Jump to content
Check out the Spin Axis Podcast! ×
Note: This thread is 2718 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

Recommended Posts

Posted

So I'm looking into some new irons I think I've narrowed it down to either the TaylorMade P series irons or Titleist AP series.  I know it comes down to what I hit better BUT I'm just looking for people who have experience in both or one of the sets I am looking at (TaylorMade P750, P770 or Titleist AP2 or AP3) just from an aesthetic, feel, and overall wear and tear perspective.  My irons now are Nike VR Split Cavity, I've had them for about 8 years now and they still look basically brand new, I take excellent care of them.  They are bladey looking but have the cavity back that offers the forgiveness on a shot that's not 100% in the middle of the face and I would like to stay with that same look.  I'm certainly not good enough to play a P730 that's too baldey for me so I'm looking for something with the looks of a blade but the forgiveness of a cavity backed iron.

 

Thanks!!

Thomas

Driver: :tmade: M3 10*  3 Wood: :nike: Vapor Fly 12*  Hybrid: :tmade: P790 UDI 2 Iron  Irons: :titleist: 716 AP2 (4-PW)  Wedges: :vokey:  52*, 56*, 60* Putter: :tmade: TP Juno  Shoes: :nike: Lunar Command,  :adidas: 360 Traxion, :adidas: Tour Boost 360  Bag: :titleist: 2016 Lightweight Stand Bag


Posted
1 hour ago, Tommy_Boy14 said:

So I'm looking into some new irons I think I've narrowed it down to either the TaylorMade P series irons or Titleist AP series.  I know it comes down to what I hit better BUT I'm just looking for people who have experience in both or one of the sets I am looking at (TaylorMade P750, P770 or Titleist AP2 or AP3) just from an aesthetic, feel, and overall wear and tear perspective.  My irons now are Nike VR Split Cavity, I've had them for about 8 years now and they still look basically brand new, I take excellent care of them.  They are bladey looking but have the cavity back that offers the forgiveness on a shot that's not 100% in the middle of the face and I would like to stay with that same look.  I'm certainly not good enough to play a P730 that's too baldey for me so I'm looking for something with the looks of a blade but the forgiveness of a cavity backed iron.

 

Thanks!!

You are a 6 handicap...how are you not good enough to play a blade??  If its preference, I get it, but don't sell yourself short by saying you aren't good enough to play a blade.  I started playing blades about 8-9 years ago when I was about a 10-12 handicap.  Bought a set of Nike TW Blades.  Rode them down to about a 4 handicap.  Next set was the Nike VR Pro blades and rode them down to a 1 handicap.  Just recently upgraded to the Callaway Apex MB irons...hoping to ride them into the plus handicaps.  I would go to a golf shop and hit some blades, you might be surprised at how well you hit them.  It has made me put some work into making center face contact which has improved my game. 

Best thing to do is to go get fitted.  Go with an open mind and not be focused on a specific brand.

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
1 hour ago, Tommy_Boy14 said:

aesthetic, feel, and overall wear and tear

I've had the 718 AP2's since last fall and absolutely love them.  I'm nowhere near your skill level and have only played about 15 rounds total maybe with them but I'm they are beautiful, feel great, and I've noticed no wear and tear.

Christian

:tmade::titleist:  :leupold:  :aimpoint: :gamegolf:

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted

Titleist is the brand most played by professionals and college players, and within Titleist; AP2 is the most common model used. i’m a mid handicapper and love my AP2s.


Posted

All the major brands produce good clubs. If you are looking for something that is blade-ish in looks, but has some game improvement help. A short list off the top of my head, 

Taylormade and Callaway produce blade irons that are not in the traditional design of muscle back (i.e. titles MB's).
The Mizuno JPX line is good.
I like my Srixon set a lot. They offer a great selection of golf shaft options at no upcharge. 
I wouldn't discount Ping irons.

I would just get fitted and try out a bunch of them. You might be surprised what you end up with. 

Matt Dougherty, P.E.
 fasdfa dfdsaf 

What's in My Bag
Driver; :pxg: 0311 Gen 5,  3-Wood: 
:titleist: 917h3 ,  Hybrid:  :titleist: 915 2-Hybrid,  Irons: Sub 70 TAIII Fordged
Wedges: :edel: (52, 56, 60),  Putter: :edel:,  Ball: :snell: MTB,  Shoe: :true_linkswear:,  Rangfinder: :leupold:
Bag: :ping:

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
On 8/3/2018 at 5:39 AM, Tommy_Boy14 said:

So I'm looking into some new irons I think I've narrowed it down to either the TaylorMade P series irons or Titleist AP series.  I know it comes down to what I hit better BUT I'm just looking for people who have experience in both or one of the sets I am looking at (TaylorMade P750, P770 or Titleist AP2 or AP3) just from an aesthetic, feel, and overall wear and tear perspective.  My irons now are Nike VR Split Cavity, I've had them for about 8 years now and they still look basically brand new, I take excellent care of them.  They are bladey looking but have the cavity back that offers the forgiveness on a shot that's not 100% in the middle of the face and I would like to stay with that same look.  I'm certainly not good enough to play a P730 that's too baldey for me so I'm looking for something with the looks of a blade but the forgiveness of a cavity backed iron.

