/**/

Collapse

Announcement

No announcement yet.
Collapse

Are all 7 irons created the same? The answer is yes.

X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    It's interesting that on a Par 3, most of the time, the tour players pull the same # iron. At most there will be a one club difference. Now, is it the loft, the shaft ,the clubhead, or the player?
    things change

    Maga Lies Matter

    Comment


    • #17
      torrentman I'm not sure if that test would really prove anything apart from showing that club A goes X yardage, club B goes Y, etc. I think it would be helpful to test this with high-handicap players and face tape though for a different purpose. Have them hit their own irons and then a newer tech iron that was built as close as possible to their current set-up and show them that even with no fitting for shaft, lie, grip, and flex they are still able to get the new iron to go ____ yards further and straighter, even including mishits.

      TeeMoney You must be a crazy high spin player!!!! I would say most people I fit are on the two opposite ends of the spectrum, either too low spin, or too high. Most of the high spin guys are easy to fix, as they are using clubs with weaker lofts, they flip at impact helping the ball in the air, and are usually using shafts that are too heavy/and or stiff so they feel like they really need to incorporate their hands into the swing. Once you go stronger loft, with a lighter shaft they tend to stop flipping because they let the club do the work and we get our launch and spin closer to the optimum. The low spin guys are easy as well, just give them something chunky. Most of the people I see just want to hit the ball straighter and don't care what it looks like. So I can give them something super fat like a GMax, XR OS, Cobra King Oversize that has a really low CG and it spikes their spin right back to normal. I swing my 6i at 85mph and I have tailored my spin to be right around 5000 RPMs due to a combination of a low-spin shaft (for me) and the loft on the head.

      Jasonp Sorry, didn't mean any disrespect on my end either. I was out of line. Anyway, back to it. Now I don't know if I completely agree with it, but TourIQ posted this distance reference chart a couple of weeks ago by Maltby and a 5* loft change should equal 11.3-15.8 total carry, yards, so if we add on the 2* loft change too (from 28.5* to your 35*), that changes it to roughly 16.5-19.25 total carry difference, which would be pretty equal to the club and a half to 2-club change you would expect. I guess my question is where do you get up to 25y? 20 I would agree with, again, at roughly 10y per club, and 6.5* is pretty close to 2 clubs, I'm just a little lost on the extra half a club. Is that attributed to more ball speed from the flexing faces? I'm also curious if you tried it with the exact same shaft? If you went from your s300 you had previously or C-Tapers and then went down to the 85g REAX, I can now see why there was such an impressive differential between your Ap2 and the M2, despite the loft. I'm just a bit skeptical because I just did the exact same test and saw basically half a club, with the same shafts, I am tempted to re-do it to make sure it wasn't a fluke. So to see such a huge difference in total carry, assuming all clubs were hit in the middle is staggering to me...not saying I don't believe it, it's just impressive.

      TourIQ Harry, I didn't. I will re-do the test on Thursday on my lunch break and make sure I do everything you asked, minus CPM. We don't have a CPM machine. I am curious though, is there any hard data despite anecdotal evidence of people thinking they are playing better with fully frequency matched, MOI-matched, PURE'd etc. clubs that don't come from the purveyors of these fitting methods? I have two clubs that have been built by Modern Golf back when they PURE'd everything...and I can't really say for certain if I hit them any better than anything else I have owned that was stock. I would like to see a test where they have a group of handicappers (from 20 down to +1) with verified, recorded handicaps hit their current clubs as is, then rip them apart, blueprint them and set them up as best as possible with Frequency matching, Puring, MOI-matching, whatever, WITHOUT changing the shafts, grips, lies, etc. and then have them record their handicaps again. If they did this for say 2 months before and then 2 months after, I am willing to bet there will be little difference. I think a lot of the supposed excitement of aligning shafts and weighting stuff to within +/- 1 CPM and what not is due in large part to newer clubs, changed shafts/lies rather than the orientation and tightening of tolerances. Be honest, and I am absolute not trying to be a jerk, but could you without a doubt say that you would play better if your driver CPM'd at say, 247 rather than 245?

      bl8d Combination of things I would assume. Primarily that most tour pros (at least the younger guys) are swinging within a couple of MPH of each other, so the likelihood of them pulling the same club is high, especially when they are all pretty well playing the same type of iron (Player's CB or better). I have seen some pretty wonky distance choices, like at the US Open I think it was when Fowler pulled an 8i on a Par 3 on the back 9 from like 190 and was a solid 15-20 yards short of the green. I mean, I get that you want to keep up appearances but that is one mighty underclub. Maybe it was the small amount of tech in his blade lol

      Comment


      • #18
        Great analysis and good read Chris!!! Thanks for posting this....

        Comment


        • #19
          My average yardage distance between clubs is 12-15y.

