Jump to content
Check out the Spin Axis Podcast! ×
Note: This thread is 5694 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!

Recommended Posts

Posted
A tough one but acceptable (I love trying out new irons). I think I need to be honest with myself and admit that changing irons has harmed my game more than helped it. I don't do well with blades nor do I do well with extreme cavity backs. I'll probably just get another set of Ping Eye 2 irons 3-SW on Ebay and say "enough". Irons seem to have no impact on my score. What you think?

Posted
A tough one but acceptable (I love trying out new irons). I think I need to be honest with myself and admit that changing irons has harmed my game more than helped it. I don't do well with blades nor do I do well with extreme cavity backs. I'll probably just get another set of Ping Eye 2 irons 3-SW on Ebay and say "enough". Irons seem to have no impact on my score. What you think?

I'll go as far as to say between all the modern equipment out there, one isn't going to have an impact on your score over another.

"its the indian, not the arrow" comes to mind.

DST Tour 9.5 Diamana Whiteboard
909F3 15* 3 FW stock Aldila Voodoo
909F3 18* 5 FW stock Aldila Voodoo
'09 X-Forged 3-PW Project-X 6.0 Flighted
CG15 56* X-Tour 60* Abaco


Posted
i change gear all the time
i dont think its affects me too bad
maybe one round to get the irons dialed in, a range session or two and im good
"My swing is homemade - but I have perfect flaws!" - Me

Posted
I just went through the demo process with irons. I hit the following demos on a simulator: Titleist AP1, TM Burner, TM R9, Callaway X-24, Ping G15, Ping G10, Ping I15, Nike VR Full Cav, Nike VR Split Cav, Nike VR Forged Blade. I think I could play with any of these, but to say there is no difference would be silly. One of the biggest thing I noticed was the difference in clubhead speed I was generating. There was a 5-6 mph spread between the highest and lowest, which made a decent difference in the carry distance. Feel is also a big thing. Some just felt better than others. Honestly, the X-24 and Burner irons felt clunky and heavy. These were at the top of my list going in, and I'm glad I tried before I bought. The Nike VR irons were the ones I kept coming back to followed closely by the Ping irons. I ended up getting the VR Full Cavity for the added forgiveness (and they are far less expensive than their forged siblings). I didn't like the feel of the VR Split Cavity for some reason. The VR Blades felt sweet but as you would expect from a blade, unforgiving when you make a less than perfect swing. It was funny because the first swing I made with the blade (6-iron) I hit it dead straight with more carry distance than any other demo I hit on the simulator. But after a few more swings I realized that I'm not good enough to play those consistently week in and week out. The forgiveness of the Full Cavity is nice to have when your swing just isn't quit on it.
In My Bag ( Superlight 3.5):

Driver: 9.5* Burner SuperFast, Matrix Ozik XCon 4.8 Stiff
Fairway Woods: Steelhead III, Uniflex Steel (3w, 5w)
Hybrids: Big Bertha Heavenwood 4H, Uniflex SteelIrons: Victory Red Full Cavity, Stiff (5-AW)Wedges: WALTER HAGEN,...

Posted
I just went through the demo process with irons. ... I think I could play with any of these, but to say there is no difference would be silly. One of the biggest thing I noticed was the difference in clubhead speed I was generating. ..

PuttPutt, Determine how much you can spend for clubs, and decide from there. Justin and I feel the same way: Lots of good irons out there, but some just feel better, look better, perform better. Look at the recipe for the different irons, and try those that match what you want. Ping Eye-2 was SGI, with MPF = 724. Shafts make a difference (flex, kickpoint). If you're going to spend the money, get something you like and that fits your game. Also, take a look at pre-2010 technology. The companies are cutting prices on these to make room for the fancy new stuff. If 2008 gear fits what you need, buy it and go for the flag! Also, look for slightly used sets that a rich guy bought, played for three months, and traded back in. Golf shops need to rotate out the trade-ins to get their $$ back. That's how I got my X20s.

Focus, connect and follow through!

  • Completed KBS Education Seminar (online, 2015)
  • GolfWorks Clubmaking AcademyFitting, Assembly & Repair School (2012)

Driver:  :touredge: EXS 10.5°, weights neutral   ||  FWs:  :callaway: Rogue 4W + 7W
Hybrid:  :callaway: Big Bertha OS 4H at 22°  ||  Irons:  :callaway: Mavrik MAX 5i-PW
Wedges:  :callaway: MD3: 48°, 54°... MD4: 58° ||  Putter:image.png.b6c3447dddf0df25e482bf21abf775ae.pngInertial NM SL-583F, 34"  
Ball:  image.png.f0ca9194546a61407ba38502672e5ecf.png QStar Tour - Divide  ||  Bag: :sunmountain: Three 5 stand bag

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
I'll go as far as to say between all the modern equipment out there, one isn't going to have an impact on your score over another.

