#1  
Old 02-18-2013, 02:59 PM
Carnavas's Avatar
Carnavas Carnavas is offline
Eagle Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Bowling Green, KY
Years Playing: 11.2
Courses Played: 54
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 503
PDGA Approval Questions

Sorry if it's been asked before, it'd be a bit ambiguous to search for.

My questions are
1) Why were certain discs (ie aero, spider, leopard, etc) approved both as CE and not CE versions? Was it just that premium plastic was new and they weren't sure about some things?
2) Why has the monster not been approved twice as it has different molds? Same with the eagle (the pdf lists old and new eagles, but I'm under the assumption that the old eagle was drastically different from both x and l molds)

PDF for reference.
http://www.pdga.com/files/documents/...scs_020813.pdf

Feel free to ask other questions as well!
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 02-18-2013, 03:02 PM
notroman's Avatar
notroman notroman is offline
* Ace Member *
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Highland Park, IL
Years Playing: 14.2
Courses Played: 174
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 3,247
Because the PDGA is incredibly inconsistent about enforcing their own rules and the manufacturers take advantage of that because they can get away with it.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 02-18-2013, 03:04 PM
Scoot_er's Avatar
Scoot_er Scoot_er is offline
* Ace Member *
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Ace. TX
Years Playing: 14.4
Courses Played: 123
Posts: 2,195
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carnavas View Post
Sorry if it's been asked before, it'd be a bit ambiguous to search for.

My questions are
1) Why were certain discs (ie aero, spider, leopard, etc) approved both as CE and not CE versions? Was it just that premium plastic was new and they weren't sure about some things?
2) Why has the monster not been approved twice as it has different molds? Same with the eagle (the pdf lists old and new eagles, but I'm under the assumption that the old eagle was drastically different from both x and l molds)

PDF for reference.
http://www.pdga.com/files/documents/...scs_020813.pdf

Feel free to ask other questions as well!

Part of the answer is a nice loophole......keep the name...keep the approval. Pretty sure some companies have even made a totally new disc using an old name and avoided approval.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 02-18-2013, 03:06 PM
notroman's Avatar
notroman notroman is offline
* Ace Member *
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Highland Park, IL
Years Playing: 14.2
Courses Played: 174
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 3,247
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scoot_er View Post
Part of the answer is a nice loophole......keep the name...keep the approval. Pretty sure some companies have even made a totally new disc using an old name and avoided approval.
Yep, this happened a few times that I know of. Probably even more times that I don't know of.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 02-18-2013, 03:09 PM
tbird888's Avatar
tbird888 tbird888 is offline
Don Rickles #1 Fan
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Cincinnati
Years Playing: 9.4
Courses Played: 89
Throwing Style: LHFH
Posts: 9,319
The CE Eagle (according to discspeed) is the Eagle-L. Maybe the reason the EL isn't listed on the docs is because they don't sell the X and L as anything other than Eagles, but there are TeeBirds and TLs and Firebirds and FLs.

With the way Dave likes to tweak his molds, they probably should all have to be recertified since they're not molding inconsistencies, they're actual mold changes.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 02-18-2013, 03:18 PM
notroman's Avatar
notroman notroman is offline
* Ace Member *
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Highland Park, IL
Years Playing: 14.2
Courses Played: 174
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 3,247
Quote:
Originally Posted by tbird888 View Post
The CE Eagle (according to discspeed) is the Eagle-L. Maybe the reason the EL isn't listed on the docs is because they don't sell the X and L as anything other than Eagles, but there are TeeBirds and TLs and Firebirds and FLs.

With the way Dave likes to tweak his molds, they probably should all have to be recertified since they're not molding inconsistencies, they're actual mold changes.
Gateway has done the same in the past. I know the current Apache is a completely different disc from the old Apache. They just used the same name so they don't have to pay to get it approved again.

