Jump to content
Check out the Spin Axis Podcast! ×
Note: This thread is 6408 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

0  

  1. 1. Which finish do you prefer on your wedges?

    • Tour chrome
      80
    • Black nickel
      33
    • Oil can
      81


Recommended Posts

Posted
I recently decided to splash out on a new set of Titleist Vokey Wedges, but couldn't decide which finish to get them in. I eventually decided on the classic tour chrome finish, but was wondering what everyone else out there prefers and plays.....
In My Bag

Driver: Titlesit 905T (10.5 dgreees) - Aldila NV65 Reg Flex Shaft (Green)
3-Wood: Mizuno F50 (15 degrees) - Aldila NV65 Red Flex Shaft (Pink)
Hybrid: Taylor Made Rescue Duel (19 degrees/3iron)Irons: Nike Pro Combo 4-PWSand Wedge: Titleist Vokey Design SM58.08Gap Wedge:Titleist Vokey Design...

  • Replies 59
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted
After using the 200 series wedges with the oil can finish, which I liked, I decided when I purchased my new irons to buy the spin mill wedges in the chrome finish to match more closely the rest of my irons. I like my choice in part because the similar finish makes the transition from regular irons to sand and lob wedge easier and in part because the current chrome finish isn't as shiny and glossy as the chrome 200 wedges were a few years ago. In any event, I suppose the choice of finish in wedges is mostly a matter of personal taste, except in those instances when a player can take advantage of the extra spin the oil can finish purportedly provides, and then chooses the oil can finish for that end.

shortgame85
In the Bag:
Driver: :TaylorMade: RBZ 9.5 Reg Flex
3 Wood :TaylorMade: RBZ Reg Flex
Hybrid: Ping G25 Hybrids 17*, 20*, 23*

Irons:Ping G25 5-Gap Wedge, Sr Flex, Vokey 56.14 Spin Mill NS Pro Reg, Flex

Putter: Bobby Grace Center Shaft 32"


Posted
i like the black look on wedges, just cause i think it looks cool. I don't really play many areas where the sun is so bad, that I'd get too much glare from a chrome wedge. I think that's the only other thing to consider besides your own taste on color.

I'm terrible, but i have fun.

In the Bag:
Taylormade r580XD 10.5° Reg flex
3 + 5 wood - Dunlop graphite shaft parts from a set3-pw - Dunlop set that looks sorta like ping I3's (i'm sorely in need of an upgrade.)LW/SW/GW - Adams black 52, 56, 60 degree wedges.Putter - Ping Karsten Anser 34"Bac...


  • Administrator
Posted
I have a pair of spin-milled oilcans.

Erik J. Barzeski —  I knock a ball. It goes in a gopher hole. 🏌🏼‍♂️
Director of Instruction Golf Evolution • Owner, The Sand Trap .com • AuthorLowest Score Wins
Golf Digest "Best Young Teachers in America" 2016-17 & "Best in State" 2017-20 • WNY Section PGA Teacher of the Year 2019 :edel: :true_linkswear:

Check Out: New Topics | TST Blog | Golf Terms | Instructional Content | Analyzr | LSW | Instructional Droplets

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
I have a pair of spin-milled oilcans.

Sorry to bump an old thread, but I would like to ask you why you opted for the Oil Can Spin Milled and not the Satin chrome spin milled ?

Do you think the Oil Can's spins the ball more than Satin's does og do you simply just prefer the Oil can rusty finish ? How soon did the Oil Can Spin Milled finish wear off and started to rust - and do you like the look of the rusty oil can wedges ? How do you like the grind on your Vokey Spin Milled wedges ? Have you considered buying some of the new wedges with the new fancy grinds - like the Cleveland DSG's, the Sonartec T35 and Mizuno Mp-R wedges ? A lot of questions for you....I know

  • Administrator
Posted
is there considerable difference in spin between the SM and non-SM?

Only for the first week or so. The spin-milleds wear down to about the same level after hitting a few bunker shots and range balls. Which is good, because at first they're WAY too spinny. Shreds balls, sucks pitch shots backwards, that kind of thing.

Erik J. Barzeski —  I knock a ball. It goes in a gopher hole. 🏌🏼‍♂️
Director of Instruction Golf Evolution • Owner, The Sand Trap .com • AuthorLowest Score Wins
Golf Digest "Best Young Teachers in America" 2016-17 & "Best in State" 2017-20 • WNY Section PGA Teacher of the Year 2019 :edel: :true_linkswear:

Check Out: New Topics | TST Blog | Golf Terms | Instructional Content | Analyzr | LSW | Instructional Droplets

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
I get about the same amount of spin. Probably because I don't hit down on the ball as well as I could. I get great control on my pitches and 75% swings. Possibly my favorite shots and clubs.

