Blades vs. Cavity Backs - with Data/Video

[ChetlovesMer]

Just now, Shindig said:

Oh, this is what you were talking about yesterday?  I hadn't heard this but it makes sense.  I'll give it some thought.  MPF might disappear from my future considerations entirely.

I grossly misinterpreted what you said yesterday.  Sorry about that, my response (which was genuine, given what I thought you were saying) probably looks sarcastic and condescending right now.  That wasn't my intention, sorry about that.

No problem. I appreciated that you were trying not to hurt my feelings. I knew what you meant and assumed you didn't want to offend me. 
I tried to tread lightly on that. I do think The MPF either badly needs to be updated to something more in line with what manufacturers produce today. Or it needs to be dropped. 

I appreciate what Maltby was trying to do. I read his book back in the early 90's. At the time it kind of made sense. 

I do think it would be great if he (or anyone for that matter) could do something like that for modern clubs, because it's certainly very confusing as this thread shows/proves. But I also think it may be an impossible task, just because it really has gotten so complex and so varied. There is so much cross pollination in the categories. Plus, I think today many people play such varied, but effective swings that it makes the water even more muddy. 
 

Again, I took no offense. I hope I didn't offend you. 

[Shindig]

23 minutes ago, ChetlovesMer said:

Again, I took no offense. I hope I didn't offend you. 

I wasn't offended either.  I was likewise just worried that I had offended you.

[Big Lex]

I love this topic. Random thoughts and observations over years of thinking about this topic: 

1. Cavity back clubs have much more mass near the toe, so as @billchao stated, they perform way better on toe hits than blades do. However.....

2. Corrolary to #1 is that _some_ cavity backs I've played perform poorly on heel strikes. I've never played blades, but it wouldn't surprise me if blades were equal to cavity backs on heel hits; or at least closer than they are on toe hits. 

3. Sometimes a miss is as good as a mile. Whether you are 5 yards short of the green or 15, you still have a short game shot coming up. Misses are also usually short AND off line, so a "better" miss with a cavity back may land in greenside rough or a bunker, where the worse result with a blade could finish in fairway. Yes, the closer we are to the hole, the better we are, all things being equal, but the small differences in distance and direction between the blade and the cavity back may not be all that important practically speaking on any given shot. Throw in the fact that it seems GOOD strikes are more consistent with blades, it could mean at the end of the day there isn't a huge influence on scoring, even for average golfers. Not nearly as much as they make it out to be.  

4. Moving the COG further from the hosel - a feature of game improvement clubs - has the effect of resisting the rotation of the club head around the axis of the shaft. So this could mean that it's actually easier to close the face of a blade than a cavity back. 

5. One of my golf friends is an equipment sales rep. He's sold Callaway, Adams, Taylor Made, and Mizuno. He tells me that he had a NJ club pro order a set of super game improvement cavity backs when he was selling callaway. He assumed the clubs were for the guy's father or something. But they were for him. And he noted that the guy won a section tournament with the clubs that year. So not all high level players play blades or necessarily even "better player" irons which aren't true blades.  

6. Another golf friend is an industry person connected to the Golf Digest Hot List. I asked him why recent iterations of the Hot List have not reviewed "true" blades. His answer was that they feel no golfers below elite level should be playing them, so they concentrate their efforts on the clubs they think are most suitable for everyone. This has a huge effect on buying patterns, I'm sure.

7. I think the argument that your swing will develop better if you play blades (because of the increased feedback on bad strikes) has been unfairly dismissed. I'm not saying it's true, but it's been dismissed without anyone ever really testing it. 

I echo the "it's just golf" sentiment and say play what you like. I think the "forgiveness" argument has some flaws and has probably been taken a bit too far. It's infused with marketing "hype," and it's to the point where an average golfer is almost looked at as a fool if they want to play a blade club. Like we have to have a certain level of ability to "qualify" to use these special instruments. So if you're a 15 and hit your driver 225, people laugh under their breath at your blades, like you're some kind of poser. I think that's unfortunate and unfair. Play the clubs you want to play. (I wish I could take my own advice and try them, but the aforementioned golf friends would ridicule me to no end 🙂 )

[Vinsk]

11 minutes ago, Big Lex said:

Play the clubs you want to play. (I wish I could take my own advice and try them, but the aforementioned golf friends would ridicule me to no end 🙂 )

Play them. Why care? Join in on the joking and just play them. I have a set of 620MB Titleist irons. Damn, they’re beautiful. 

[billchao]

18 minutes ago, Big Lex said:

1. Cavity back clubs have much more mass near the toe, so as @billchao stated, they perform way better on toe hits than blades do. However.....

2. Corrolary to #1 is that _some_ cavity backs I've played perform poorly on heel strikes. I've never played blades, but it wouldn't surprise me if blades were equal to cavity backs on heel hits; or at least closer than they are on toe hits.

