Player Cavity Backs

[jamo]

Great great clubs there. But Srixon is not a "little guy." The Sumitomo rubber company is huge, and owns Srixon, Cleveland, and Never Compromise. They're one of the largest golf companies in the world.

Sumitomo owns Cleveland? Sweet, I have their tires.

Anyway, I highly recommend either of the Mizunos, though I will have to disagree with Maltby a little, I've never found the X-Forged to be particularly forgiving, but I haven't tried the new ones, maybe that's it. (that was a huge run-on sentence)

[James_Black]

Try out the cobra's.
I've heard great reviews about them.

On the other hand.
I've heard great reviews about the rest of the iron too!

Try them all out I guess

[WUTiger]

... And I think confidence is more important than any technology out there. So what do you guys say? ...

If you want a challenge, why not play the Titleist AC108 irons from the early 1970s? They have a Maltby Playability Factor (MPF) of -352 (a negative score). The irons you are suggesting all have positive MPF scores.

Technology is important - you want it to match your game. * I can have all the confidence in the world if I buy a driver with an XS, high-kick shaft and 8* loft head. But being I only have 85 mph swingspeed, it won't work for me. * If someone with a shallow attack angle uses 12* and 14*-bounce wedges on hard turf, it will be skull city when the clubhead ricochets off the ground on every other shot.

[Shanks A Million]

If you want a challenge, why not play the Titleist AC108 irons from the early 1970s? They have a Maltby Playability Factor (MPF) of -352 (a negative score). The irons you are suggesting all have positive MPF scores.

I have the Pinnacle Acushnet AC-108s. They they are hard to get off the ground. A good swing and they go just fine, but the area of the club that is available to get under the ball is so small. The cavity on the bottom is larger than the one on top, so they are fairly top heavy, which accounts for the negative score. I found it interesting to see them rated at -352. I learned to play on them, not a good idea in retrospect.

[bman1313]

I still have my Acushnet 108's that were my first set of clubs. Thanks Dad.

[Gibby]

If you want a challenge, why not play the Titleist AC108 irons from the early 1970s? They have a Maltby Playability Factor (MPF) of -352 (a negative score). The irons you are suggesting all have positive MPF scores.

Touche, I never said technology wasn't important, dunno why what I had to say offended you On the other hand, I could have custom fitted clubs perfectly matching my swing, but if i didn't like the way the club looked and had negative thoughts running through my mind, it wouldn't work for me either. In the end, both are very important. In my opinion, i think confidence is even more important than technology. If you think the nitrogen pumped Powerbilt baloons have amazing technology and will give you an extra 50yds, go for it. I'd rather have something I think looks nice and simple, and inspires confidence, with a properly fitted shaft. -Gibby

[Shanks A Million]

Touche, I never said technology wasn't important, dunno why what I had to say offended you

I'm to the point where I don't try clubs before I buy them anymore. The only thing I care about really are looks and cost. If it looks good in the bag, and it's cheap, I buy it. Modern clubs are so easy to hit, that all other factors are pretty much eliminated.

[Bump-n-MI]

Great great clubs there. But Srixon is not a "little guy." The Sumitomo rubber company is huge, and owns Srixon, Cleveland, and Never Compromise. They're one of the largest golf companies in the world.

Understood, my point was the Srixons, Clevelands, Bridgestones, etc in the US are not often seen in the average Joes bag. They are the little guys in iron sales compared to the Pings, Taylor Mades, Titleists, etc...

[WUTiger]

I have the Pinnacle Acushnet AC-108s. They they are hard to get off the ground. I found it interesting to see them rated at -352. I learned to play on them,

Au contraire, Shanks. You are single digit today because you overcame adversity and learned to hit challenging clubs.

[Shanks A Million]

Au contraire, Shanks. You are single digit today because you overcame adversity and learned to hit challenging clubs.

No, I learned to play on Northwestern J.C. Snead blades. I changed to the AC-108s when I was 24 and took golf back up again. I didn't begin to drop the handicap and learn to play better until I got some Adams Tight Lies clubs, big easy to hit things that helped me gain confidence. I did use some very small old blades to practice a lot though, those helped me learn to make good contact. It's really a combination of hard practice and easy rounds.

[rafal]

I am confused about the confidence that gets mentioned...shouldn't there be more confidence when hitting easy GI clubs than blades? What do looks have to do with "confidence" at all?

[Shanks A Million]

I am confused about the confidence that gets mentioned...shouldn't there be more confidence when hitting easy GI clubs than blades? What do looks have to do with "confidence" at all?

A lot. Confidence is not quantifiable. You can be more confident with a tiny blade than a huge GI shovel. When I look down and see the face square or open, with no offset, I'm a lot more confident than if I see a big hook face with offset. My brain will start to tell me to keep the face open, and either I do it and slice the piss out of it, or don't and hook it into the next county. Confidence is in the eye of the beholder.