          As for the larger discrepancy that's user error aka me. Here's an example.

          My 7iron is my usual 150-155y club. That's with my mediocre swing. While I was taking lessons I had my 8i going that distance consistently. Even now my 7i is consistent. However on days I'm swinging well in a club longer.

          With the m2 etc I couldn't be consistent. I'd hit some extreme flyers that went stupid long like 1/15.

          Comment


          • #20
            [QUOTE=Phatchrisrules;n2651521][, Puring, MOI-matching, whatever, WITHOUT changing the shafts, grips, lies, etc. and then have them record their handicaps again. If they did this for say 2 months before and then 2 months after, I am willing to bet there will be little difference. I think a lot of the supposed excitement of aligning shafts and weighting stuff to within +/- 1 CPM and what not is due in large part to newer clubs, changed shafts/lies rather than the orientation and tightening of tolerances. Be honest, and I am absolute not trying to be a jerk, but could you without a doubt say that you would play better if your driver CPM'd at say, 247 rather than 245?
            QUOTE]

            I have done it all and frankly the best way to lower one's handicap is by spending some quality time at the range chipping and putting.
            That will do more for your handicap than all the methods posted above including your analysis Sure you might hit more greens and fairways with a proper fit but it won't improve your scores if you can't chip and putt


            Comment


            • #21
              [QUOTE=Tintin;n2651667]
              Originally posted by Phatchrisrules View Post
              [, Puring, MOI-matching, whatever, WITHOUT changing the shafts, grips, lies, etc. and then have them record their handicaps again. If they did this for say 2 months before and then 2 months after, I am willing to bet there will be little difference. I think a lot of the supposed excitement of aligning shafts and weighting stuff to within +/- 1 CPM and what not is due in large part to newer clubs, changed shafts/lies rather than the orientation and tightening of tolerances. Be honest, and I am absolute not trying to be a jerk, but could you without a doubt say that you would play better if your driver CPM'd at say, 247 rather than 245?
              QUOTE]

              I have done it all and frankly the best way to lower one's handicap is by spending some quality time at the range chipping and putting.
              That will do more for your handicap than all the methods posted above including your analysis Sure you might hit more greens and fairways with a proper fit but it won't improve your scores if you can't chip and putt

              Just to clarify are you saying it did not make a big difference for you? And you're preaching to the guy who shoots 11-14 over with 36 putts a round....and who can't chip to save his life. Get me all fixed up and 5 handicap here I come!!! (Hopefully :P)

              Comment


              • #22
                [QUOTE=Phatchrisrules;n2651693]
                Originally posted by Tintin View Post

                Just to clarify are you saying it did not make a big difference for you? And you're preaching to the guy who shoots 11-14 over with 36 putts a round....and who can't chip to save his life. Get me all fixed up and 5 handicap here I come!!! (Hopefully :P)
                I have tried them all. Flatline frequency, TLT, Moi matching, Puring, frequency matched. single length and whatever you can think of
                It did not make any difference at all . It does not make a difference if i hit a 7 iron 160 yards or 140 yards as long as I know what I am getting with each club. Heck I could probably play better with a half set

                What made a significant difference is working on chipping and putting and working on what's between my ears



                Comment


                • #23
                  [QUOTE=Tintin;n2651667]
                  Originally posted by Phatchrisrules View Post
                  [, Puring, MOI-matching, whatever, WITHOUT changing the shafts, grips, lies, etc. and then have them record their handicaps again. If they did this for say 2 months before and then 2 months after, I am willing to bet there will be little difference. I think a lot of the supposed excitement of aligning shafts and weighting stuff to within +/- 1 CPM and what not is due in large part to newer clubs, changed shafts/lies rather than the orientation and tightening of tolerances. Be honest, and I am absolute not trying to be a jerk, but could you without a doubt say that you would play better if your driver CPM'd at say, 247 rather than 245?
                  QUOTE]

                  I have done it all and frankly the best way to lower one's handicap is by spending some quality time at the range chipping and putting.
                  That will do more for your handicap than all the methods posted above including your analysis Sure you might hit more greens and fairways with a proper fit but it won't improve your scores if you can't chip and putt

                  Unless you use the balls you play with and have a quality green to chip to, I am afraid that is a complete waste of time with range balls.
                  In the Hamilton Golf + CC Embroidered Ping Hoofer

                  Club Champion Callaway AI Smoke 11*, Aldila Ascent 40 A Flex​​
                  Srixon F45 4-wood, 17*, KuroKage 606 S
                  TXG Custom T. Made SIM Max 21* 7-wood, Accra FX 140 2.0 M2
                  TXG Custom Cobra Tech 5-hybrid, KBS TGI 75 R

