STX Scandium

[laxplayer989]

First off, this is not a preference thread, so......
But what i need to know is what shaft, in terms of strength, does the STX Scandium most closely compare, facts. Also is it as thin, thinner, or thicker sidewalls as a krypto pro and krypto alloy
~Thanks~

[Stringer4Lax]

in my opinion it is much stronger but i have only used it in a d-pole length.

[tkdlaxer]

I think mine dented much quicker then my klyte. It seemed to ding up easily, but maybe its just me

[laxplayer989]

ok, in addition to the scandium, whats your comparison of the klyte and premiere to the kypto pro?

[MACDADDY]

klyte is stronger because of the thicker sidewalls. though it is heavier by only .7 oz.
this is to the kpro of course...

[Rosie411]

honestly id get the scandium-- i have both and the scandium is lighter then the kryptolyte and honestly its not much weaker it also depends on how much you can spend of course one's a 90-100 dollar shaft (for attack) and ones 60-70 (for klyte not the pro)

[laxplayer989]

well how thick or thin is the sidewall of a scandium, compare

[Lacrosse4life31]

If your gonna get a Scandium, go with the Brine SC21

[brainddeadjock]

that is not a fair question. I took a set of micrometers and measured the wall thickness of 2 dozen different shaft models. Not here is something that will flip all you guys out. Sometimes the wall thickness of the attack shaft is thicker than the D-pole of the same model. Case in point, the Warrior Kryptolyte. On D-poles, I found wall thickness that varies from 0.042 to 0.055 inches thick. I found two attack length Kryptolytes with wall thickness of 0.050 inches. This is true of all brands and most models. There are two defensemen I coach, one has a Platinum Alloy (CU31) and the other has a Kryptolyte (C405). The Kryptolyte is heavier than the Platinum Alloy. Wall thickness, Platinum Alloy 0.045 inches and the Kryptolyte, 0.050 inches. So weight is not a good indicator of a shaft's strength or quality. Weight is directly proportional to wall thickness and wall thickness has a direct relations with dent and ding resistance, not bending resistance.

[Lacrosse4life31]

that is not a fair question. I took a set of micrometers and measured the wall thickness of 2 dozen different shaft models. Not here is something that will flip all you guys out. Sometimes the wall thickness of the attack shaft is thicker than the d-pole shaft of the same model. Case in point, the Warrior Kryptolyte. On d-poles, I found wall thickness that varies from 0.042 to 0.055 inches thick. I found two attack length Kryptolytes with wall thickness of 0.050 inches. This is true of all brands and most models. There are two defensemen I coach, one a a platinum alloy (CU31) and the other has a Kryptolyte (C405). The klyte is heavier than the plat. alloy. Wall thickness, Plat. Alloy 0.045 inches and the klyte, 0.050 inches. So weight is not a good indicator of a shaft.
nice find! thanks... i'll keep that in mind!

[laxplayer989]

one i lost where u were going with that, and did u measure the scandium, premiere, dolomite?

[Saintslax22]

what hes saying is that thickness doesnt matter to how heavy or how strong the shaft is...

[brainddeadjock]

one i lost where u were going with that, and did u measure the scandium, premiere, dolomite?


I measured two years ago in December 2006. I have not measured the wall thickness of any of the scandium enhanced shafts, the dolomite, or the Premier. My point is that weight is very subjective and not a true indicator of the strength or durability of shaft. I think most people would agree that a 7075 (C405, Kryptolyte) shaft is "better" than a 7050 (CU31, Platinum Alloy) but on my team the defenseman with the thinner and lighter Plat Alloy shaft believe his is "better" since it is lighter.

What if you found out that Brine, Warrior, and STX all use the same foundry, that the shaft were manufactured in the same plant, from the same metal source? Would that make a difference?

C405 is Alcoa Brand made for ASTM 7075 aluminum alloy.
CU31 is Alcoa Brand made for ASTM 7050 aluminum alloy.

