Old Berthas vs. New Tech

[fishbig36]

I play 2004 Berthas, and have been pretty satisfied with them.  BUT....  I am wondering if I am missing out on the new tech, particularly in terms of distance.  I am wondering if I can make an improvement, with out busting my wallet.  Game improvement irons will still be in my bag for the forseeable future.  Any thoughts?

[Righty to Lefty]

Iron haven't changed that much really. If you want "new" technology just make the shafts 3/4 inch longer and strengthen the lofts 3 or 4 degrees and "tada" new technology !

[GaijinGolfer]

Agree.  New irons arent better, they are simply longer because the lofts are stronger and the shafts are longer.  While you may gain some distance, you may also lose some accuracy and may find it more difficult to hit your long irons.

[Mr. Desmond]

Originally Posted by GaijinGolfer

Agree.  New irons arent better, they are simply longer because the lofts are stronger and the shafts are longer.  While you may gain some distance, you may also lose some accuracy and may find it more difficult to hit your long irons.

Of course, you may gain accuracy/consistency with newer irons as old Callaway Irons were said to have "hot spots."

And some of the newer irons also have thinner faces, adding to distance. Some irons are close to the old standard length of 37.5-37.75 in. for a 5i, but the new standard appears to be 38 in.

Shafts have also changed over the last 9-10 years; there is more from which to choose that may provide a better fit.

Pros and Cons exist over the strengthening of lofts - because many OEMs have moved the COG of more irons low and back, I believe they've had to strengthen lofts to keep ball flight down for a high yet strong flight.

My advice is to demo and see for yourself - you may be surprised.

[fishbig36]

Originally Posted by Mr. Desmond

Of course, you may gain accuracy/consistency with newer irons as old Callaway Irons were said to have "hot spots."

And some of the newer irons also have thinner faces, adding to distance. Some irons are close to the old standard length of 37.5-37.75 in. for a 5i, but the new standard appears to be 38 in.

Shafts have also changed over the last 9-10 years; there is more from which to choose that may provide a better fit.

Pros and Cons exist over the strengthening of lofts - because many OEMs have moved the COG of more irons low and back, I believe they've had to strengthen lofts to keep ball flight down for a high yet strong flight.

My advice is to demo and see for yourself - you may be surprised.

I have swung the x hot and Burner 2.0.  I did notice a distance increase, (simulator) but attributed it to the lofts.  Thing is, though, if i hit a "new' 6 iron (with similar length/loft  as my old 5 iron), and get the same distance as my 5, but with a higher ball flight, is that a bad thing? I have read that the 'new' irons also  create gaps in my bag.  Not overly concerned, as choking down will handle most of that problem (I think), but I have read others have serious issues with this.

Also, any recs on what to try?

[Mr. Desmond]

I have prejudices. I typically see what Callaway and Mizuno are offering. Look at reviews here. I play the XHot Pros and find them fairly forgiving in a good-looking iron. The Mizuno 825 line gets a lot a good reviews

[fishbig36]

Alas, those those may not be in my budget.  And my sticks don't have to be brand new.  The x hots are sweet, though.  Hoping to hit the 825's soon, and look for a deal.....

[GaijinGolfer]

Originally Posted by fishbig36

I have swung the x hot and Burner 2.0.  I did notice a distance increase, (simulator) but attributed it to the lofts.  Thing is, though, if i hit a "new' 6 iron (with similar length/loft  as my old 5 iron), and get the same distance as my 5, but with a higher ball flight, is that a bad thing? I have read that the 'new' irons also  create gaps in my bag.  Not overly concerned, as choking down will handle most of that problem (I think), but I have read others have serious issues with this.

Also, any recs on what to try?

If youre going to choke down on them, whats the point?  The notion that new irons are, "better" is smoke 'n mirrors.  Take an old set of irons, bend them strong, lengthen the shafts a couple inches and theyre just as good as any of the, "new and improved" irons.

[GaijinGolfer]

Originally Posted by fishbig36

Alas, those those may not be in my budget.  And my sticks don't have to be brand new.  The x hots are sweet, though.  Hoping to hit the 825's soon, and look for a deal.....

Last month I scored a set of JPX-800 Pros on Ebay for $270.  They were nice but to me felt a little too much like a GI iron for my liking.  I prefer an iron that has more of a soft, dull thud at impact and the 800 Pros had a harder feel to me.

