• Announcements

    • iacas

      Create a Signature!   02/05/2016

      Everyone, go here and edit your signature this week: http://thesandtrap.com/settings/signature/.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
tooc

Apex 2006

5 posts in this topic

Has anyone got an opinion on these Hogans look very similar to 73 model
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Want to get rid of this advertisement? Sign up (or log in) today! It's free!

The gist of what I read was, that they were not liked, because the felt a little harder compared to the 88 and 99 or 2003 model. Design-wise they look like a copy of copy of a nice piece. Hit the 2003 model today (Apex 50) and it felt sure nice. Nicer than my FTX today...

Over at golfwrx are a few reviews of the 2006 blade.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just got a set for 50 quid with DG S300 in them, reason being I couldn't bring my self to drilling out the 99s for the r11 graphite shafts I got. I've read that they are endo forged same as 99s but a Callaway rather than spalding. I did have a set of FTX with apex 4 in them, really didn't suit me they look really nice, maybe slightly too much offset, but I really couldn't get them in air to me theres not enough weight in the bottom. Im planning now to put the a set of fujikura motore r11 shafts in the 06s. I got a apex plus 6 iron with stiff Ben Hogan graphite shaft. ....wow this is a really realty nice iron, I'm not sure if spalding or callaway. What driver do u use?
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What shafts are in the 03s they look very similar to the 99s ?
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I uploaded a picture of the shafts in the other thread .

Oh, there are a couple of nice 03s and 99 on ebay right now. Pitty I am not in the US and would have to shell out another 100+ for tax and shipping.

The 99 shaft has a Spalding on the red shaft band. The guy that sold me the Apex 5 shafted 99 said that it plays more like a stiff. And I think it does. Whereas the Apex 3 ftx iron feels more like a xx-stiff, because the ball flight is very low (and the shaft feels somewhat stiffer).

The 03 with the Apex 3 shaft feels very nice to hit. Contrary to the ftx Apex 3 shaft, it flies way higher. Don´t know why...

Regarding the driver, I toyed buying a Hogan driver, but came to the conclusion that my TaylorMade 2007 r7 425cc w/ regular OEM shaft is a nice one. I tried all the latest models at the range, but I see not much difference. Mine has a low spin rate and a piercing lower flight, which I like. I can hit up on it if needed.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0



  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • 2016 TST Partners

    GAME Golf
    PING Golf
    Golf Evolution
  • Posts

    • GAME GOLF - Digital Tracking System
      Well, I went ahead and bit. Amazon Warehouse Deals has a few for $86 each. I had a $25 Amazon GC from Christmas, so after tax, it's going to be $66. It says the packaging is damaged, but no mention of problems with the device. Here's hoping it comes in good shape, and that it warms up pretty quickly so I can use it!
    • "5 Minutes Daily" Practice Challenge (February 2016)
      The tournament I was supposed to play in was cancelled , so I played in a shotgun start today. The group I was in played at a quicker pace than the group in front and the group behind us, so I had plenty of opportunities for practicing greenside chipping and bunker shots as well as putting.
    • Jack or Tiger: Who's the Greatest Golfer?
      While I expect it's largely accurate, I was more interested in a link to the actual quote than your paraphrase. The context of the question and interview plus the exact wording gives a clearer understanding of the statement. I accept deeper field of talent, I don't accept that it's automatically 'a ton' or an order of magnitude greater. What's the average score relative to the field (or % making the cut) in the PGA for the Pros vs. the PGA qualifiers from then to now? That could provide some insight to relative gap between majors field depth then and now. I am certain it's gotten harder for the PGA qualifiers to make it tot he weekend. I am less certain by how much the margin has shifted. The reason I stress the Majors and Opens is that size of field and openness to qualifiers is very important in making the top competitors face many elite players with potential to have a hot run of form. You're comparing apples to oranges there. That was ~ 1.5 million players in the U.S., not the world population of golfers. About 26 million golfers today in the U.S. Worldwide in 1920 who knows? But including Europe, Australia, and other 'commonwealth' countries it was likely double that - maybe triple. Also I can find no credible estimate that supports 100 million current golfers worldwide. Most generous is about 61 million. While there are a lot of clubs world-wide, participation of 'casual' unaffiliated golfers per club is not going to be the same as in the U.S. and that's the only way I get a number close to 100 million based on actual data. U.S. golf population talent base roughly tripled between Jack and Tiger and I expect worldwide it was a similar rate of increase. I think since the 1920's the U.S. has had about half the wold golf population, though that's started to decline of late as Asian participation increases. Jack was head and shoulders above highly competitive fields for nearly a generation similar to Tiger. I don't think human abilities change by orders of magnitude in short spans of time so I expect that Jack was an outlier of similar human ability as Tiger. How close and who has the edge is IMO debatable. Were Tiger's achievements (esp. the 'beat the field' streak) tougher than Jack's because of field depth, yes. How much more I'm not as sure as you. Did a relative 'competitive break' from full field events offered by the WGC's help Tiger there? Don't know but it's possible. Combine Tiger's regular wins and Majors and I have no problem giving him the greatest player of all time nod. I just don't think it's as cut and dried or by as large a margin as you seem to. They didn't play against each other so your confidence isn't any more a fact than my uncertainty. We're both estimating. Size of the field actually competing matters too, not just who wasn't invited to the party. I like the idea of a top player field and enjoy watching the events, but if only the top 50 players are playing they all have a better shot statistically than if the field was open to 156 or more players who are still very 'elite' in skill. As you've said in many posts, golf skill performance is highly variable. I agree and that's why I think size of field is relevant to the comparison, because I think the scoring variability of the top 90 golfers in the world overlaps considerably with the next 90 down and even a bit beyond that. That's why I wondered whether WGC wins are a bit less valuable than a major or a full field PGA tour event that's also open to Monday qualifying. Granted the world ranking system is better than it used to be, but it still weights international events more strongly than they deserve. Some of the reasons I think you may be undervaluing Nicklaus' achievement in comparing across eras.
    • "5 Minutes Daily" Practice Challenge (January 2016)
      I managed to complete the January challenge (without missing a day, I believe). It was a great months' work for my game - having to blog every day sure helps to focus each session.
    • Steel vs Graphite generic question
      S300 is one of the lowest launching steel shafts.
  • TST Blog Entries

  • Images

  • Today's Birthdays

    No users celebrating today
  • Blog Entries