Ergo => The metal in a Warrior Kryptolyte is not better than a STX Axe, since there are both made from Alcoa's C405. In theory, both of these shafts should not be any better than the Brine Ignite Supra or Swizzle (7075) since they are all made from the same aluminum alloy spec.

The reality is that mixing accuracy, the purity of the raw metals, and the quality of extrusion of the shaft are major contributor to the quality of the shafts. Wall thickness is a major factor in the durability of shafts.

Case in point, the new Brine Ignite series suffers from thin walls and probably poor material quality from the Communist Chinese metal foundry. (Edited: Just found out the ignites are not 7050, but 7005 spec aluminum alloy, a little cheaper, and a lower yield strength than 7050, which explains the failures compared to the f-15 series) Look at the pet food contamination, the chinese manufacturer cheated and added a non-food ingredients to boost the "nutritional" value of the pet food and it killed a bunch a cats and dogs.

So back to the original thought, my guess this that the Brine SC21 and the STX scandium are made from the same source metal at the same extrusion plant. The only difference is the shape and the finish. The warranty is the same, 6 months, so get the cheaper one.

[brainddeadjock]

what hes saying is that thickness doesnt matter to how heavy or how strong the shaft is...

Not quite, thickness has a direct relationship to weight, but not to how strong the shaft is. If you take two shafts, a 7075 (C405, Kryptotye) and a 7050 (CU31, Platinum Alloy) and make them the same thickness, i.e. same weight and test them, here would be the results.

The dent resistance would be the same. If you were to hit them the same way with the same force at the same angle, they would dent the SAME!!!!

However, if you were to apply a load until the 7050 was permanently bent, you could add about another 10% to the 7075 shaft before it bent, that is why it is "stronger".

The problem with evaluating shafts, specifically Warrior is that the higher model you go, the thinner walls you get. The only definitive way to test the "strength" of a shaft is to get a sample of each one from every company and do destructive testing. See what force it takes to get each one to fail. I can't afford that and I don't think any company wants to provide a sample to two for destructive testing. If certain models don't met expectations of the community (coughWarriorcoughTitanium coughD-polescough), sales would be affected and the results would become stuff of urban legend.

I am more than willing to do the testing is some company or store is will to provide the shafts...... But my guess the list of volunteers would be very short.

[Lacrosse4life31]

Not quite, thickness has a direct relationship to weight, but not to how strong the shaft is. If you take two shafts, a C405 (7075, kltye) and a CU31 (7050, Platinum Alloy) and make them the same thickness, i.e. same weight and test them, here would be the results.

The dent resistance would be the same. If you were to hit them the same way with the same force at the same angle, they would dent the SAME!!!!

However, if you were to apply a load until the CU31 was permanently bent, you could add about another 10% to the C405 shaft before it bent, that is why it is "stronger".

The problem with evaluating shafts, specifically Warrior is that the higher model you go, the thinner walls you get. The only definitive way to test the "strength" of a shaft is to get a sample of each one from every company and do destructive testing. See what force it takes to get each one to fail. I can't afford that and I don't think any company wants to provide a sample to two for destructive testing. If certain models don't met expectations of the community (Warrior Titanium D-poles), sales would be affected and the results would become stuff of urban legend.

I am more than willing to do the testing is some company or store is will to provide the shafts...... But my guess the list of volunteers would be very short.
dang you are one smart guy... i just learned ALOT!! thanks dude!

[brainddeadjock]

I wonder if you realize that "scandium" shafts are still aluminum-zinc-magnesium based alloy, like 7075 (C405) and 7050 (CU31), they have at most 0.2% of scandium by volume, probably 0.05-0.15% with aluminum being over 87%. Only about 2 tons of scandium are mined worldwide per year.

Here is a elemental breakdown of the two most common Aluminum shaft alloys.

