steveg

Shinto -- Briefly, different "classes" of targets (low conductor, mid conductor, etc.) respond/react differently to different frequencies. Essentially, as the transmitted electromagnetic energy emanating from the detector's coil encounters a metal target, the transmitted electrical field moving across the target as you sweep the coil induces electrical currents in (actually on the surface of, for the most part) the metal objects. And the characteristics of the induced electrical currents are then "received" by the coil, and analyzed by the machine. One of the things that affects the characteristics of the electrical "eddy" currents induced in a given target (in addition to the target's shape, size, depth, and metallic composition, etc.) is what frequency of electromagnetic energy (as transmitted by the coil) the target is exposed to. Certain metal objects are more "resonant" to certain frequencies than others, and so by changing your transmit frequency, you are changing the character of the electrical currents that are induced in the target, by the transmitted energy. As the electrical field induced in the target is received by, and then analyzed by, the algorithms in the detector, these observed, induced electrical field differences (as related to changes in the transmit frequency) manifest as changes in the machine's reported VDI. While there are "clues" which can be gleaned from these differences -- i.e. how a given target responds to different frequencies, it takes alot of experimentation (switching between the various frequencies, and observing resulting responses of many targets over time) to begin to glean any meaningful/helpful information. And, of course, there's still a certain amount of "subjectiveness" there, due to how many different types and orientations of targets exist in the ground. Gleaning these details, is what a good detector algorithm tries to do FOR you. This is what detector designers try to incorporate into their VDI algorithms, of course. That's not at all to say that there are not things you can glean from the information at hand, that can enhance or even "outdo" the detector algorithms; of course, that's what we are ALL trying to do. Anyway, hopefully that helps to partially address some of your questions. Steve

rvpopeye -- Thanks! Steve

rvpopeye -- yep, that could certainly be done, and might be "the best of both worlds," so to speak. But I'd have to design that S-shaft first, and somehow make it compatible with BOTH the Garrett units, AND the Equinox... Steve

Steve -- I absolutely agree with you about the focus right now on detectors being LIGHT -- with the aim to be under 3 pounds. That's exactly my perception -- an obsession with absolute weight (even if at the expense of ergonomics which, just as you noted, only becomes apparent to a user over long hours in the field). Interesting story about the F75 and MXT. I REMEMBER when you were a huge fan of the MXT, and although I never used one, that machine had MANY fans (even as a small nugget finder, if I recall some of your old posts). But, like you said, ergonomics are certainly something worth considering, especially if you are choosing between two relatively evenly match machines, performance-wise... Totally agree. Steve

Steve, interesting points/observations. Makes sense, and you are talking about that same "rotational" feel when switching directions as GB was describing, and you say that the S-shaft feels like it reduces that for you, giving you a more "in-line" feel than a straight shaft -- also what GB seemed to be implying. Aside from all of this, yes -- a balanced shaft should nearly always feel better than an imbalanced one. Obviously, the lighter the better, overall, for a machine, but if you focus TOO heavily on strictly going "as light as possible," without considering balance/ergonomics (which is from my view what Minelab did with the Equinox), then the machine can still be uncomfortable for some to swing, especially after many hours swinging. Bottom line, you are right. Finding something that everyone agrees on is essentially impossible! But, nothing wrong with that... Steve

GB -- precisely correct. Our conjecturing here is qualitative, not quantitative. And you are right -- mother nature has the qualitative answer key! 😉 Thanks! Steve

