Anyone else find it easier to hit blades?

[mvmac]

To answer the OP's question, no I don't find blades easier to hit.  Just from hitting/testing the PING S55 irons (I get that the S55's aren't a "true" blade) compared to the i20's, I wouldn't say they are easier to hit.  On a good shot both go exactly the same, even on a slight toe/heel hit they perform well.  It's when I hit it a groove high or low with the 55's that the sound changes and distance control can vary.  I don't know if it's actually a groove high or low, just how I'm describing it Obviously the wider soles in the i20's help compared to a more narrow sole.  Wider sole, you effectively have more bounce, lower CG, so your low point control doesn't have to be as precise.  Slightly thin or heavy shot, you don't notice it, both in feel and ball flight, with the i20 as you would with the S55.

I think most OEM's are missing the boat on not have a ton of bounce/camber on their MB offerings, to me that's where you really feel the forgiveness  The soles on MB's tend to be flatter, so the club will dig more.  Callaway did this with their tour guys a few years ago, with their MB Proto iron.  One of the smallest heads that you can find and most of their staff guys switched to this iron.  The players don't have much problem hitting it in the center but they all liked the turf interaction better.  I was told they would say stuff like "easiest blade I've ever hit".

They had a demo day going at the course I played yesterday.  I got to hit the 714 AP2's and MB's.......while I didn't get much time with them (had to get to the tee), my quick impression was that as much as I'd like to be able to play the MB's, they're too much club for me.  I'm sorry, but you have to be a very consistent ball striker to play them effectively.   The AP2's were outstanding though.  VERY impressive.....and they look almost identical to the MB's at address, which surprised me a little.

Yeah they did a nice job with those, especially in the long irons, nice sized head and ball launches.

[dbuck]

I learned to play with some crappy blades, and my first really nice set was Wilson Staff Tour Blades which is about as blade as you get. I still play with them often and am very comfortable with them. If you define "easy" as more consistent, then my Titleist DCI's are "easier" in that they are a little more off set, cavity backed, and more forgiving of a less than perfectly centered hit. Those old DCI's do have a thinner topline than some, so they don't look clunky. My experience with a club is what influences my perception of "easy to hit" than its looks or form. In one bag, I carry a PING ZING 5 iron that is the epitome of "chunky", but it is "easy to hit". If I am in the rough and need to hit a 5 iron, or just need to hit a full shot within that club's range, I feel good in just taking a whack at it. I have hit a lot of balls with my 5-PW Wilson Tour Blades, so I usually have some confidence when I am over the ball with one of them. and therefore consider them "easy to hit".

[SoundandFury]

I recently made a quick transition from CB's to blades:  went from Callaway Razr X's to Mizuno MP-53/63 combo set, and a couple weeks later went to Titleist 712 AP2 4-5i/ 712 MB 6-PW.  My ballstriking is pretty good, but I'm no +1 or scratch guy like everyone seem to think is the only type of golfer who can play muscle backs.  I have problem hitting the MB's.  For me, they make golf more fun, they feel so much sweeter, and they are extremely consistent (when well struck of course).

Of course there's more of a penalty when you miss, but a bad swing is a bad swing.  Finally, don't see any merit to the notion that you lose distance with blades.  In fact, I'd bet money you gain distance. I'm roughly the exact same yardage as I was with the Callaways, maybe a couple yards longer, BUT the lofts are traditional/weaker.

[mvmac]

I recently made a quick transition from CB's to blades:  went from Callaway Razr X's to Mizuno MP-53/63 combo set, and a couple weeks later went to Titleist 712 AP2 4-5i/ 712 MB 6-PW.

Roger Dunn's?

Finally, don't see any merit to the notion that you lose distance with blades.  In fact, I'd bet money you gain distance. I'm roughly the exact same yardage as I was with the Callaways, maybe a couple yards longer, BUT the lofts are traditional/weaker.

It does depend on the player and to be fair you're comparing a blade against a players cavity back that are pretty similar to blades, in tech and loft (like you said).  I think when people say that blades will go shorter, they are comparing it with other irons in mind, there is a wide range of what qualifies for a CB irons.

[saevel25]

It does depend on the player and to be fair you're comparing a blade against a players cavity back that are pretty similar to blades, in tech and loft (like you said).  I think when people say that blades will go shorter, they are comparing it with other irons in mind, there is a wide range of what qualifies for a CB irons.

Yep. If you compared a Mizuno MP iron to a Mizuno JPX iron, you will find the JPX will go farther because it has stronger lofts. GI irons can have stronger lofts because they get the ball up easier and higher. So that isn't really a bad thing. It was when you had similar lofts because GI clubs would just go way to high for better players. Now with better golf shaft fitting, and stronger lofts, GI clubs can fit a lot of people.

In reality, if you get fitted for an iron, then in the end all that should matter is Feel and Look of the club, and Flight of the golf ball. The flight can be adjusted by getting the right shaft. The rest is cosmetic and what ever makes the golfer comfortable over the ball.

