Inertia - threw one a bit today

Golf Discs, Bags, Baskets, Videos, and other Disc Golf Related Equipment

Moderators: Timko, Solty, Frank Delicious, Blake_T, Fritz, Booter

Re: Inertia - threw one a bit today

Postby UncleBrother2001 » Mon May 05, 2014 3:42 pm

BentElbow11 wrote:Right, Inertia won't be much shorter than Tern or King at 250 ft of distance.


:lol: Sorry Pmantle I had to laugh at that.
Tern|Beast|PD|Stalker|Truth|Comet|Suspect|Judge|Wizard|Magic

"Driver controls the music,shotgun shuts his cakehole"
UncleBrother2001
Tree Magnet
User avatar
 
Posts: 385
Joined: Wed Mar 05, 2014 3:47 pm
Favorite Disc: Truth

Re: Inertia - threw one a bit today

Postby JR » Tue May 06, 2014 11:12 am

UncleBrother2001 wrote:
BentElbow11 wrote:Right, Inertia won't be much shorter than Tern or King at 250 ft of distance.


:lol: Sorry Pmantle I had to laugh at that.


Yeah the information content of a 250' shot with each of them flying 250' seems lean :D Cannot fault the logic though hehe.
Flat shots need running on the center line of the tee and planting each step on the center line. Anhyzer needs running from rear right to front left with the plant step hitting the ground to the left of the line you're running on. Hyzer is the mirror of that.
JR
Scandinavian Video Mafia
User avatar
 
Posts: 11526
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2007 6:07 am
Location: Finland, sea level
Favorite Disc: About to ace

Re: Inertia - threw one a bit today

Postby jubuttib » Sun May 11, 2014 9:39 pm

BentElbow11 wrote:Every mfgr's discs can vary from the flight characteristics they claim, and often do...EVERY mfgr. Everybody knows this. You're the first person who has such a problem with it that you're actually insisting they all change the numbers on their discs at random, each run. It's insane. Have you ever heard of the word "standardization"? How about a "uniform measuring system"?
Disc flight numbers mean very little as they are, because there are no standards, there are no uniform measuring systems, many companies don't even use the same rating categories, and there's so much variance in the discs to make any rating given to a mold suspicious at best. All of the companies really SHOULD modify their systems, try to come up with a unified testing methodology and rating system so that they would actually have comparable numbers, and take run variations into account. One way to get the run variances somewhat taken into account could be achieved with a fairly simple machine vision or laser based scanning system (something suitable for rapid measurements) that quickly measured the PLH of the discs going down a conveyor belt and then sorted them into bins based on the results, which could later be stamped separately in some way (let's say + for the high PLH ones, - for the low PLH ones, and nothing for the ones that fit their target disc).

Of course I have no illusions about any of that happening, because there aren't enough high class disc nerds who'd really appreciate it to make it profitable (it wouldn't necessarily be a complex system, but it would be quite an expensive one), and frankly I'd rather see that money go into developing a way to make the discs more consistent in the first place, and also the companies don't necessarily seem all that buddy buddy as to be willing to work with each other for a unified system. They "should" do those things, it'd make the ratings actually useful for something, being more helpful for both beginners and more advanced players alike (now I basically need to take my own reference discs with me and compare dome and PLH when buying discs), but of course they won't be doing it.
BentElbow11 wrote:According to you, the people at Innova, Lat 64, Westside, etc are all a bunch of yahoos who don't know what they're doing and assign completely erroneous #'s to their discs...
I don't believe they don't know what they're doing, but I do have a feeling they really don't care all that much. And why should they, when business is going along quite swimmingly without them actually making the ratings something truly useful and accurate.

Heck, even getting different ratings for different plastics would help a bit, though individual variances can still overrule even those...
BentElbow11 wrote:Regardless of dome or flat top, the L wing of the Leopard is an understable design and does not induce fade. Another example is the TL, which doesn't have turn like the Leopard, but it's not overstable and the L wing produces very little fade, if any.
Mmmmmmmmmmmmyeah normally that's indeed so, but an L wing disc can indeed be overstable. Exhibit A: The L mold Monster. And I'm fairly certain I've seen L mold Xcals as well. Neither are AS overstable as their X mold brethren, but they're still decidedly overstable. It'd have to be a REALLY freaky molding of a Leopard to actually be overstable, with immensely high rising PLH, but it's not totally out of the realm of possibilities. Hell, I've had a fucking 150 class DX Archangel that flew like Champ Banshee. Yes, seriously. Weird things can happen.

