Master "Forged vs. Cast" or "Blade vs. Game-Improvement" Iron Thread

[Guest]

I say Cavity! but not cast!!!! GO FORGED! Miura irons!! the best!!!

I use the Miura CB-201 fitted w/rifle p-x shafts. At address it has blade like look. On impact it has the forged feel w/the cavity forgiveness.

Honestly though, I think the important thing is to go get fitted by a local pro shop/local pro and take the advice they give.

[ronaldkuntoro]

I have Snake Eyes 600Bs Blades . They hit farther than my CB irons....

Maybe u guys talking about blades made about 10 years ago...

[crazy_horst]

Keep in mind, when you hit it in the middle, they all feel the same.

Au contraire, mon frere. There ain't a cast shovel out there that feels even remotely close to a nice forged blade at impact when you hit 'em well.

My advice is this: if you want blades, buy blades. It's personal preference, and a pull is a pull, a push is a push, a skull is a skull, etc., blade or CB. I personally can't stand looking down at a top line that looks like a hockey stick, and cast clubs feel like blades with a towel wrapped around them. It's all personal preference.

[keiyoz]

i read somewhere on this forum that the "ideal" ball flight is a ball that ascends at a gradual pace, as opposed to a "u-shaped" shot whereby the ball ascends at a faster pace (reaching its highest point faster).

can anyone tell me whether this "ideal" ball flight is exclusive only to blades, or can cavity backs produce a similar-looking shot?

so far, the people i met on the range that produce this "ideal'" ball flight all use blades, and they also hit the ball further than me (my 7i is 140)

[FakeMontana]

all things being equal, what types of advanteges do forged clubs give you? I've heard that they give you more control and ability to shape shots, but noone can really tell me why

[fusioncal]

all things being equal, what types of advanteges do forged clubs give you? I've heard that they give you more control and ability to shape shots, but noone can really tell me why

I believe there's already a thread for this. http://thesandtrap.com/forum/showthread.php?t=5081

[Tomboys]

No, it's not a dumb question. It's a very good question, but I think you meant to ask; blades (muscle-backs) vs. cavity backs--and there's already a thread for that. If you want to compare forging, then you have to compare it to casting because both describe the manufacturing process. So, it's either blades vs. cavity backs or forged vs. cast.

As noted above, forging is a manufacturing process of the head. So, there are forged blades AND forged cavity backs. The other manufacturing process is cast. There are no cast blades (well, I'm not counting Vokey wedges because we're talking strictly about irons--I'll address these clubs later), but there are cast cavity backs. I'll give you a rough idea of the differences between forged and cast--and trust me, it's going to be very rough because I'm not that smart. At any rate, here it is.

When a clubhead is forged, the metal is compressed to make it harder (more dense) and formed into a particular shape. When a clubhead is cast, the metal is melted and poured into a mold to make a particular shape. This heat treatment (and ensuing cooling) hardens the metal.

Manufacturers discovered that by casting, they could make clubfaces that were much thinner, yet would be just as hard (or harder) than their forged counterparts. This allowed clubhead designers more descretionary weight to move around the clubhead.

Manufacturers found that by moving more weight to the perimeter of the clubface, they were able to increase the size of the sweetspot and the ball would fly straighter. Also, they found that by placing more weight to the sole of the club would lower its center of gravity. This design combination resulted in a clubhead that hit the ball straighter and higher.

So, the major differences amounts to this:

Forged blades = clubs that are the most workable because their overall design allows the player to put more sidespin on the ball because of the lack of perimeter weighting (so it travels left or right easier). Also, they could only move so much weight to the bottom of the club, so the center of gravity tends to be higher. This yields a lower trajectory overall. Most players that chose blades tend to be high-ball hitters, so they need a clubhead that allows them to hit the ball lower.

Forged cavity backs = clubs that are still workable because most of the weight is still behind the ball. But, the presence of perimeter weighting makes the ball want to fly a little straighter, so it's a little harder to work left and right. Also, the center of gravity is slightly lower than the blade, so shots will tend to fly a little higher and / or want to "get up" a little easier. This makes it a little harder to hit the ball low.