The ballflight with them was good and from a performance standpoint they were great irons, I just want a little more feel and feedback.  I guess Im just more of a MP-64 or MP-69 player.  The other day I demoed a used set of MP-68s at Golfsmith and they were like butter.

[dataris17]

I play 2004 Berthas, and have been pretty satisfied with them.  BUT....  I am wondering if I am missing out on the new tech, particularly in terms of distance.  I am wondering if I can make an improvement, with out busting my wallet.  Game improvement irons will still be in my bag for the forseeable future.  Any thoughts?

For me, this topic is a little ironic. I had the same question about 2 months ago switching from big bertha 2005 and decided to buy the ping I20s. I love the irons, but they did not add distance if thats what youre looking for. more spin and fit my game better now that ive improved, but not more distance.

[Mr. Desmond]

Alas, those those may not be in my budget.  And my sticks don't have to be brand new.  The x hots are sweet, though.  Hoping to hit the 825's soon, and look for a deal.....

There are discounts galore right now. Try www.discountdansgolf.com Sign up for emails on www.Callawaygolfpreowned.com The X hots are little hotter in terms of the face but the Xhot pros are easier to look at and are very forgiving

[fishbig36]

Originally Posted by GaijinGolfer

If youre going to choke down on them, whats the point?  The notion that new irons are, "better" is smoke 'n mirrors.  Take an old set of irons, bend them strong, lengthen the shafts a couple inches and theyre just as good as any of the, "new and improved" irons.

Choke down just to fill the so called gaps, is all.  And I have been looking at the 800's on e bay.  But I will need to be more consistent striking the ball before i go to something like a 64.

[Old Timer]

I play Big Bertha 1996 irons.

They hit the ball as sweet as anything out there.

Even on mishits, I still get good distance...and when I hit it in the sweet spot, I don't even feel the ball make contact.

On average I hit a five iron 175 yards with this set.

I also use a Big Bertha 460cc Driver which I think is about 2009 technology.

Recently, I picked up a Great Big Bertha Warbird Driver from a garage sale for a few bucks.

I am guessing that it is maybe 1999 technology or so,.

I took both to the driving range to compare them.

Both hit the ball equally as well.

I get about 230-240 yards per drive.

that being said...maybe some aspects of technological breakthrough's of club design touted by manufacturers are more to seperate you from your cash than to improve your game.

[Mr. Desmond]

Originally Posted by Old Timer

I play Big Bertha 1996 irons.

They hit the ball as sweet as anything out there.

Even on mishits, I still get good distance...and when I hit it in the sweet spot, I don't even feel the ball make contact.

On average I hit a five iron 175 yards with this set.

I also use a Big Bertha 460cc Driver which I think is about 2009 technology.

Recently, I picked up a Great Big Bertha Warbird Driver from a garage sale for a few bucks.

I am guessing that it is maybe 1999 technology or so,.

I took both to the driving range to compare them.

Both hit the ball equally as well.

I get about 230-240 yards per drive.

that being said...maybe some aspects of technological breakthrough's of club design touted by manufacturers are more to seperate you from your cash than to improve your game.

When you say equally well, you don't compare it with anything - you compare BB against everything in general, meaning nothing really to the reader. I've got to think that someone still using the big, clunky, hot spot BB Irons of 1996, as I once did either is too economically minded to purchase a new set, or doesn't bother to try new irons.

There are also lots of Big Berthas - BB, BB FT-3, etc. Which one is working for ya?

[Old Timer]

Originally Posted by Mr. Desmond

When you say equally well, you don't compare it with anything - you compare BB against everything in general, meaning nothing really to the reader. I've got to think that someone still using the big, clunky, hot spot BB Irons of 1996, as I once did either is too economically minded to purchase a new set, or doesn't bother to try new irons.

There are also lots of Big Berthas - BB, BB FT-3, etc. Which one is working for ya?

What it means to the reader is that older clubs can perform as well as newer regardless of the brand..

We both just happen to use BB's.

At 61 years old, I don't feel the need to put out several hundred dollars just to gain maybe 10-15 yards distance.

I just hit one extra club for the second shot.

As far as their being big, clunky and hot spotish...

Many would disagree with you.

http://reviews.golfreview.com/golf-clubs/callaway/irons/big-bertha-1996.html

http://www.buzzillions.com/reviews/men-callaway-golf-big-bertha-irons-1996-reviews

[Mr. Desmond]

Originally Posted by Old Timer

What it means to the reader is that older clubs can perform as well as newer regardless of the brand..

