[Innova] The secret to choosing the right Destroyer

[XC_Eddy]

Okay, this is super helpful. Definitely messes with buying discs online. I do wonder if the variance is greater in destroyers because they mold so many batches of them. Would wing variance be more controlled with a smaller sample size?

Do we think that this same general principle is the same for most molds? If I'm looking for the most OS firebird I can find, do I try to find one with a very concave rim? I find most current Teebirds to be more OS than I want. Do I look for one with a flatter/more convex wing?

 

[SD86]

I do wonder if the variance is greater in destroyers because they mold so many batches of them. Would wing variance be more controlled with a smaller sample size?

Do we think that this same general principle is the same for most molds?

I do think variance is greater in Destroyers because they mold so many batches... and temperatures of the rooms will vary more, etc. Smaller sample sizes might make variances more controlled within a batch, but not from batch to batch.

 

[slowplastic]

Okay, this is super helpful. Definitely messes with buying discs online. I do wonder if the variance is greater in destroyers because they mold so many batches of them. Would wing variance be more controlled with a smaller sample size?

Do we think that this same general principle is the same for most molds? If I'm looking for the most OS firebird I can find, do I try to find one with a very concave rim? I find most current Teebirds to be more OS than I want. Do I look for one with a flatter/more convex wing?

Wider rim/higher speed discs tend to be way more finicky or different disc to disc. Look at how little people complain about their putters being different in flight. Mids are fairly consistent too...there are variations but in a lot of molds it's not so bad. Then as you said, tons of Destroyers are made as well.

I always look for PLH/wing height, but the wing shape of flare or concave wing compared to flatter or convex definitely seems to factor in...I have not measured it like in the video at all, but just visually and then from throwing the discs it seems to be very consistent.

Generally with Firebirds, the flat flight plate ones have a higher wing or PLH, and that means that the bottom part of the wing is taller with more flare. With Teebirds for example, my straighter one has a flatter looking bottom of the wing profile and my OS one has a bit more flare at the bottom similar to a Firebird, but not to that extent. Definitely the PLH is higher in the more OS one, it's very obvious when the discs are side by side on a flat surface.

Then look at molds that are designed to be straight like an FD, it has a very straight bottom wing. Roadrunners are designed to be understable and have a convex bottom wing.

I'd just look at your discs that you know how they fly and compare these characteristics between molds, then when you're looking at a variety of the same mold you can spot those subtleties a little more easily. I look at PLH/wing height first, and then really look at the shape of the wing and nose to try to get an idea of it it has any extra curves or anything. Again it's experience but it will give you a good idea or ballpark for if it will be a Destroyer with some turn, or very straight, or truly OS out of the hand.

 

[mk.ultra]

I am absolutely perplexed as to how people are not furious about this. What a ridiculous lack of quality control.

 

[slowplastic]

I am absolutely perplexed as to how people are not furious about this. What a ridiculous lack of quality control.

Why do you think the Destroyer thread is so long? People need to figure out which one to buy so it flies like they want...because everyone wants something different from their Destroyer.

Yep it's tricky. The ones I like are the best disc ever. Then some I can't even throw.

 

[Twmccoy]

Why do you think the Destroyer thread is so long? People need to figure out which one to buy so it flies like they want...because everyone wants something different from their Destroyer.

Yep it's tricky. The ones I like are the best disc ever. Then some I can't even throw.

Agree. You either like Destroyers or you don't. I've thrown pretty much every iteration of star Destroyer since the disc came out in 2008. The mold has all sorts of inconsistencies. I guess you have to remember that not every batch of star plastic is molecular-ly similar. They're going to cool slightly differently and take on different flight characteristics. Also, who knows how often parts of the mold have been tweaked over the years.

I personally like trying different star Destroyers to see what they do. Not all of them are to my liking, but that doesn't dissuade me from putting in the effort to find ones that fly great.

From a dilettante view I could see how a bad star Destroyer would be vexing.

 

[Meillo]

Isn't this variance great: Everyone can find a Star Destroyer that they like!

No need for cycling, just pick fresh Destroyers to cover the whole spectrum.


Same for Aviars: There are so many types, but they all are Aviars.

That's good marketing, I'd say.

 

[Casey 1988]

Isn't this variance great: Everyone can find a Star Destroyer that they like!

No need for cycling, just pick fresh Destroyers to cover the whole spectrum.


Same for Aviars: There are so many types, but they all are Aviars.

That's good marketing, I'd say.

No not with Aviars, as some are Big Bead, a small bead Aviar to others as a no bead Classic Grid Aviar, some like the AviarX3 are totally different discs. Then the Yeti Aviar is a totally unique disc as well but more like a standard Aviar/ 3 mold unlike AviarX3.

