Overhand: Do Faster Discs Net More Distance?

[zenbot]

Or is stability a larger factor?

DISCuss.

 

[Dan Ensor]

There are certainly more important factors. Stability being the most important. I also think dome shape is also more important. Could be in my head, but I think concave domes are more aerodynamic when upside down.

Some people I know that are more OH dominant tell me the Nuke OS is the longest overhand disc. I don't know if they've thrown Xtremes etc. though. I'm also not sure how the two compare as far as stability goes.

 

[Smigles]

Epic is the longest OH disc.

 

[fritothedog]

^That is probably it. I had to throw my arm out to get it to do what it is supposed to but you can get it to flip all the way over if you put enough on it.

No clue what the speed and stability rating are for it. I do know that the Epic comes with instructions for varying the stability. IIRC, bend up the edge up for overstable and bend it down for understable. That could be backwards...

 

[Horsman]

I think it is a factor but not the biggest factor. When comparing an overhand with a mid to a driver the driver will go further but for myself I havent really seen a big difference in distance if I throw a firebird or a destroyer.

I think Schwebby is the best example for thumbers in that he throws Whippets like crazy for distance and accuracy.

 

[KGB84]

Imho, stability is the biggest factor. I tested this out by throwing the 3 different nukes overhand. OS went the farthest by far!!!! Then, the Nuke. Followed by the SS. Stability of the disc determines how quickly it will flip over. The longer it takes to flip over, the more distance it covers before diving to the ground.

 

[tbird888]

I used to thumb a 150 Flick when I threw them, but it never got as much distance for me as TeeBirds did. I thumbed a Reaper during a practice session, and it went much farther for me than anything else I've thrown. I usually thumbs PDs today, but I've often found myself wishing I'd had the Reaper on me.

I don't have a cannon of an arm by any means so I guess what I'm trying to say is that disc speed matters just as much for thumbers as it does FHs and BHs.

 

[pointdisc]

Stability is more important than speed - throwing OH ~320-330. I had a Nuke OS to try out, but could get Firebirds just as far & the early snowflake xXx farther, whippets weren't far behind either. I've thrown xTremes, but just wasn't a fan of them for OH.

 

[Thumber]

I will have to try out a Nuke OS. I have a couple at home but haven't found much use for them

I really like FBs. I have tried Flicks, xXx, etc but keep coming back to the FB.

Destroyers work well for shorter range

One factor for me is the grip. The FB is just about perfect. I find bigger rims harder to hold on to which affects D and accuracy a ton.

 

[tcblank]

Here is the deal, to maximize distance you want a disc that flies as straight as possible for as long as possible. This is going to be different for different people and how they throw. The more power and spin you put on a disc the more likely it is going to turn during the early part of the fight. The less power you have, the more likely it will fade faster and farther.

There is the dilemma. Because discs will have either turn or fade or both during their flight. They really don't actually ever fly perfectly straight unless the are angled to drive into the ground during their flight so that they actually never slow down enough to fade.

So the balance point for maximizing distance based upon disc selection is really to know your own strength. Those with stronger arms and better throwing form will be able to throw far more overstable discs straighter for a longer distance than another person that is weaker and has less than perfect form.

The problem is that just because a disc is rated to be a higher "speed" doesn't mean it will automatically go further distance for everyone that throws it over a lower rated speed. A "faster" disc is really just a more aero dynamic and more stable disc than something slower speed. The more aero dynamic the disc is, the more stable it is. That is why as disc get used over time, they slightly deform. That deformation makes them less aero dynamic and less stable. They will turn to turn over more compared to new ones of the same type disc.

So the basics of a disc for stability is as is.
1) Speed. Faster discs are more stable than slower speed discs.
2) Weight. Heavier discs are more stable.
3) Plastic. Stiffer discs are more stable.

The more stable a disc is, the more likely it will fade sooner and lose distance when thrown at a give power compared to a less stable disc. Also a less stable disc is more prone to turn and loose distance when thrown to hard compared to a stable disc. Knowing your strength is key to maximizing your distance.

A Nuke OS for some people will go further than any other disc they could throw. That is because it is one of the fastest and most over stable discs out there on the market today. The people that throw a Nuke OS will not throw a less stable disc the nearly as far if they throw with the same power. In fact, they may throw a less stable disc even less distance than someone throwing that same disc with less power.

 

[ejvogie]

I'm no guru, but I could thumb Whippets (10x KC Pro) just as far as a 12x FB or a max weight Flick. YMMV.

I almost wish I could still throw OH because I have the stupidest OS glow FB that would be a sick thumber disc. Stupid rotator cuff :thmbdown:

 

[knettles]

Here is the deal, to maximize distance you want a disc that flies as straight as possible for as long as possible. This is going to be different for different people and how they throw. The more power and spin you put on a disc the more likely it is going to turn during the early part of the fight. The less power you have, the more likely it will fade faster and farther.

There is the dilemma. Because discs will have either turn or fade or both during their flight. They really don't actually ever fly perfectly straight unless the are angled to drive into the ground during their flight so that they actually never slow down enough to fade.

