Fussing over disc weights

[Alexplz]

Hey guys.

Anyone else struggle with (for lack of a better term) some level of OCD when it comes to discs that they bag and throw, particularly when it comes to weight class? For the longest time, I preferred drivers around 165-169g. I found that the tradeoff between getting them up to speed easier vs any supposed reduced control or wind resistance was worth it. I just didn't feel right throwing anything 170g+, especially alongside a cycle of 160 class discs.

Then I got to thinking, as I am one to do. 5g is a nickel, and I figure any difference in mass "less than" a nickel is surely negligible, or at least is small enough (about 2% difference) to not be able to consistently discern.

So then I figured, if I'm dealing with a stack of Teebirds in weights 175g, 174g, 173g and so on, that means I would likely not be able to discern a difference between the max weight teeb and one with mass 4g less - 171g. One click lower to 170g, and we're talking the difference of an entire nickel, which I imagine I would be able to notice when hefting a disc.

So if I conceptualize 170g as in a lower weight class than 175g, and extrapolate at 5g intervals, then I have the following weight classes:

175-171
170-166
165-161
etc

So long story short I now consider 170-166g as my arbitrary "sweet spot" for small diameter discs, not 169-166g.

...on the other hand, if I started with the 150 class as my reference point, my weight class conceptualization might look more like:

155-159g (upper limit of 150 class)
160-165g
166-169g
170-174g
175g

This way, while based on the PDGA imposed 150 class limit, seems to introduce more arbitrary cutoffs. For example, here max weight discs stand in a league all their own.

Weird stuff, huh? Anyone else have odd hangups that bug them in DG?

 

[scarpfish]

Purple discs or discs with purple stamps are bad luck.

That's all I got.

 

[Dire Wolfy]

150s are for lightweights, Real men throw 170+ heh heh.

Spoiler

I don't get really picky with weights as long as they are above 165, anything less I turn over without trying to because I torque alot.

 

[Quinntastic]

Weigh your discs if your that picky. Max weight is usually higher then the typical 175 or 180. I have a roc penned 180 that weights 181.2g. I just throw "max weight" and 2 grams less, because they're already is probably some difference in them. Although I still bag 2 172s that don't really bother me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[wims]

I find that higher weight discs hold their stability for longer than very light discs. I guess the weighting agent makes the discs more durable

 

[Grippenripp]

Flight is a sensitive thing. I do believe that 5 grams makes a difference. I was throwing a while ago with a lighter disc hit some leaves went up, over and rhe sideways. Same shot max weight dosc barreled through the tuft of leaves. And my putters. HAVE TO BE 174G.

 

[Cgkdisc]

Hey guys.

Anyone else struggle with (for lack of a better term) some level of OCD when it comes to discs that they bag and throw, particularly when it comes to weight class? For the longest time, I preferred drivers around 165-169g. I found that the tradeoff between getting them up to speed easier vs any supposed reduced control or wind resistance was worth it. I just didn't feel right throwing anything 170g+, especially alongside a cycle of 160 class discs.

Then I got to thinking, as I am one to do. 5g is a nickel, and I figure any difference in mass "less than" a nickel is surely negligible, or at least is small enough (about 2% difference) to not be able to consistently discern.

So then I figured, if I'm dealing with a stack of Teebirds in weights 175g, 174g, 173g and so on, that means I would likely not be able to discern a difference between the max weight teeb and one with mass 4g less - 171g. One click lower to 170g, and we're talking the difference of an entire nickel, which I imagine I would be able to notice when hefting a disc.

So if I conceptualize 170g as in a lower weight class than 175g, and extrapolate at 5g intervals, then I have the following weight classes:

175-171
170-166
165-161
etc

So long story short I now consider 170-166g as my arbitrary "sweet spot" for small diameter discs, not 169-166g.

...on the other hand, if I started with the 150 class as my reference point, my weight class conceptualization might look more like:

155-159g (upper limit of 150 class)
160-165g
166-169g
170-174g
175g

This way, while based on the PDGA imposed 150 class limit, seems to introduce more arbitrary cutoffs. For example, here max weight discs stand in a league all their own.

Weird stuff, huh? Anyone else have odd hangups that bug them in DG?

Not to mess with your OCD more than disc weights already has, but consider that your five gram range is based on the units used for measuring weight that give you nice "round" number range of 5. If discs were weighed in decagrams, would you still think to consider discs in the 16.6 - 17.0 decagrams as the same "weight" or maybe 16.1-17.0 the same weight? Even worse, imagine how you would handle it if disc weights were in decimal ounces where 166-170 grams would be 5.86 oz to 6.0 oz.

While weight categorization makes sense, the subtle underlying factor that messes it up is the disc shape which changes more for some molds versus other molds for each gram of weight change. On a beefier, rounder edged mid-range or putter, the shape will typically not change that much per 5 grams of weight loss. For high speed discs, even a few grams can slightly change the wing shape, especially when you also consider the cooling rate of the production run can play a role.

 

[DiscFifty]

Putters, mids, max weight all day. Everything else..5-10g can make a huge difference in flight based on power, wind, etc.

 

[ODRB]

Putters, mids, max weight all day. Everything else..5-10g can make a huge difference in flight based on power, wind, etc.