 

[Meillo]

No not with Aviars, as some are Big Bead, a small bead Aviar to others as a no bead Classic Grid Aviar, some like the AviarX3 are totally different discs. Then the Yeti Aviar is a totally unique disc as well but more like a standard Aviar/ 3 mold unlike AviarX3.

Of course, the technical case is different between the Destroyer variance and the Aviar types, but the marketing model is the same: Covering a broad spectrum of discs/flights unter one disc name.

The different beads on the Aviars require different molds, but where is the difference in result if one mold allows you to produce rim undersides ranging from Firebird over Valkyrie to Roadrunner? You don't find Firebirds with convex rim undersides or Roadrunners with concave rim undersides, either. But Destroyers in the same plastic have it all. That's because people get a Firebird if they want overstability. They get a Roadrunner if they want a roller disc (and believe that they have the arm for it). But they get a Star Destroyer if they want a cool distance driver. Other than a Firebird, Star Destroyers have to cover a far broader range of expectations. Instead of telling the customers that Star Destroyers simply are not for most of them, they rather produce ones for everyone and tell them to just try out a bunch of them and you'll find the right one. Not only does that leverage the value of the ``Star Destroyer'' name's coolness but also does it increase the preception that the Star Destroyer is *the* distance driver of choice.

In the same way, the Aviar became the most successful disc, because it is not one disc but a whole family of discs. Philo putts with Avairs, right? Yeti got his putting world titles with Aviars, right?

It's all just fine marketing.

 

[BeRReGoN]

In the same way, the Aviar became the most successful disc, because it is not one disc but a whole family of discs. Philo putts with Avairs, right? Yeti got his putting world titles with Aviars, right?

It's all just fine marketing.

Everybody knows that Yeti putts with Yeti Aviars, that McBeth was using McPro Aviars, etc... Those different type of aviars are not inconsistents in between each type.

Destroyers are completely different since even within McPro, Pro, Star, ..., Destroyers there is a lot of variations. If you can hold the disc and know what you're looking for it's nice but if you're buying online, well good luck!

 

[PMantle]

Isn't this variance great: Everyone can find a Star Destroyer that they like!

No need for cycling, just pick fresh Destroyers to cover the whole spectrum.

It would be if I had a store nearby with a huge stack. But, because I basically have to order everything, it kinda sucks.

 

[Casey 1988]

Of course, the technical case is different between the Destroyer variance and the Aviar types, but the marketing model is the same: Covering a broad spectrum of discs/flights unter one disc name.

The different beads on the Aviars require different molds, but where is the difference in result if one mold allows you to produce rim undersides ranging from Firebird over Valkyrie to Roadrunner? You don't find Firebirds with convex rim undersides or Roadrunners with concave rim undersides, either. But Destroyers in the same plastic have it all. That's because people get a Firebird if they want overstability. They get a Roadrunner if they want a roller disc (and believe that they have the arm for it). But they get a Star Destroyer if they want a cool distance driver. Other than a Firebird, Star Destroyers have to cover a far broader range of expectations. Instead of telling the customers that Star Destroyers simply are not for most of them, they rather produce ones for everyone and tell them to just try out a bunch of them and you'll find the right one. Not only does that leverage the value of the ``Star Destroyer'' name's coolness but also does it increase the preception that the Star Destroyer is *the* distance driver of choice.

In the same way, the Aviar became the most successful disc, because it is not one disc but a whole family of discs. Philo putts with Avairs, right? Yeti got his putting world titles with Aviars, right?

It's all just fine marketing.

Yeah I just went technical but the Straight Wing Destoyers are a mistake that is being dupliucated in a Infinite Discs, disc made for them by Innova. Also Could call the Straight wing Destroyer a different mold as I bet they feel so different.

 

[Plastic Thunder]

Well, actually there is a disc I was wondering about and so I dug out all my Champion Sidewinders. I then looked for the grinding at the location where the the patent number should be on newer disc, and sure enough grinding was there. So the mold never changed but if you have ever thrown them there was a time when the rim angle was at about 90 degrees. Now Champion Sidewinder rims are more like a plus mold disc. I figure it has to do with the blend of plastic and the way it cures.

Until now we have not looked at other disc all that closely. Variation may exist in many of the models to varying degrees. If they use the same plastic and they use the same manufacturing processes then the variations are there in every model. My guess in in order to keep up with the growing demand of more players, production has sped up at the cost quality. What used to be a factory second might make it out as a normal production first quality disc.