It’s not just about moving mass towards the toe, though. CoG is farther back from the face and lower which increases launch angle. That’s the primary reason I stopped playing my blades and switched to GI clubs. I tend to have too much shaft lean at impact and GI clubs launch the ball 3° higher for me, which is important for apex height and holding greens.

22 minutes ago, Big Lex said:

7. I think the argument that your swing will develop better if you play blades (because of the increased feedback on bad strikes) has been unfairly dismissed. I'm not saying it's true, but it's been dismissed without anyone ever really testing it. 

It didn’t do anything for me. Just because you feel the center better doesn’t mean you’re going to hit it there more often. Plus I can generally feel the impact location on my GI clubs just fine.

[GolfLug]

3 hours ago, SullyGolf said:

Hey guys this is a very interesting read as someone who was recently going through all of this to buy new irons. I'm not a super frequent player, when I did play a lot I was able to get under 90 a decent amount of the time. Now I am playing less but I still shoot low-mid 90s when I get out. My iron ability is definitely what keeps me in this range when comparatively my putting, chipping and tee box shots get me into a fair amount of trouble. So I guess I would have to say I'm in the 18-22 handicap range (haven't turned in enough rounds this year).

I spent some time on the launch monitor before purchasing and I swung a mix of GI, SGI and Players Distance/GI irons. What immediately jumped out at me while hitting a mix of clubs was that one of the most "player" marketed sets I hit, the Mavrik Pro were by far the best for me in terms of consistency, reducing fat shots and dispersion. I found with the SGI clubs I hit way more fat shots and was more like the pull a shot way off to the left.

Honestly I can't stand the look at address of the SGI and UGI irons behind the ball and I don't feel like they do much for me in terms of actual results. So my question to you guys is do you think the "Forgiving Players Irons" are sort of pushed too far towards better players in terms of what handicap they get recommended too?

The guy helping me was pretty adamant that despite the clear best results coming from as he called them "blades" (I know these aren't blades) that he would still suggest I go for the SGI type club. I went back and hit the Pros again just to confirm that my  numbers looked good again another day and they did so I pulled the trigger on them from CPO. To me it feels like these clubs remind me of my old A7 in feel and look in the high irons and and I still find those irons a joy to hit. But I can't help but wonder where this push for SGI on everyone above say 10 handicap has come from?

You are fine. I don't think you are leaving out 5 shots out there cuz you are not playing SGIs. The huge offset they put on these irons is not only ugly but far too assuming that every high handicapped needs anti-slice help.

And  26 deg loft on a '7' iron?? heh. 

[Big Lex]

15 minutes ago, Vinsk said:

Play them. Why care? Join in on the joking and just play them. I have a set of 620MB Titleist irons. Damn, they’re beautiful. 

I bought new clubs recently. I didn't buy blades. But I did move in that direction. I was playing Mizuno JPX "hot metal," and I switched to Callaway Apex. So it was one level up (Apex DCB was equivalent to the JPX, according to the fitter). I didn't try the Apex Pro, which is another level up, but isn't a true blade, either. Maybe I will buy a set of used blades and play with them in practicing. 

 

8 minutes ago, billchao said:

It’s not just about moving mass towards the toe, though. CoG is farther back from the face and lower which increases launch angle......etc.

Which irons do you like better? The GI's or the blades? 

[SullyGolf]

21 minutes ago, GolfLug said:

You are fine. I don't think you are leaving out 5 shots out there cuz you are not playing SGIs. The huge offset they put on these irons is not only ugly but far too assuming that every high handicapped needs anti-slice help.

And  26 deg loft on a '7' iron?? heh. 

Yes this what I mean in the marketing going crazy. "Woah I hit the 7 iron 175 yards on these clubs AMAZING!" But it's actually like a 5 iron in your old set.

[SEMI_Duffer]

41 minutes ago, Big Lex said:

So not all high level players play blades or necessarily even "better player" irons which aren't true blades.  

Nor do all mid- to high-cap players play GI or SGI clubs.  I've mentioned before these old TM knock-off CB irons I'm swinging.  Perhaps they were regarded as GI clubs back when they were new, but, with all the tech that goes into today's GI and SGI clubs: I wonder if they would be anymore?

They sure don't look anything like the GI clubs I've looked at recently, the top lines all of which look like you're swinging a brick 

I'd expected I'd replace them if I got into the game enough.  But now I'm not sure. They actually treat me real well when I do my part.

So well, in fact, that if I do replace them I wonder if GI clubs will be what I go with?  I guess I'll find out if I decide to upgrade them.  For that kind of money I'll be getting fitted.

[GolfLug]

52 minutes ago, SullyGolf said:

Yes this what I mean in the marketing going crazy. "Woah I hit the 7 iron 175 yards on these clubs AMAZING!" But it's actually like a 5 iron in your old set.

