How fast are discs thrown?

[Karl]

IF this thread is drifting toward "distance" (and away from speed), then I state that - inherently (not taking in consideration individual's specific limitations of such due to injuries, etc.) - overhands generate the most initial disc speed, forehands second, and backhands last (no, we're NOT taking in consideration rollers, scoobies, chickenwings, etc. ).
BUT speed does not correlate into distance directly AT ALL! And this is because of the disc's spin rate "part of the equation" which shows that bh's, while normally are slower in initial speed or forward motion, will "hold the line" longer / stay aloft longer due to the centripetal force "rpms" it exerts. And this is usually about 150% more than fh or oh throws.

Karl

 

[grodney]

BUT speed does not correlate into distance directly AT ALL!

Well, it certainly does within a type of throw, on average, across a large data set. Right?

Totally agree with you on the rest of it.

 

[Karl]

Within any ONE type of throw, absolutely.

My point (maybe I didn't make it properly) is that the throw that MOST people get the most distance on - the bh - is, in fact, the SLOWEST of the throws! But STILL can get the most distance due to its spin rate being higher.

But yup, I'd say that (without taking in consideration any disc flutter, poor nose orientation, etc.) the faster the disc is launched, thrown a certain specific way, the further the disc flies - all other factors being equal (no wind bounces, elevation, etc.) - opposed to another similar disc thrown the same specific way only slower.

Karl

 

[billnchristy]

They do a MPH contest at the Vibram as well, its in the extras on the dvd. I think 70 something won.

 

[tom8658]

will ... stay aloft longer due to the centripetal force "rpms" it exerts.
Karl

Negative. The spin on the disc has no impact on flight parameters that depend entirely on the directional velocity of the disc (namely, lift and drag). The spin stabilizes the disc, so some minimum amount of spin is necessary to keep the disc from a) flipping end over end or b) diving into the ground.

Everything else that you wrote is right, though, especially about the relative speeds of different throws.

EDIT: Heres some wind tunnel tests that agree with the first paragraph: http://www.discwing.com/research/aerodynamics.html

 

[grodney]

Negative. The spin on the disc has no impact on flight parameters that depend entirely on the directional velocity of the disc (namely, lift and drag). The spin stabilizes the disc, so some minimum amount of spin is necessary to keep the disc from a) flipping end over end or b) diving into the ground.

More spin will cause the disc to hold it's line longer, though.

You guys are probably saying the same thing, and I'm not nearly smart enough to get into it, but more spin CERTAINLY causes a disc to fly more distance, all else being equal.

More spin stabilizes the disc, which on a backhand throw keeps it from hyzering off sooner, thus (sorta indirectly I suppose) increasing distance.

 

[CwAlbino]

That seems high to me for the "average" thrower. From what I understand, Blink is not the average thrower.

IIRC, when Bradley did the video of him throwing with that speedometer he was getting in the mid to upper 50's with Rocs and throwing them in the 350' range. Based on that I'd guess most people are struggling to break 50mph.

I also think I remember a discussion somewhere about the Jarvis brothers and how they were two of the biggest guns at the time but they were "only" throwing in the mid 50's which was noticeably slower than the rest of the big guns at the time.

I'm not sure what good Vibram's numbers really are. Most people have a way to measure how far they throw (football fields are pretty abundant in the US) but not very many have a way to measure how fast they're really throwing. Sure it's an interesting number, but IMO not a very useful one. Some evidence of that is the rating they choose to show on their "ratings" page. Blink's 63mph throw with a Rhyno was probably at least 330'-350'. That same throw with their disc would only go 265'. I'm not sure what the use is in a disc that's that much shorter than a Rhyno.

I should specify. The majority of people I play with can throw 350 or over.

 

[tom8658]

You guys are probably saying the same thing, and I'm not nearly smart enough to get into it, but more spin CERTAINLY causes a disc to fly more distance, all else being equal.

More spin stabilizes the disc, which on a backhand throw keeps it from hyzering off sooner, thus (sorta indirectly I suppose) increasing distance.

Yeah, looking back at what he wrote, we might be saying the same thing.

 

[Karl]

"You guys are probably saying the same thing"

Actually, yes!

By me saying "will ... stay aloft longer due to the centripetal force "rpms" it exerts", I'm alluding to that the disc - due to its spin - will pitch over (hyzer out) less quickly and thus will fly further.