GB_Amateur -- in thinking through the forces you are trying to describe, and your golf club analogy, I think I can envision what you are trying to get at. If I understand what you are thinking of, it would be something that could occur at the very end of your swing, as you change direction with your sweep. If you are sweeping quickly, and if you change direction abruptly, then with the coil on a "lower" plane than the plane your hand is on (as it would be if using a straight shaft with pistol grip), then the "momentum" of the coil going in one direction, while you are quickly switching direction to swing your machine back in the other direction, could "turn" your wrist/forearm slightly. It's a momentum argument (which increases, of course, with swing speed and how abruptly one changes direction), and the fact that the coil/shaft is on a different plane than your hand is. But, if such a slight turn of your wrist does cause issues, then the only REAL way to "fix it" (besides slowing down and swinging much more "deliberately," which in my opinion is VERY important from a "finds" perspective, especially with Minelab machines) would be to have -- as you drew in your first drawing -- your hand, the shaft, and the coil all moving in the same plane. But, it wouldn't seem that changing to an S-shaft accomplishes that, as you still have your hand and your coil on different planes -- it just reverses things. In other words, with the S-shaft, your coil (and shaft) are now in a HIGHER plane than your hand, instead of the opposite situation with straight shaft and pistol grip (where your coil/shaft would be in a LOWER plane as compared to your hand). So, even if you are a "fast swinger," that changes directions quickly, such that the momentum of the coil moving in one direction is momentarily in opposition to the direction you begin exerting your muscles (in trying to reverse your swing direction and get everything moving in the other direction), I'm not sure why, theoretically, an S-bend shaft would help; you'd still be working in two different planes -- your "hand plane," and your "shaft/coil plane." While in your fourth drawing you show the S-shaft, and the hand "in line" with the shaft and coil, in reality your hand would sit much farther down the S-shaft handle than what you drew it -- in other words, a similar distance BELOW the shaft, as it would be ABOVE the shaft if using a straight shaft/pistol grip. Anyway, just wanted to say that I think I can see what you are trying to describe. I'm sure this discussion is getting way too esoteric -- in other words, boring, LOL -- for most folks at this point. But, the bottom line is this...you feel more comfort in swinging an S-shaft, and I think that's great. Again, we are all built a little differently, and have different amounts of strength in different muscle groups, and each of us swing our machines a little different, with different swing mechanics, and at different speeds. And so, from that perspective, "comfort" can be a somewhat relative term, dependent upon the individual. Thanks for the discussion; while this type of conversation quickly becomes boring to many, as a scientist I find focus and examination of details like this fascinating! 🙂 Chase -- you make a good point; I've considered other materials for the "S-bend/handle portion" of such a shaft. Kac -- a user here -- and I have had many discussions on this issue. It's something I'll continue to explore. The other issue you quickly get into with an "S-shaft" discussion is -- what is the "right" angle, for the handle? Again, that becomes an individual thing, with lots of different opinions. Interestingly, though, something that I think might surprise people is that the "right" angle is at least in part a bit of a red herring; again, a big part if the issue boils down to BALANCE. In other words, when a machine is imbalanced, one tends to grip it tighter (as they fight to keep the coil floating, as I described in an earlier post). And a tight grip is a primary contributor to the development of elbow tendonitis. Combine that with the fact that much of the "fatigue" or "pain" that is felt when swinging a nose-heavy machine is focused in the wrist/forearm, and what you end up with is folks saying "the handle angle is wrong, and is hurting my wrist/elbow," when actually the issue is that the machine's IMBALANCE is causing most of that pain, NOT the handle angle itself. I recall back when users were swinging Explorers and E-Tracs, and people complaining about "handle angle." I remain convinced that the MAIN issue there was nose-heaviness/shaft imbalance, being to some degree mistakenly blamed on "handle angle." But, I digress...bottom line is, I'll continue to explore the possibilities of an "S-bend" shaft, including the possibility that it may be more cost-effective to use an alternate material as the "S-portion" (handle portion) of the shaft... Steve -- it's interesting that you like one or the other type of shaft, at different times, with different machines, but that you'd vote for a S-shaft for the Equinox if you had your druthers. Interesting, and an interesting discussion (at least for my admittedly odd mind!) Steve