Cast cavity backs = clubs that tend to hit the ball straighter and higher because of their design. They have more perimeter weighting and a lower center of gravity than their forged counterparts because the manufacturing process allows more weight to be moved around when compared to forging.

The problem that I see when people debate forged and cast stems from comparing apples to oranges. In my opinion, if you took two clubheads that had the same design (weight distribution) and had the same clubface hardness, it would be very hard to tell the difference between well-struck shots by either club. Suffice to say, if forging was "better" than cast for feel, etc., why is it that Vokey wedges (a cast head) one of the top wedges chosen by pros and very good amateurs alike? I'm not saying they're the best, but the numbers don't lie.

I've read a lot of different posts about why certain pros play certain equipment. Yes, they make money from endorsements. No doubt about it. Many top players have equipment contacts that are very lucrative. However, none of that money counts towards your earnings from tournaments. And, it's that earnings number that determines whether or not you stay on the tour. Bottom line: Lose your PGA card, lose your endorsement deal. At the very least, your deal will not be renewed.

Also, I see a problem when people compare blades to cavity backs. Again, it's apples and oranges. Blades are for people who want maximum workability and require little, if any, forgiveness. Cavity backs, by their design, allow for less workability and a little more forgiveness. Cast cavity backs again, by their design, allow for even less workability and even greater forgiveness.

I know I'll probably get some heat about this next statement, so I will merely say that this is my opinion; nothing more, nothing less. At the end of the day, the quality of the golfer is determined by the score, period.

So, (again, please see disclaimer in the above paragraph), I would choose a set of clubs that helps you shoot the lowest score.

Hope the above helps,
DT

[fusioncal]

No, it's not a dumb question. It's a very good question, but I think you meant to ask; blades (muscle-backs) vs. cavity backs--and there's already a thread for that. If you want to compare forging, then you have to compare it to casting because both describe the manufacturing process. So, it's either blades vs. cavity backs or forged vs. cast.

Nice explanation, but you missed reviewing the "feel" department in detail which is also debated on another thread. Moreover, using blades somehow lets you to keep your fundamentals always in check. It'd be good if you write more about these topics.

[SubPar]

If you pay attention to the tour players when you get a chance to see their clubs up close, you will see more of them playing some kind of cavity back design than you might expect.

I have experimented a good deal lately with different clubs and, while my ego wants me to love a muscle backs or blades, my practical side realizes the perimeter weighting yields far more GIRs. What part of “easier to get up” and “more forgiving on slight mis-hits” is bad? The talk about how you can't "work the ball" with cavity backs is either coming from really low handicappers who can work the ball very precisely, or from people who couldn't fade or draw the ball very well with any club. I have experimented with a wide variety of head designs and find I can bend the ball as much with cavity backs as with blades. Muscle back wedges are a must, but IMHO there is hardly any practical reason for most golfers to not use cavity backs for their longer irons. "I use Srixon I-302, 2-iron through pitching wedge, with Royal Precision Project X 7.0 steel shafts. I like these clubs because they're forged, but they still have a cavity-back for forgiveness." - Robert Allenby "This mix-and-match set was the first combo set TaylorMade put together on tour. The 3- through 6-iron are rac Combo cavity-backs, and the 7-iron through pitching wedge are rac MB." - Darren Clarke

I have Snake Eyes 600Bs Blades . They hit farther than my CB irons....

The swing weight and shaft specs have more to do with total performance than the head design, particularly with regard to distance. I don't think one can hit a given club farther than another and attribute much of that to the clubhead.

SubPar

[elchene]

Deciding between muscle backs and cavity backs really is tough. I have Mizuno MX-23s and MP-32s in my house and I just can't decide which ones to use. I can hit the blades rather well, it's just that when you have a blade, you feel like you have to hit the sweet spot. With the cavity backs, I feel like I can do whatever I want to without worrying about hitting bad shots. The blades really give you maximum workability and control though. I remember watching the Golf Channel and seeing the commentator talk about Camilo Villegas' improved ball-striking. He said that Camilo loved his new cavity back players clubs because they had forgiveness and blade performance all in one. The 67s are really great clubs though and I can't help but try my friends every time I play with him.