[Gioguy21]

short answer is no, blades are not easier to hit. however, if you hit blades long enough and work on ballstriking...yes, they can go as far if not further than SGI clubs of the same loft. i personally love blades or players cb's. nothing better IMO than a pured blade...forged or not...but i won't get that debate riled up again lol

[SoundandFury]

They're not easier to hit in the sense that mishit on a SGI iron, most notably a miss off the toe, won't be anywhere near as punitive, and won't sting like a motherf***er.  However, some misses (fat shots, closed face, open face, etc.) are going to show up whether you're hitting a a gigantic adams SGI or an MB.  So i suppose it's sort of a yes and no.

In terms of distance, I was actually comparing my Callaway Razr X's which are true GI irons to the MB.  The Cally's have stronger lofts, yet I haven't lost any distance whatsoever with the Titleist MB's, and like I said, I think I might be a few yards longer.  Of course, I take lesson's and I practice a good amount, so that might just be the result of a better swing.

Not Roger Dunn actually (though that's my primary shop); get most of my clubs of the Bay.

[Mr Playerhater]

I much prefer blades and do hit them a lot better.. My theory why is because the moi is lower I so it makes it easier to make adjustments on the fly with the cavity backs I cand do that and up hitting it way worse

[BENtSwing]

I agree with you OP. I always played GI irons because I only played maybe 2-4 times a year. This year I began taking golf more seriously aka "became addicted"...since I've had a few lessons and actually learned the proper way to strike a golf ball, the GI irons are becoming less and less appealing. I found a set of Mizuno MP-62s in great shape for $150 and I've been slowly replacing my GI clubs one at a time (I'm up to the 7 iron). I know the 62s aren't the "bladey-ist" irons but I feel much more confident that I can strike the ball first and cut through the grass in front of the ball with the Mizunos vs the GIs (Callaways). The combo set I have now is working great for me.

BS32

[colin007]

short answer is no, blades are not easier to hit. however, if you hit blades long enough and work on ballstriking...yes, they can go as far if not further than SGI clubs of the same loft. i personally love blades or players cb's. nothing better IMO than a pured blade...forged or not...but i won't get that debate riled up again lol

this is true, people are often surprised to learn this.

[tooc]

No... a good cavity back is easier ...I've got a set of TM RAC LTs, Apex 99's, Apex IIs Mizuno Tp 19s, 21s and Zs and SB-02s..... all the blades are about 1 club less than LTs in distance

But saying that the Apex 99's are very forgiving compared to the Apex II. If i was playing for my life  I would take the TM LT's, but it would be hard choice over the Apex 99's. The TM LTs are still one of the best cavity backs out there. Faldos TP 19 for blade sit very well behind the ball actually u feel quite confident with them.. but not a easy as they look. Just my thoughts

[march11934]

True blades? Probably not, but I do love a thin top line.

MP52s and MP58s are a great blend.

Agreed. I play 52's. Can't stand over a large GI head.

[Roblar]

It's all the same - I've never met a club that I can't hit poorly or inconsistently.

[Bourneidentity]

I bought a brand new set of Ping I25 with DG x100 and they are now on ebay and craigslist. Why? Becuzzzz after 3 rounds I realized just how perfect My Mizuno MP 32's are. Best irons ever, period!

[march11934]

I game with MP52's but practice hitting into a net with a spare set of MP33's. There is a little adjustment in the top line thickness of the 52's but that is it. Overall I try to practice my tempo with the 33's as they are a little heavier and harder to get fast on the back swing.

[awmgolfer]

I grew up playing an old set of RAM blades, when I came back to golf I purchased a new set which were GI heads and hit them just fine but the look of them drove me nuts. Ended up getting a set of blades and hit them no worse or better but they just feel right to my eye. Have to be comfortable and like what's in your hand and for me GI heads just don't look right. The kids on the golf team try mine every now and then and they grew up starting out with GI heads and to them mine don't look right for them, to each their own :) If you hit them well and like how they look then stick with em'!

[prooneday]

Yep I just went back to my adams mb2 pvd Finnish irons after trying cavity backs blades are easier and nicer for me big time much better penetrating ball

[WUTiger]

From 1974 to 1994, I played MacGregor MT irons (a competitive players model back then). These were blades, but came with stock Stiff 1 shafts which were a little lighter and livelier than a lot of Seventies steel stiff flex. Here's what I found:

In seasons when I could play twice a week and practice frequently, they worked reasonably well. Mishits, however, didn't go very far - miss a 5 iron, and you got a 90-yard clunker or floater into the left or right rough. And truly bad hits were a disaster.

In seasons when I played twice a month, performance was much more uneven. You had to hit them a lot to stay "in the groove."

My next set was some Pro Tour Black irons - clones of the Ping Eye2. Shafts were stiff Dynalites, a high-launch cousin of the Dynamic Golds. I didn't have to practice as much with the PTBs to get good results. Bad hits still got me in trouble, but the mishits always ended up somewhere around the green. I was over 40 when I made the switch, and I found it took less physical effort to hit PTB cavities.

My scores had crept into the low 90s in my final MT seasons, but the PTBs took me back to the mid 80s in a few months. (At the same time, I also swapped out my persimmon-headed woods for metal woods. But, most of the scoring improvement came from the new irons).