7075 (C405, Axe, Kryptolyte, F-22, Ignite Supra)

Aluminum Balance
Chromium 0.18 - 0.28
Copper 1.2 - 2
Iron 0.5 max
Magnesium 2.1 - 2.9
Manganese 0.3 max
Other Each 0.05 max
Others Total 0.15 max
Silicon 0.4 max
Titanium 0.2 max
Zinc 5.1 - 6.1

7050 Aluminum (CU31, Platinum Alloy, STX Zirconium & Sabre, Brine Ignite)

Aluminum Balance
Chromium 0.04
Copper 2.0 - 2.6
Iron 0.15 max
Magnesium 1.9 - 2.6
Manganese 0.10 max
Other Each 0.05 max
Others Total 0.15 max
Silicon 0.12 max
Titanium 0.06 max
Zinc 5.7 - 6.7
Zirconium 0.08-0.115


My personal guess is that "Scandium" shafts are CU31 based with some Scandium added. If you look at the analysis of CU31, it has some titanium, so when the Brine F-15 and the STX Ultra+Ti shafts were as advertised "Titanium Enhanced", they were talking about CU31 , since it has some Titanium in it.......

[Thomson#1]

BDJ do you know anything about 7080 alloys? Is that C555? (Kyrpto Pro, F55, DeBeer C555, Ignite Optra)

[brainddeadjock]

The Krypto Pro is most likely a heat or cryogentically treated c405 alloy. The F55 and C555 are mostly like based on Alcoa's SC555 Scandium-Aluminum Alloy.

There is not recognized spec for 7080 aluminum.
It is based on a 7000 series aluminum. The first digit indicates the principal alloying element, which has been added to the aluminum alloy and is often used to describe the aluminum alloy series, i.e., 1000 series, 2000 series, 3000 series, up to 8000 series. For 7000 series, it is zinc. The second single digit, if different from 0, indicates a modification of the specific alloy, and the third and fourth digits are arbitrary numbers given to identify a specific alloy in the series.

1= 99% Al (almost pure Al)
2= Copper
3= manganese
4= Silicon
5= Magnesium
6= Magnesium & Silicon
7= Zinc
8= others

Since 7080 has "other" for a modifiy alloy and Brine says it has scandium, the "8" represents scandium. Probably arounf 0.05% by volume. Therefore, a scandium enhanced 7075 alloy.

The SC21 and Brine Scandium shafts may have as much as 0.2% scandium. So it is marketed as a scandium alloy, not as an Aluminum-Scandium alloy. The going rate for refined Scandium is $600 a kg.

Let's do the math, an attack shaft weighs 7.5 oz or 213 grams. and lets assume all the metal have the same density. So assuming 0.2% scandium by weight = 0.4 grams of scandium or .000426 kg @ $600/kg = $0.25 additional cost in raw material.

Do you think a SC21 cost $0.25 more than a 7075 shaft? :loser: :nut: :dummy:


Just checking?????

[MACDADDY]

a bit off topic but what about titanium shafts. are they just an aluminum based alloy or is it actually mostly titanium?

[slinkyspine]

a bit off topic but what about titanium shafts. are they just an aluminum based alloy or is it actually mostly titanium?
Check the number classification it has


Brain just explained how it works

[brainddeadjock]

The titanium shaft are an extruded titanium alloy. So all the warrior Levitation, Titan Pro, Classic, fatboy; as well as the STX Titanium; and the Brine Ti22 are true titanium shafts.
The db803 and variants are aluminum based and are "titanium enhanced".

What I don't know and have not been able to figure out are the mixed metal shafts, like the Dolomite and Sc + Ti Premiere. I wonder how much titanium is mixed in with the c405 mix to make a Dolomite, 0.05%, 0.15%, or 2%, don't know. Same thing with the Sc + Ti Premiere. I am sure that the scandium content is less than 2%, but is it a "scandium & titanium enhanced" aluminum alloy? or a "scandium enhanced" titanium alloy. And basing the composition on the price would not be a reliable indicator.

[Thomson#1]

Isn't your name brain dead? Doesn't seem like it to me...

So with a 7080 alloy (C555, F55) it's only composed of about .05% scandium, which means them marketing the shaft as "Scandium enhanced" or whatever is really just to make it flashier and sound better? Thanks.

[brainddeadjock]

Isn't your name brain dead? Doesn't seem like it to me...