To be fair, not all loft strengthening is for length. Some is necessary to mitigate over spin/ballooning resulting from the weight distribution of these irons. But 26 degs is a bit silly IMO. 

Thankfully they are cutting off the sets at 5 iron longest in majority new SGIs from what I see at the local GG.

Edited August 19, 2022 by GolfLug

[Bucki1968]

I have a mixed set of Mizuno's. Some JPX Hot metal pros and some forged 221's. I'm always surprised more guys don't go this route.

[ChetlovesMer]

18 minutes ago, Bucki1968 said:

I have a mixed set of Mizuno's. Some JPX Hot metal pros and some forged 221's. I'm always surprised more guys don't go this route.

To your point. I have a mixed set of PXG's. 

I have 0311P in GW through 8 iron

Then 0311 XF in 7 iron through 5 iron. 

In my opinion mixed sets are great. 

 

[WillieT]

Great discussion on this topic.  I have a soft spot for the look of the old “blades” that were gifted me in the late 90’s (MacGregor Mike Souchak TSL) , which is why I lean toward the original 845 Silver Scots as well as the TM SLDR irons.  They look so good to my eye at address.  Sometimes I get stuck in the rhetoric that says if you shoot is “X” range you need to be playing this type of club.  This discussion lends itself to debunk that and just play the clubs that “talk to you”.  Much like when testing a new guitar, pay no attention to the head stock name or the price tag.  How it plays, how it sounds will tell you if it’s right.  Same with a properly fit club - there is a harmonious connection that happens. 

[saevel25]

For me, I like to know if I hit the ball slightly on the heel or toe, and that feeling can get lost when hitting GI clubs. Also, I like the ball flight characteristics of the more blade irons. I found GI irons to difficult to flight low. 

In the end, just get fit and go with you are most comfortable with for your game. 

[Wade Patton]

My playing partner today showed up with a nice set of Tommy Armour blades from BITD, as are my Staff Tour Blades.  Life is good. 

[DewSweeper09]

The technology has come so far. It’s truly amazing now to see how irons (and all clubs/balls) perform now compared to years ago. I find it comical when people refer to “players clubs” like Titleist T-100 as blades. 
 

I suggest just choose the ones you like, and perform and get fitted for them and just enjoy. People love to push what they play or tell everyone why they shouldn’t play this or that. Play what you will enjoy.

[ChetlovesMer]

6 minutes ago, DewSweeper09 said:

I suggest just choose the ones you like, and perform and get fitted for them and just enjoy. People love to push what they play or tell everyone why they shouldn’t play this or that. Play what you will enjoy.

IMO - This is the correct answer. 

7 minutes ago, DewSweeper09 said:

I find it comical when people refer to “players clubs” like Titleist T-100 as blades. 

You want to find something more comical try to figure out what is cast and what is forged. Sometimes the whole club head is forged. Sometimes the whole head is cast. Sometimes the face is forged and welded to a cast head. They still stamp "forged" on it. Sometimes the body is forged, then a cast face is welded on it. Again, they still stamp "forged" on the clubhead. 

[Pretzel]

On 8/19/2022 at 11:02 AM, Vinsk said:

Play them. Why care? Join in on the joking and just play them. I have a set of 620MB Titleist irons. Damn, they’re beautiful. 

Darn right they are!

I don't hit the ball as well as I did even just a few years ago, in part due to losing my way with my swing and getting overly steep due to a lack of video feedback during practice sessions that I could use as a concrete reference as to what I'm actually doing. As a result I'm getting more toe strikes, which always felt like they were particularly painful and unforgiving with blades compared to how I remembered "more forgiving" irons being that I had previously used. I decided to try out some of the Ping Eye 2's that I bought for my wife because they're the same irons I had when I first got serious about golf and the "most forgiving" design I had ever played.

Turns out I can hit shots just as poorly off the toe with those as any that I hit with my blades, the only difference that stood out was that the sole doesn't dig as deep into the turf if I miss it fat with my current overly steep swing. Similarly, they both hit some really nice shots when I make contact with the ball in the center of the clubface. Same went for going to a golf shop and testing out the T400's on the simulator just to get a modern point of comparison. Extreme misses might have gone slightly straighter or a couple yards further on the Eye 2's and T400s, but not enough so to make it an obvious change that I could attribute to the club rather than just the quality of the strike itself being slightly different. There's more room to miss on the larger clubfaces, so while I may have missed the same amount from the center it was proportionately slightly closer to the middle than the same amount of miss with a blade, but not enough to account for more than a few yards since really anything away from the middle (and particularly out on the toe) is punished heavily.

I stuck with the blades even if I sometimes make myself look a fool for using them out on the course. I'm pretty confident the problem is not, in fact, the clubs but perhaps instead the nut that attaches to them.