But he went and got all technical on me (which is fine!).

As I have to be aware of 'how MB threads read', it is VERY hard to both "be practical in your wording / approach" and "be technically 100% correct in all your wordings".

Karl

 

['ster]

Spin/Hyzer

I know this is an old thread, however, I just can't stand when misinformation is not corrected.

"More spin stabilizes the disc, which on a backhand throw keeps it from hyzering off sooner, thus (sorta indirectly I suppose) increasing distance." - This is not how it works.

Hyzer is an effect of Spin. If a disc did not spin, it would not hyzer. Stability is any disc's potential to Hyzer with any given amount of Spin. That is, Overstable discs require less spin to Hyzer, while Understable discs require more spin to Hyzer. Furthermore, Anhyzer occurs when a disc is traveling faster forward than the Spin can generate Hyzer. Finally, a slower disc will require more Spin to remain stable during a fast throw. That means that it is possible to throw a slow, Understable disc farther than a fast, Overstable stable disc, even when the fast Overstable disc was thrown and travels forward faster. That is, Speed does not equal distance. Speed+Spin+Mold+Environment = Distance.

 

[Star Shark]

Cale Leiviska has a speed cage over at Airborn DG now.

 

[rhatton1]

I know this is an old thread, however, I just can't stand when misinformation is not corrected.

"More spin stabilizes the disc, which on a backhand throw keeps it from hyzering off sooner, thus (sorta indirectly I suppose) increasing distance." - This is not how it works.

Hyzer is an effect of Spin. If a disc did not spin, it would not hyzer. Stability is any disc's potential to Hyzer with any given amount of Spin. That is, Overstable discs require less spin to Hyzer, while Understable discs require more spin to Hyzer. Furthermore, Anhyzer occurs when a disc is traveling faster forward than the Spin can generate Hyzer. Finally, a slower disc will require more Spin to remain stable during a fast throw. That means that it is possible to throw a slow, Understable disc farther than a fast, Overstable stable disc, even when the fast Overstable disc was thrown and travels forward faster. That is, Speed does not equal distance. Speed+Spin+Mold+Environment = Distance.

Hyzer and Anhyzer are release angles.

You are mixing up terminology very confusingly and are incorrect as to how spin affects a disc.

"That is, Overstable discs require less spin to Hyzer, while Understable discs require more spin to Hyzer."

this is totally incorrect. The quote you used has it right.

It's all been discussed many times on here and DGR before by people far more qualified than me. Basically though your final line is absolutely correct - but not for the reasons you are stating.

 

[grodney]

Hyzer and Anhyzer are release angles.

Not exclusively.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with saying "I threw the disc flat and it flew flat but then at the end it started to hyzer.".

Also nothing wrong with "This hole is a tricky anhyzer -- I think I'll use a super-understable disc and start it with quite a bit of hyzer.".

You can say those are wrong all you want, but they are common and accepted usage, and have been for many many years.

p.s. This has nothing to do with the spin-speed points being made.

 

[coupe]

For fun, here are the slowest throws that went over 500 ft. Honestly, I think you have to question the validity of the first couple.


Speed Distance
48 528
49 540

I don't know: glide might be just as big a factor to distance than disc speed. I know I can get my Comets and Phenix out as far, if not farther, than my high speed drivers if wind conditions are right and I get them high enough: they just take a lot longer to get there.

 

[rhatton1]

Not exclusively.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with saying "I threw the disc flat and it flew flat but then at the end it started to hyzer.".

Also nothing wrong with "This hole is a tricky anhyzer -- I think I'll use a super-understable disc and start it with quite a bit of hyzer.".

You can say those are wrong all you want, but they are common and accepted usage, and have been for many many years.

p.s. This has nothing to do with the spin-speed points being made.

Fair enough, I'm not getting into another semantics debate. Call the flight path whatever you will.

 

[BennettUA]

The new video of Brodie Smith throwing an Ultimate disc as a weapon on the History Channel clocked him at ~60mph, at 18.5 revolutions/second, ~1,000 revolutions/minute.

I'd imagine a disc golf disc would go faster than an Ultimate disc at max power.

 

[BirdieMachine]

Lizotte holds the record 89.5 mph

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TO2RQj-L7gg