Have you ever wanted to throw a huge stack of understable mid-range disc is a field just to see how they compare? That’s what we did. Our goal was to find the most accurate, straight-flying understable mid-range disc. Here are the details of our experiment. Allan and myself, Matt, took 17 popular midrange discs to […]
Have you ever wanted to throw a huge stack of understable mid-range disc is a field just to see how they compare? That’s what we did. Our goal was to find the most accurate, straight-flying understable mid-range disc.
Here are the details of our experiment. Allan and myself, Matt, took 17 popular midrange discs to a field nearby. The site had two rows of large trees, about 25 feet apart from each other. We set up our launch pad and target in the middle of this alley of trees at a distance of about 175 feet. Our first round of tests included 15 throws with each disc per person for a total of 30 throws of each disc.
Here is a list of the discs we tested:
Discraft, Buzz SS
ABC Discs, Flying Squirrel
Latitude 64, Fuse
Latitude 64, Pearl
Allan and I took turns throwing all the discs towards the target. While one of us was throwing, the other was recording the distance from the target using colored cones set up around the target. If a disc faded to the left or to the right, we recorded “L” or “R” showing the disc landed nowhere near the target. I have to say, standing there throwing disc after disc through this tunnel of trees made me feel like I was in training for some big competition. It also made my arm extremely tired. Hence this experiment took us a couple days of throwing.
The data listed below shows our results. Notice how the first row of results simply ranks the disks by distance to pin. The most consistently closest disc was ranked #1. The second row of results ranks the discs by a custom score. This score was made using a formula calculating three main variables:
1. Average Distance to Pin.
2. Total Number of Recorded Throws.
3. Total Number of Tree Hits.
The lower the score the better. A closer average distance to pin lowered the score. A higher number of recorded throws also lowered the score. Every tree hit added to the score.
As you analyze the results, notice the difference between the distance to pin rankings and the score rankings. For example, look at the Tursas in Matt’s results. If ranked #1 for the best average distance to pin. However, it ranked #5 in Matt’s score. This is because the number of tree hits (2 “L” and 6 “R”) lowered its ranking. (CLICK on a graph below to zoom.)
**Note: All throws were standard back-hand throws. Allan threw right-handed. I threw left-handed.
**Note: That a disc could hit a tree and a distance still recorded.
**Note: The Tangent was only thrown in the second round of results, hence it is only shown in the total column results. These results may not be as accurate.
**Note: The distance to pin was not recorded with a direction. This means a disc could have landed 10 feet to the left on throw #1 and 20 to the right of throw #2 for an average distance to pin of 15 ft. (10ft. + 20ft. / 2 = 15).
The second round of tests included the over-all top discs and the Tangent since it wasn’t included in the first round of tests. The second round results aren’t shown here for two reasons. First we had to test the discs at a different location. We only threw each disc six times each in the second round. For this reason we didn’t feel the number values were as accurate as they could be.
The discs that were thrown in the second round include:
Latitude 64, Fuse
However, we did want to mention our opinion of the second test. From what we could tell, the Stratus and the Fuse were very closely matched for both straight flight and distance. It is safe to say the Stratus flew consistently further than the Fuse.
Hopefully this information was helpful. Please add your two cents worth about understable discs.
We want you to have the most information possible to improve your game!