[Innova] What’s all this “3” business

[oldmandiscer]

i hate that it has to happen

of course it doesn't mean overstable either because it's not a category. stability is a continuum not a set of 3 (or more) categories.

I hate when people are now saying their understable discs are more overstable. Just say stable, not overstable. I heard it from McBeth in a recent video of his like a week ago. :doh:

 

[Three Putt]

Just want to chime in incase anybody has any thoughts about the 3 series having slightly wider rims than the '1' series they're based on. Multiple times I had little quibbles on reddit with people who thought the 3 series had slightly larger rims. One person even showed me a picture of their calibers demonstrating a Leopard3 to have a larger rim than a Leopard.

I borrowed my dad's Mitutoyo micrometer (multi-hundred dollar product, only measures up to 1 inch with .001mm resolution.). I took a couple Leopards and Leopard 3s of mine, then I took several Teebirds and Teebird3s. The verdict? The rims are between the Leopard and Teebirds are all around the same size. Super tiny differences were present as I move the measuring rods around the molds, but they all hit a general neighborhood of accuracy.


Also, even though one of the original intentions for the 3 series might have been more torque resistance, I can't really agree that it's a guarantee for all 3 discs. As an example, plenty runs of Teebird3s and TL3s I find slightly less HSS than their non 3 counterparts. It really all depends on how they mold up at that time, and of course the plastic used affects that to a great degree. I also have a domey Mako3 and a flat Mako-- go figure.

I think that comes from the approved discs list; the Leopard is listed as a 1.6cm wing and the Leopard3 is listed as a 1.7 cm wing. People jump on stuff like that which can be accounted for just by the fact that the Leopard was approved in DX and the Leopard3 was probably submitted in Champ. That could account for the wing being a millimeter off on measurement. Hell, if you bought a Champ Leopard every year and measured the wing, you would probably find a millimeter of variation was standard run from run. At any rate, I think those measurements are what make people swear the wings are bigger on the 3 discs.

The Mako is listed as a 1.2cm wing and the Mako3 is listed as a 1.4cm wing on the approved disc list, which I cannot account for. The only Mako's I owned had pop-top domes and really, really sucked so I got rid of them a long, long time ago. I can't even compare the wings to see if they look the same. If you have both and calipers, I'd like to know what you find out.

 

[ian.w]

I'm convinced that the 3 versions of teebirds and leopards are identical to the originals. They even measure identically. The PDGA site is not accurate. As far as other 3 molds, some are obviously different and new molds. But leopard(3 and og) and teebird(3 and og) nah they're the same disc just stamped differently.

 

[twistedraven]

The Mako is listed as a 1.2cm wing and the Mako3 is listed as a 1.4cm wing on the approved disc list, which I cannot account for. The only Mako's I owned had pop-top domes and really, really sucked so I got rid of them a long, long time ago. I can't even compare the wings to see if they look the same. If you have both and calipers, I'd like to know what you find out.

Unfortunately I don't have my Mako(1) anymore. I just did some measurements of an ESP Buzzz and Star Mako 3 though.


Star Mako3: 12.610mm average

12.588mm
12.638mm
12.516mm
12.607mm
12.703mm

ESP Buzzz: 13.048mm average

13.112mm
13.040mm
13.101mm
12.956mm
13.032mm

 

[elmexdela]

Unfortunately I don't have my Mako(1) anymore. I just did some measurements of an ESP Buzzz and Star Mako 3 though.


Star Mako3: 12.610mm average

12.588mm
12.638mm
12.516mm
12.607mm
12.703mm

ESP Buzzz: 13.048mm average

13.112mm
13.040mm
13.101mm
12.956mm
13.032mm

as in you did this with 5 different discs for each mold

or you measured it in 5 different spots on the same disc

 

[twistedraven]

as in you did this with 5 different discs for each mold

or you measured it in 5 different spots on the same disc

I measured an ESP Buzzz and a Star Mako 3, 5 measurements each taken at different positions.

 

[wolfhaley]

I measured an ESP Buzzz and a Star Mako 3, 5 measurements each taken at different positions.

Why though?

 

[twistedraven]

Why though?

Just to compare the '5' speed Mako3 vs another 5 speed midrange that's fairly ubiquitous.

 

[runningDoc]

I've come around on the "3" discs especially on the mid range and putters. I used to kind of hate on the "3" discs because the lack of glide compared to regular non 3 mold.

i throw KC pro rancho rocs but also bag flat top KC pro rocs/Pro Roc 3 (don't hate me but i think KC pro flat top and pro roc3 are the same exact disc) and also champ roc3.

i tried throwing champ (usdgc champ rancho) rancho rocs and they were more overstable and had good glide but didn't do what I wanted when i needed a more wind resistant more overstable compliment to my KC pro rocs.

the flatter faster roc3 is easier to sidearm (for me, i do sidearm my rocs up to 220ft) and does better in lower ceiling situations and also when i need to try to force a flare skip on bendy fairways.