GB_Amateur -- first of all, to address your last point, first. I appreciate the sentiment, that you desire to support members here. But, I hope it goes without saying that I would NEVER ask nor want someone to spend money on something, when in their mind it doesn't offer any improvement (or, not enough of an improvement to justify the cost). That's a personal decision and I of course fully respect that! I am glad that you've been able to make a shaft that works well for your needs; I applaud the effort and the ingenuity! Now, as far as your drawings, and what you are describing, I must admit to you that I don't sense, and thus can't figure, the "torsional" forces you refer to. Perhaps it's differences in our styles of swinging? For me, having been a LONG-time Minelab user, going back to Explorer days, "low and slow" is the name of the game. For that reason, I've learned to do two things...one, I swing VERY slowly/methodically, and two, I actually DO "turn my wrist" ON PURPOSE, as I near the end of the swing. It's not a "torsional force" caused by the detector in my case, but instead it's a purposeful attempt to keep the coil as close to, and as level to, the ground as is possible. Many "new" detectorists, which we've all seen, will swing in a "pendulum-like" manner, with the coil ONLY close to the ground right at the center of their swing (i.e. in front of their feet). But the farther out toward the edges of their swing they get, the more the coil raises off the ground. NOT good, if you hope to detect a target out there at the edge of your swing arc! To combat this, I turn my wrist gradually "outward" as I move toward the end of my swing arc (and then "inward," as I move back toward the opposite end of the swing arc), and this "turning" of my wrist helps to offset the desire of the coil to rise away from the ground, and thus it allows me to keep the coil "flat," close to -- and level to -- the ground. So, when swinging VERY slowly, and using that slight turning of my wrist intentionally, I have never experienced any "torsional" force induced by my detector, that I'm having to oppose. My GUESS, and this is just a GUESS, is that any such forces would have to be stemming from a "fast" sweep speed, and a rather "abrupt" change of direction at the ends of each sweep. I can't imagine, with my slow, deliberate, methodical way of swinging the machine, there being any of these "torsional" forces occurring for me, to any appreciable degree at all. It's just not something I feel, sense, or experience. On the other hand, what I DO feel, is a constant "forwards" torsional force on my wrist, that I must then counter with a "backwards" torsional force. In other words, imagine holding a fishing pole, and making a cast using ONLY your wrist (no arm motion at all). You'd first draw your wrist back toward you, to "load" the pole, and then you'd flip your wrist forward to cast the bait/lure. That "backward twist" of your wrist, while "loading" the pole in preparation to cast, is a similar force to what you are applying with your wrist the whole time you are swinging your machine, as that is the force required to oppose gravity, and "lift" the coil off the ground. You are "fighting gravity" so to speak, through application that type of force, using your wrist. And the heavier the coil, and the longer the "lever" (shaft), the more that gravity is working against you, in a multiplied/leveraged manner -- and thus the need for more application of that force, using your wrist. And for most folks, THIS is where the issues arise with the Equinox. THIS is why swinging the 6" coil is so much easier than swinging the 12" x 15" coil; the big coil -- weighing substantially more -- requires MUCH MORE application of force, by your hand/wrist/forearm. Fighting "gravity," as we are discussing here, will cause you to tend to grip the handle tightly (and prolonged, tight grip is a known contributor to elbow tendonitis, aka "tennis elbow.") Additionally, the negative effects of that constant "backwards torsional force" that is required, are felt most substantially in your wrist (especially for those with a bit of carpal tunnel already at play), and in your forearm muscles. And so, counterweighting -- which acts to assist you in lifting the coil off the ground (and thus less work for your hand/wrist/forearm) -- is a BIG help, with respect to comfort. For each ounce of counterweighting applied to the butt end of the shaft, in opposition to the force of gravity acting on the coil, the less effort you are having to exert to offset the coil weight with your hand/wrist/forearm. And I am certain that for a large majority of folks, it is this effort that they are having to exert to fight gravity, that is the source of most of the fatigue/discomfort when swinging the Equinox. To return briefly to your thoughts about "torsional forces..." If you feel "torsional forces" that cause you fatigue or discomfort, and an S-bend shaft relieves that, then you should absolutely utilize an S-bend shaft! Obviously, we are all built differently, have different swing mechanics, swing at different speeds, etc. And so you may experience things that I don't, or vice-versa. Each of us obviously needs to find what works best for us, to make detecting as enjoyable and pleasant as possible. However, I can say that for me, I'm not sensing any "torsional" forces at all, so I can't relate to what you are describing (which is probably why I also can't imagine an S-shaft being substantially more comfortable than a straight shaft with pistol grip). Anyway, I'm enjoying the discussion, GB_Amateur, and again, I hope that none of my words come across in a negative or confrontational way. I like a good discussion/debate, but it's all with good intent, and I hope not to come across in any negative way. Thanks! Steve

