Need some help choosing my new irons!

[vangator]

You can check out your irons on the Maltby Playability Factor chart.  When in doubt, go with the highest MPF.  We're not so good that we shouldn't get irons that might help our not so good strokes.

http://www.golfworks.com/images/art/MPFRatingsChart.pdf

The Cally XR is 660 (GI) and the TM RSi is 386 (Classic).  Based on those numbers, I personally wouldn't get either.

Edited November 3, 2015 by vangator

[SavvySwede]

26 minutes ago, vangator said:

You can check out your irons on the Maltby Playability Factor chart.  When in doubt, go with the highest MPF.  We're not so good that we shouldn't get irons that might help our not so good strokes.

http://www.golfworks.com/images/art/MPFRatingsChart.pdf

The Cally XR is 660 (GI) and the TM RSi is 386 (Classic).  Based on those numbers, I personally wouldn't get either.

Those ratings a pretty weird though. my irons are rated very low (218) and they don't feel anything like ancient blades. Need to hit them in person to really feel those GI qualities.

[saevel25]

20 minutes ago, SavvySwede said:

Those ratings a pretty weird though. my irons are rated very low (218) and they don't feel anything like ancient blades. Need to hit them in person to really feel those GI qualities.

I agree. I would put the TP MC in the AP2 to Titliest CB range. Something in the 500 range. I think Maltby has done a lot of good trying to categorize irons. I think his method has a few holes that get some strange measurements. 

[newtogolf]

10 minutes ago, saevel25 said:

I agree. I would put the TP MC in the AP2 to Titliest CB range. Something in the 500 range. I think Maltby has done a lot of good trying to categorize irons. I think his method has a few holes that get some strange measurements.

The TP CB is close to the Titleist AP2 and CB with an MPF rating of 464, the TP MC is closer to the Mizuno MP-5 or MP-25.

[Pretzel]

25 minutes ago, saevel25 said:

I agree. I would put the TP MC in the AP2 to Titliest CB range. Something in the 500 range. I think Maltby has done a lot of good trying to categorize irons. I think his method has a few holes that get some strange measurements. 

 

48 minutes ago, SavvySwede said:

Those ratings a pretty weird though. my irons are rated very low (218) and they don't feel anything like ancient blades. Need to hit them in person to really feel those GI qualities.

As an example, it rates the Ping s55 at 594 and the i25 at only 512, saying that the s55 is Game Improvement while the i25 is "Conventional". Having hit both in person I would consider the i25 more forgiving, though I personally prefer the s55 (hence why I use them!). 

It also rated the R9 Inverted Cone irons at only 97, lower than most blades including those made in the 70's.

[vangator]

I know the MPF is not perfect and I don't know exactly what goes into the calculation.  It seems biased toward his own stuff.   But it is an additional data point to enter into a person's choice.

Personally, and of course it's just my preference, but I would never go back to hitting blades.  I love the forged feel when I hit a pure shot.  But that is too few and far between for me.  Or at least it was.

Now, I want straight.  Any club can be shaped if you want.  I just like the idea that my basic shot has some help.  I don't want to make it tougher than it already is.