[grant_the_tank]

Deciding between muscle backs and cavity backs really is tough. I have Mizuno MX-23s and MP-32s in my house and I just can't decide which ones to use. I can hit the blades rather well, it's just that when you have a blade, you feel like you have to hit the sweet spot. With the cavity backs, I feel like I can do whatever I want to without worrying about hitting bad shots. The blades really give you maximum workability and control though. I remember watching the Golf Channel and seeing the commentator talk about Camilo Villegas' improved ball-striking. He said that Camilo loved his new cavity back players clubs because they had forgiveness and blade performance all in one. The 67s are really great clubs though and I can't help but try my friends every time I play with him.

Why not try a combo set? Maybe combine your 23's and 32's. I've been checking out new irons, but am starting to think about keeping my MP-60's PW-7 and try a combo with the MP-57's or MX-25's in the 6-3 or 4.

[fusioncal]

The 67s are really great clubs though and I can't help but try my friends every time I play with him.

Same here. MP-67 is just irresistibly sexy.

[Tomboys]

Nice explanation, but you missed reviewing the "feel" department in detail which is also debated on another thread.

Agreed. While I thought about discussing feel in detail, I didn't because of the way I interpreted FakeMontana's question. To me, I thought that the question was more of, "Can someone explain to me the differences in clubheads and how that affects the flight of the ball." So, I wrote my post based on that assumption.

Moreover, using blades somehow lets you to keep your fundamentals always in check.

No offense, but I respectfully disagree with this statement. How will using blades always keep your fundamentals in check? Is it because of the small sweet-spot? The intensity of feedback on mishits?

I played 690.mb blades for four years (just bought a set of 735.cm irons last weekend). There would be times that I would flush a shot with my 690's. The only problem was that I pulled it 20 yards to the left of where I was aiming. Blades didn't tell me I did something fundamentally wrong, the ball flight did. There would be other times that I flushed a shot and the ball flew fairly straight down my target line. I had the right club for the distance I was hitting yet, I came up short of the green. So, in this scenario, both the club and the ball flight didn't tell me what I did wrong. I looked at my divot and it gave me my answer. It was deep and pointed left of my target line. In this case, I stopped my rotation, which caused me to have a slight out-to-in swing path resulting in a divot that was pointing to the left. Also, I chopped at the ball, which gave me a steep angle of attack resulting in a deep divot. The loss of distance was due to a slightly glacing blow to the ball instead of one that would go "through" the ball. I had a habit going slightly past parallel on my backswing. Yet, I still manage to hit most shots near the center of the clubface. So, blades didn't tell me that I broke parallel, my instructor did. So, every so often, I will set up in front of a mirror and practice my backswing to ensure that my backswing isn't getting too long. Finally, just because blades generate the most intense feedback on mishits doesn't mean that all the other types of clubheads are devoid of any feedback. As stated above, I just switched to 735.cm irons. I can still feel shots that are thinned, toe'd and "fat". If I combine that information with the feedback of my ball flight, my divots, maybe an occasional peek at my swing in the mirror or video camera, then I should be able to keep my fundamentals always in check. DT

[WilsonsRBest]

This thread caught my interest and warranted my first reply on this forum. I am always intrigued by this never ending debate. What I find even more intriguing, whether cavity back or muscleback clubs are your choice, the facts according to the USGA are that the average men's handicap index has remained virtually unchanged over the last few decades.

How is that possible? With the advent of all of the latest technology, blades to cavity back irons, to supposedly make the game more forgiving, I would like to ask why aren't golfers scoring any better? Surely there must be some sort of empirical evidence to prove that the average golfer will become a better golfer simply by taking that hideous forged blade out of his hand and replacing it with a cavity back iron.

