Price of Clubs

[Dornenglanz]

I've bought some new clubs, with mixed results.  The first new club I ever bought was a 4H and it's still in my bag, and I love it.  Then I bought a Scotty Cameron, but in the last few weeks I've gone back to my old putter, so the Scotty is going on Ebay.  I bought two new wedges before I had any idea about grind, bounce, loft etc.  They're going on ebay too.  I'm happy with my ATVs - they do all I want. I bought a set of new irons before lockdown, but I don't love them, and gave them to my son. Apart from the 4H everything in my bag is 2nd hand, and some of the stuff is pretty old.

Ludicrously I play 690MBs (as a beginner) - but I adore them.  When I hit good shots, they feel amazing, and I'm learning a lot from them 😄

[Typhoon92]

Prices on everything are out of control.  Have you looked at your Food shopping bill?  Solution is to “do without”.  It’s only golf, we’re not on tour, it doesn’t really matter especially when you factor in the cost…unless you have disposable income, then go for it.

I have 2 sets of clubs cleaned up and for sale.  Which ever one doesn’t sell goes in my sons bag even though he never plays.  For me, if I decide to play I’ll grab a 7 iron and a gap wedge from our lost and found and use that.

 

 

[Quack]

Golf is far and away the most gimmick ridden sport in the face of the earth.  The only things that are close are penis enlargement and hair loss.

The brands have for the most part have  all gotten so big they need to convince buyers to get new clubs every year or two to sustain the shareholders.  One of the things that drives me nuts is the planned obsolescence of clubs through the use of metal and paint finishes that won’t hold up for more than a year or two. Decals, holograms, glued on weights, screws…you name it.  I know…let’s raise the prices, jack the lofts, sell everybody 3 wedges and a hybrid.  Thanks industry 
 

I’m 38 and have been playing golf since I was five and the only major tech jumps I’ve seen are in order…

1) the ball…no contest.  Modern balls are longer and straighter.  I think the USGA and PGA will impose boundaries honestly. 

2) metal woods replacing persimmon

3)waterproof shoes

honorable mention…graphite shafts. They have gotten better and are light enough to allow even the tepid and weak to swing 46 inch water balloons.

irons?  Nope…tell yourself whatever you want but imho modern clubs are not easier to hit than 845s and ping eye 2s.  Old blades were far superior than the vacuum cast Chinese made “forgings” being sold today by the majors(except mizuno and couple smaller brands that still do it right)

What’s in the bag…Titleist “prototype”  I laugh 

there is a reason average handicaps haven’t changed much in the past 60 years…

 

the thing I love about golf is that it’s not pay to play.  You can either swing it or you can’t.  If you can’t…no club is going to help.  

[Vinsk]

2 hours ago, Quack said:

Old blades were far superior than the vacuum cast Chinese made “forgings” being sold today by the majors

Superior how? I really don’t think my Northwestern Thunderbirds are superior to my new Titleist 620MBs in any way.

 

2 hours ago, Quack said:

tell yourself whatever you want but imho modern clubs are not easier to hit than 845s and ping eye 2s.  Old blades were far superior than the vacuum cast Chinese made “forgings” being

With all the use of launch monitors today that weren’t used back then I don’t think it’s people telling themselves it’s easier. It’s being shown with data.

[Quack]

Data which does not reflect the amount of strokes to get the ball in the hole.  Look at handicap data and draw your own conclusion.  
 

*We need to select a $500 custom shaft with the right spin characteristics to fix fix your grotesque swing flaws.
 

thats called the tail wagging the dog.  
 

as far as blades go…it’s my opinion that the quality Hogan, Wilson, MacGregor, and Japanese forgings are far superior to what’s being passed off as forging these days.  
 

id bet dollars to dog poop that many of the so called Nike and titleist blades in tour bags over the recent times were made elsewhere and stamped. Pretty sure that’s common knowledge.  
 

I don’t really care as I don’t play forged clubs anyhow but it drives me crazy sometimes thinking about the gimmicks 

 

Edited April 29, 2022 by Quack

[NM Golf]

Fortunately, I saw the writing on the wall and got into the golf business as a side job more than 25 years ago so I really haven't paid full retail on golf equipment...ever. It's a good thing too as I do like new things. I don't typically change irons all that much, maybe every 5 years, but I change drivers and wedges at least every other year. 

Everything is more expensive these days, why would golf clubs be any different? You get what you pay for.

1 hour ago, Quack said:

Golf is far and away the most gimmick ridden sport in the face of the earth.  The only things that are close are penis enlargement and hair loss.

