Jump to content
Check out the Spin Axis Podcast! ×
Note: This thread is 2688 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

hello all I'm looking to upgrade my wedges and have settled on a set of vokeys. My questions are 1 Is there a a $50 difference in technology between the sm6's and the sm7s? I can buy a new set of sm6s for $100 a club or sm7s for $150 a club i guess im wondering between brand new clubs is there that much of a difference? and my 2nd question is how accurate is the questionnaire on the vokey website? the problem I have is that Im like 2 hours away from anyone that can do a detailed fitting. thanks for the help


Posted

As far as sm6/sm7 I wouldn’t worry about that. Save the $50/club. So are you saying you weren’t fitted for any of your clubs? If you are reluctant to drive the 2hrs to get fitted then the website info is probably better than just buying off a rack. If you were happy with your old wedges then you could always just replicate their specs on your new Vokeys. Obviously the best situation is to be fitted. But I don’t think you’re losing a huge advantage by not doing so. But golf is hard and many feel they want to capitalize on every advantage possible no matter the degree of effect. Cheers!

:ping: G25 Driver Stiff :ping: G20 3W, 5W :ping: S55 4-W (aerotech steel fiber 110g shafts) :ping: Tour Wedges 50*, 54*, 58* :nike: Method Putter Floating clubs: :edel: 54* trapper wedge

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Moderator
Posted
1 hour ago, Matt Maxey said:

My questions are 1 Is there a a $50 difference in technology between the sm6's and the sm7s?

It depends on if you need what's offered in the SM7 that isn't in the SM6. SM7 offers a couple of more grind options and the shift in CoG is further than it was in the SM6. I don't know what skill level you are as a player, but these things matter to some people more than others.

1 hour ago, Matt Maxey said:

my 2nd question is how accurate is the questionnaire on the vokey website?

It's bound to be better than buying blind. Bounce and grind combinations can be one of those things that players learn for themselves, but even then some people go through a fitting and learn what they've always used isn't the best setup for them.

In the end I think it comes how you value your time, money, and golf. For some, a custom fitting and the newer technology is well worth it. Others are perfectly happy buying previous model years or second hand and playing with stock options.

Bill

“By three methods we may learn wisdom: First, by reflection, which is noblest; Second, by imitation, which is easiest; and third by experience, which is the bitterest.” - Confucius

My Swing Thread

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted

You’re a step ahead of me. I wanted a new 56 and pretty much grabbed a glide 2.0 off the rack and didn’t even look at the dot. It felt right in my hands and having played ping irons for years I know my lie angle I guess. But I had no clue the many grinds etc.... I personally think wedges are all about feel. They are going to be the clubs that should, in theory, be your scoring clubs. I want a club that feels right more than what someone says is right.

Ping G400 9 degree driver, 3 Wood and 3 Hybrid, Ping 2016 G 4-UW,  Ping Glide Forged Pro 52 degree, Ping Glide 2.0 WS 56 degree, Ping Craz-E Putter, Titleist Tour Soft balls

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted

May I ask why you ‘settled’ on a set of Vokeys? Have you hit them on the course/grass? I’m just asking if you’ve tested wedges and settled on Vokeys or if you’re just going by the good reviews? Don’t mean to clutter your decision but Edel sure makes a damn nice wedge!

:ping: G25 Driver Stiff :ping: G20 3W, 5W :ping: S55 4-W (aerotech steel fiber 110g shafts) :ping: Tour Wedges 50*, 54*, 58* :nike: Method Putter Floating clubs: :edel: 54* trapper wedge

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted

My guess is that the previous year's model will work just as well as the current model, for most amateurs. 

I have always had the opinion that manufactures of any kind of product operate with "planned obsolescence" in their manufacturing minds. Golf club manufacturers are no different.

In My Bag:
A whole bunch of Tour Edge golf stuff...... :beer:

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted

I have SM6 58 M8 as a well as SM7 54 M8 and a SM7 50 F8. Love all three, they have taken strokes off my game! If you can find SM6’s with the right grind and bounce I think you’ll be fine. The feel is essentially the same. For me anyway. 

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted

No real difference between the two. If they are both new then the grooves are good. The Titleist online fitting tool is pretty good. These are the basic rules on the bounce/grind stuff.

Higher bounce is good for steeper angle of attack (deep divot). Also good for fluffier lies, both in sand and grass as it keeps the wedge from digging down too far. Low bounces are opposite that. Shallow angle of attack with little divot, tight lies, hard fairways, and shallow filled bunkers. Most golfers are better off with more bounce. Grind is important if you are using the wedge with an open face to hit flop shots etc. Can also be helpful on uneven lies. That being said, the more you grind off the bottom of the club, the less forgiving it will be.


Note: This thread is 2688 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.