GI Irons for a Mid-Handicapper with Minimal Offset?

[sean_miller]

Originally Posted by shades9323

Hitting them while wearing a runners hat might spice things up a bit!

You should report back after trying it.

[socalsharky]

Originally Posted by WUTiger

The ones I play might be of interest to you: Callaway X20 Tours. These have noticeably less offset than the X20s I played last two years.

The X20 Tours have a Maltby Playability Factor rating of 716, which is in the SGI category (this assumes the original six-category MPF rating system, not the three-category Golf Digest rating system. Under the GD system, it would be considered Game Improvement).

This is more than 100 points higher than the follow-on X22 Tours.

Mine are shafted with PX 5.0 rifle flighted.

I am working on my swing, and the X20 Tours. Compared to the X20s, the slightly smaller head moves through the turf better, especially in the rough. Feel is excellent: You know on impact the quality of your shot. The flighted shafts help get the ball up on the longer irons, and I can almost hit a 3i again. (It actually works quite well when the ball is teed up, still a bit iffy from the fairway)

Back to socal's issues: As far as hooking goes, offset can contribute to hooking, but it is about No. 4 down the list of contributing factors. Your sig-line doesn't mention what shaft flex you have in your irons. If you started with regular shafts and are developing your swing power, you might need stiffer shafts to straighten your shots. Also, grip size can contribute. Too-thin grips can lead to draws and hooks (permit greater hand action), while too-thick grips can lead to fades.

X22 Tours can be found at Callaway Preowned. If you buy some with PX shafts, be aware that the the PX 6.0 are stiffer than DG S300s, and some people find the 6.0 a bit much to handle.  Also, X20 Tours can be adjusted for lie angle, whereas X22 Tours cannot.

I know what you're saying, but I simply can't understand some of the MPF ratings.  My current set of TM Burner Plus irons is a 528, which is supposedly harder to hit than either the AP1 (838) or the AP2 (548)!  Even more confusing is the TM Burners:  The 1.0 is a 300, and the 2.0 is a 607.

[socalsharky]

Originally Posted by glock35ipsc

Just curious.... you mean bulky as in weight, or looks?  FWIW, the Burner Plus 6 iron head Maltby tested for the MFP rating was 259g.  A typical 6 iron head is around the 260g area, +/= 3g or so (1g = .032 ounce).

Yeah, I meant looks.  I realize that almost all of the heads within a given category will have very similar head weights.  I just mean the size of the head and the huge topline.  These things look like shovels at address.

[sean_miller]

Originally Posted by socalsharky

I know what you're saying, but I simply can't understand some of the MPF ratings.  My current set of TM Burner Plus irons is a 528, which is supposedly harder to hit than either the AP1 (838) or the AP2 (548)!  Even more confusing is the TM Burners:  The 1.0 is a 300, and the 2.0 is a 607.

My interpretation of the MPF numbers is that hitting the ball different trajectories and getting some feedback on "slightly" off-centre hits is best done with a lower MPF number. All my most favourite irons have the lowest numbers, and some of them were very easy to hit relative to their MPF. For some people it can be a starting point. The difference is in which direction you go next.

[socalsharky]

Originally Posted by rustyredcab

I liked the Adams Black CB1 and CB2 forged clubs and loved their look. I heard lots of good things about them and went to demo them expecting to buy them. I would add them to your list.

The Mizunos demoed better for me and I am happy I tried them.Like Shaggy, I was playing 2005 Fusions before switching to JPX 800 Pros. I love my Mizunos too. Feel and all you'll read here and in reviews is true for me. They are also super out of the rough compared to my Fusions (I am a bit of a sweeper and the Mizunos help me get to the ball much better).

As suggested, lots of things can cause a hook. I find that my Mizunos line up to my eye better than my Fusions. I feel like I am squaring the club face at address much better with these clubs. I think the Adams set up square for me too. That's one of the many things that can cause a hook that I can cross off my list.

You play the pros or just the regular JPX 800?  Your post says pro, but sig is regular.

[glock35ipsc]

Originally Posted by socalsharky

I know what you're saying, but I simply can't understand some of the MPF ratings.  My current set of TM Burner Plus irons is a 528, which is supposedly harder to hit than either the AP1 (838) or the AP2 (548)!  Even more confusing is the TM Burners:  The 1.0 is a 300, and the 2.0 is a 607.

Like I said, the MPF ratings are heavily weighted toward Actual Vertical CoG.  The lower the VCoG, the easier it is to get the ball up in the air.  This is good for sweepers who don't hit "down and through", as opposed to better ball strikers who hit the little ball before the big ball.

And it makes sense in the ones you listed (VCoG vs. MPF):

Burner 1.0 - 300 MPF, .911" VCoG  (keeping in mind the CoG of a golf ball is .840".  This club head grounded behind a ball will have a CoG higher than the ball itself.)

Burner Plus - 528 MPF, .815" VCoG

Burner 2.0 - 607 MPF, .846" VCoG

AP2 - 548 MPF, .771" VCoG

AP1 - 838 MPF, .738" VCoG

It looks like the "C" Dimension and the MOI are what separate the AP1 and the AP2.  The AP1 has a larger "C" Dim (Horizontal Center of Gravity), which puts the "sweet spot" farther away from the hosel centerline, so toe hits are more forgiving.  The AP1's "C" Dim is 1.503", the AP2 is 1.265", almost a 1/4" difference.  All else being close, the higher MOI give the AP1 the MPF edge.

I'm still trying to figure out how all the measurements come together to make a certain MPF number, but this is just what I see laid out in front me.  By NO means an expert at this!!

[socalsharky]

Originally Posted by glock35ipsc

Burner Plus - 528 MPF, .815" VCoG

Hard to believe the VCoG is so high given the width of the sole on that club!  Maybe the massive topline is influencing things.

[minty7890]

Golf is the only place a Bruin will help a Trojan =)  I have both the JPX 800 and MX 200.  TM is a good brand if you're looking for less offset (and if you have the TM hookup).  The JPX 800 has all the game improvement features-- large face and cavity without the grotesque offset.  The sole is 3 way cut and will provide workability.  The JPX 800 is basically a Ping G series iron minus the huge sole.  I tested the AP1s on the simulator and I was not impressed.  The feel of the AP1s was not better than a Ping or Mizuno, and the distance was weaker.  Try the new TM CB's as well as the MC's.  If they don't work out, I'd go Mizuno b/c the offset is better hidden.  And yes offset promotes a hook/draw.

[WUTiger]

Shades and glock are correct. X22 family irons can be bent, but Callaway urges caution:

E-mail reply to me from Callaway customer service:

... In response to your inquiry, the lie angles of the standard sets of X-22 and X-22 Tour irons can be bent as many as three degrees flat or upright. Please note, however, that due to the special process required to adjust Callaway irons, we recommend doing so directly through us. ..