  • 3 weeks later...
Posted
Only for the first week or so. The spin-milleds wear down to about the same level after hitting a few bunker shots and range balls. Which is good, because at first they're WAY too spinny. Shreds balls, sucks pitch shots backwards, that kind of thing.

Mine shred V1s like no other, right now....but I still love 'em!

But to the other topic of oil can or Tour Chrome, supposedly the oil can SM increases spin over Tour Chrome SM by 10%(dry conditions). But the oil can SM increases spin over the regular Tour Chrome by 85%(wet conditions) which is ridiculous!
In the bag:

Driver: 905R 9.5* NV-Stiff
Woods: (Tour Issue) 906f2 15* Speeder-Stiff
Irons: 695CBWedges: Vokey 252.08, Vokey Spin Milled 256.14Putter: Studio Stainless 2.5 (35 1/2" 350g)Ball: Pro V1x (Low #'s)

Posted
Mine shred V1s like no other, right now....but I still love 'em!

I'd be interested in hearing where the info of oil can vs. tour chrome is from?

A 10% gain in spin in dry conditions is a big deal for a layer of chrome that's only .001" thick. . . Ideally in dry conditions there shouldn't be hardly any difference in spin since loft is the predominant factor in spin.

Posted
I'd be interested in hearing where the info of oil can vs. tour chrome is from?

From Titleist site or 2006 product line book.

10% gain isn't that much. A ball fully struck maybe 2800rpm (just a random figure) that only 280 more rpms? Which is probable.
In the bag:

Driver: 905R 9.5* NV-Stiff
Woods: (Tour Issue) 906f2 15* Speeder-Stiff
Irons: 695CBWedges: Vokey 252.08, Vokey Spin Milled 256.14Putter: Studio Stainless 2.5 (35 1/2" 350g)Ball: Pro V1x (Low #'s)

  • 4 weeks later...
Posted
Sorry Guys can't go with any of the above because I do my own finishes. THe best finish has to be Blasted Raw, Black Oxide rust, or tanned nickel

  • 3 weeks later...
Posted
While I prefer the Oil-can look when it's new, the oxidizing would drive me crazy... (Tour chrome for me).

In My Bag:
Driver: M-500 9.5° (Aldila NV 65-S Shaft)
Irons: MP60 3-PW DG S300
Wedges: Vokey Spin-Milled Chrome 54.10/60.04
Putter: Scotty Cameron Circa 62 #2 Ball: Pro V1x


Posted
I have the Chrome Satin Finish vokey's, non glare which is good. If i wanted a rusty club i would by a cheap wedge and leave it in the rain. Think the oil can wedges look terrible after a couple of rounds, would you use a wooden driver if it has wood worm, NO. If yes then let me know as i have an old one in the garage.
CHROME ALL THE WAY!

  • 2 months later...
Posted
I once bought a satin chrome spin milled...my lord, I'd have to throw the ball 10 yards behind the cup to get the ball even close with the backspin.

all in all, that would be the finish I like on the Titleist wedges, however, I play Cleveland because the Titleist's are weighted too heavily in the clubhead for my liking...
Ping i15 8.5 Stock Stiff
Titleist 906F2 13* w/UST V2 FW 92g X

Titleist AP2 3-GW (KBS Tour)
Cleveland CG14 Black Pearl (56/60)

Titleist Cameron Futura 34" & Titleist ProV1x

Posted
Oil can for me. Feel is amazing, and imo they look amazing when new and when "rusted".
Driver: SQ 9.5* w/ Aldila NV 65 Stiff
3 Wood: X-Tour 13* w/ Aldila NV 65 Stiff
Irons: 3-PW 695MB w/ True Tempor Dynamic Gold S300
Wedges: Vokey 250.08 Oil Can, 254.10 Oil Can, SM60.08 Tour Chrome
Putter: Scotty Cameron Circa 62 #3

Posted
I am currently using the spin milled oil can wedges. The differences include

different spin characteristics, slightly softer feel, and wedge finish will wear

over time. Its all a matter of preferance really.

Driver: Speed Pro D 9.5*

3 Wood: 904F4 15.5*

Hybrid: 585.H 19*Irons: MP-32 4-PWWedges: 52* CG12 DSG 58* CG12 DSG 64* CG12 DSGPutter: custom Studio Select Newport 2 Mid-SlantBall: Pro V1x


Note: This thread is 6408 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

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


  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • TST Partners

    PlayBetter
    Golfer's Journal
    ShotScope
    The Stack System
    FitForGolf
    FlightScope Mevo
    Direct: Mevo, Mevo+, and Pro Package.