The brands have for the most part have  all gotten so big they need to convince buyers to get new clubs every year or two to sustain the shareholders.  One of the things that drives me nuts is the planned obsolescence of clubs through the use of metal and paint finishes that won’t hold up for more than a year or two. Decals, holograms, glued on weights, screws…you name it.  I know…let’s raise the prices, jack the lofts, sell everybody 3 wedges and a hybrid.  Thanks industry 
 

I’m 38 and have been playing golf since I was five and the only major tech jumps I’ve seen are in order…

1) the ball…no contest.  Modern balls are longer and straighter.  I think the USGA and PGA will impose boundaries honestly. 

2) metal woods replacing persimmon

3)waterproof shoes

honorable mention…graphite shafts. They have gotten better and are light enough to allow even the tepid and weak to swing 46 inch water balloons.

irons?  Nope…tell yourself whatever you want but imho modern clubs are not easier to hit than 845s and ping eye 2s.  Old blades were far superior than the vacuum cast Chinese made “forgings” being sold today by the majors(except mizuno and couple smaller brands that still do it right)

What’s in the bag…Titleist “prototype”  I laugh 

there is a reason average handicaps haven’t changed much in the past 60 years…

 

the thing I love about golf is that it’s not pay to play.  You can either swing it or you can’t.  If you can’t…no club is going to help.  

Some of this I can agree with, some...not so much.

First, the irons of today are better without a doubt. Now at 38 I imagine you see eye 2s and 845s as "old". To me thats the beginning of the modern age of clubs. Prior to those all there was were blades that were extremely hard to hit. Even the first ping eye irons weren't exactly easy to hit. So no... there's not exactly a chasm between eye2s and irons today, but there is a huge difference between irons today and older blades (Thank you Karsten Solheim).

As far as the older blades being better than modern blades, that's just ridiculous. I played blades for years, those 1970 butter knives had a sweet spot half the size of a dime, modern blades are much easier to hit without having to give up any of the workability. If that wasn't true the pros would all still be hitting McGregors.

Second, there is also a big difference between Persimmon and Metalwoods, but there is also a huge difference between the first metalwoods and the metalwoods of today. The difference in driver technology in just the last 20 years is night and day. The first Big Bertha Driver was 190cc, now many 3 woods are bigger than that. 20 or 25 years ago driver heads were 250cc-300cc now they are 460cc. It's a lot easier to hit a modern driver than a 250cc Burner Bubble I guarantee you that.

Additionally, the invention of the hybrid has been a great advance in the world of golf. Most players, even the best in the world, have traded in their long irons for a hybrid. Gone are the days of the 2 and 3 iron because hybrids are just a LOT easier to hit.

Finally, I think it's a little short sighted to dismiss all new equipment as gimmicky. Year to year you might not see huge breakthroughs, but If you're playing clubs that are 10+ years old, you can probably gain some forgiveness with an upgrade.

[Quack]

Pros play what they are paid to play and when Macgregor was paying…pros were a playing.  I honestly don’t think older blades were harder to hit. The Maltby website calls the staff tour blade fg-17s game improvement and they are basically the same club head as the haig ultras were.  For the record I put no faith in the Maltby playability numbers 
 

I don’t view the eye 2 or silver Scot as old really.  You may not believe me but I still play eye 2s and titleist pt 8.5, 15, and 20 degree woods.  Purchased new by my dad for me in 1992.  Ping has adjusted the irons from blue to white dot and reshafted once to a .25 over to be fair.

I play around switching drivers like everyone but what I gain in distance I loose in accuracy.  I stepped away from the game for about 8 or ten years but did play a launcher 460 for a while at 45 inches and a 975d with a pro force 65 for a while.  Pt fairway woods have never left the bag nor has my 35.5 anser 2.

Huge drivers don’t lower my scores…

A hook hooks and slice slices.  
 

my swing sucks and that hurts my score lol 

[Vinsk]

8 minutes ago, Quack said:

Pros play what they are paid to play

There’s more to it than that and you know this.

No pro is going to sacrifice his best game for an endorsement deal. If 1970 MacGregor irons were superior to JT’s Titleist MB’s he’d play them.

And it’s completely fine for you to prefer older clubs. But to dismiss all the new technology with irons while accepting it exists with ball technology is just being a bit of a fuddy-duddy.🙂

[NM Golf]

12 minutes ago, Quack said:

Pros play what they are paid to play and when Macgregor was paying…pros were a playing. 

Not really true anymore, the club manufacturers cannot pay them enough to play clubs they don't like.

Ryan Palmer: Equipment contracts are not worth the money

---

Outside of Tiger Woods' incredible comeback season, the biggest story in the golf world was the rise of the equipment free agent. Some players choose to sign new equipment contracts while others, like Ryan Palmer...

 

13 minutes ago, Quack said:

 I honestly don’t think older blades were harder to hit. The Maltby website calls the staff tour blade fg-17s game improvement and they are basically the same club head as the haig ultras were.  For the record I put no faith in the Maltby playability numbers 

SMH Come on now, you really think a 1970s McGregor blade is as easy to hit as a 2022 Titleist MB? I think you would have a hard time selling that...to anyone.

