Jump to content
ChetlovesMer

Should Club Manufacturers Have to Standardize Loft?

How should lofts be handled when producing irons.   

60 members have voted

  1. 1. I'd like to see club manufacturers follow this protocol when it comes to lofting a set of irons:

    • Manufacturers need to standardize on lofts. (i.e. all seven irons should be the same loft, no matter who makes them.)
      7
    • Lofts need to be standardized within some range. (i.e. all seven irons should be made with in a range of lofts.)
      0
    • Clubs numbers should be standardized based on how high they hit the ball. (Iron Byron testing, maybe?)
      1
    • Clubs numbers should be standardized based on how much they spin the ball. (4-irons spin X, 5-irons spin Y... again, Iron Byron... maybe?)
      0
    • Manufacturers can make clubs any loft they want, but lofts should be printed on the club INSTEAD of numbers. (no more 7-iron, now you get a 33 degree iron.)
      2
    • Manufacturers can make clubs any loft they want, but lofts should be printed on the club IN ADDITION to the numbers. (now you get a number and a loft on your club.)
      14
    • Quit your worrying. It doesn't matter what number is printed on the bottom of the club. You get the same score by hitting a club with a 7 printed on the bottom as if you hit a club with a 5 printed on the bottom.
      36


68 posts / 2924 viewsLast Reply

Recommended Posts

Okay, so a I’m at Golf Galaxy with friends this weekend. We are all hitting different irons. None of us were seriously shopping, just looking. I wanted to see how far I could hit a Callaway Rogue X 7 iron.  I tagged that thing like 200 plus yards according to their launch monitor.
So, this guy walks up and says, “That iron is Bull5hit.” I kid you not, that’s a direct quote from a guy I’ve never met. I guess that’s how he introduces himself. We all stare at him. “All they did was jack the loft, that ain’t no 7 iron is a 5 iron.” 

None of us know what to say. This guy seems actually offended by the design of the Callaway Rogue X.

Now the good part. The fitter guy walks over and says “They had to deloft them because they are engineered to get the ball up. If they didn’t deloft it, the club will literally hit the ball too high…. Here let me show you.”

So, the fitter guy has me hit the Callaway Rogue X 7-iron and then the Titleist 718 MB. I hit the Callaway like 204 yards. I hit the Titleist just over 150. The angry guy is like “See, told you, it’s Bull5hit.” And he walks off.

The fitter however had us look at the spin numbers and the height. I spun the Rogue X just over 4500 and the Titleist almost 5100. Not that much different. The interesting part was the height was almost exactly the same. They were both almost exactly 35 yards and decent angles were almost identical.

So, the fitter guy made a good point that the angry guy missed. Maybe the number on the bottom of the club refers to the height you hit it, not the distance you hit it???????

I don’t know? What do you guys think?

Do manufacturers need to standardize on lofts?

Edited by iacas
removed many unnecessary blank lines

Share this post


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

Want to hide this ad? Register for free today!

8 minutes ago, ChetlovesMer said:

Do manufacturers need to standardize on lofts?

No. AFAIK you can find the lofts of all the major brands clubs on their websites so it's not like they are keeping the lofts a secret or something.

I'm surprised that random guy said something to you. He must feel really strongly about that. Yeesh.

Share this post


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

It would make absolutely no sense to "require" them to do any such thing.

One club's 7-iron might go as far as another's 5-iron, so what are you accomplishing when they both say "7" on the bottom? Tons of things matter in addition to the static loft: clubhead speed, CG, shaft flex and length, dynamic loft… the ball being hit… etc.

Share this post


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

no.  just look at it this way.   the numbers on the bottom of the club are relative to each other, rather than relative to other club for other manufacturers. 

And the clubs are made for different types of golfers.   The Callaway Rogue X is a club that is designed for extra distance, and for it to be easy to get the ball up in the air.   That Titleist MB, obviously designed for constantly and a more penetrating ball flight.   

if you were to have some sort of signifying mark on a club that would some how be comparable across brands and styles that that Titlist MB would have to be called something like [35 degree, LS (low speed), PF (penetrating flight), LF (low forgiveness).   where as the Callaway 7 iron would have to be called something like [27 degree, HS, HF, HF].   it would be silly.  

the current information on the club is more than sufficient.  The titleist MB 7-iron flies lower and further than the 8 iron, but higher and shorter than the 6 iron.  

Edited by iacas
removed unneeded whitespace at the end

Share this post


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

I do think the fitter has a duty to explain the difference in performance if he's doing a good job.  Just handing me a bunch of 7 irons doesn't mean I'm comparing apples to apples.

The number is a bit meaningless - they can print smiley faces on it for all I care.  But it is a nice way to track which of my clubs does what once I figure them out.