    Coupon Codes (save 10-20%): "IACAS" for Mevo/Stack/FitForGolf, "IACASPLUS" for Mevo+/Pro Package, and "THESANDTRAP" for ShotScope. 15% off TourStriker (no code).
  • Posts

    • Nah, man. People have been testing clubs like this for decades at this point. Even 35 years. @M2R, are you AskGolfNut? If you're not, you seem to have fully bought into the cult or something. So many links to so many videos… Here's an issue, too: - A drop of 0.06 is a drop with a 90 MPH 7I having a ball speed of 117 and dropping it to 111.6, which is going to be nearly 15 yards, which is far more than what a "3% distance loss" indicates (and is even more than a 4.6% distance loss). - You're okay using a percentage with small numbers and saying "they're close" and "1.3 to 1.24 is only 4.6%," but then you excuse the massive 53% difference that going from 3% to 4.6% represents. That's a hell of an error! - That guy in the Elite video is swinging his 7I at 70 MPH. C'mon. My 5' tall daughter swings hers faster than that.
    • Yea but that is sort of my quandary, I sometimes see posts where people causally say this club is more forgiving, a little more forgiving, less forgiving, ad nauseum. But what the heck are they really quantifying? The proclamation of something as fact is not authoritative, even less so as I don't know what the basis for that statement is. For my entire golfing experience, I thought of forgiveness as how much distance front to back is lost hitting the face in non-optimal locations. Anything right or left is on me and delivery issues. But I also have to clarify that my experience is only with irons, I never got to the point of having any confidence or consistency with anything longer. I feel that is rather the point, as much as possible, to quantify the losses by trying to eliminate all the variables except the one you want to investigate. Or, I feel like we agree. Compared to the variables introduced by a golfer's delivery and the variables introduced by lie conditions, the losses from missing the optimal strike location might be so small as to almost be noise over a larger area than a pea.  In which case it seems that your objection is that the 0-3% area is being depicted as too large. Which I will address below. For statements that is absurd and true 100% sweet spot is tiny for all clubs. You will need to provide some objective data to back that up and also define what true 100% sweet spot is. If you mean the area where there are 0 losses, then yes. While true, I do not feel like a not practical or useful definition for what I would like to know. For strikes on irons away from the optimal location "in measurable and quantifiable results how many yards, or feet, does that translate into?"   In my opinion it ok to be dubious but I feel like we need people attempting this sort of data driven investigation. Even if they are wrong in some things at least they are moving the discussion forward. And he has been changing the maps and the way data is interpreted along the way. So, he admits to some of the ideas he started with as being wrong. It is not like we all have not been in that situation 😄 And in any case to proceed forward I feel will require supporting or refuting data. To which as I stated above, I do not have any experience in drivers so I cannot comment on that. But I would like to comment on irons as far as these heat maps. In a video by Elite Performance Golf Studios - The TRUTH About Forgiveness! Game Improvement vs Blade vs Players Distance SLOW SWING SPEED! and going back to ~12:50 will show the reference data for the Pro 241. I can use that to check AskGolfNut's heat map for the Pro 241: a 16mm heel, 5mm low produced a loss of efficiency from 1.3 down to 1.24 or ~4.6%. Looking at AskGolfNut's heatmap it predicts a loss of 3%. Is that good or bad? I do not know but given the possible variations I am going to say it is ok. That location is very close to where the head map goes to 4%, these are very small numbers, and rounding could be playing some part. But for sure I am going to say it is not absurd. Looking at one data point is absurd, but I am not going to spend time on more because IME people who are interested will do their own research and those not interested cannot be persuaded by any amount of data. However, the overall conclusion that I got from that video was that between the three clubs there is a difference in distance forgiveness, but it is not very much. Without some robot testing or something similar the human element in the testing makes it difficult to say is it 1 yard, or 2, or 3?  
    • Wordle 1,668 3/6 🟨🟨🟩⬜⬜ ⬜🟨⬜⬜🟨 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
    • Wordle 1,668 3/6 🟨🟩🟨🟨⬜ 🟩🟩🟩🟩⬜ 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩 Should have got it in two, but I have music on my brain.
    • Wordle 1,668 2/6* 🟨🟨🟩⬛⬛ 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Welcome to TST! Signing up is free, and you'll see fewer ads and can talk with fellow golf enthusiasts! By using TST, you agree to our Terms of Use, our Privacy Policy, and our Guidelines.