                  TXG Custom PXG 0211 6-Pw, 1* up, Recoil ESX 460 R
                  PXG 0211 GW, 50*, UST Recoil Dart R
                  TXG Custom Cleveland CBX 54*, Tour Issue DG Spinner 115

                  Ping Glide 4.0, 58* TS/6, Nippon 115 S
                  Tour Velvet Midsize Grips, Custom TXG Signature Putter Grip
                  TXG Custom King Cobra Nova, 25 gram weights, KBS CT Tour Shaft

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    [QUOTE=rgk5;n2651753]
                    Originally posted by Tintin View Post

                    Unless you use the balls you play with and have a quality green to chip to, I am afraid that is a complete waste of time with range balls.
                    Quality green and same balls I play with .BTW if you skull or hit a fat chip it does not matter if you're practicing with a Pro V or a pond ball.
                    Making 10 4 footers in a row will boost your confidence 10 fold

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Great thread.

                      Moderators: Please set up a YouTube channel.

                      Phatchrisrules: record your session and post to the TGN YouTube channel.

                      Others on this board can do the same with their club, ball etc review. I wouldn't mind seeing a review from bl8d, tourIQ, tintin, jasonp. ........

                      Cheers

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by Phatchrisrules View Post

                        TeeMoney You must be a crazy high spin player!!!! I would say most people I fit are on the two opposite ends of the spectrum, either too low spin, or too high. Most of the high spin guys are easy to fix, as they are using clubs with weaker lofts, they flip at impact helping the ball in the air, and are usually using shafts that are too heavy/and or stiff so they feel like they really need to incorporate their hands into the swing. Once you go stronger loft, with a lighter shaft they tend to stop flipping because they let the club do the work and we get our launch and spin closer to the optimum. The low spin guys are easy as well, just give them something chunky. Most of the people I see just want to hit the ball straighter and don't care what it looks like. So I can give them something super fat like a GMax, XR OS, Cobra King Oversize that has a really low CG and it spikes their spin right back to normal. I swing my 6i at 85mph and I have tailored my spin to be right around 5000 RPMs due to a combination of a low-spin shaft (for me) and the loft on the head.
                        Well it is safe to safe I do put a lot of spin of the ball, but I feel like I'm fairly sane about it.

                        All kidding aside, my personal thoughts are that more spin is better up until the point it becomes detrimental. I.E. shots balloon and distance is lost.

                        Based on Trackman data the PGA tour average spin rate is is 7097 rpm and the LPGA is 6699.

                        Tour stats include: Club Speed, Attack Angle, Ball Speed, Smash Factor, Launch Angle, Spin Rate, Max Height, Land Angle and Carry.   TrackMan Average Stats Taken From The PGA TOUR   &nbsp…


                        So if the best players in the world are putting 6700 - 7100 rpm spin on the ball when they hit a 7 iron why would it be considered too high?
                        Taylormade Stealth Plus 9o Fujikura Ventus Blue 6x
                        Titleist TSR3 15o Fujikura Rombax P95x
                        Titleist TSi3 Hybrid 18 Fujikura Ventus Blue 10x
                        Titleist T200 4 Iron Hzrdus Smoke Black RDX 90x
                        Titleist T100 5-PW DG AMT White X100
                        Vokey SM8 50, 54 & 58
                        Scotty Cameron Select Newport 2

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by Phatchrisrules View Post
                          In summary, my hypothesis that the stronger the loft of an iron, the further it will go was proven false.
                          Then how do single-length-irons work ?

                          Conversely : Why have different lofts for traditional-length irons (surely the shaft length difference creates the carry distance(but then how do single-length-irons work?)

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Interesting read. The difference is trajectory and spin, rather than total distance. Im assuming that the lower traj the higher the spin. Correct. That assumption would prove your findings correct.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by Phatchrisrules View Post
                              TourIQ Harry, I didn't. I will re-do the test on Thursday on my lunch break and make sure I do everything you asked, minus CPM. We don't have a CPM machine. I am curious though, is there any hard data despite anecdotal evidence of people thinking they are playing better with fully frequency matched, MOI-matched, PURE'd etc. clubs that don't come from the purveyors of these fitting methods? I have two clubs that have been built by Modern Golf back when they PURE'd everything...and I can't really say for certain if I hit them any better than anything else I have owned that was stock. I would like to see a test where they have a group of handicappers (from 20 down to +1) with verified, recorded handicaps hit their current clubs as is, then rip them apart, blueprint them and set them up as best as possible with Frequency matching, Puring, MOI-matching, whatever, WITHOUT changing the shafts, grips, lies, etc. and then have them record their handicaps again. If they did this for say 2 months before and then 2 months after, I am willing to bet there will be little difference. I think a lot of the supposed excitement of aligning shafts and weighting stuff to within +/- 1 CPM and what not is due in large part to newer clubs, changed shafts/lies rather than the orientation and tightening of tolerances. Be honest, and I am absolute not trying to be a jerk, but could you without a doubt say that you would play better if your driver CPM'd at say, 247 rather than 245?
                              Chris no disrespect taken, you are not eating beef-jerky, just advancing dialogue and discussion. When discussing the merits of blueprinting to very tight tolerances, with a ‘'∆ Variance'’ approaching ZERO across a fully matched set, then it’s best not to throw the two odd-ball clubs into the equation to start, the ones at the outer extremes of the gamer bag (the driver and the putter).

