Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
fishbig36

Old Berthas vs. New Tech

31 posts in this topic

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?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sign up (or log in) today! It's free (and you won't see this ad anymore)!

Sign up (or log in) today! It's free (and you won't see this ad anymore)!

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 !
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

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?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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
1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

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.....

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

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.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

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

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

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.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

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
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0



  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • 2017 TST Partners

    PING Golf
    Leupold Golf
    Snell Golf
    Talamore Golf Resort
    Lowest Score Wins
  • Posts

    • Yeah i think you make a good point. it might be easy to dial it back if you have a solid full swing, but i don't think a half swing is the same as a chipping swing ya know. and i think you're absolutely right, there is a little bit of a turn in the half swing as well. that is what i alluded to earlier i think. it was just the amount to focus on a full turn vs. 3/4 turn/ vs. half turn.  That is so true as well. I could stand to limit some difficult second shots, and potential drops from a hazard. I actually didn't think about this that much. The other thought i have on this is the feedback from the distribution of practice, is that whether i am in position at the top of the full swing or not, my mind is able to get the club face back to the ball to at least compensate for being out of position and get the ball out in play, meaning that the practice itself( not the outcome of perfect practice) is not always as beneficial although it can have more benefits in its mastery! Where as the half swing, if you are not in position at the top of a half swing, it is very very difficult to compensate and get back to the ball, while not as much improvement, the improvement is easier to come by i would think. The swing really does have to be very precise to even be able to make solid contact. So that is the dilemma I see in placing more emphasis on one or the other. Ill revise my thinking and say that they are both more so equally important. for every full swing, there needs to be a 3/4 swing as well as a half swing so that you can still make sure to keep good position throughout the entire swing. But that we also match up the benefits of different types of practice with their ease of mastery and what that is dependent on. I think i will see where that philosophy leads. start to practice them equally as much and see how the improvement goes. It is always great to hear this feedback to help me revise my thoughts on the golf swing. appreciate it @DaveP043
    • Well it is not as simple as just throwing my leg up. It would be more of a result of increased momentum of my turn. I do try to catch the ball on my upswing  and hope to carry it through.
    • I don't think you would want to do it on purpose.  Meaning like @MRR stated you don't want to do it consciously as this involves different muscles and memory patterns and will probably throw your swing off.  I'm not sure that any of these guys realize they are doing it.  Obviously they have seen it while watching themselves, but I don't think its something they were trying to do for extra power.  Bubba Watson does it too, so its not just the "vertically challenged" that do it they are just swinging at 120+mph so that's the result of it.
    •  If Donald Ross didn't visit the site of a golf course when asked to design it, what process did he use to design the golf courses? Did he required any sort of geographical information, like a survey? Here's an excerpt from a letter he wrote to Ponkapoag:
      "I will require a general plan of the property on a scale of one inch equals one hundred feet and contours at five foot intervals to be supplied by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. After the course is laid out I will submit a general plan of the whole layout and also individual plans and specifications for each hole. Mr. Walter B. Hatch, my Associate...expects to call on you..." In the case of Ponkapoag, he did visit. However, the letter gives you some sense of how part of that process worked. ......................................................
          How would you describe his philosophy when it came to designing a golf course? Ah, one could write an entire book on that alone. There's a large chapter on that in the Ross book (I did another book on how they transformed the barren wasteland of Pinehurst into a dreamworld previously: amazon.com/author/chrisbuie)
      He tried to incorporate all the natural features of the land. He tried to accommodate a wide variety of playing levels. He wanted thinking/strategy to be part of the experience. There are many, many different parts to how he approached design.
      Basically, he tried to make his designs as invigorating and intriguing and enjoyable as he could. ......................................................
       Did he actually visit the Lucerne area to see the course or was this a "postcard" design?  And are there very many Donald Ross 9 hole courses remaining?
      I don't think there are an abundance of 9 hole courses. In the appendix of my book there is a complete list (as we know it at this time) of all his courses. One of the items noted is how many holes he designed at each course. Regarding Lucerne, have a look here and tell me what you think and we'll discuss further:
      http://givenmemoriallibrary.net/vex/vex1/67EEF659-E134-4E4C-8C8E-397028601766.htm That is from the Tufts Archives in Pinehurst, by the way. It is an organization absolutely worth supporting.
      http://giventufts.org/tufts-archives You can find information on many of the individual courses here:
      http://givenmemoriallibrary.net/vex/vex1/toc.htm  
    • Now THERE is a VLOG! I just wanted to bump this thread for a few reasons: To get it going again. I want people to consider vlogging their rounds this season. It's fun, and editing can be fun (and it can be pretty painless, especially once you get good at it). To point out that we have a new VLOG award! It's not been awarded to anyone yet, but you can find it here: https://thesandtrap.com/awards/category/2-site-awards/. To earn this badge you have to have completed 3 VLOGs and posted them here. VLOGs should be at least seven holes, since that's what counts for a nine-hole round posted for handicap. To encourage people to post VLOGs of OTHER people playing. It doesn't just have to be us. It can be like the above. I think the Newport Cup applications have led to some really nice VLOGs already. Let's see some more!
  • TST Blog Entries

  • Blog Entries

  • Today's Birthdays

    1. Judah Ben-Hur
      Judah Ben-Hur
      (55 years old)
    2. Kalnoky
      Kalnoky
      (41 years old)
  • Get Great Gear with Amazon