So the balance point for maximizing distance based upon disc selection is really to know your own strength. Those with stronger arms and better throwing form will be able to throw far more overstable discs straighter for a longer distance than another person that is weaker and has less than perfect form.

The problem is that just because a disc is rated to be a higher "speed" doesn't mean it will automatically go further distance for everyone that throws it over a lower rated speed. A "faster" disc is really just a more aero dynamic and more stable disc than something slower speed. The more aero dynamic the disc is, the more stable it is. That is why as disc get used over time, they slightly deform. That deformation makes them less aero dynamic and less stable. They will turn to turn over more compared to new ones of the same type disc.

So the basics of a disc for stability is as is.
1) Speed. Faster discs are more stable than slower speed discs.
2) Weight. Heavier discs are more stable.
3) Plastic. Stiffer discs are more stable.

The more stable a disc is, the more likely it will fade sooner and lose distance when thrown at a give power compared to a less stable disc. Also a less stable disc is more prone to turn and loose distance when thrown to hard compared to a stable disc. Knowing your strength is key to maximizing your distance.

A Nuke OS for some people will go further than any other disc they could throw. That is because it is one of the fastest and most over stable discs out there on the market today. The people that throw a Nuke OS will not throw a less stable disc the nearly as far if they throw with the same power. In fact, they may throw a less stable disc even less distance than someone throwing that same disc with less power.

I'm not trying to be an ass, but I don't think this guy realizes we're talking about overhand throws here.

My question is, what do you all think about various weights in regards to overhand? I've usually thrown 170-175 for no particular reason other than that's what I've had. Someone recently mentioned they get the best distance out of a 150 Flick. So I'm thinking about picking up a 150 Bliz Destroyer, or the lightest Champion Firebird I can find. As long as it's not windy out, the lighter weight discs seem like a good choice.

 

[JC17393]

I'm not trying to be an ass, but I don't think this guy realizes we're talking about overhand throws here.

My question is, what do you all think about various weights in regards to overhand? I've usually thrown 170-175 for no particular reason other than that's what I've had. Someone recently mentioned they get the best distance out of a 150 Flick. So I'm thinking about picking up a 150 Bliz Destroyer, or the lightest Champion Firebird I can find. As long as it's not windy out, the lighter weight discs seem like a good choice.

In my experience, strength of arm is just as much a factor in getting distance out of an overhand as anything else. To that end, I think heavier is better but how heavy depends on the strength of one's arm. If you have a powerful throw (say a long background in baseball), max weight might be best. However, if you don't have a lot of strength, lighter might be easier, especially if it's not a frequently used technique.

Going too light in weight, though, I think can be harmful both to distance and body. I don't think switching from a 175 Flick to a 150 Flick is going to result in more distance at all. Thrown the same, I think the 175 goes further and will cause less pain as well. Think about throwing a baseball and throwing a tennis ball as hard as you can. The baseball is going to go further on the fly and probably won't leave you wincing.

 

[Thrival Time]

I agree about the baseball/tennis ball analogy. Also, feel free to add wiffle ball if that's not convincing enough...

Anyway, I noticed the same issue regarding backhands with DX Leopards and weight. I never took it into consideration for thumbers, so I will have to see for myself.

 

[zenbot]

In my experience, strength of arm is just as much a factor in getting distance out of an overhand as anything else. To that end, I think heavier is better but how heavy depends on the strength of one's arm. If you have a powerful throw (say a long background in baseball), max weight might be best. However, if you don't have a lot of strength, lighter might be easier, especially if it's not a frequently used technique.

Going too light in weight, though, I think can be harmful both to distance and body. I don't think switching from a 175 Flick to a 150 Flick is going to result in more distance at all. Thrown the same, I think the 175 goes further and will cause less pain as well. Think about throwing a baseball and throwing a tennis ball as hard as you can. The baseball is going to go further on the fly and probably won't leave you wincing.

I had to take Blizzards out of my bag. It messed up my timing for my other discs and started hurting my arm.

 

[Thrival Time]

I am still somewhat of a newbie, and have not noticed a big difference with thumbers, but this may have to do with losing my glow TB and now only having 150g replacements. I do not currently have a heavier TB and my whippet recently arrived in the mail (~175g), so I will have to experiment. I will let you know my results when I get a chance.

Still would suggest trusting the feedback from the more experienced disc golfers (both experience and not having both heavy and light TB's and whippets can skew the experiment results imo...)

 

[Thrival Time]

I had to take Blizzards out of my bag. It messed up my timing for my other discs and started hurting my arm.

Quick newbie question: Is this Innova's champion blizzard plastic or an actual disc I have not heard about?

Thanks

 

[zenbot]

Quick newbie question: Is this Innova's champion blizzard plastic or an actual disc I have not heard about?

Thanks

Here you go.

 

[Thrival Time]

Here you go.

Thanks, that helps.

 

[tarel]

the issue with the z flicks is the current few runs have been awful gummy which suck balls for overhand