We both just happen to use BB's.

At 61 years old, I don't feel the need to put out several hundred dollars just to gain maybe 10-15 yards distance.

I just hit one extra club for the second shot.

As far as their being big, clunky and hot spotish...

Many would disagree with you.

http://reviews.golfreview.com/golf-clubs/callaway/irons/big-bertha-1996.html

http://www.buzzillions.com/reviews/men-callaway-golf-big-bertha-irons-1996-reviews

You told us everything we need to know.

You don't try new clubs.

As previously stated, I owned the BB 1996 - I know what they are and are not. If others disagree, great - that's what makes the world goes 'round. In general, buyers of clubs don't knock them until later ... it's something psychological to justify their purchase - cognitive dissonance?

But I digress. I acknowledge a spectrum of the golf world that is notoriously cheap, or "value minded." Value is subjective. You appear to be "value-minded," and that's great. But stay there. Don't make claims that you can't back up. Just say, "I like what I have and am comfortable with them." The statement you made of being as sweet as anything out there - is so general as to be meaningless.

Happy for you - I'm 58 and got rid of the '96 BB's in '98. I don't mind changing irons - would like it to be every 5 years or so - I admire the money you've saved. I recently re-tried the '97? Ping iSi Irons - they were fine, too - no feel, weird look, but they worked, just like your BB's work. Some people get tired of looking at the same irons. And I bet a lot of people have bought new to find magic in clubs - I commend you for not buying into that...

And yes, I agree with you. Manufacturers will tout every advancement as something you "must" have. And you'd think after 17 years, some of it truly is an advancement - COG, weight back, thinner faces, bounce, grind, grooves, multi-materials, etc, the list goes on. I think the new stuff is an improvement, and .... you can find it on sale!

[GaijinGolfer]

Originally Posted by Mr. Desmond

You told us everything we need to know.

You don't try new clubs.

As previously stated, I owned the BB 1996 - I know what they are and are not. If others disagree, great - that's what makes the world goes 'round. In general, buyers of clubs don't knock them until later ... it's something psychological to justify their purchase - cognitive dissonance?

But I digress. I acknowledge a spectrum of the golf world that is notoriously cheap, or "value minded." Value is subjective. You appear to be "value-minded," and that's great. But stay there. Don't make claims that you can't back up. Just say, "I like what I have and am comfortable with them." The statement you made of being as sweet as anything out there - is so general as to be meaningless.

Happy for you - I'm 58 and got rid of the '96 BB's in '98. I don't mind changing irons - would like it to be every 5 years or so - I admire the money you've saved. I recently re-tried the '97? Ping iSi Irons - they were fine, too - no feel, weird look, but they worked, just like your BB's work. Some people get tired of looking at the same irons. And I bet a lot of people have bought new to find magic in clubs - I commend you for not buying into that...

And yes, I agree with you. Manufacturers will tout every advancement as something you "must" have. And you'd think after 17 years, some of it truly is an advancement - COG, weight back, thinner faces, bounce, grind, grooves, multi-materials, etc, the list goes on. I think the new stuff is an improvement, and .... you can find it on sale!

Its interesting how incredibly disrespectful you are to anyone who disagrees with you.

[Mr. Desmond]

Originally Posted by GaijinGolfer

Its interesting how incredibly disrespectful you are to anyone who disagrees with you.

You are off-topic, but no disrespect was intended.

Actually, I tried a friendly and respectful tone except for the first part - where I did not see him respond to a direct question. I agreed with the poster on certain issues, and disagreed on others. If you review the thread, I asked directly which irons he had compared against his BB's and received no response - in many places, that is an answer by itself. The remainder of the post was respectful discussion. He seems to be a good guy who loves what he has - I don't find a need to agree with the poster that advances in technology over 17 years have made no difference in iron performance. The ball has changed, shafts have changed, iron design has changed... I was trying to find the basis for his opinion that there is no difference and I did not see his basis ... and it's okay.

This is a discussion board with facts and opinions, not an "agree" board. We may not agree, but I do try to respectfully disagree, although I am human and do falter at times. For that, I apologize. And you'r right - I "beat up" people too much, but not purposely. It's my job to cut through issues, and when I post, it's mainly in between working. I will try to limit my posting to the night or weekends, when I'm not in working mode.