Share this post


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

52 minutes ago, ChetlovesMer said:

Okay, so a I’m at Golf Galaxy with friends this weekend. We are all hitting different irons. None of us were seriously shopping, just looking. I wanted to see how far I could hit a Callaway Rogue X 7 iron.  I tagged that thing like 200 plus yards according to their launch monitor.
So, this guy walks up and says, “That iron is Bull5hit.” I kid you not, that’s a direct quote from a guy I’ve never met. I guess that’s how he introduces himself. We all stare at him. “All they did was jack the loft, that ain’t no 7 iron is a 5 iron.” 

None of us know what to say. This guy seems actually offended by the design of the Callaway Rogue X.

Now the good part. The fitter guy walks over and says “They had to deloft them because they are engineered to get the ball up. If they didn’t deloft it, the club will literally hit the ball too high…. Here let me show you.”

So, the fitter guy has me hit the Callaway Rogue X 7-iron and then the Titleist 718 MB. I hit the Callaway like 204 yards. I hit the Titleist just over 150. The angry guy is like “See, told you, it’s Bull5hit.” And he walks off.

The fitter however had us look at the spin numbers and the height. I spun the Rogue X just over 4500 and the Titleist almost 5100. Not that much different. The interesting part was the height was almost exactly the same. They were both almost exactly 35 yards and decent angles were almost identical.

So, the fitter guy made a good point that the angry guy missed. Maybe the number on the bottom of the club refers to the height you hit it, not the distance you hit it???????

I don’t know? What do you guys think?

Do manufacturers need to standardize on lofts?

 

I wrote about lofts in the review below. People are misunderstanding how the actual measured loft factors into design.

From the review:

Because the new 716 AP1 launches higher, Titleist lowered the lofts to keep the same launch angle. It is misconception that companies lower the club loft to get more distance through lower launch and more roll out. If a head has a lower center of gravity and launches higher, companies like Titleist lower the head loft to get the same optimum launch angle. More distance comes from faster ball speeds, which will give more carry.

https://thesandtrap.com/b/clubs/titleist_716_ap1_review

So basically the whiny guy at the shop doesn't understand club design. I underlined the critical part, optimum launch angle. The measured loft is only one variable.

Share this post


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

The number shouldn't matter, only how far and how high YOU hit it.  Besides, who gets to decide?  Can you imagine the arguments between different manufacturers, each of whom think their way of doing things is the right way?   Each one trying to get some competitive edge on the others?  Oy, I'm getting a headache even imagining it.

Share this post


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

56 minutes ago, klineka said:

I'm surprised that random guy said something to you. He must feel really strongly about that. Yeesh.

Yeah, he was really mad. Like it was some kind of personal insult to him to have different lofts. He didn't even wait around to talk about it. It's not just different lofts; It's different everything. 

17 minutes ago, rehmwa said:

I do think the fitter has a duty to explain the difference in performance if he's doing a good job.  Just handing me a bunch of 7 irons doesn't mean I'm comparing apples to apples.

I think he did a good job. After all, none of us were really buying clubs or even getting fit for them. He probably just overheard profanity-man and figured he should come over and try to shed some light on the differences in design.

 

12 minutes ago, boogielicious said:

So basically the whiny guy at the shop doesn't understand club design. I underlined the critical part, optimum launch angle. The measured loft is only one variable.

It IS funny to me how often I hear this argument though. "Oh, they just made the lofts stronger." As if that's the only difference between the two clubs. It should take no time at all to look at the two clubs and realize they are about as similar as a sportscar and an SUV. 

Share this post


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

1 hour ago, ChetlovesMer said:

That iron is Bull5hit

Sheesh. F***ing be a grown-up and type out the goddamn swear word.

Share this post


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

5 minutes ago, DaveP043 said:

The number shouldn't matter, only how far and how high YOU hit it.  Besides, who gets to decide?  Can you imagine the arguments between different manufacturers, each of whom think their way of doing things is the right way?   Each one trying to get some competitive edge on the others?  Oy, I'm getting a headache even imagining it.

Good point. It would be like regulating the number of people a car has to sit, and the size, shape etc...

Just now, iacas said:

Sheesh. F***ing be a grown-up and type out the goddamn swear word.

Two things:
1 - that's funny. Good use of irony.

2 - This is my "work" computer, never sure if that kind of 5hit gets flagged. 

Share this post


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

I think the number on the club relates more to the other clubs in the Nathan other sets of clubs. I hit my 7i 150 yds.  I hit 9iin another set 150 yds. I play the distance not necessarily the club. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, ChetlovesMer said:

2 - This is my "work" computer, never sure if that kind of 5hit gets flagged. 

I think they'd get you for being on a golf forum during work before they would for typing a swear word. 

As far as the topic goes, different iron designs will yield different results and they're after different types of players. If someone wants to hit a 7 iron 200 yards that's perfectly fine.  Maybe this guy was really butthurt about a buddy hitting his irons 20 yards longer than him?

Share this post


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

I voted "Quit your worrying."

You are getting fitted for a set of irons. It doesn't matter what the number is on the bottom of the club.

Share this post


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

16 minutes ago, Foot Wedge said:

I think they'd get you for being on a golf forum during work before they would for typing a swear word. 

