• Discover new ways to elevate your game with the updated DGCourseReview app!
    It's entirely free and enhanced with features shaped by user feedback to ensure your best experience on the course. (App Store or Google Play)

[MVP] MVP Disc Sports (Official Thread) (Part III)

Status
Not open for further replies.
For me I judge the beefiness of a disc more off of the turn than the fade.

If I throw a switch full power, 15' high, flat it will definitely roll.

...same for the crave and it might roll, but will probably be a severe any.

...same for servo and it will turn some, but likely not enough to burn.

I do factor in the fade some but to me that seems more self evident, after the fact, and momentum driven; where turn is something you have to judge in conjunction with how hard and clean you throw the disc.
 
Menace, you remind me of a question I was meaning to throw out to everyone here. (Not sure if this is a dumb "noob" question, or worthy of its own thread?)

When "measuring" the fade of a disc, what do you consider "more fade," the lateral distance the disc fades, or the depth of the angle it fades into? I'm sure one is "correct" and the other isn't, but I don't know which.

For me, a more severe fade is a steeper angle, which results in less lateral movement at the end of the flight. Like a 3 or 4. Where a 1 or 2 is shallower angle, but more lateral movement.

But, I can see how the opposite has it's logic too, that "more fade" actually means 'turns farther off the line.'

Anyone?
 
i was thinking this while throwing a X1 yesterday. didnt so much want to go left far, but more drop wing and get out of the sky.
 
^right. And it seems, based on my experience, that the Innova-style number system considers "more fade" to be the nose-diver type finish.

But I wonder if sometimes there's miscommunication in the disc threads based on one or the other interpretations of "more" or "less" fade.
 
^right. And it seems, based on my experience, that the Innova-style number system considers "more fade" to be the nose-diver type finish.

But I wonder if sometimes there's miscommunication in the disc threads based on one or the other interpretations of "more" or "less" fade.

Definitely could be some misinterpretation because I've always considered further left off line as more fade (RHBH). I never considered that others might have different definitions. It helps when people use terms like "forward penetrating fade" versus a dumping fade when describing a disc.
 
Fade is measured by how hard it fights to tip its wing from flat. Lateral travel is more a function of altitude. Never once occurred to me that a shallow fade with a big lateral travel could be considered high-fade.
 
Fade is measured by how hard it fights to tip its wing from flat. Lateral travel is more a function of altitude. Never once occurred to me that a shallow fade with a big lateral travel could be considered high-fade.

I hear you. For RHBH when a disc runs out of speed and/or spin the left edge starts to tilt down and the disc "fades" or turns left and eventually falls to the ground. I'm just saying that discs that have more fade generally start to tip the left wing down earlier and turning the disc further left for most of the flight. To see this graphically look at the inbounds charts and you'll see that almost any disc with a high fade number ends further to the left than those with low fade numbers. I also agree you get more left lateral movement with more altitude and this is especially true if a disc has more fade. Throw a roc3 really high and and it will generally go pretty far left. Throw a foxbat or a diamond high (discs with little fade) and they won't travel nearly as far to the left. It's definitely a combination of fade and altitude that will cause discs to go left at the end.
 
^Yeah, I don't know. Given the same altitude, a disc with 'more fade' is going to "tip over" steeper, and drop faster, with less lateral movement.

I think the 'earlier starting gradual fade' is more a function of a disc with less fade not thrown entirely to speed...? I'm feeling around in the dark for a light switch here, not claiming I know.

Speaking of drifting off line, this might be new-thread worthy?
 
I agree on the thread drift so this will be my last comment on this but I'll just reiterate one point I stated earlier:" To see this graphically look at the inbounds charts and you'll see that almost any disc with a high fade number ends further to the left than those with low fade numbers." Check for yourself.
 
These guys kind of killed my interest in new plastic - too much too soon, too many marketing promises.

I did get kind of a thrill feeling up a 155 Axion Crave in the shop today tho.

The only MVP discs I've given an honest shot so far are Amp and Vector, and my final verdict on them is kind of underwhelmed. I like the Volt when I've thrown it, and also the Axis.

They seem to require more effort than other discs I've thrown.
 
kinda agree

it's frustrating that a soft envy feels like its never coming.
 
kinda agree

it's frustrating that a soft envy feels like its never coming.

same. the envy has improved my game a great deal this year. yet for putting, the N are a bit slick at times. a softer, grippier plastic would be nice for either N or P.
 
It has been a long time coming. There's no arguing that. But I'm fairly certain that the Richardsons have put base plastic as a high priority. For all we know, they're already finalizing the process as we speak.
 
Recently, MVP/axiom have been releasing discs side by side. Whether its new discs or a disc available in new plastic options. Maybe this is what they plan on releasing alongside the clash? Though my fingers are still crossed for a proton inertia.

Now that the impulse and proton inspire have been released, I am sure soon we will be hearing what's in our future.
 
Last edited:
Well, I've been hoping for a Proton Amp for over a year and a half now. So I wouldn't hold your breath on a P Inertia.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top