 

Thanks!!

Fyi, the P770 is analogous to the Ap2 (player’s cavity back) and the P790 is analogous to the Ap3 (hollow player’s distance iron).  If you are considering TaylorMade P750 then that would be more like the Titleist CB (minimalist cavity back).  And of course each company’s blade would be comparable.

They all look close to blades from the top IMO except the P790, which is a bit bigger.  The AP3 has more noticeable offset than the others.

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Note: This thread is 2718 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

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

    • Nah, man. People have been testing clubs like this for decades at this point. Even 35 years. @M2R, are you AskGolfNut? If you're not, you seem to have fully bought into the cult or something. So many links to so many videos… Here's an issue, too: - A drop of 0.06 is a drop with a 90 MPH 7I having a ball speed of 117 and dropping it to 111.6, which is going to be nearly 15 yards, which is far more than what a "3% distance loss" indicates (and is even more than a 4.6% distance loss). - You're okay using a percentage with small numbers and saying "they're close" and "1.3 to 1.24 is only 4.6%," but then you excuse the massive 53% difference that going from 3% to 4.6% represents. That's a hell of an error! - That guy in the Elite video is swinging his 7I at 70 MPH. C'mon. My 5' tall daughter swings hers faster than that.
    • Yea but that is sort of my quandary, I sometimes see posts where people causally say this club is more forgiving, a little more forgiving, less forgiving, ad nauseum. But what the heck are they really quantifying? The proclamation of something as fact is not authoritative, even less so as I don't know what the basis for that statement is. For my entire golfing experience, I thought of forgiveness as how much distance front to back is lost hitting the face in non-optimal locations. Anything right or left is on me and delivery issues. But I also have to clarify that my experience is only with irons, I never got to the point of having any confidence or consistency with anything longer. I feel that is rather the point, as much as possible, to quantify the losses by trying to eliminate all the variables except the one you want to investigate. Or, I feel like we agree. Compared to the variables introduced by a golfer's delivery and the variables introduced by lie conditions, the losses from missing the optimal strike location might be so small as to almost be noise over a larger area than a pea.  In which case it seems that your objection is that the 0-3% area is being depicted as too large. Which I will address below. For statements that is absurd and true 100% sweet spot is tiny for all clubs. You will need to provide some objective data to back that up and also define what true 100% sweet spot is. If you mean the area where there are 0 losses, then yes. While true, I do not feel like a not practical or useful definition for what I would like to know. For strikes on irons away from the optimal location "in measurable and quantifiable results how many yards, or feet, does that translate into?"   In my opinion it ok to be dubious but I feel like we need people attempting this sort of data driven investigation. Even if they are wrong in some things at least they are moving the discussion forward. And he has been changing the maps and the way data is interpreted along the way. So, he admits to some of the ideas he started with as being wrong. It is not like we all have not been in that situation 😄 And in any case to proceed forward I feel will require supporting or refuting data. To which as I stated above, I do not have any experience in drivers so I cannot comment on that. But I would like to comment on irons as far as these heat maps. In a video by Elite Performance Golf Studios - The TRUTH About Forgiveness! Game Improvement vs Blade vs Players Distance SLOW SWING SPEED! and going back to ~12:50 will show the reference data for the Pro 241. I can use that to check AskGolfNut's heat map for the Pro 241: a 16mm heel, 5mm low produced a loss of efficiency from 1.3 down to 1.24 or ~4.6%. Looking at AskGolfNut's heatmap it predicts a loss of 3%. Is that good or bad? I do not know but given the possible variations I am going to say it is ok. That location is very close to where the head map goes to 4%, these are very small numbers, and rounding could be playing some part. But for sure I am going to say it is not absurd. Looking at one data point is absurd, but I am not going to spend time on more because IME people who are interested will do their own research and those not interested cannot be persuaded by any amount of data. However, the overall conclusion that I got from that video was that between the three clubs there is a difference in distance forgiveness, but it is not very much. Without some robot testing or something similar the human element in the testing makes it difficult to say is it 1 yard, or 2, or 3?  
    • Wordle 1,668 3/6 🟨🟨🟩⬜⬜ ⬜🟨⬜⬜🟨 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
    • Wordle 1,668 3/6 🟨🟩🟨🟨⬜ 🟩🟩🟩🟩⬜ 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩 Should have got it in two, but I have music on my brain.
    • Wordle 1,668 2/6* 🟨🟨🟩⬛⬛ 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
×
×
  • 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.