So with a 7080 alloy (C555, F55) it's only composed of about .05% scandium, which means them marketing the shaft as "Scandium enhanced" or whatever is really just to make it flashier and sound better? Thanks.

I don't think the alloy mix recipe for the F55 and the C555 are the same as the 7080. I think they are similar. Like I said SC555 is Kaiser propriatory name for of a "scandium enhanced" aluminum alloy.

I am guessing the amount of Scandium is 0.05%, I don't know for sure. It's just and educated guess.

But all scandium shafts are truly "scandium enhanced" aluminum alloys, since the have at most 2%, probably more like 0.2% of scandium. Over 85% of the shaft is aluminum.

[laxmiddie11]

I don't think the alloy mix recipe for the F55 and the C555 are the same as the 7080. I think they are similar. Like I said SC555 is Kaiser propriatory name for of a "scandium enhanced" aluminum alloy.

I am guessing the amount of Scandium is 0.05%, I don't know for sure. It's just and educated guess.

But all scandium shafts are truly "scandium enhanced" aluminum alloys, since the have at most 2%, probably more like 0.2% of scandium. Over 85% of the shaft is aluminum.
Then how come scandium shafts are so much stronger than aluminum.

[ET5057]

klyte is stronger because of the thicker sidewalls. though it is heavier by only .7 oz.
this is to the kpro of course...

If I read correctly you are saying that the KLyte and KPro are different weights because if you read the LU catalog they are both 5.3 oz.

[Thomson#1]

If I read correctly you are saying that the KLyte and KPro are different weights because if you read the LU catalog they are both 5.3 oz.

Don't trust that.

The kryptolyte was the original Warrior C405 shaft, it is "crygotentiasdfliasdfkjlasdf" treated or w/e. The they came out with the Krypto-Pro which is a Kryptolyte with thinner walls and a higher price tag, that's it...

[Thomson#1]

Then how come scandium shafts are so much stronger than aluminum.

I don't think your getting it. Aluminum shafts are still alloys, except they have higher aluminum amounts that other shafts. Say an F10 is 95% aluminum, and a Scandium is 85% aluminum. There is substitute metals in a scandium that take away from the aluminum percentage (metals like scandium, titanium, magnesium, all that stuff) This resulting in a shaft with stronger metals and less aluminum %.

That's how I interpreted it, I could be incredibly wrong though, if so, BDJ fill him in.

[brainddeadjock]

I don't think your getting it. Aluminum shafts are still alloys, except they have higher aluminum amounts that other shafts. Say an F10 is 95% aluminum, and a Scandium is 85% aluminum. There is substitute metals in a scandium that take away from the aluminum percentage (metals like scandium, titanium, magnesium, all that stuff) This resulting in a shaft with stronger metals and less aluminum %.

That's how I interpreted it, I could be incredibly wrong though, if so, BDJ fill him in.

Very close. Think of steel. What is steel? An iron based alloy. The compare it to stainless steel, another iron based alloy with a high chromium content. Look at the alloy mix for 7050 (CU31) vs 7075 (C405). Both alloys have about the same amount of aluminum, 87% or so. The 7050 aluminum even has titanium, but everybody knows 7075 is stronger without any titanium. Why? The alloy mix.

So by adding scandium to the right alloy mix, you get a "scandium enhanced" aluminum based alloy, likely Kaiser's SC555 that is stronger than a "zinc-magnesium enhanced" aluminum based alloy, Alcoa's C405 or even a "titanium-copper enhanced" aluminum based alloy, like Alcoa's CU31.

And remember stronger shaft is a misnomer. These alloys may have a higher yield strength, but you thin the walls, a stronger "scandium enhanced" shaft may fail at a lower force and a thicker walled "zinc-magnesium enhanced" shaft.

Remember, steel is a very strong metal, but everybody can bend a paper clip. But can you bend a 6061/f10/alloy2000/al6000 attack shaft?

By playing with the wall thickness, I can make a 6061/f10/alloy2000/al6000 shaft snap any titanium shaft out there, even a fatboy.

[Jourmane]

^^^ you have just saved me so much money...