Hey guys, I was "sort of" asked a question in this thread, so I will throw in my two cents. First off, I am always interested in hearing what customers want, and don't want; I hope most of you know that I'm all about trying to meet needs and improve the detecting experience. I've been asked many times about producing an S-shaft, and yes -- it IS a rather sizeable up-front investment, that you don't have when building a straight shaft. Straight carbon-fiber tubes are produced by EVERY tube company, and thus the prices are competitive. However, to build a custom, "non-straight" (or non-round) carbon-fiber tube requires a mold, and that mold is a rather expensive, up-front investment (I've been quoted at well over $1000 just for the mold production). So, to invest in a mold -- and for it to be a smart investment -- would mean that there would have to be good return, in the form customer interest in such a shaft. I've considered doing so, for my Garrett AT/Ace shafts specifically, and have been trying to gauge just how much interest there is, from customers who are Garrett users. Honestly, I sell a relatively small number of my Garrett 2-piece shafts; I sell probably 30 to 40 Equinox shafts, for every one Garrett shaft I sell, and so, I remain uncertain as to whether the investment in an S-shaft for Garrett machines would be a wise investment. MEANWHILE, I know there has been some interest in an S-shaft for the Equinox, and that S-shafts have some passionate fans. So, I write this at the risk of stepping on some toes, but please understand that this is NOT my intent; this is coming strictly from the point of view of me as a scientist, and not as a customer-service-oriented shaft builder. The fact is, I'm nowhere near convinced scientifically that an S-shaft would solve the Equinox's ergonomic deficiencies, nor even "improve" the situation substantially. At the end of the day, you have a relatively heavy coil out at the end of a long shaft (a long "lever," from a physics perspective), and very, very little compensating weight at the other end of the shaft. In other words, it's a very nose-heavy machine, and it's nose heavy whether you have the machine attached to an S-shaft or a straight shaft. Yes, there are minor differences in the skeleto-muscular exertions, from the different muscle groups, that would be used to keep the coil of a nose-heavy machine "floating," when using an S-shaft vs. a straight shaft. But at the end of the day, you still have a nose-heavy machine, and thus are still having to exert substantial force with your hand/wrist/forearm to do the "heavy lifting," so to speak, to keep that coil floating. And in all the hours I've spent thinking through this issue (though acknowledging that I may be missing something in my analysis), I just can't convince myself that there's a reason to believe that an S-shaft effectively "solves" the Equinox's ergonomic deficiencies. And IF it does not, for most people, then I would not feel comfortable at all selling a shaft where I'm implying that it WOULD. When I sell a counterweight, I know with a great deal of certainty that for a very large majority of folks, there WILL be an ergonomic improvement. While the increase in overall weight may have some negative effect for some, a vast majority of people will instead experience an overall much more comfortable experience with a balanced shaft, versus an imbalanced one. The science says so, and most importantly, customer feedback says so. On the other hand, I don't feel I have science "in my corner," so to speak, to market an Equinox S-shaft as an "improvement" to the machine's issues. And I truly believe that a good number of folks who THINK that an S-shaft is a "solution," would come to find out that it's NOT, and my concern at that point would be that some of that dissatisfaction would be turned toward me, and my company. I believe in dealing honestly with customers, and the bottom line is that scientifically I can't feel that I'm dealing honestly by selling an S-shaft as a solution to the Equinox's poor ergonomics. I would need to have a solidly scientific demonstration that I'm wrong, so that I could be convinced that the S-shaft WOULD offer improvement, before I could embrace the possibility of production. That's not to say that I won't produce an S-shaft for the Garrett units; it's still something I'm considering. If I did so, I could try and accomplish such a design with an eye toward customer modification for use with an Equinox -- for those who REALLY have the urge to do so. But, I would NOT market it as any sort of "improvement" to the Equinox's issues; again, the scientist in me simply doesn't see that such a shaft is a solution, whereas counterweighting IS. Thanks all, for giving ear to my diatribe. Again, I apologize for any toes upon which I may have unintentionally stepped. I don't want to cause any disagreements or friction, I'm just trying to shoot straight as to where my mindset is at this point, regarding the S-shaft issue. Thanks! Steve

Goldpick -- no doubt! I got such a bad case of "tennis elbow" swinging an Explorer, that I ended up having to become "ambidextrous" and learn to swing left-handed! 🙂 Steve

Goldpick, Good points. As for the CTX, I've never checked the actual balance on the CTX, but I do swing one, and I can tell you that having swung a "perfectly balanced" Equinox, the CTX is NOT "perfectly balanced." It is DEFINITELY "more balanced" than an Explorer or E-Trac, but it absolutely does NOT feel "perfectly balanced." Again, I've never checked to verify that, but if you go back to nickeldNdimed's pictures, and look his pictures, I am expecting that at best, the CTX would hang somewhere between his "no weight" picture (machine nearly vertical), and his "weight applied" (machine approaching "detecting position") picture. In other words, I expect that the CTX is rather far removed from being "perfectly balanced" (perfect balance being defined as the machine "naturally" resting in "detecting position"). Steve

