You cannot run it at an angle downwards because the club head would fly off during the test. You can glue it, but it will take too long.

+Juan Romero Presumably you want to do it the right way, you find the best adjustment and stick with it, then FLO the shaft to the adjustments and leave it along.

Callaway has a system that accounts for this.

He did. It gives a definitive starting reference to begin testing.

I used to wonder this. Maybe it is useful for making sure the weakest point won't be on 12 or 6 o'clock. I guess the flo (straight laser)can be either on nbp or spine. this video indicates the spine is approximately 12 or 6 o'clock because of fine tuning making big impacts on flo.

Lmao , just saw this video n read ur comments exactly the same thought as me

It certainly is a key element of pureing. Systems using computerized equipment make additional data more precisely, the goal of aligning the shaft to optimize its flexing characteristics under dynamic load is the same.

Club droop is in the equation ,since the the club butt end is supported in the vise and the head end is not supported.The dynamics of each individual swing is not and should be incorporated in rhe flo peocedure.A purist like Moe N would be easy but J Furyk would be difficult.What convinces me about floing a shaft is,I can make a club hook or slice by adjusting the head to the spine.

@@randolphsnyder1505 you are overthinking very small variables

@@billmoyer3254 Yes Bill,I am a overthinker but that's what it took to design the first space simulator,and the people at NASA liked me.The clocking of the club face is fraught with variables, however,I have proven to myself,given the time,I can clock a players graphite shaft to a position that will consistently send the ball to the direction I desire except straight away.Emphasis on GRAPHITE.I have not been able to clock the face to produce consistent straight away shots , I think it is because the center of mass of the head is cantilevered in relation to center of shaft and very slight path deviations produce variable torque values to the shaft.the fade bias on a driver usually ends up between 15 and 40 yards and a consistent fade bias,might sneak in a straight away shot but never a draw. I have been thinking it would be possible to produce a shaft with high torque resistance while it would allow some flex inline with the club path and still maintain the round tapered outward appearance. By the way I love the PXG gen11 driver heads.I have been able to tune them by moving and change weights on stiff shafts.

@@randolphsnyder1505 you made a strawman competency statement and are ignoring the fatal flaws most engineers have in the human input to the equation. Most players negatively shift their weight and cast their hands from inside the proper plane to outside the plane in a late attempt to flush the ball. Toss in the inconsistency of those efforts and you have what?

@@billmoyer3254 Please excuse me if my statements appear to be changing the subject matter. Of course dynamic loading of the golf shaft should be considered and yes the path of the center of mass does change relative to the path of the shaft during the golf swing,and is further complicated by the rolling of the wrists through impact.My work on clocking my shafts has been for my clubs and my swing, it works for me and the proof is,I can make one of my drivers produce a horrible cut 9 out of 10 times,change the shaft and hit it straight 9 out of 10 times. The USGA has recognized these possibilities and have ruled against clocking shafts to produce these results.

You're spot on with that. Pureing/ F.L.O. alignment are a greater benefit to the scratch golfer that to a double-digit hacker with an inconsistant swing pattern. For most recreation level amateurs these added cost procedures provide a psychological placebo.

Sorry, but I beg to differ! If you at least know the club is set up correctly, any offline paths tell you it has to be your swing that's at fault. With a poorly setup club, you haven't got a clue where the fault lies. It could be club, swing, or both. I'd sooner blame the Indian and not the Arrow. Just my opinion.

@@alanread4763 My opinion, based on fact, is that it does very little to nothing at all. I floed my irons that I had been using for 20+ years and found no difference in Distance, Accuracy or Consistency. They felt stiffer at first because I found the strongest bend in each of the shafts and aimed this at the target, then fine tuned floed with the head on. After about 3 games they felt normal again (IE: I got used to them). Fact is I am playing my best golf ever (lowest handicap) with untouched clubs now for about 5 straight years.