[Bullitt5339]

I had never seen the Maltby ratings before, and found them interesting.

They show that my clubs are very hard to hit. I'd have to agree, but they are forcing me to improve my swing, and I'm hitting them better than my old X-22's now.

[Simon Redwine]

I play the ac108 with great pride.  I figure if they were good enough for the old guys they are good enough for me.  I went out of my way to find a complete set of 2-pw-pw.   The shape well but are a little harder to slice,  fade really well and draw like nobody's business.  I also play some vintage spalding musclebacks which are much harder to shape.  I've actually played no name r700 (knockoffs) that hit further than anything I've played, except the driver of course (what's that about).   As with all clubs the trick with the ac108 (s) is stay off the toe and keep the swing compact.  I've played a 71 already this year and left a few out there ( go out and shoot a 80+- the next time out ).  8 iron goes about 165 and 5 Iron around 190.  No doubt the 2 is hard to hit but it does play an open face push  very well and gets right up there. It's an awesome tool for punching 150 (even 200 with a decent lie) yarders out of the woods off the back foot closed.  Try that with a hybrid!

I recommend you go out and play 3 club (or bag and irons only once in a while).   It will knock 5 strokes off your regular game for a 15 handicapper. Golf is like an 8- peice jigsaw puzzle on a 100 acre spread. Stay out of trouble and don't let the course play you.

Play the hole and get to where you can hit the 3rd of the green below the cup 1/2 the time and you will break 80-.  It only takes 10 pars and no double bogies folks. Take the breaks when you can and suck up a bogie when you have to.

[mcguire10]

Any idea what Maltby rates any of the Wilson irons at?  I am also interested in upgrading my irons from my Titleist DCI 762's to something newer with the players cavity, and the Wilson's look really nice.

[LuciusWooding]

Originally Posted by Simon Redwine

I play the ac108 with great pride.  I figure if they were good enough for the old guys they are good enough for me.  I went out of my way to find a complete set of 2-pw-pw.   The shape well but are a little harder to slice,  fade really well and draw like nobody's business.  I also play some vintage spalding musclebacks which are much harder to shape.  I've actually played no name r700 (knockoffs) that hit further than anything I've played, except the driver of course (what's that about).   As with all clubs the trick with the ac108 (s) is stay off the toe and keep the swing compact.  I've played a 71 already this year and left a few out there ( go out and shoot a 80+- the next time out ).  8 iron goes about 165 and 5 Iron around 190.  No doubt the 2 is hard to hit but it does play an open face push  very well and gets right up there. It's an awesome tool for punching 150 (even 200 with a decent lie) yarders out of the woods off the back foot closed.  Try that with a hybrid!

I recommend you go out and play 3 club (or bag and irons only once in a while).   It will knock 5 strokes off your regular game for a 15 handicapper. Golf is like an 8- peice jigsaw puzzle on a 100 acre spread.  Stay out of trouble and don't let the course play you.

Play the hole and get to where you can hit the 3rd of the green below the cup 1/2 the time and you will break 80-.  It only takes 10 pars and no double bogies folks. Take the breaks when you can and suck up a bogie when you have to.

I have a set of AC108s, learned to play on them. It was no wonder I had a hell of a time striking the ball at first. They have a really high CoG, no significant help in the cavity, and a really thin sole. The sole is not cambered; it's completely flat, and lacks any bounce. It goes through the turf like crap, and is made out of what appears to be steel but feels like broken glass. The one good thing about them is that the PW lies so low when opened up that I can hit a flop off of cement. Maltby bases the MPF off things like hosel length, offset, and sole width, which are more about shot height than forgiveness, but I agree that those irons are at the bottom of the list. Bad turf interaction, poor distance, bad feel and forgiveness, and super low launch. Good distance control, though. That's about the only nice thing I have to say.

As a side note, I don't recommend you tell people to play only a few clubs. There was a member here recently, who shall remain nameless, who you evoke almost perfectly. But surely he was IP banned so he couldn't make another account...

[mlf16507]

Originally Posted by mcguire10

Any idea what Maltby rates any of the Wilson irons at?  I am also interested in upgrading my irons from my Titleist DCI 762's to something newer with the players cavity, and the Wilson's look really nice.

I looked at 2008 -2012 ratings and he doesn't mention Wilson at all.  Call them and maybe they have info they can give you over phone.-- http://www.golfworks.com/article.asp_Q_ai_E_519

[The Tin Man]

Some of  the irons on the top of the Maltby list are as horrible in their own way as whats on the bottom,  Ultra Game Improvement  bananas on a stick.