I do...if you are an active or retired service member, let me know when purchasing, and thank you for your service! Steve

Tom, I agree with you. There are two things you need to be able to do, physically, to swing the Equinox. One, as you said, you have to have the strength in your fingers/hand/arm to LIFT the machine, and KEEP it lifted, in the first place. If you can't easily lift 3 pounds, and KEEP it lifted for several hours, then yes, detecting will not be comfortable. And yes, if your main issue is that you struggle to lift the 3 pounds and carry it for several hours, then it will be even more difficult for you to lift and carry FOUR pounds. So I agree with you there. However, most folks I speak with have a consistent experience with the Equinox. They say the machine feels "light" at first, but after several hours of swinging, they "feel it" in the wrist, forearm, etc. Most of these users ALSO say that when swinging the 6" coil, the machine feels not only light AT FIRST, but that they can swing it all day, with no issues. In other words, it REMAINS light. But, they say, while even with the 11" coil the machine starts out feeling quite light, they become fatigued after a couple of hours, when swinging the 11", unlike when swinging the 6". So, given that, let's consider this. The 6" coil weighs about 10.6 oz. The 11" weighs right around 19 oz. So, by removing the 6" coil and adding the 11" coil, you are adding 8.4 oz. to the machine. Adding 8 oz. is very unlikely, just from an "absolute weight" perspective, to be the "make or break" issue. In other words, that 8 oz. of ABSOLUTE weight should not be enough to move the machine from the "I can swing it all day with no issues, it feels light as a feather" category, to the "after a couple of hours, I start feeling fatigued" category. Said another way, it's not the "absolute weight" making most of that difference, it's the fact that you increased the nose-heaviness of the machine MUCH MORE SUBSTANTIALLY than just an 8 oz. addition of weight would otherwise suggest. Why? It's due to the physics/leverage arguments, of course. Adding that 8 oz. at the "fulcrum" (i.e. the handle of the machine) would have MUCH less effect, than adding that same 8 oz. down at the end of a 3-foot long lever (the shaft). Leverage, as we all know, multiplies the forces involved, substantially. So, to continue with the analogy, since adding 8 oz. of absolute weight to the machine when switching from the 6" to the 11" coil should not be a "deal breaker" in terms of comfort, adding 8 ounces of absolute weight to the machine (but as a counterweight, at the butt end of the machine) should ALSO not be a "deal-breaker." Again, this is speaking from an "absolute weight" perspective. However, when 8 oz. of weight is added in an EFFECTIVE location, relative to the coil, THEN that 8 oz. of counterweight can have a SUBSTANTIAL effect in balancing the machine, and thus making it counter-intuitively MORE comfortable to swing. In fact, 8 oz. of counterweight is very close to being the amount needed -- when swinging the 11" coil -- to return the overall balance of the machine back to where it was when you were swinging the much lighter, 6" coil. And therefore, for most people, adding 8 oz. of counterweight makes the machine SUBSTANTIALLY more comfortable to swing, with the 11" coil attached. Again, it brings the "feel" of the machine back much closer to what it felt like, when swinging just the 6" coil. I'd like to reiterate that I was not saying that simply switching to an S-shaft couldn't bring a bit more comfort, for some. Switching to an S-shaft, you would definitely change, to some degree, which muscles are being used, and that might be at least a partial solution, for some. My only argument is that the idea that adding counterweight "doesn't help" in making the machine "swing better" is not, in a large number of cases, a "true" statement. Because, in fact, for many users, it in fact does...and there's science behind the reason that it does. Steve

