Jump to content
Check out the Spin Axis Podcast! ×
IGNORED

Tommy Armour Regular or Oversized?


Recommended Posts

Posted

Hey fellow hackers......  Found a set of Tommy Armour 845s Silver Scot on Craigslist for $40 bucks (3-PW), I am just getting back into the game after a layoff for a couple years.   Tried a set of Hybrid Irons from Adams,  did not like them, so I went to searching and found the 845s and like the way they hit.   Found a Gap Wedge and Sand Wedge in the same model so the set is coming together....  Just a question for the group and anyone that has played them or owned them?   Whats the difference in the Regular and Oversize, am I good with regulars or would I be better off with the oversize?   


Posted

Oversize should be a little more forgiving; check Maltby Playability Factor. And Google reviews for the club. But go with what you like. I liked the 845u Silverback. Very easy to hit. Best of luck with your search and purchase! -Marv

DRIVER: Cleveland 588 Altitude ( Matrix Radix Sv Graphite, A) IRONS: Mizuno JPX-800 HD Irons & 3,4,5 JPX Fli-Hi (Grafalloy Prolaunch Blue Graphite, R); WEDGES: (Carried as needed) Artisan Golf 46, 50, 53, 56 low bounce, 56 high bounce; PUTTER: Mizuno TP Mills 9

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted

Never been a giant fan of oversized clubs, but it is a personal decision. I personally would try to play the regular heads and if you don't get the forgiveness you need, give the OS a try. Had a set of the 845's many moons ago, great set to get back into the game with.

Danny    In my :ping: Hoofer Tour golf bag on my :clicgear: 8.0 Cart

Driver:   :pxg: 0311 Gen 5  X-Stiff.                        Irons:  :callaway: 4-PW APEX TCB Irons 
3 Wood: :callaway: Mavrik SZ Rogue X-Stiff                            Nippon Pro Modus 130 X-Stiff
3 Hybrid: :callaway: Mavrik Pro KBS Tour Proto X   Wedges: :vokey:  50°, 54°, 60° 
Putter: :odyssey:  2-Ball Ten Arm Lock        Ball: :titleist: ProV 1

 

 

 

 

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted (edited)
16 hours ago, popohacker said:

Found a set of Tommy Armour 845s Silver Scot on Craigslist for $40 bucks (3-PW),

If these are the originals from 1988, the MPF = 677, in the Maltby Game Improvement zone just a few points below Super Game Improvement. (The Oversize reached SGI with MPF = 825).

Tommy Armour 845s SILVER SCOT Iron Set Preowned Golf Club

In Maltby's 2005 book on MPF, p. 28 has pictures and a full-page analysis of this model of iron. Maltby credits the 845S with being one of the few modern irons that retained a classic look but still achieved high playability. In production from 1988 to 2002, the 845-Silver Scot family has one of the longest runs of any modern iron model.

Here is a Tommy Armour 845 thread from a few years back. Interesting stories!

Edited by WUTiger

Focus, connect and follow through!

  • Completed KBS Education Seminar (online, 2015)
  • GolfWorks Clubmaking AcademyFitting, Assembly & Repair School (2012)

Driver:  :touredge: EXS 10.5°, weights neutral   ||  FWs:  :callaway: Rogue 4W + 7W
Hybrid:  :callaway: Big Bertha OS 4H at 22°  ||  Irons:  :callaway: Mavrik MAX 5i-PW
Wedges:  :callaway: MD3: 48°, 54°... MD4: 58° ||  Putter:image.png.b6c3447dddf0df25e482bf21abf775ae.pngInertial NM SL-583F, 34"  
Ball:  image.png.f0ca9194546a61407ba38502672e5ecf.png QStar Tour - Divide  ||  Bag: :sunmountain: Three 5 stand bag

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
2 hours ago, WUTiger said:

If these are the originals from 1988, the MPF = 677, in the Maltby Game Improvement zone just a few points below Super Game Improvement. (The Oversize reached SGI with MPF = 825).

Tommy Armour 845s SILVER SCOT Iron Set Preowned Golf Club

In Maltby's 2005 book on MPF, p. 28 has pictures and a full-page analysis of this model of iron. Maltby credits the 845S with being one of the few modern irons that retained a classic look but still achieved high playability. In production from 1988 to 2002, the 845-Silver Scot family has one of the longest runs of any modern iron model.

Here is a Tommy Armour 845 thread from a few years back. Interesting stories!

Is there a way to tell what batch they came out of


Posted
7 hours ago, WUTiger said:

If these are the originals from 1988, the MPF = 677, in the Maltby Game Improvement zone just a few points below Super Game Improvement. (The Oversize reached SGI with MPF = 825).

Tommy Armour 845s SILVER SCOT Iron Set Preowned Golf Club

In Maltby's 2005 book on MPF, p. 28 has pictures and a full-page analysis of this model of iron. Maltby credits the 845S with being one of the few modern irons that retained a classic look but still achieved high playability. In production from 1988 to 2002, the 845-Silver Scot family has one of the longest runs of any modern iron model.

Here is a Tommy Armour 845 thread from a few years back. Interesting stories!

I was able to find a set of the Oversize Plus [3 - PW] online tonight for $55 so I pulled the trigger... will give both a tryout and see what happens....thanks for the feedback...


Posted
20 hours ago, popohacker said:

I was able to find a set of the Oversize Plus [3 - PW] online tonight for $55 so I pulled the trigger... will give both a tryout and see what happens....

