Ninja

[discgolfer#1]

what kind of flight pattern does the ninja have, I've heard that it flies really far but thats about it. I know it's not legal but would be fun to toss around. If anyone has any info on it let me know

 

[abcd]

http://www.discgolfreview.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=16796&hilit=ninja

 

[discgolfer#1]

ok I've heard a lot about how the disc is illegal but no one is really discribing how the disc turns or fades. I don't think opinions should be applied to a product and I really don't care. I just want to know how it throws. I only go out and have a good time throwing with friends and enjoy the outdoor experience and I think most people are too hung up on regulations. It's all about having fun for me. So if anyone would be kind enough to inform me of the flight pattern before I purchase one that would be great. Thanks ahead of time

 

[HeartlessCynic]

When I threw it I had to focus on throwing more smooth than fast and it needed to be high with some hyzer. It's more understable than you will expect. I only have about 350' of power and I felt like I was holding back to throw it well. I imagine this disc would do nothing for you if you were already creeping in on 400'.

 

[Marmoset]

Here is my post from the Ninja thread that was linked in abcd's post:

Marmo-blog:

My initial impressions:
I opened my Gateway box and I had 5 E Ninjas (177-182g) and 2 S Ninjas (168-169g). After fondling them I got the impression that they are relatively unrefined in several ways which I will not expand on at this time. The wing is perfectly flat and has a small bead that juts downward. The profile is very similar to a very domey Wraith with a flat Katana sized wing. This thing is all dome and the PLH is barely off the countertop at 0.091". The wing is nearly parallel to the countertop and the disc almost rests on its wing instead of on its bead. Ignoring the enormous wing width- which is nearly impossible to do- the grip is still kinda funny.

I picked a White E Ninja that was marked 177g and went outside to throw it. I was afraid that Gateway modified their E Plastic to get lower weights. On the first throw the disc went much further than I expected and skipped off some asphalt. No damage to the disc even though the narrow nose definitely hit first. I guess the plastic durability was not compromised in an effort to hit lower weights. It went probably about 400' but that was over an elevation drop of 30'. I was only trying to throw it 300' or so. Throwing it back up the same hill I came in waaaay too low and only got 150'. Back down at the bottom of the hill I tried again and got about 350' over 30' of elevation rise. Not bad but not fabulous. It feels strange to huck such a wide wing.

Second round of field practice:
177 First Run E Ninja
168 Prototype S Ninja
171 First Run Pro Katana- I originally bought it because it has a high PLH

The Ninjas have more turn and harsher fade than my Katana. It is kind of strange... they turn turn turn then abruptly transition into a lawn dart fade. If you get some height on them they will eventually flatten out and then dump harshly into the ground. If you get it right they will definitely bomb.

My S Ninja was consistently 15' longer than my E Ninja. Might be the weight difference, might be the plastic difference; I dunno. Like I said before, my S ninjas don't have surface technology. I averaged about 400' with these guys but I honestly expected more than that.

My Katana is like a refined Ninja IMO. It doesn't change directions nearly as quickly and it seems to have more of a tendency to fade forwards instead of sideways. At least compared to the Ninja. In my opinion this is a more refined flightpath. The Katana was edging out the Ninjas by a few feet on most every throw.

All in all I think I prefer the high PLH Katana more than the Ninjas. They feel better in my hand, they usually do what I intend for them to do, and they get fabulous distance. My story might change as I get more familiar with the Ninja. I got some throws around 450' so the Ninja's potential is definitely there, I just have to unlock it.

Some initial opinions:

-My bag is all 150 class, most of it is base plastic, and I rarely ever throw anything faster than a Valk/PD/1.9cm wing. At 177.4g (according to my scale... what do ya know, Gateway's measurement was spot on), molded in premium plastic, and having a 2.75cm wing (according to my calipers) this Ninja is everything I don't usually like. I was surprised I got it to work so well.

-It is not as twitchy as I expected. Other peoples' reviews had me scared.

-Nose angles will definitely affect distance but it wasn't overly difficult to keep the nose down. When it fades, it fades HARD.

-There is a tiny window of airspeed where it will fly straight for a long time. If you fail to meet or if you exceed this window then you will get a hard turn in one direction or the other.

-It is long but you need to get used to its eccentricities like the huge wing, big dome, etc.

-It seems to fly lower than I expect; I had to consciously aim higher.

