How does the DIVNICK™ compare to other adjustable golf clubs?

There have been more than 120 patents on adjustable golf clubs since 1895…and that first one was pretty ingenious for the technology that was available during that era. But all the designs have lacked the playability, performance, and feel of modern clubs. If you are interested in patent research, we encourage you to review our patent from the US Government files. You can also click on the references to past inventions to see older patents. Click here to begin that tour.

The "All-In-One" adjustable is our club, but marketed by one of our distributors under their tradename. We supply it to them.

Condor

A few years after we introduced our Whole-In-One, a mail-order company made a direct copy. In fact, they made their molds right off of our club...didn't even try to change the look.

However, they do not include several of the most important features, and have not been a significant threat to our proprietary design.

Shaft: The Condor uses a .375" tip-diameter iron shaft that is cut into two pieces. So it collapses down to only 28" in length and is very stiff. Remember, when you overlap a few inches of shaft-sections, it stiffens up the shaft dramatically. So the 4-iron head-weight that they copied, ends up on a super-stiff shaft that yields un-rewarding shots. We designed our head to fit on a .335" tip-diameter driver shaft. Ordinarily, if it was a one-piece shaft, that would be too flexible. But we cut the shaft into 3 pieces with 2 overlapping sections. Not only does that collapse down to a shorter 18" length which is much easier to pack for travel, it stiffens it back up to a normal 4-iron flex which produces a rock-solid shaft, majestic shots, and a great feel.

Lofts: The Condor only has odd lofts (3, 5 ,7, 9) because they do not have a "ring gear" transmission which is quite a bit more expensive to make. Also, they mold their head out of 300-series stainless which is not tough enough for the number of teeth necessary for a transmission, while ours is 17-4 stainless...a more expensive and more rugged material.

Lever: Their lever is chrome-plated plastic. Because plastic flexes, the chrome is vulnerable to flaking, so it is not a good engineering option. It also adds weight where it is best to keep it light. Our lever is glass-filled nylon, which is designed for the automotive industry in various high-heat and strength components, so it is very rugged.

Super Stick

For a couple of decades prior to our introduction of the DIVNICK™, perhaps the best design was being sold as the "Super Stick". It was strongly-built and replicated the traditional lofts.

Its drawbacks were that it did not have perimeter weighting, the mechanism was high on the back of the head which produced a high center of gravity and caused it to interfere with the ground on steeper lofts, the shaft alignment was behind the head rather than offset in front as with modern clubs, it required a coin to loosen and tighten, had 3 confusing index marks to line up, and the 2 piece shaft was a stiff .395" diameter that fit over-the-hosel. It could not collapse any shorter than 23" which is too long to fit into a brief case or other small carry-on luggage.

"Universal" or "Walker "

A few years after we came out with the DIVNICK™, the originator of the Super Stick adapted some of our design features on an improved version of their club which was called the "Walker". The name was later changed to the "Universal". We have a side-by-side photo comparisons linked later on this page.

Even though the Universal is an improvement over the Super Stick, there are still some important weaknesses. It still includes the stiff .395" shaft and 23" closed length. The shaft exposes a critical performance difference, even more profound than the stiff Condor. Normal iron shafts are .375" diameter at the tip which is epoxied into a female hosel socket. The Universal uses the extra large .395" tip that fits over a male stud which is easier to manufacture. When it is cut to make it telescopic, the overlapping sections result in an even stiffer shaft.

Our shaft begins as a .335" driver shaft which would result in too much flex if we used it as a one-piece shaft. But we cut it into 3 pieces with two overlapping sections which "stiffens" it up to a normal iron feel with medium flex with a medium flex-kick point. That is one of the reasons why our club hits so far with such great accuracy.

The Divnick's 38.5" model (97.8 cm) is a full 3/4" longer than the Universal. It is the length of a modern 4-iron.

The Universal replicates each of the traditional lofts while ours can be set on twice as many because it includes half-lofts.

We consider the Universal/Walker to be the closest comparison to the DIVNICK™. So the rest of this report will be comparing the DIVNICK™ to the Universal Golf Club.

We have had many customers who have previously purchased a Universal and have offered some direct comparison feedback. In addition to hitting farther and more accurately, which will be discussed below, the most common report is that the DIVNICK™ is much easier to use. The reasons for this will become more evident in the photo comparisons linked below.

Robot Laboratory Comparisons

In October 2002, Golf Laboratories, the premier club performance laboratory in the world compared the Divnick and the Universal producing 16 pages of graphs and tables. We invited the Universal manufacturer to participate in the tests...sort of a "May the best man win" competition, but they declined.

The testing protocol used a robot to hit 30 balls on 3 different lofts of 3 clubs (3-iron, 5-iron, and 9-iron) with 10 balls each on the center, heel, and toe. A second test was done two weeks later on all three lofts with center hits only to validate the first test. The input energy was the same for all swings. Distance, dispersion, and spin-rates were plotted for every shot.

Golflabs reported an early problem with not being able to keep the telescopic Universal shaft from rotating on each hit. They tried two different Universals, and neither one would hold. So the shaft sections were epoxied so that the robot would not need to be reset for each swing.

The Universal and Divnick were then alternated throughout the testing period to minimize wind or other environmental affects. The only measurable wind gave a slight tail-wind advantage to the Universal while testing their 3-iron.

Distance

Total distance was very similar. The Divnick hit a couple yards farther. This was expected as there is nothing magic about delivering mass and club-head speed to a ball with the perfect swing of the robot.

Accuracy

The total dispersion (accuracy) shows the Divnick 38% more accurate! Of the center, heel, and toe comparisons, the largest difference was on toe hits with the Divnick being 138% more accurate. Since that is where the majority of amateur golfers hit the ball, this gives the Divnick an extraordinary advantage. This is a result of the design which places much more perimeter weight toward the toe of the Divnick.

The ball spin-rates (rpm) show the distinct advantage of the lower center of gravity of the Divnick. The total center-hit spin rate of all the Universal hits was 16,920 and the Divnick was 17,920 which is almost a 10% increase. The advantage for the Divnick was even greater with heel-hits at 20% and toe-hits at 23% for a total average of 17% greater spin rates. Of course, higher spin rates result in getting the ball to stop more quickly. The only time it is desirable to reduce spin rates is with a driver.

Summary

Since the goal of hitting irons is to be able to predict the place you want the ball to land and stop, the 38% tighter shot pattern and 17% greater spin rate results in a huge advantage for the Divnick.

Click here for a head-to-head photo comparison of the DIVNICK and the Universal/Walker.

Click here to read testimonies from customers who own both a Universal and a DIVNICK.

Click These Topics For More Information

Main Adjustable Page

Click here to read more reports and testimonies about the Whole-In-One Adjustable...

Click here to read more reports and testimonies about the BIG STIK...