That's the best way to do it.

As for "which batch..." the original 845s and the eventual Oversize were produced several years apart.

Focus, connect and follow through!

  • Completed KBS Education Seminar (online, 2015)
  • GolfWorks Clubmaking AcademyFitting, Assembly & Repair School (2012)

Driver:  :touredge: EXS 10.5°, weights neutral   ||  FWs:  :callaway: Rogue 4W + 7W
Hybrid:  :callaway: Big Bertha OS 4H at 22°  ||  Irons:  :callaway: Mavrik MAX 5i-PW
Wedges:  :callaway: MD3: 48°, 54°... MD4: 58° ||  Putter:image.png.b6c3447dddf0df25e482bf21abf775ae.pngInertial NM SL-583F, 34"  
Ball:  image.png.f0ca9194546a61407ba38502672e5ecf.png QStar Tour - Divide  ||  Bag: :sunmountain: Three 5 stand bag

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • 3 years later...
Posted
On 11/9/2017 at 11:02 PM, popohacker said:

I was able to find a set of the Oversize Plus [3 - PW] online tonight for $55 so I pulled the trigger... will give both a tryout and see what happens....thanks for the feedback...

ok, so 4 years later....  Which did you prefer - original or oversize?  I looking at them too 😀


  • 3 years later...
Posted
On 11/9/2017 at 1:08 PM, NM Golf said:

Never been a giant fan of oversized clubs, but it is a personal decision. I personally would try to play the regular heads and if you don't get the forgiveness you need, give the OS a try. Had a set of the 845's many moons ago, great set to get back into the game with.

But your putter is a hockey stick


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


  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • TST Partners

    PlayBetter
    Golfer's Journal
    ShotScope
    The Stack System
    FitForGolf
    FlightScope Mevo
    Direct: Mevo, Mevo+, and Pro Package.

    Coupon Codes (save 10-20%): "IACAS" for Mevo/Stack/FitForGolf, "IACASPLUS" for Mevo+/Pro Package, and "THESANDTRAP" for ShotScope. 15% off TourStriker (no code).
  • Posts

    • Day 470 - 2026-01-13 Got some work in while some players were using the sim, so I had to stick around. 🙂 Good thing too, since… I hadn't yet practiced today until about 6:45 tonight. 😛 
    • That's not quite the same thing as what some people messaged me today.
    • Day 152 1-12 More reps bowing wrists in downswing. Still pausing at the top. Making sure to get to lead side and getting the ball to go left. Slow progress is better than no progress.  
    • Yea, if I were to make a post arguing against the heat map concept, citing some recent robot testing would be my first point. The heat map concept is what I find interesting, more on that below. The robot testing I have looked at, including the one you linked, do discreet point testing then provide that discrete data in various forms. Which as you said is old as the hills, if you know of any other heat map concept type testing, I would be interested in links to that though! No, and I did say in my first post "if this heat map data is valid and reliable" meaning I have my reservations as well. Heck beyond reservations. I have some fairly strong suspicions there are flaws. But all I have are hunches and guesses, if anyone has data to share, I would be interested to see it.  My background is I quit golfing about 9 years ago and have been toying with the idea of returning. So far that has been limited to a dozen range sessions in late Summer through Fall when the range closed. Then primarily hitting foam balls indoors using a swing speed monitor as feedback. Between the range closing and the snow flying I did buy an R10 and hit a few balls into a backyard net. The heat map concept is a graphical representation of efficiency (smash factor) loss mapped onto the face of the club. As I understand it to make the representation agnostic to swing speed or other golfer specific swing characteristics. It is more a graphical tool not a data tool. The areas are labeled numerically in discrete 1% increments while the raw data is changing at ~0.0017%/mm and these changes are represented as subtle changes in color across those discrete areas. The only data we care about in terms of the heat map is the 1.3 to 1.24 SF loss and where was the strike location on the face - 16mm heal and 5mm low. From the video the SF loss is 4.6% looking up 16mm heal and 5mm low on the heat map it is on the edge of where the map changes from 3% loss to 4%. For that data point in the video, 16mm heal, 5mm low, 71.3 mph swing speed (reference was 71.4 mph), the distance loss was 7.2% or 9 yards, 125 reference distance down to 116. However, distance loss is not part of a heat map discussion. Distance loss will be specific to the golfers swing characteristics not the club. What I was trying to convey was that I do not have enough information to determine good or bad. Are the two systems referencing strike location the same? How accurate are the two systems in measuring even if they are referencing from the same location? What variation might have been introduced by the club delivery on the shot I picked vs the reference set of shots? However, based on the data I do have and making some assumptions and guesses the results seem ok, within reason, a good place to start from and possibly refine. I do not see what is wrong with 70mph 7 iron, although that is one of my other areas of questioning. The title of the video has slow swing speed in all caps, and it seems like the videos I watch define 7i slow, medium, and fast as 70, 80, and 90. The whole question of mid iron swing speed and the implications for a players game and equipment choices is of interest to me as (according to my swing speed meter) over my ~decade break I lost 30mph swing speed on mine.
    • Maxfli, Maltby, Golfworks, all under the Dicks/Golf Galaxy umbrella... it's all a bit confounding. Looking at the pictures, they all look very, very similar in their design. I suspect they're the same club, manufactured in the same factory in China, just with different badging.  The whacky pricing structure has soured me, so I'll just cool my heels a bit. The new Mizuno's will be available to test very soon. I'm in no rush.  
×
×
  • Create New...

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.