The fact of the matter is that three things drive golf equipment sales; emotion, ego and marketing. Commitment to improving one's game is what makes you a better player, not what equipment you choose to play. Frankly, PGA pros today have the ability to play anything. Likewise, amateurs also possess the same potential.

After moving to a new city I showed up to my a new PGA instructor with the 20 year old Wilson Staff irons (blades) that I play. Without even seeing my swing he said, "I can't teach you to swing those. You have to get some 'modern' clubs". To which I responded, "So if you can't teach me on these, does that say more about my ability - or yours".

WilsonsRBest
3-SW 1987 Wilson Staff Fluid Feel (1967 Wilson Dyna-Power 2-SW on special occasions)
Driver Taylor Made R580
3 Wood Taylor Made Burner Bubble
5 Wood Cleveland Quad Pro

[fusioncal]

Agreed. While I thought about discussing feel in detail, I didn't because of the way I interpreted FakeMontana's question. To me, I thought that the question was more of, "Can someone explain to me the differences in clubheads and how that affects the flight of the ball." So, I wrote my post based on that assumption.

Point noted and no offense was taken.

I was referring to the big picture. You might want to check posts #137.

[RichF]

I've only been playing golf since June and currently use Mizuno MX-19 s - these I find very easy to hit (3-PW) and have been trying out some blade-muscleback irons out of curiosity.
I have so far tested Nike Forged, Mizuno MP-67 and Titleist 695MB - I'm not experienced enough to know the difference between the three and so far have only demo'd the 6 and 8 Irons off a driving mat - but I have a pretty good swing and I can hit them, consistently straight and with good distance compared to my cavity-backs. (maybe not as far or as high)

However, I understand full-well that if I blow a load of money on a whole set and take 'em out on the course, I may be heading for some frustration!
Maybe next year?

[northcoastgolfer]

Hey there,
I am a 5 handicap and I believe in keeping the game as simple as possible. While I love the feel of a true blade the truth is even at a 5 hndcp I had trouble on miss hits when I got into the 5,4,3 irons. Truthfully the 3 iron of my old mizuno blades looked like a dam butter knife and performed about that well. Now, saying that, my shorter irons Pw-6 iron blades I loved. Nothing like the feedback of a forged iron in the scoring irons and most can hit shorter irons of any type reasonably well. A few years ago I purchased a set of Hogan FTX irons. This is a forged iron with a progressive cavity design. For example my sw-about 7 iron are classic forged blades. The 6 iron begins to have more of a cavity with the center of gravity getting progressively lower until my 3 iron which is a forged cavity back iron. From there I carry an old cast cavity back 2-iron with a slight offset which is good on mishits and I can just nuke. This set gives me the best of both worlds and I love it. Forged feel with progressive cavity weighting towards the long irons. My short game from 50 yards - 130 yards has never been better than it is with these forged irons. My long game is decent and getting better with the progressive cavity. Not sure if they offer irons of this set up these days but good luck.
Jay

[g-funk13]

AS A RESULT OF THIS THREAD, I went on Ebay and found a set of Titleist 735s. Because my previous clubs were ALL cavity (most recent are PING i5's) this was a very big departure for me. Even the 7i-3i cavity backs of the 735's were a much smaller head than I was used to looking at.

Impressions? Well, I understand why those of you who use forged blades do. Immediately I experienced much more feedback from the PW-8i, both in ball flight and hand sensation. My focus on fundamentals woke up, as mis-hits are much more costly with the 735's.

There is also much less adjusting needed to achieve a draw or a fade-- for example, i felt like I needed a much more drastic in-to -out swing to get a nice draw on my i5's. Not with the 735's--it seems like the club is wanting to perform a "shot". Straight is boring for these irons. They want to perform.

In general, they feel much lighter than any of the PINGs, which I have relied on over the last 5 years (eye 2's were the other set).

Can I handle 735's? Will they be my go-to guys in the '08 season? No idea, but they are pushing my fundamentals up 2 notches. . . I am already dreaming of a performance cavity set, maybe some Mizunos. . . what a junkie!

Thanks to those of you who posted in this thread, because it convinced me to make a positive move for my game.