I agree with you to some degree. I personally would draw the line at blades, I'm sure if I used blades my score would suffer unless I was having a great ball striking day. However, I've picked up and used a bunch of different sets of irons and scored similarly with each one.

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
I agree with you to some degree. I personally would draw the line at blades, I'm sure if I used blades my score would suffer unless I was having a great ball striking day. However, I've picked up and used a bunch of different sets of irons and scored similarly with each one.

Yeah i should've been more specific. What I meant to say was between modern equipment within your playing level, there won't be a huge difference. Mizuno blades vs Titleist blades won't give you an impact in your score. Though it goes without saying, your score may vary while you adjust to new clubs but the overall performance of irons within your skill level won't make a huge difference. Likewise, one SGI iron over another won't show a big beneficial difference.

DST Tour 9.5 Diamana Whiteboard
909F3 15* 3 FW stock Aldila Voodoo
909F3 18* 5 FW stock Aldila Voodoo
'09 X-Forged 3-PW Project-X 6.0 Flighted
CG15 56* X-Tour 60* Abaco


Note: This thread is 5694 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

    • Day 470 - 2026-01-13 Got some work in while some players were using the sim, so I had to stick around. 🙂 Good thing too, since… I hadn't yet practiced today until about 6:45 tonight. 😛 
    • That's not quite the same thing as what some people messaged me today.
    • Day 152 1-12 More reps bowing wrists in downswing. Still pausing at the top. Making sure to get to lead side and getting the ball to go left. Slow progress is better than no progress.  
    • Yea, if I were to make a post arguing against the heat map concept, citing some recent robot testing would be my first point. The heat map concept is what I find interesting, more on that below. The robot testing I have looked at, including the one you linked, do discreet point testing then provide that discrete data in various forms. Which as you said is old as the hills, if you know of any other heat map concept type testing, I would be interested in links to that though! No, and I did say in my first post "if this heat map data is valid and reliable" meaning I have my reservations as well. Heck beyond reservations. I have some fairly strong suspicions there are flaws. But all I have are hunches and guesses, if anyone has data to share, I would be interested to see it.  My background is I quit golfing about 9 years ago and have been toying with the idea of returning. So far that has been limited to a dozen range sessions in late Summer through Fall when the range closed. Then primarily hitting foam balls indoors using a swing speed monitor as feedback. Between the range closing and the snow flying I did buy an R10 and hit a few balls into a backyard net. The heat map concept is a graphical representation of efficiency (smash factor) loss mapped onto the face of the club. As I understand it to make the representation agnostic to swing speed or other golfer specific swing characteristics. It is more a graphical tool not a data tool. The areas are labeled numerically in discrete 1% increments while the raw data is changing at ~0.0017%/mm and these changes are represented as subtle changes in color across those discrete areas. The only data we care about in terms of the heat map is the 1.3 to 1.24 SF loss and where was the strike location on the face - 16mm heal and 5mm low. From the video the SF loss is 4.6% looking up 16mm heal and 5mm low on the heat map it is on the edge of where the map changes from 3% loss to 4%. For that data point in the video, 16mm heal, 5mm low, 71.3 mph swing speed (reference was 71.4 mph), the distance loss was 7.2% or 9 yards, 125 reference distance down to 116. However, distance loss is not part of a heat map discussion. Distance loss will be specific to the golfers swing characteristics not the club. What I was trying to convey was that I do not have enough information to determine good or bad. Are the two systems referencing strike location the same? How accurate are the two systems in measuring even if they are referencing from the same location? What variation might have been introduced by the club delivery on the shot I picked vs the reference set of shots? However, based on the data I do have and making some assumptions and guesses the results seem ok, within reason, a good place to start from and possibly refine. I do not see what is wrong with 70mph 7 iron, although that is one of my other areas of questioning. The title of the video has slow swing speed in all caps, and it seems like the videos I watch define 7i slow, medium, and fast as 70, 80, and 90. The whole question of mid iron swing speed and the implications for a players game and equipment choices is of interest to me as (according to my swing speed meter) over my ~decade break I lost 30mph swing speed on mine.
    • Maxfli, Maltby, Golfworks, all under the Dicks/Golf Galaxy umbrella... it's all a bit confounding. Looking at the pictures, they all look very, very similar in their design. I suspect they're the same club, manufactured in the same factory in China, just with different badging.  The whacky pricing structure has soured me, so I'll just cool my heels a bit. The new Mizuno's will be available to test very soon. I'm in no rush.  
×
×
  • 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.