A side note, I figured this patent number work might have been done a vast number of molds and I have found the following molds:

Teebird
Eagle X
Teedevil
Archon
Firebird
Orc
Monarch
Beast
Waith
Valkyrie, there is a newer mold that has Made in USA now.
TL
Thunderbird, this one I was surprised to see, the grind pattern matched the Firebird.
Starfire
DD
FD2
CD3, was surprised here as well
FD
PD

I am sure there are more. Also, some of these discs do have newer mold versions with the "Made in USA engraving.

Of course, the technical case is different between the Destroyer variance and the Aviar types, but the marketing model is the same: Covering a broad spectrum of discs/flights unter one disc name.

The different beads on the Aviars require different molds, but where is the difference in result if one mold allows you to produce rim undersides ranging from Firebird over Valkyrie to Roadrunner? You don't find Firebirds with convex rim undersides or Roadrunners with concave rim undersides, either. But Destroyers in the same plastic have it all. That's because people get a Firebird if they want overstability. They get a Roadrunner if they want a roller disc (and believe that they have the arm for it). But they get a Star Destroyer if they want a cool distance driver. Other than a Firebird, Star Destroyers have to cover a far broader range of expectations. Instead of telling the customers that Star Destroyers simply are not for most of them, they rather produce ones for everyone and tell them to just try out a bunch of them and you'll find the right one. Not only does that leverage the value of the ``Star Destroyer'' name's coolness but also does it increase the preception that the Star Destroyer is *the* distance driver of choice.

In the same way, the Aviar became the most successful disc, because it is not one disc but a whole family of discs. Philo putts with Avairs, right? Yeti got his putting world titles with Aviars, right?

It's all just fine marketing.

 

[Casey 1988]

Everybody knows that Yeti putts with Yeti Aviars, that McBeth was using McPro Aviars, etc... Those different type of aviars are not inconsistents in between each type.

Destroyers are completely different since even within McPro, Pro, Star, ..., Destroyers there is a lot of variations. If you can hold the disc and know what you're looking for it's nice but if you're buying online, well good luck!

Yep I agree this is the problem with all Destroyers even in Champion. With Champion one is not sure if they are going to get one with bubbles deep in the rim or a beefy model with little to no dome etc. Fortunately I have yet to read/hear/see if the straight wing comes up on the Champion mold. Only other disc that has this problem from Innova that is not the Grove is the Wraith an 11 speed disc that is essentially a slower Destroyer. The Wraith can have a straight wing problem too as well as big dome variance. The Wraith disc has when made right a wing like a normal Destroyer just a tad smaller wing. Is it that Wing shape of the Wraith/Destroyer hard to get right? I know most would say get an Orc then but the rim is odd and uncomfortable since the modify of mold a tad in the 2000's.

 

[ODRB]

PLH matters.

 

[ILUVSMGS18]

Well, actually there is a disc I was wondering about and so I dug out all my Champion Sidewinders. I then looked for the grinding at the location where the the patent number should be on newer disc, and sure enough grinding was there. So the mold never changed but if you have ever thrown them there was a time when the rim angle was at about 90 degrees. Now Champion Sidewinder rims are more like a plus mold disc. I figure it has to do with the blend of plastic and the way it cures.

Until now we have not looked at other disc all that closely. Variation may exist in many of the models to varying degrees. If they use the same plastic and they use the same manufacturing processes then the variations are there in every model. My guess in in order to keep up with the growing demand of more players, production has sped up at the cost quality. What used to be a factory second might make it out as a normal production first quality disc.

A side note, I figured this patent number work might have been done a vast number of molds and I have found the following molds:

Teebird
Eagle X
Teedevil
Archon
Firebird
Orc
Monarch
Beast
Waith
Valkyrie, there is a newer mold that has Made in USA now.
TL
Thunderbird, this one I was surprised to see, the grind pattern matched the Firebird.
Starfire
DD
FD2
CD3, was surprised here as well
FD
PD

I am sure there are more. Also, some of these discs do have newer mold versions with the "Made in USA engraving.

The ThunderBird has some part of the Firebird/Valk or may be a mash up of the 2.

The CD3 might be ustilizing a part of the Wraith/Starfire which makes sense.

Is that a new FD2 or the old mold?

I've seen some DM discs that have pat#s and were recently introduced, MD, MD2, and I think one more.

 

[Lumberjack504]

PLH matters.

As does wing shape.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ODRB]

As does wing shape.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Sure sure. I got that. From the 20 minute video that analyzes wing shape without once discussing PLH.

 

[Manzer]

Let me blow your minds... the straight wing destroyers I have also have the lowest PLH!

 

[ODRB]

Let me blow your minds... the straight wing destroyers I have also have the lowest PLH!

Someone is paying attention!!!