nickeldNdimed -- A couple of things. First of all, you are right that there are different types of pain experienced by some, versus others. In addition, some users experience "fatigue" only, not really pain, and some experience no pain or fatigue at all. If you are experiencing no fatigue or pain, then there's no reason to counterbalance. Obviously, for that person, the muscular effort to keep the coil floating is not so great, that it "strains" the muscles. But, if you are feeling fatigue, or pain, then it's quite likely due to the machine's imbalance. There are few people that couldn't lift 3 pounds, and carry that 3 pounds a long distance, with little to no problem. It is how the three pounds is DISTRIBUTED, and which muscles you are having to use, that matters. You mentioned shortening your shaft. That will definitely reduce nose-heaviness. Again, that's just physics. And yes, arm length, shaft length, height, etc. are "variables." I consider all of those, when "fitting" a customer for counterweight. You said counterweight did not help you, and that it just gave you a "heavier-feeling" machine. My guess is that you were not using the right amount of weight. If you put on some counterweight, and it's not enough to balance the shaft, then yes -- you have not solved the balance issue but instead you've just made the machine heavier, without the benefit of "balance." With that said however, the pictures you showed do indicate that you "helped" the balance situation, in that the machine is "better balanced" in the picture where you have your weighting attached, versus the one without. That would by definition mean you were exerting less "muscle effort" to keep the coil lifted off the ground with the counterweighted shaft, than you were with the un-weighted one. In any case, there's no doubt that everyone is different, their physical capabilities are different, etc., but there's also no doubt that the Equinox is a nose-heavy machine, and that if you struggle with that nose-heaviness, counterbalancing will help... If you struggle with other aspects of the machine's ergonomics, then that may be a different story. Steve

Tom, If some folks find that an S-shaft is easier to swing, I think that's great. However, adding counterweight DOES make a nose-heavy machine "swing better," even though to some that seems somewhat "counter-intuitive." While an S-shaft might be preferred by some, that shaft design doesn't change the fact that a machine like the Equinox, which places relatively substantial weight at one end (the coil end), out at the end of a long "lever," and essentially no weight at the other end (the butt end) IS a nose-heavy unit, by definition. That's just the physics of it. Which exact groups of muscles you are using to overcome the nose-heaviness of the machine likely changes a bit, when using an S-shaft vs. a straight shaft, and so for some, it may be less difficult to swing a nose-heavy machine using an S-shaft, vs. a straight shaft. But the bottom line is that if your machine is nose-heavy (and the Equinox is), then you have to fight the leverage exerted by the coil, if you are wanting to keep the coil floating above the ground. And if the muscles you are using to fight that leverage are not sufficiently strong in order to do so without fatigue, then the machine will feel uncomfortable. Again, the Equinox is imbalanced with EITHER shaft, that's just the physical facts based on the way the machine is designed. And therefore, counterbalancing the shaft DOES make it more comfortable to swing. Steve

That's a GREAT haul, Dan! Congratulations! Steve

Joe, Nice job on the repair, AND the 8-point! Can't beat that, LOL -- not even to your blind yet, and you jumped a good one? Congrats! Steve

Dan, I'll look forward to seeing what you find on the next hunt. Might be a surprise or two waiting for you amongst that trash! Steve

Park 1, Recovery 3, Horseshoe off (accept all targets), 50 tones, FE2 at 0, and sensitivity as high/hot as you can possibly run it (and still keep it "stable" with respect to EMI). Steve

A couple of TERRIFIC finds, Rick! Outstanding!!! Steve

Dave -- I really appreciate the comments, and I'm glad it feels "perfectly balanced!" Balance, and zero flex, are two things I was hoping to accomplish with the design, for sure! Steve

CPT_GhostLight -- Thank you for sharing your thoughts, and the fantastic review! I really appreciate the kind words! What I am the MOST happy about, is the fact that when attaching the counterweight, the machine became "comfortable" for you again, and you were able to continue detecting for another few hours. THAT is probably the most rewarding part of what I do (aside from meeting some really interesting fellow hobbyists!) THANK YOU! Steve

Dan, THANKS for the follow-up thoughts; I really appreciate it and it sounds like you are well-pleased (and therefore, so am I)! BeachHunter, Thank you for the endorsement! 🙂 Steve

Norm, Thanks for including that picture; it shows the improved balance very nicely! Steve

nickel -- if you "commit" to swinging with your "off hand" for awhile, it will eventually become second nature; you will become just as proficient as you are with your dominant hand, and can then use either one with equal effectiveness. Years ago, I developed some tendonitis in my "swinging elbow," due to the weight of the Minelab Explorer (which was my go-to machine). I was forced to learn to swing with my "off hand," and eventually, it became a non-issue. Now, I can swing with either -- but still tend to use my "off hand" (lefty) most of the time. Steve