Innova is getting pretty ballsy too, actually STAMPING different Roc names on their different Roc molds. Star San Marino Roc, Star Rancho Roc... They're all approved by the same mold name. But judging by the past, Innova can get away with a lot more than some of the other manufacturers.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 02-18-2013, 03:30 PM
Cgkdisc Cgkdisc is offline
.:Hall of Fame Member:.
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Twin Cities
Years Playing: 25.4
Courses Played: 572
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 7,595
The manufacturers are only required to resubmit when there are mold changes that change the dimensions that are actually part of the disc specifications. Different plastic in the same mold does not require a resubmission unless the manufacturer wishes to have it tested because they suspect something like the flexibility might be too stiff.

Note in the Disc Spec diagram on the bottom of Page 2: http://www.pdga.com/documents/pdga-t...ers-guidelines that the shape of the curvature from the Leading Edge to the where the disc Height and inner Rim Width are measured is not specified. As long as the Height and Rim Width dimensions haven't changed, the manufacturer can fiddle around with the curve both above and below the Leading Edge. As far as meeting Tech Standards, it's the same disc. Same thing with the dome. There is no dome spec. Because of where the Height is measured, flat, raised or sunken domes can come from the same approved mold.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 02-18-2013, 03:38 PM
tbird888's Avatar
tbird888 tbird888 is offline
Don Rickles #1 Fan
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Cincinnati
Years Playing: 9.4
Courses Played: 89
Throwing Style: LHFH
Posts: 9,319
Quote:
Originally Posted by notroman View Post
Gateway has done the same in the past. I know the current Apache is a completely different disc from the old Apache. They just used the same name so they don't have to pay to get it approved again.

Innova is getting pretty ballsy too, actually STAMPING different Roc names on their different Roc molds. Star San Marino Roc, Star Rancho Roc... They're all approved by the same mold name. But judging by the past, Innova can get away with a lot more than some of the other manufacturers.
I bring this argument up every time this discussion comes up, and I'm resisting the urge to do it now. For an organization that could probably use the cert money, this seems like a loophole that needs to be closed. Aside from the Roc, I also question the plus molds. They're far from the same as the original mold that was submitted for certification, but because they're within the same specs as the mold they're emulating they don't require certification. They're also sold under differentiated names if you count the +.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 02-18-2013, 03:39 PM
notroman's Avatar
notroman notroman is offline
* Ace Member *
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Highland Park, IL
Years Playing: 14.2
Courses Played: 174
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 3,247
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cgkdisc View Post
The manufacturers are only required to resubmit when there are mold changes that change the dimensions that are actually part of the disc specifications. Different plastic in the same mold does not require a resubmission unless the manufacturer wishes to have it tested because they suspect something like the flexibility might be too stiff.

Note in the Disc Spec diagram on the bottom of Page 2: http://www.pdga.com/documents/pdga-t...ers-guidelines that the shape of the curvature from the Leading Edge to the where the disc Height and inner Rim Width are measured is not specified. As long as the Height and Rim Width dimensions haven't changed, the manufacturer can fiddle around with the curve both above and below the Leading Edge. As far as meeting Tech Standards, it's the same disc. Same thing with the dome. There is no dome spec. Because of where the Height is measured, flat, raised or sunken domes can come from the same approved mold.
Wouldn't "rim configuration" be affected by different shapes of the wing? I know they only test the initial 5mm of the wing, but with the rim configuration numbers in the approved list being rounded up to the nearest 1/100th of a millimeter, I figured even slight mold tweaks would produce a noticeable change in that number.
Reply With Quote
 

  #10  
Old 02-18-2013, 03:42 PM
onemilemore's Avatar
onemilemore onemilemore is offline
* Ace Member *
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: San Marcos, CA
Years Playing: 3.4
Courses Played: 24
Throwing Style: LHBH
Posts: 4,651
As the game has grown and more consumers come into the market, has the PDGA thought about tightening their standards? Seems like people get upset by the changes that aren't viewed as changes by the governing body, yet still have a major effect on disc performance.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:48 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.