Spike said:So what method do you prefer? ...Taking the top from one successful mold and combine with the bottom of another successful mold, and voilá... a new disc! And then add a millimeter to the rim width to turn a speed 12 disc into a brand new speed 13 disc? ... well, you see my point! Creative? I actually think that there's way too little trial and error attitude in disc design. If a discs design works, then congratulations to the manufacturer! If it doesn't work, it will be dumped eventually. The players will decide the faith of a mold, and from what I know, discs like Riot and Halo are pretty popular. Medius? I don't know.FHthrower said:THEY lose a little credibility when they put slanted rims(Riot) or very shallow rims(Halo), or 64dome(Medius) into their designs. Smells of gimmickry. Who else does that? Oh yes, the vaunted Quest.
I assume you're primarily talking about Innova, and their tweaking and overlap. The Groove...Innova's a sales whore. But one has to question a company like Latitude 64, only making discs since 2006, to be spewing out new discs every couple months, with lots of meaningless overlap themselves. They have 4 understable midrange. And what about Mirus, Riot, Vision, and now Flow? Geez, slow down and get your discs truly up to snuff first. Lat64 flooding the market with a bunch of "different" discs in such a short time is entirely busines/sales motivated, have no doubt.
Yeh, a lot of it is trial and error...design a disc, it doesn't work out too well, sell it anyways while hyping bogus attributes. The Groove, Dragon, and Monarch come to mind. And a ton of Quest. Name me any Discraft blunders.
BTW, my Discraft/Innova ratio is about 60-40 for drivers, fairway drivers, midrange, and putters...so I'm hardly a Discraft only fanatic.