This.

Putters at 175
Rocs at 177-180

Firebirds/OLFs anywhere from 166-175, but I expect the heavies to fly more OS and take longer to season in. My preference is right around 170.

Roadrunners, heavy as I can find them (more mass helps rollers keep going, and they're plenty flippy as is).

Destroyers in the 167-172 range, preferably, for go-far.

 

[Moose33]

Usually just the heaviest they have available. Or... if it feels good whatever.

I rarely throw a disc I find to be hideous though.

 

[Turnipseed]

Alex
There is no such thing as weight class. Some discs are a little bit lighter than others. Any weight "sweet-spot" exists only in your mind. Weight is rarely the determining factor of disc performance. The majority of these "max-weight" knuckleheads could be given 150s stamped as 180s and never know the difference.

Disc weight can be used as a very rough guide during purchasing, but you will never find consistent performance within any particular weight range. Each individual disc must be treated as unique and weight will rarely help you find a particular flight. In other words, the entire range of stability and shape is represented in the entire range of weights.

Experience, were it unbiased, should have taught this to far more players than it has.

 

[VLaForce2002]

I whole heartedly agree with your weight OCD. I have been carefully testing and studying weight difference. I prefer axiom and MVP in the 154-158g range for drivers 20g more for putters and mids. The gyro is more pronounced in the lighter weights and i can get better distance and control. I don't care for 150 class discs non gyro because they don't fly true to form and it is too random as to how discs that are identical to the naked eye fly different. I don't bother buying anything over 166g even to test out a new release, because I know I won't enjoy throwing it as much as I will the 154g version.
Now for the disclaimer. I'm in my 50's, weigh 290 and throw my ions and anodes 200 ft max and my Vanish is my longest disc at somewhere between 300 and 320. I use the discs and weights I use because they go exactly where I want and I stopped losing discs while saving strokes.

Grams matter; I'd like to meet the player who can turn over my 153g fireball or my 154g thrill

 

[@iDiscGolf]

You just have so much more variety and choices the closer to max weight you get. Some molds and drivers they don't even make in lighter weights. It's just easier to get what you want. If you need less stability you can always club down too, and go max weight, again.

*Although, I do appreciate a very overstable disc in light weights.

 

[StevenSeagal]

I don't place any stock in any one aspect of a disc because I believe any single aspect can be negated by a combination of known and unknown factors. IMO the best way to determine how ANY disc will preform is to pick it up and throw it. Case in point I have a 159g FAF champ firebird that I yet to see anyone throw over 350+ feet. It's so insanely overstable I only use it for thumbers, pancakes and extremely tight corners.

 

[zontar]

I don't place any stock in any one aspect of a disc because I believe any single aspect can be negated by a combination of known and unknown factors. IMO the best way to determine how ANY disc will preform is to pick it up and throw it. Case in point I have a 159g FAF champ firebird that I yet to see anyone throw over 350+ feet. It's so insanely overstable I only use it for thumbers, pancakes and extremely tight corners.

I agree that the best way to determine how a disc will perform is to throw it. in my 10-disc bag right now I have weights from 155g to 180g. I like them all for what they do.

 

[Baseballadp]

I generally bag 168-172 but I really don't care as long as it's not flippily light. I have lots of max weight and some lighter than those. To me it's a disc and as long as it's fun to throw it's good

 

[ODRB]

There is a lot more to be said for consistency of feel when slecting weight though.

Try this: get a 150g and a 175g disc in a mold you like. Better if they happen to be of similar stability.

Now throw them both.

What one likes and how it feels throughout the motion will be vastly different from what the other responds to and feels like.

I was toying with a Blizz Scorp for a while, because it went FAR. But I was just thrown off by the different feel of the whole motion and having to think, even for a splitsecond, about adjusting my swing.

 

[Turnipseed]

There is a lot more to be said for consistency of feel when slecting weight though.

Try this: get a 150g and a 175g disc in a mold you like. Better if they happen to be of similar stability.

Now throw them both.

What one likes and how it feels throughout the motion will be vastly different from what the other responds to and feels like.

I was toying with a Blizz Scorp for a while, because it went FAR. But I was just thrown off by the different feel of the whole motion and having to think, even for a splitsecond, about adjusting my swing.

This suggests a fragile psyche more than anything. Many players could not detect a difference without the help of a sticker, but once they read the sticker they imagine a different feel. I throw 140s to 200s with the same technique and motion and have noticed no disruptive conscious or unconscious need to adjust anything.

 

[ODRB]

Psyche's good. Form is ok too.

Only thing disruptive to my game is the introduction of additional variables. I try to control the ones I can.

 

[Meillo]

On a calm day, my 158g Star Teebird performs great. In a windy day it starts doing surprising things. The worn in 175g DX Teebird does change less in flight when the wind picks up. This is my main view on weight.

Many of my discs are around 171g, because that is the range with the best availability here (don't know why, it just is). Even my putting putters are 171g. I don't notice much difference in such small weight differences; other factors of disc variance are more important, IMO.

Refering to Turnipseed: If you'd write 175g on a 171g disc and give it to one of the ``I only throw max-weight'' guys, they probably would not notice. But I do think they would notice a 165g disc.