 

[discgolfer#1]

Well i bought a ninja and threw it quite a bit today. I have to say that I thought this was a good disc it did feel a little awkward in my hand but not too bad. I noticed that you do indeed need to keep it high and was impressed at the way that it didn't fade right away when it went up high like most discs do. I didn't see a very big difference in distance because I already have decent D. I didn't throw it enough to make accurate comments about the flight pattern. When I get more time with it I'll post some more thoughts. One thought for now however is that it's too bad that the disc didn't pass spec. Maybe the PDGA should revise the limits on some of the features, after all the epic is a PDGA approved disc.

 

[HeartlessCynic]

Gateway is supposed to be releasing a tweaked version to pass PDGA spec. Probably not before the end of the year from what I heard.

 

[discgolfer#1]

Yeah it would be good to see a PDGA approved version, but I think since the new wider rimmed discs are the next gen the PDGA should in my opinion change some but not all specs on certain aspects of discs. I understand there has to be some kind of cut off point but it just seems to be a shame when a product doesn't pass due to such a small amount of width on the rim of a disc. Like I said before the Epic did pass spec. not to single out one disc but anyone who has seen the Epic knows that at least one side of the disc is much wider than the rim of the Ninja. Now the weight thing could be decreased to 170-175 and I think it wouldn't make that big of a difference. I did hear that there will be a PDGA approved version of the Ninja and I will be picking one up.

 

[discspeed]

I have just a couple comments regarding the above posts. The Epic was grandfathered in because the rules were made long after it had been released and it had been around long enough to prove that it was not going to radically change disc golf. It's specifications are illegal and no other disc like it will be approved. Also, I really disagree that the PDGA should change it's rules because a manufacturer HAS CHOSEN to break them.

 

[money 21]

I have just a couple comments regarding the above posts. The Epic was grandfathered in because the rules were made long after it had been released and it had been around long enough to prove that it was not going to radically change disc golf. It's specifications are illegal and no other disc like it will be approved. Also, I really disagree that the PDGA should change it's rules because a manufacturer HAS CHOSEN to break them.

I am with discspeed on this one. I like the regulations. Gateway needed to do a better job on this one. Not to bag on Gateway as they make a couple of my favorite disc but they dropped the ball on thi one. I think they should make a less stable version of the illusion with all that speed if the take a little off the stablity so weal arms like myself could control it they would have a winner.

 

[Marmoset]

They have flippy runs of Illusions.

 

[riverboy1]

They have flippy runs of Illusions.

Those earlier baby blue ones were money.

 

[discgolfer#1]

I don't think the Ninja was intended to be illegal by the PDGA specs. When I had originaly heard of the disc it was advertised as max everything. That being said I work in rotational molding and there is one thing that is a hard fact when it comes to plastics and that is that it shrinks when cooling. I think that the disc came out of the mold large and they exspected it to shrink a bit when it cooled. However sometimes due to the shape of the product it may not have shrank as much as they would have liked, so they put it on the market anyway to make up for the money put into the casting for the disc. Gateway is planning on putting out a legal version of the disc some time in the future. In my previous post I stated that the PDGA should revise some of their specs because if they stand where they are we will not advance any further into new designs. Lets face it if we put a stop to innovation then we will be at a stand still. I'm not saying lets just throw whatever we want on the field but to stick to certain specs and never revise them would limit the sport.

 

[Marmoset]

You mentioned that putting a cap on the wing width and disc height will halt technological advancement. Saying that assumes that the current designs are in their optimal configurations. I think that flight paths can refined and distance potential can be augmented by massaging the current designs.
For example, the 1.7cm wing width has been around for a decade or more. And yet the Teebird (1.7cm wing width) is a really long disc, comparable to discs with much wider wings. It has great HSS, great glide, great speed, and minimal LSS. I feel this mold is refined, a carefully massaged and manipulated disc. But I still don't think it has been perfected.
The PD is another disc that stands out as being very refined for the same reasons I listed above... PDs also have a wing width that has been around for more than a decade (Valks have the same 1.9cm wing width and were approved in 2000) and they are still out-distancing faster discs. Also PDs have the HSS of more overstable discs with the LSS of less overstable discs. It has better wind resistance and better glide than anything in its class; these 2 qualities do not usually coexist in the same disc. IMO, this is the textbook definition of "more refined."

By reworking older designs I believe the manufacturers will do more for advancing the technology of golf discs. Anyone can make a mold with a 3.0cm wing width and end up with a fast disc that gets good distance; it takes much more ingenuity and experience to make an older model go faster and longer. I would argue that the second approach I just mentioned advances disc technology more than the first.

