Tour discs and similar: making one disc into another disc?

[Orioles_Lefty]

Was thinking about this recently and was wondering what other people thought. When pros introduce a signature/tour disc, they often say "I like X disc, but I wanted A, B, and C to be slightly different." So, how often does doing A, B, and C to a particular disc more or less create a "new" disc that is very close to being just a new version of another stock disc in that manufacturer's lineup?

I think about this specifically in terms of Triology discs where they have so many special plastics intended to make a stock disc more overstable. At what point does making X disc more overstable really just make it Y stock disc?

Makes me think of gear inches on bicycles, where a bike with two front chain rings and two rear gear clusters has a fair degree of gear inch overlap across, say, 22 "different" gears.

I get that I'm asking a logical question about what amounts to marketing. Just thinking aloud about how modifications to a stock disc to make it a tour/signature/special release disc likely makes that new disc closer to some other disc in the lineup that just doesn't have the same marketing cred.

 

[BillFleming]

Often enough to make it worthwhile would be my guess. Case-in-point....when Drew Gibson first went with Infinite Discs, he had a secondary contract with Legacy. He liked the Rival (7/5/0/2), but it didn't quite meet his need for a forehand disc, so he got them to create the Phantom Warrior (7/5/0/2). It's a flatter Rival with a different plastic. I've thrown both and the Rival is more of a backhand disc for me and Phantom Warrior does meet my criteria for a forehand....I just don't like the plastic. This is what Infinite Discs says about the Phantom Warrior: The Phantom Warrior was made for Drew Gibson. It met his specifications for the perfect stable fairway driver. This driver goes a long way with tons of control.

There is a video on YT somewhere which has Drew talking about how he designed/came up with the Phantom Warrior.

 

[@CD-]

I think the pros often ask for a more durable (stiffer plastic usually) and more overstable version OR a grippier/less durable and less overstable version (think Sexton FB).

This allows them to start cycling a mold in their bag and know that a replacement isn't going to be hard to find. Tour players are throwing their discs pretty much every day in fieldwork/practice rounds/warmup/tournament play so they will cycle out discs more regularly and the extra durability keeps their most stable slot disc around longer.

Getting the same mold for most/all of an entire speed range for a consistent hand feel might also be a goal for players. Tour players are throwing in different conditions almost every weekend so knowing how a mold behaves in wind or at different elevations is beneficial to their consistency.

 

[The Mickstar]

I think about this specifically in terms of Triology discs where they have so many special plastics intended to make a stock disc more overstable. At what point does making X disc more overstable really just make it Y stock disc?

I've wondered the same about Innova Halo discs. My sample size is pretty small, since I've only tried a few and learned my lesson after buying one, but... My Halo Sidewinder flies a lot more like my Champion Thunderbird & Star Firebird than anything close to its flight numbers. I can't even imagine how beefy an actual OS mold must be in the Halo plastic.

 

[Shallows]

By disc the company means Mold, aka the shape and dimensions of the disc. But of course the same mold will fly very differently according to the material that fills up, be it play-dough, ESP plastic, or cement. But all three would be the same disc with very different flight #s.

Of course as you play with the plastic blend stiffness and select for certain runs based on cooling temperature day of (creating dome) and call them "Tour Series", you get further away from the original flight #s given, but the disc is still the same.

 

[Jolt]

Players "Special" disc are basically always a more OS version of the mould…..and I guess that's to get the same flight on a beaten in special blend disc to fly like a new stock one

 

[dmoore1998]

If we just ignore "intentional" changes, we're already at some pretty wild variation too. I throw Shrykes primarily. I have them in varying weights from 170-175...and I have Shrykes that fly anywhere from a Mamba to a Destroyer based on plastic, weight, and run.

 

[dmoore1998]

I've wondered the same about Innova Halo discs. My sample size is pretty small, since I've only tried a few and learned my lesson after buying one, but... My Halo Sidewinder flies a lot more like my Champion Thunderbird & Star Firebird than anything close to its flight numbers. I can't even imagine how beefy an actual OS mold must be in the Halo plastic.

You're pretty generally right. Halo tends to be more beefy than the general Star version of the same disc. The upside is that it makes mold minimization great (i.e. fewer molds, but more discs of the same mold instead of moving to a different mold). In that case, the more variation you have within the same mold works out great.

And for reference, my OG Halo Firebird (not the new Haley King ones) is basically a brick. Destroyers and Wraiths have a lot more variability in the runs in terms of how much more OS they are compared to the normal plastic.

 

[wims]

The PDGA approves disc shapes, not flight patterns

Sent from my M2004J19C using Tapatalk