Similar situation with my aviars. I used to bag S-P2 (which was a aviar variant) for overstable putter upshots/drives and the glide and overstability was nice (especially off the tee) but I would get into trouble on those 200ft and in upshots because the glide and overstabilty i'd often overshoot my target or it would hyzer out too hard and skip too wide of the target.

Now I just throw my Aviar 3 harder on hyzer and don't worry because the less glide minimizes the possibility of overshooting the target and the overstability (harder fade end of flight) minimizes the skip fade too. My upshot game has been my strongest its ever been since finding the Aviar3. I also can sidearm the aviar 3 on upshots up to 200ft confidently. The added benefit of the hyzer upshot on both backhand/sidearm is the ability to actually go for throw-ins and still have a shorter comeback putt. I've nailed a lot of 100-200ft upshots because of it (this is especially good in doubles).

for me i think the "3" versions can be great tools and partners to the normal more domey and glidey versions of molds also.

 

[Streets]

Sure, Mako being released in premium plastic gets it moved into the group with the RocX/Wombat as discs that weren't popular enough (for Innova) to keep around with the bigger dome. Coyote/Mako/Lycan/MD all share some lineage/mold pieces and didn't mold up mid-low profile consistently so they are all OOP now.

Dave Dunipace has talked a few times about the history of the 3 series and Roc3
https://www.innovadiscs.com/disc-golf-discs/why-do-some-innova-discs-have-a-3/

-DGU short blog about them (references the above podcast + some brief history)
https://discgolfunited.com/blog/post/innova-3-series-discs

-mentions the Roc3 as being a straighter Roc in this video ~3:30


Flat/Lower dome = Increased flight speed (lower profile) + increased torque resistance (more RPMs = more neutral/straighter) + less glide

I think the original's flight numbers are mostly based on the plastic they were introduced with. Since DX shrinks more in the cooling process, the rim widths are slightly wider with the premium plastics = slightly higher 'speed' rating.

Thanks for posting this...I guess I need to amend my earlier statement. However, did DaveD forget making the San Marino Roc?

 

[Three Putt]

Thanks for posting this...I guess I need to amend my earlier statement. However, did DaveD forget making the San Marino Roc?

At the time that the Roc3 came out and the "3" thing was explained, we all went "Small diameter (now Classic) Roc, San Marino, Ontario, Rancho, Roc +...we get 6, Dave." They bunched the San Marino, Ontario, and Rancho all together as the "regular Roc" and blew off the original Roc completely to get to three.

At the time, it kinda seemed like they were pimping the Roc+. The Roc+ was already a sales dud and they were already moving the recreated San Marino and Ontario molds as TFR discs, so they really couldn't claim amnesia about Roc history. It seemed like they were just trying to elevate the Roc+ to an equal status with the Rancho Roc to make it seem more legit. I don't think the Roc+ is in production anymore, so you see how that worked for them.

We did get all these confusingly-named 3 discs, though. :| Lose/lose?

 

[Three Putt]

Unfortunately I don't have my Mako(1) anymore. I just did some measurements of an ESP Buzzz and Star Mako 3 though.


Star Mako3: 12.610mm average

12.588mm
12.638mm
12.516mm
12.607mm
12.703mm

ESP Buzzz: 13.048mm average

13.112mm
13.040mm
13.101mm
12.956mm
13.032mm

Thanks. It seems like the Mako3 that was approved either wasn't measured correctly or molded up weird, because I'm pretty sure the 3 discs just have a different top and share the wing. It would be weird to have a different top, a different wing and use the same name essentially, but...Innova, man. They make the rules.

You mentioned domey Mako3's; if those were Star that tracks. Star for as popular as it is and as expensive as it is molds up like crapola with pop-top domes a lot. A lot of Star discs I run across should have been ground up of sold as F2's due to the cartoonishly huge domes they have. I won't order a Star disc sight unseen, I only buy them in person. It's weird since I actually throw more ESP than Star, and I've never noticed a corresponding dome issue with ESP. I order ESP discs online all the time, and the only dud I've gotten was a really flat Cyclone.

 

[Streets]

At the time that the Roc3 came out and the "3" thing was explained, we all went "Small diameter (now Classic) Roc, San Marino, Ontario, Rancho, Roc +...we get 6, Dave." They bunched the San Marino, Ontario, and Rancho all together as the "regular Roc" and blew off the original Roc completely to get to three.

At the time, it kinda seemed like they were pimping the Roc+. The Roc+ was already a sales dud and they were already moving the recreated San Marino and Ontario molds as TFR discs, so they really couldn't claim amnesia about Roc history. It seemed like they were just trying to elevate the Roc+ to an equal status with the Rancho Roc to make it seem more legit. I don't think the Roc+ is in production anymore, so you see how that worked for them.

We did get all these confusingly-named 3 discs, though. :| Lose/lose?

Of course, I shouldn't be surprised by the company that brought us the Destrulcan, snuck (sneaks) in runs of plus rims of regularly stamped discs (looking at you champ valk, viking and banshee), stamps eagle x and l as the same thing, and a bunch of other amateur hour manufacturing blunders.