Oh 5hit, I'm in trouble. 

Share this post


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

5 minutes ago, ChetlovesMer said:

Oh 5hit, I'm in trouble. 

Hahahaha well played.

Share this post


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

40 minutes ago, ChetlovesMer said:

1 - that's funny. Good use of irony. 

iron-y

Share this post


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

Not sure why anyone cares so much about iron loft and what not. When I hit irons I just want the clubs to have correct gaps. The numbers on the bottom don't mean much, I only care about how far each one goes. I've never had two sets of irons that were exactly the same.

Share this post


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

1 hour ago, rehmwa said:

I do think the fitter has a duty to explain the difference in performance if he's doing a good job.  Just handing me a bunch of 7 irons doesn't mean I'm comparing apples to apples.

The number is a bit meaningless - they can print smiley faces on it for all I care.  But it is a nice way to track which of my clubs does what once I figure them out.

A good Fitter does explain the difference, at least with every fitting I have either had done or been at with friends getting clubs.  Not only did my Fitter explain what the difference was between a Miura 7 Iron and a Mizuno 7 Iron he also explained why I should or should not consider one brand vs another while letting me choose which club head to focus on.

A good Fitter will also go into great length on the best shaft to us as well and explain why that particular shaft with that particular head works best and not. 

Then a good Fitter will also go into the grip

A good Fitter doesn't look at the loft of a particular brand, but how well those clubs gap and how best to maximize your game within your budget.

 

Share this post


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

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • 2018 TST Partners

    PING Golf
    FlightScope Mevo
    More to come…
  • Posts

    • Point by point: • I noted above 6 holes with different options and decisions to be made off the tee. • I agree some fairways should be widened and noted which ones above. That said, the holes are still good to excellent and highly memorable and far from boring • This point about the greens being plain and flat is somewhat a misnomer. Yes, they are not Winged Foot or Augusta, but they aren’t all flat ovals either. 1, 3, 4, 7, 8, 11( since the changes last year), and 15-18 all have shapes, slopes, tiers or undulations to a significant degree.  • Agreed, the course was designed to be a beast tee to green • Same comment as above, although I will say that this point also gets overplayed. It’s not like you have no option but to chip out of the rough. Hit a wedge or short iron, position yourself for a wedge into the green, and try to go up and down.  • Agreed there are no short or drivable par 4s. Those are good features but not some make or break requirement for a course to be not boring • 1 and 18 are fine. They aren’t world beaters but you can probably count on one hand the number of courses with all 18 world class holes. And Golden Age courses often had soft opening holes and their best holes before the 18th because back then Match Play was the dominant game and matches often didn’t make the 18th. And 18 is not boring at all, with the bunkering and elevated greensite • I have played the Black countless times and never once came close to a 6 hour round. Maybe if you catch a very busy Saturday afternoon you will hit 5-1/2 or so. Usually I play in 5 hours or just past that. People who play the Bethpage courses know that rounds on the Red and Blue take longer than rounds on the Black. And btw, that is no different than any other public course in the NY-NJ area except Ferry Point. 
    • I don't know. A weird one. I had four birdies on Friday and shot 87. Those things do not jive.   EDIT--Also, in case you think I may be one of those long hitters who just get in trouble a bit, I'm not. No penalty shots in that 87 with four birdies. Just a lot of bad shots.
    • Rock Bottom did wee, by me  
    • I'm not doing it here just for the heck of it - I think that BPB is wildly over-rated. I think it's boring. It completely fails to live up to what it could or should be given the property. If you need to hang your hat on me agreeing that "some holes aren't boring" then that says quite a bit. Untrue. Get an avatar for yourself, please. My opinion in a nutshell? 20-26 yard wide fairways on relatively long holes force you to almost always just hit a driver and to find the really narrow fairway. There's almost never a decision to be made on the tee about the club OR the location of the tee shot. Angles don't matter, but they really don't matter at BPB. The bunkers are set into the rough, meaning that the fairway corridors have been somewhat artificially narrowed. The greens are generally flat, relatively oval-shaped, and uninspiring. There are few that have any interesting contours, interior OR exterior. Virtually every hole is a mid- to long-iron that must carry and land and stop on the green. Very few holes even allow a run-up shot. Thick rough with virtually no recovery options everywhere. Almost no half-par type holes (unless you count the ample 4.5-par par fours). A dud of a hole opens and closes the course: 1 and 18, meh. Six-hour rounds are common.
    • I prefer the Zero gloves.  It is basically a one size adapts to all.  Feels more like a second ski and I have enjoyed it over 6 months of using it.  Reasonably priced.
  • TST Blog Entries

  • Blog Entries

  • Today's Birthdays

    1. Adunifon
      Adunifon
      (38 years old)
    2. Caveman59
      Caveman59
      (60 years old)
    3. Mech12
      Mech12
      (44 years old)
    4. metbid
      metbid
      (70 years old)

×
×
  • 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.

The popup will be closed in 10 seconds...