Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Mack H

3 and 5 wood

Recommended Posts

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)!

Well, you are a 6 so I feel kinda funny giving advice, but here goes. I think it depends on what you are trying to do with the 5, what your distances are, how you play(do you prefer to hit full shots all the time, etc) and what the rest of your bag looks like. I think some folks look at the 5 wood as a shorter range 3 wood and use it like that. Stay short of trouble or straighter off the tee etc. In that case I think it would be beneficial to have at least a similar shaft to your three wood and maybe the same make of head so that if you swing them the same, they feel the same but just cover different distances. Others might look at the 5 wood as more of a trouble or specialty club, and in this case I think it would matter less that it matches the 3 wood; it would be more important to have a shaft and head design for what you are trying to do with this club. Also playing into the decision would be what if any hybrids you carry.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally Posted by Mack H

Should your 3 and 5 wood be the same or is it just preference with each club?

It depends on player preferences. The same model and shaft for a 3W and 5W lends to consistency of feel, and set-up.

For better players, the differing models and/or shafts may be a way to get different things out of different clubs; not necessarily using the clubs as a "team."

Also, you may see casual/beginning players who piece together their sets - just find a club that works and add it in the bag.

From 1982-2008, I played matching heads and shafts in persimmon-headed D, 3 and 4 of MacGregor MTs; then component FWs; and later Tour Edge Bazooka 3W and 5W.

Then I had Callaway X Tour 3W (R.flex) until 2012, paired with an odd assortment of Hs and FWs.

Then I went to matching RBZ 3W.HL and 7W (dumped after one season), and now have Tour Edge Exotics XRail 4W and 7W, very happy with this matched set! Best FW pairing since the Bazookas.

A quick look at GD's What's In My Bag (Golf Digest online). Thompson has matching shafts, and Watney has matching everything. H and P, very creative.

Player Long FW + Shaft Next Long Club + Shaft
Russell Henley

Nike SQ Sumo 3W 13*

- Mitsu Rayon Diamana Blue Board

Nike VR.Pro H 18*

- Mitsu Rayon Fubuki

Michael Thompson

Ping G25 3W 15*

- Grafalloy ProLaunch Red, X.Flex

Akira M117 5W 18*

- Gr. ProLaunch Red, X.Flex

Nick Watney

Nike VR_Covert Tour 3W 14*

- Graphite Design BB-8X

Nike VR_Covert Tour 5W 18*
- Graphite Design BB-8X
Carl Pettersson

RBZ 3W 14.5*

- ???

Nike VR Pro Limited Ed 19*

- ???

Others: Scott Stallings and Gary Woodland carry a single FW (3W) and no Hs, and Charlie Beljan carries all irons and wedges except for a putter and Driver.

Share this post

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

I have matching 3&5 fairway woods, same shafts and make, the 5w being an inch shorter at 42", i think it helps with consistency, i can hit them both as badly as each other! ;-)

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

A couple of years ago, I hit Callaway and Adams hybrids at a demo day. The mfgr reps from both companies discouraged mid-HDCP golfers form loading up 2Hs. They said you needed a lot of clubhead speed to be able to get a 16* or 17* H out of the rough.

Also, most companies only make the 2H in the Tour or Pro models.

Mack, as a 3.5 HDCP, it depends on what works for you. If you have a 3W and one hybrid, you might want one with a bigger margin of error.

But, what do I know? I did an online fitting for Ping, and got this suggested mix for long clubs:

  • Ping G20 5W (18*)
  • Ping G20 2H (17*) and 3H (20*)

Final verdict: If you feel at all iffy about a 2H, go with a 3H. If you have any distance concerns, go with a 5W if you can hit it.

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  

  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • 2017 TST Partners

    Talamore Golf Resort
    PING Golf
    FlightScope Mevo
    Mission Belt
    Snell Golf
    Frogger Golf
    PitchFix USA
  • Posts

    • As a disclaimer I wont bother with techinal terms for this.    Exessive stretching puts the muscle in an elongated or "full rom" state. Basically its as long as the muscle can get without tearing. More rom sounds pretty good eh? What could go wrong? The problem is that when the muscle is stretched to this point it doesnt have the same ability to stretch anymore. So that tightness people are so keen to get rid of is actually the muscles inherent stretch reflex that protects the muscle, tendons and ligaments from tearing. The muscle is designed to stretch first to protect everything else. If you live a sedentery lifestyle and that stretch reflex isnt used it can tighten up too much but even then youre best off doing dynamic stretching because thats how the muscle is supposed to work in the first place. This principle is why it isnt recommended to do static stretching before a workout. So really you shouldnt attempt to increase the static rom as much as the dynamic rom.  
    • It is and it isnt. For the most part Id say it isnt. At the end of the day it really is as simple as calories in and calories out BUT because that piece of cake is not particularly nutritious nor does it take very long to digest you tend to need to eat more cake to say full which tends to promote overeating. You pretty much have to decide to stay hungry for a while to compensate.  
    • When did I ever say I was talking about them using to RUN FASTER. Never. If the ball flies further guess what. The club was moving faster. THEY GOT FASTER. Yes steroids have a multitude of benefits for an athlete but for the sake of this discussion I didint think it was relevant to list every one of them. For sure they benefitted from the faster recovery aswell as the increased performance.   Dont tell me about my logic when its obvious you havent even read what Ive said. To quote myself: "Also keep in mind were not talking about going from Bubba to Arnold here. Theres a healthy middle point for optimal performance. Tour players just do not look like athletes(on average)." "Youre always going to find exceptions" You are uninformed to put it nicely. 450*10 does not happen all the time outside of powerlifting gyms. Especially not for a guy weighing 165. His estimated max is around 600-640 lb. Please dont get started on the way estimations work. The american record is like 700 for the 165. Either way he is very strong both in relative and absolute terms and its a very impressive lift. Ofcourse there comes a point where if he bulks up too much it wont help thats exactly what Ive said. At no point have is said tour players should look like bodybuilders. Infact to quote myself again: "Strength = speed potential. Speed athletes are not inherently going for size its just a byproduct of getting stronger and faster. If it was we would have meat balls like IFBB pros breaking records at everything speed related. The whole bulking up too much is pretty much a myth for natural athletes anyways."
    • Yes Daniel Im is a CP-ish player with kind of an inline downswing, he likes the way "swinging left" with his body feels. He does hit up a little with the driver. CP is not optimal for clubs over a 6 iron....typically. It's just a much easier pattern, easier way to swing and hit all the trajectories, especially with today's equipment. Hogan didn't have the left arm as far out as Mac wants it and Snead hit pull draws. Like I just said CP isn't good for the longer clubs, Mac never played a tournament going CP, he went with CF fades.  It's also a complicated pattern, lots of sequencing and movements have to be in order and most importantly you need a lot of speed to do it functionally. I could make the case Hogan had more CF pieces than CP pieces. Anyway, I agree with what @iacas has been posting. Mac's info isn't the answer to the golf swing, it's an attempt in the right direction but there is better and more functional information out there.
    • Oh, gosh, on the range tonight, I discovered that my address position was too far away from ball, and I had lowered my hands at address. I was setup for failure. Made  a few minor changes, and was hitting fairways high again. Now I can determine whether the shafts fit on some new Tour Edge woods - I fear the regular is too soft. Another winter project - shafts. I want to be done with clubs.
  • Blog Entries

  • Today's Birthdays

    1. hockeyref18
      (18 years old)
    2. Mike86
      (31 years old)
  • Get Great Gear with Amazon


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.