                              I would not advocate the following, since the test methodology is less than ideal, and other Noise Factors + Uncontrollable Variables would creep in the equation, and make the collected data very cloudy;
                              • a group of handicappers (from 20 down to +1);
                              • handicap reduction as the Output/Result Variable; and
                              • 2 months before and then 2 months after.
                              I’'ve thought about what you describe nearly 18 years ago, but never had the resources to design and execute the test plan, to get the hard data to prove this theorem. What I really lacked at the time was a valid measurement system (ie, Trackman), so the data collection would have been a very laborious task. I had the + handicap test pilot in FB, by no way to collect the data efficiently. Building the test clubs to varying degree of precision would have been the easy part. I still have the 40 Golfsmith Tour Cavity 5-iron heads (20 in LH and 20 in RH in a box), by which to study what you proposed. This was your basic 431 Stainless 5-iron head used by a PGA tour player at the time. It could have formed the basis of such a study you envisioned.

                              From 1999 to 2001, Duane (forgedblade), Dwight, and I conduction three pretty extensive Design of Experiments (DOE) tests, and in all cases we found an optimization strategy which reduced % Error in shotmaking. This is the critical hard data, but none of our original research was entered into the public domain.

                              The Name Brands with their billion $’s of sales is not interested in such a study, since it would prove once and for all, that the quality of the build correlates to a reduction in ‘Club % Error’, which correlates to a reduction in Stroke Average. They would rather spout rhetoric that their Quality is the highest in the industry, meanwhile its approaching Cut and Glue mass production levels, even when ordered custom from their prestigious tour department.

                              To my way of thinking, the club you hit to the green is usually an iron or a wedge. They are your scoring clubs, and must be matched to work as a system. Blueprinting is the high yield strategy to ensure the scoring clubs are matched.

                              I’'ve talked to National and World Champions in other sports like rifle/pistol shooting, archery, and darts, and they are light years ahead of understanding the Concept of Variation, and seek consistency in the build of their tools, in an effort to dominate their chosen sport. Golfers even tour players do not connect the dots, and therefore leave a lot on the table never to be realized, but they pride themselves in grinding it out each week ...… work Harder not Smarter.

                              If we pooled 100 golfers of varying handicap levels, and asked them to play darts for an opportunity to win $10K that evening (and winner take all), and they had to select a set of 3 darts. Would even 1 of the 100 pick a single set of 3 darts which had different total weight, different length, difference balance point, different point dia., different grip knurling, etc.? I think we all know the answer, but it’s ok if our golf gear is ill-fitted and build out-of-specification to wide tolerances.

                              The main difference between darts and golf is the size of the playing field, 1 square foot vs. 100 acres, but they both demand absolute precision to excel, since each is a Game of Consistency. In golf, often a foot makes the difference between a birdie vs. a bogie. The golf industry (to include the retailers) have done a great job in duping the consumer for decades, and the consumer is none the wiser.
                              Last edited by TourIQ; Jul 5, 2017, 12:17 AM.
                              Adams XTD Ti 12.5* / TightLies 2 Ti / Super 9031 Tour / Ping WRX i20 Irons
                              Ping WRX Tour Gorge / YES Natalie Putter B-CG / Leupold GX-4 Rangefinder
                              Personal Best: 79, hoping for another sub 80 round before the Twilight Zone

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Chris, as your GC2 does not measure club speed, only calculates it from a static smash factor, club speed really shouldn't be stated as it isn't known. You could be swinging one club 3-4 mph faster than another yet producing the same ball speed and never know it.

                                Also, you don't mention landing angle. And iron that flies 150 and stops in 2 yards is very different than one that flies 150 and stops in 10 yards. Carry distance isn't the only/main factor here. WRX happened to have an article on this last week:
                                In the chart below, you can see the average results for an iron fitting I did with one of my members at Biltmore Forest CC recently. Based on these three data points presented, which iron would you choose? Most golfers go with club No. 2. The club head speed is faster, the carry is the longest, […]


                                Comment

                                Collapse

                                Latest TGN Reviews


                                Collapse

                                PGA Leaderboard


                                Collapse

                                Today's Birthdays


                                Working...
                                X