 

[discspeed]

I don't think the Ninja was intended to be illegal by the PDGA specs. When I had originaly heard of the disc it was advertised as max everything. That being said I work in rotational molding and there is one thing that is a hard fact when it comes to plastics and that is that it shrinks when cooling. I think that the disc came out of the mold large and they exspected it to shrink a bit when it cooled. However sometimes due to the shape of the product it may not have shrank as much as they would have liked, so they put it on the market anyway to make up for the money put into the casting for the disc. Gateway is planning on putting out a legal version of the disc some time in the future. In my previous post I stated that the PDGA should revise some of their specs because if they stand where they are we will not advance any further into new designs. Lets face it if we put a stop to innovation then we will be at a stand still. I'm not saying lets just throw whatever we want on the field but to stick to certain specs and never revise them would limit the sport.

I don't buy your "Gateway made an honest mistake" line of reasoning. David Mac is a plastics expert and nothing was done by mistake...I think he was trying to push the PDGA to see if they would somehow approve a "borderline" disc and lost his bet. I just know that he prototyped and those prototypes were illegal (and poorly made otherwise as well).

The wing restrictions were not made in the spirit of stifling innovation, in fact, it's quite the opposite. Just look at the distance drivers that have come out in the past 10 years...What advancements have been made in design besides simply lengthening the wing? I'm just going to use Innova for an example here to keep it simple, but all the drivers that have come out in the past 10 years have simply been an application of design based on old discs with the small exception of a lengthened wing.

Beast--basically a Valk with a wider wing
Orc--Basically a longer winged Teebird with the Valk top
Starfire--first mold had Valk-like bottom, second mold had Teebird like bottom
Wraith--Valk shaped wing with more mms added
Teerex--Same wing, different top
Destroyer--Valk shaped rim with more mms
Bosss--Valk shaped rim with even more mms
Katana--same as Bosss with different top

So what you were citing as "technological advancement" was actually a rut where NO new ideas were coming about, and all emphasis was on changing one tiny dimension of the disc to make it simply faster (and not better).

I'm actually excited by the technological advancements that have already been made since the rim size has been capped. The Stalker probably would have lost out to a wider rim release, and it shows creative thinking in messing with diameter, wing shape, and stabilization. Latitude64 and MVP have both come out with discs that have traditionally sized rims yet offer technological advanced glide and stability. Innova has come up with several new molds for the Discmania line that have smaller rims as well. I think this trend will continue as disc manufacturer's explore all the avenues ignored for the past 10 years as rims simply got 1mm wider again and again.

 

[discgolfer#1]

I'd have to agree with some of the things that you stated however most of the things you pointed out were simply that they took old designs and tweeked them. I'll give my example if the PDGA had put their standards on discs say in 1991 most of the discs that you mentioned would not be in play today. I'm not trying to argue the fact that their should be regulations on the discs, but like I said before advancement is key to making the sport better. In my opinion the reason all the avenues were ignored for the past 10 years is because now the sport is growing faster than ever. We can't ignore the fact that sooner or later we will run into a wall for the designs and advancement won't be possible. There always has to be a revision on the standards, no one should just settle. I'm glad David Mac is testing the set boundries.

 

[Marmoset]

It seems that perfection is reached not when there is nothing left to add, but when there is nothing left to take away.

When discs fly further and further without having to extend the wing width to 2.2, 2.3 or 2.5cm, disc technology will be advancing.
Advancement will halt when designers stop being creative.
Yes, putting regulations on what designers can/cannot do will limit some options but we still have hundreds- if not thousands- of ways to alter disc flight without elongating the wing.

Any intelligent fool can make things bigger, more complex, and more violent. It takes a touch of genius - and a lot of courage - to move in the opposite direction.

 

[discgolfer#1]

clearly no one understands what i mean by the posts i've made. I've seen post that say they don't want to see anything on the field that flies furthur because it would put stress on course designers and that they were perfectly content with the signature 500 ft. hole on any given course. Yeah i'm sure that is probably how ball golfers got to the level they are at now, by just accepting that they can't expand on the game they love. I don't know if anyone has noticed but the wing width does make a disc fly further. If that was not true then everyone would be throwing a putter or a midrange on those 500 ft. signature holes. Where I live we throw all holes at par 3 and a 500 ft. hole is not the longest by any means.

 

[matchu]

the inferno (old mold) and assassins carry push the envelope of glide

 

[discgolfer#1]

yeah i never got to throw a inferno old mold or otherwise. What is a assassins carry? lately i've been throwing the pro boss, pro katana and the wraith as far as drivers go.