 

[oldmandiscer]

Of course, I shouldn't be surprised by the company that brought us the Destrulcan, snuck (sneaks) in runs of plus rims of regularly stamped discs (looking at you champ valk, viking and banshee), stamps eagle x and l as the same thing, and a bunch of other amateur hour manufacturing blunders.

They also sold me DD2's (leftovers) instead of Katanas also. Yes I can see the anhyzer top. Katanas don't have that. You can't tell me the variation in cooling is that big to change the nose shape that much. But anyways. I still love some Innova discs. You just have to find the good ones.

 

[kevdiv48]

Of course, I shouldn't be surprised by the company that brought us the Destrulcan, snuck (sneaks) in runs of plus rims of regularly stamped discs (looking at you champ valk, viking and banshee), stamps eagle x and l as the same thing, and a bunch of other amateur hour manufacturing blunders.

the plus rim thing is all a ploy. By making the rim to flight plate angle greater than 90 degrees it is easier to remove the disc from the mold and results in less rejects. No way it started as a design feature for "more comfort" or "easier relase."

 

[oldmandiscer]

Thanks. It seems like the Mako3 that was approved either wasn't measured correctly or molded up weird, because I'm pretty sure the 3 discs just have a different top and share the wing. It would be weird to have a different top, a different wing and use the same name essentially, but...Innova, man. They make the rules.

You mentioned domey Mako3's; if those were Star that tracks. Star for as popular as it is and as expensive as it is molds up like crapola with pop-top domes a lot. A lot of Star discs I run across should have been ground up of sold as F2's due to the cartoonishly huge domes they have. I won't order a Star disc sight unseen, I only buy them in person. It's weird since I actually throw more ESP than Star, and I've never noticed a corresponding dome issue with ESP. I order ESP discs online all the time, and the only dud I've gotten was a really flat Cyclone.

My guess is that they are cooling the discs longer in the mold which is keeping them flat, if you pull it out quicker then it has time to shrink differently and create a bigger dome.

I don't think it's a different mold even at all, just they way they are cooling it. I think the domes come from cooling, it's not built into the mold itself.

Someone who makes discs could correct me but I think most of the tops are created flat, but the variability is how it is cooled. I was just thinking about how the plastic shrinks, the dome will cool first or faster but the rim area will remain hot or warm longer and then shrink into the flight plate area causing the dome. Different plastics even within a blend shrink and cool at different rates as well, so in comes more variance.

 

[@CD-]

My guess is that they are cooling the discs longer in the mold which is keeping them flat, if you pull it out quicker then it has time to shrink differently and create a bigger dome.

I don't think it's a different mold even at all, just they way they are cooling it. I think the domes come from cooling, it's not built into the mold itself.

Someone who makes discs could correct me but I think most of the tops are created flat, but the variability is how it is cooled. I was just thinking about how the plastic shrinks, the dome will cool first or faster but the rim area will remain hot or warm longer and then shrink into the flight plate area causing the dome. Different plastics even within a blend shrink and cool at different rates as well, so in comes more variance.

The tooling for the 3 series versions are different. It may be that Innova uses the same bottom rim piece with different top and core to produce the lower dome/flat tops. Rancho Roc/Shark/Mako/VRocs have the patent numbers but the Roc3/Shark3/Mako3/Lions do not. Tooling also looks different for the Leopard/Leopard3, Teebird/Teebird3, TL/TL3. I'd assume they use the same top/core for all the 5 speed mids and 7-8 speed fairways for the TB3/TL3. I think they have reused the Leo3 core for the Infinite Centurion, reused the TB3/TL3 core for the Discmania FD2 3rd version, and reused the 5 speed top/core for the newer flat runs of Millennium Aurora MS and Infinite Chariot based on the tooling.

 

[oldmandiscer]

The tooling for the 3 series versions are different. It may be that Innova uses the same bottom rim piece with different top and core to produce the lower dome/flat tops. Rancho Roc/Shark/Mako/VRocs have the patent numbers but the Roc3/Shark3/Mako3/Lions do not. Tooling also looks different for the Leopard/Leopard3, Teebird/Teebird3, TL/TL3. I'd assume they use the same top/core for all the 5 speed mids and 7-8 speed fairways for the TB3/TL3. I think they have reused the Leo3 core for the Infinite Centurion, reused the TB3/TL3 core for the Discmania FD2 3rd version, and reused the 5 speed top/core for the newer flat runs of Millennium Aurora MS and Infinite Chariot based on the tooling.

I do have a Champ Leopard and Leopard 3 with the same bottom tooling. The Teebird and T3 I bought last year have different tooling. So IDK.

 

[wims]

I'm 99% sure that the Leopard and the Leopard3 uses the same mold

 

[ian.w]

I'm 99% sure that the Leopard and the Leopard3 uses the same mold

Yeah they pretty much identical.