There's still another possibility as well: Molding issues making the L wing into something that is NOT an L wing. Two of my favorite runs of my favorite discs are such freaks, the original 1st run orange P-MD2s and the 2nd run C-FDs. At first I didn't notice it, but later I figured out what made the orange P-MD2s fly so much more stable and resist wear so much better than the red P-MD2s from the same original run: The wing of an MD2 is supposed to be flat, but the orange ones had come out with slightly concave wings. The difference isn't massive but it's clearly visible to the naked eye and also easily distinguished with a fingertip, you can consistently pick those out blindfolded. And a few days ago when I received my 1st run C-FD2 I compared the profile to my DGR CFR and production run S-FDs as well as my 1st and 2nd production run C-FDs. I like all of them, but the 2nd run Cs are my favorites because they have a lot of HSS while having fairly little LSS, basically they kicked my neutral Teebirds out of my bag. I'm hoping that the C-FD2 will fly mostly like they do. Anyway, the FD2 seemingly has the same wing as the FD but a different top, resulting in a blunter nose (possibly spacers as well), "artificially" raising the PLH, so trying to get the stability out that way rather than with the wing shape. Not a bad idea as such, the original MD2 mold was with a sloping shoulder and a sharper nose, but the mold revision that happened around when production C was introduced switched that to a higher shoulder top with a blunt nose profile (older CFR C-MD2s usually have the old sloping top) increased the HSS of the disc significantly and made them a lot better in the wind. The actual wing is flat, verging on slightly convex (S-Lines tend to have more noticeably convex wings). The 2nd run C-FDs though have a very clearly concave wing, not as concave as a proper X-mold wing and lacking the notch, but still concave, as well as being the highest PLH FDs I've seen (bottom of the nose is even higher than on the C-FD2, though the top of the nose is still higher in the FD2). Again, not a massive difference, but visible to the naked eye and clearly felt with a fingertip.

So yeah, there can be so many huge variations in discs that under normal circumstances I can believe almost any disc being called almost anything, and just assume that the person talking about it got unlucky. Though note, while I CAN believe it, it's not certain that I will. There are still plenty of reasons why people could have weird opinions of discs, like not being able to throw properly.
Parks wrote:If the posts on this forum are any indication, the PD is like a Teebird with sunshine coming out of its butthole so hard that it flies faster.
Anode|ION|JOKERi|MD2|FD|TD|PD|LEGENDa
jubuttib
Long Finnish Word
User avatar
 
Posts: 5447
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 4:30 pm
Location: Finland
Favorite Disc: Orange FR P-Line MD2

Re: Inertia - threw one a bit today

Postby BentElbow11 » Sun May 11, 2014 10:23 pm

Very interesting and informative.

Regarding "standardization" and "uniform measuring system", I was not implying that they get it right with this, but that they have to arrive at some method of measuring the characteristics of their discs.

Slightly concave L wings, I haven't seen this myself, but don't doubt it. We know that Innova likes to tweak their molds without disclosing it, same for those discs they make for Discmania and Millennium. The Plus rim is a good example, lots of plus rim Innova product floating around before they ever started acknowledging and marketing it as such.

And I agree that the biggest variable in perception of disc stability is based on throwing ability. That's why you have to wonder when people start describing US discs as OS, or vice versa.
BentElbow11
Tree Magnet
 
Posts: 441
Joined: Thu Oct 24, 2013 7:39 pm

Re: Inertia - threw one a bit today

Postby jubuttib » Sun May 11, 2014 10:39 pm

BentElbow11 wrote:Very interesting and informative.

Regarding "standardization" and "uniform measuring system", I was not implying that they get it right with this, but that they have to arrive at some method of measuring the characteristics of their discs.

Slightly concave L wings, I haven't seen this myself, but don't doubt it. We know that Innova likes to tweak their molds without disclosing it, same for those discs they make for Discmania and Millennium. The Plus rim is a good example, lots of plus rim Innova product floating around before they ever started acknowledging and marketing it as such.

And I agree that the biggest variable in perception of disc stability is based on throwing ability. That's why you have to wonder when people start describing US discs as OS, or vice versa.
I'll see if I can take pictures that show it, it's easy to see with the naked eye when you can move it around a bit, but on video or in images the reflections tend to play out very differently and make it less obvious. I doubt it's a purposeful mold tweak though, since the discs differ in other ways as well, for example they're a lot flatter and stiffer than the other C-FD's I've handled, and the plastic looks a bit different as well, has a different sheen to it. I'm guessing the plastic just shrunk differently this time, or they cooled it in a different way, or something. Some CFR runs that have resulted in higher PLH and flatter discs have been left into the mold for a longer time after injection than normal production run discs, and to be honest these remind me of my CFR C-PDs in some ways, so it could just be a process difference.

And yeah, +molds can indeed be surprises, I know Jussi was annoyed by Innova making +mold C-PDs without asking.
Parks wrote:If the posts on this forum are any indication, the PD is like a Teebird with sunshine coming out of its butthole so hard that it flies faster.
Anode|ION|JOKERi|MD2|FD|TD|PD|LEGENDa
jubuttib
Long Finnish Word
User avatar
 
Posts: 5447
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 4:30 pm
Location: Finland
Favorite Disc: Orange FR P-Line MD2

Previous

Return to Equipment

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests