong - adjusting loft doesn't actually adjust loft, it opens and closes the face.

So you adjust the adaptor for more loft and it just closes the face.
It sits closed at address, so you open the face to make it sit square again. The extra loft comes from you opening the face.

Possibly.

 

[patricks148]

From how I understand it - which could be wrong - adjusting loft doesn't actually adjust loft, it opens and closes the face.

So you adjust the adaptor for more loft and it just closes the face.
It sits closed at address, so you open the face to make it sit square again. The extra loft comes from you opening the face.

Possibly.

sort of get where you are coming from.

last two drivers have been set at 7.5 by a pro and always block it, turned one up to 10.5 and that looked very closed and was a hook machine.

 

[ManinBlack]

From how I understand it - which could be wrong - adjusting loft doesn't actually adjust loft, it opens and closes the face.

So you adjust the adaptor for more loft and it just closes the face.
It sits closed at address, so you open the face to make it sit square again. The extra loft comes from you opening the face.

Possibly.

This may be true for some clubs that appear to offer adjustability of both loft & face angle. However the SLDR, for example, has a sleeve that has a bend in it. Set at minimum loft, the bend in the sleeve has the same effect as moving the hands ahead of the ball i.e. the loft is reduced without any change in the face angle. What Tom Wishon says is that if you sole this club flat on the ground and then grip itit, the face angle will not be square & the loft will be altered. But this isn't how most of us do it. I normally grip the club so the face looks square and therefore the loft is as set. Can't be any other way.

 

[HomerJSimpson]

I've always shied away from too much adjustable tech as I am only going to tinker. Interesting to hear that according to some the loft adjusting mechanism isn't making too much difference