15 minutes ago, Quack said:

Pros play what they are paid to play and when Macgregor was paying…pros were a playing.  I honestly don’t think older blades were harder to hit. The Maltby website calls the staff tour blade fg-17s game improvement and they are basically the same club head as the haig ultras were.  For the record I put no faith in the Maltby playability numbers 
 

I don’t view the eye 2 or silver Scot as old really.  You may not believe me but I still play eye 2s and titleist pt 8.5, 15, and 20 degree woods.  Purchased new by my dad for me in 1992.  Ping has adjusted the irons from blue to white dot and reshafted once to a .25 over to be fair.

I play around switching drivers like everyone but what I gain in distance I loose in accuracy.  I stepped away from the game for about 8 or ten years but did play a launcher 460 for a while at 45 inches and a 975d with a pro force 65 for a while.  Pt fairway woods have never left the bag nor has my 35.5 anser 2.

Huge drivers don’t lower my scores…

Ping eye 2s are old, but they are still decent irons, much better for the average golfer than 1970 blades thats for sure. 

I think your 1992 8.5° driver is probably hurting your game both in accuracy and almost certainly in distance. 

20 minutes ago, Quack said:

A hook hooks and slice slices.  
 

my swing sucks and that hurts my score lol 

Yes, but adjustable drivers and proper fitting can definitely lessen those hooks and slices. 

Look you like your older clubs, and that's fine. I know a guy who loves to play hickory shafts, but I don't think he would argue they're just as good as modern clubs. You definitely cannot buy a golf game, but being properly fit with good modern equipment will always be better for your golf game.

[Quack]

Why aren’t handicaps lower today?  

[NM Golf]

1 hour ago, Quack said:

Why aren’t handicaps lower today?  

They are...

"A quick call to the USGA confirmed that very fact. In the last 25 years, the average USGA handicap for a man has improved nearly two full strokes, from 16.3 to 14.4. For women, the improvement is no less impressive, dropping from 29.7 in 1991 to 26.1 in 2016."

 

A closer look at handicap data shows just how much golfers have improv | This is the Loop | Golf Digest

---

A closer look at handicap data shows just how much golfers have improved in recent years

 

[Quack]

Wow two strokes…with laser rangefinders, YouTube lessons and modern balls and video recording in every phone.
 

Thank your new clubs lol.  Persimmon to titanium…I rest my case 
 

 

All of that tech and it’s within a couple three puts.  Thank God for shaft fitting 

[klineka]

11 minutes ago, Quack said:

I rest my case 

Your "case" is based solely on your opinion with very little facts or evidence to back up your position.

When others pointed out that a statement you made was straight up not true you tried to dismiss it as an insignificant change even though its over a 10% improvement.

Making claims without facts and being dismissive when others point out flaws in your logic won't be received well on this forum.

[iacas]

17 minutes ago, Quack said:

Wow two strokes…

You: "Why aren’t handicaps lower today?"
Danny: "Uhhh, they are."
What you should have said: "Ohhh, wow, I was wrong there."

C'mon. You're entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts.

Clubs are better today. Shafts are better. Even blades are a bit better. CGs are more reliably placed. Bounce is understood better. Grooves are better. Weighting is better, including multiple materials.

[Quack]

Less than 2 strokes better 😉

Due to clubs no doubt 

I’ll stop being a jerk…wasn’t my intention.

this a great forum…look forward to getting to know everyone 

Edited April 30, 2022 by Quack

[solarbear88]

On 4/30/2022 at 6:11 AM, Quack said:

Why aren’t handicaps lower today?  

One reason may be course design.  The newer courses I have tried are a lot longer and have all sorts of difficult obstacles that may be above people's skill levels.  Older courses tend to be shorter and have obstacles where you can lay up or cheat to the left or right to avoid.  Being pretty average myself I kind of prefer the older courses.

Of course, swings are another element. The golf swing is hard to learn for most people.  Golf pros and single digit handicappers don't realise just how difficult it is.  

 

[iacas]

@solarbear88, welcome to TST.

Two quick things:

First, this:

Second, you responded to something that was not only off topic, but which was wrong and immediately corrected. Handicaps ARE getting lower, and have been for the past 20+ years.

Big fans of facts around these parts.

Now, back to topic, please.

 

[Typhoon92]

The price of clubs doesn’t seem to deter people. I was at a demo day and had a guy almost take out half the range behind him, whiff a few times and hit a bunch over the net dead right. He bought a 3 wood. I was in awe. It’s too bad the “golfers getting better because handicaps are lower” article didn’t stress that only golfers with handicaps are the sample size, not all people that play golf. Like the guy from yesterday, price of a club didn’t deter him, and it wasn’t going to make him better.