Planning 1/4" Length Progression Build

ninjabninjab Posts: 120 ✭✭
Planning a Maltby TS1 or TS2 build with 1/4" progression. I tried single length and kinda liked it but never got used to the long wedges and the long irons always felt a little too short. Went back to 3/8" progression and the long irons were just too long for my consistency level. [background=transparent]My iron swing speed is ~80mph. 95mph driver ss. [/background]
  1. D 10.5* 45.25" D3
  2. 3W 15* 43" D5
  3. 5W 19* 41" D7
  4. DI 19.5* 38" D2.5
  5. 4I 23.5* 37.75" D2.75
  6. 6I 28* 37.5" D3 ->2.25" tip trim
  7. 7I 32* 37.25" D3.25
  8. 8I 36* 37" D3.5
  9. 9I 40.5* 36.75" D3.75
  10. P 45* 36.5" D4
  11. G 49.5* 36.25" D4.25
  12. S 54* 36" D4.5
  13. L 58.5* 35.75" D5
  14. P


DI is a cobra single length utility black re-shafted to 38" which worked out almost exactly were I wanted it's swing weight with minimal added weight. With the length difference there does seem to be a 15-20 yard gap from the 5W at the same loft.

[background=transparent]Currently have a 6I built of TS1/TS2 and testing them, leaning towards TS1 so far. So 4I, 7-GW,SW are not built yet. 6iron has 10gm tip weight and still had to load up with some lead tape. [/background]

[background=transparent]Planning on tip trimming the 7iron stock at 2.5", (recoil 660 F3 regular flex) and going up and down 1/4" tipping instead of the standard 1/2" increments (eg 2.25" for 6 iron, 2.75" for 8 iron). [/background]

[background=transparent]Swing weighting is progressive but slightly less progressive than full MOI matching (1SW/inch instead of 1.33). This was based on trial and error testing with my DBM 7iron and GW until they were at ideal swing weights for me and extrapolating the rest of the SW progression. [/background]



The 7iron specs match a DBM 7iron that I have and seems to fit perfectly (same shaft, sw, and length). Lob wedge I am currently playing at these specs already (shaft is nippon 950gh in just the lob). [background=transparent] [/background]



[background=transparent]Any criticism of this build? I wasn't sure on modifying the tip trim amounts, but this seemed like a logical solution. I've also skipped the 5iron and planned for a slight amount of bending of the irons for 4-4.5* gaps, I've found the long irons with gaps of 3* or less just don't give me appropriate distance gaps. [/background]

[background=transparent]Also what 54 wedge would someone recommend to fit in with the TS1 for mainly full shots (tend to use 58 or GW for most short game shots). [/background]

Comments

  • ryborybo Members Posts: 2,215 ✭✭
    Well thought out and looks to be a solid build!





    Please follow up on how things turn out, and also be prepared to tweak some specs as things on paper do not always work out in actual play.
  • wkuo3wkuo3 RELEASE Members Posts: 3,800 ✭✭
    edited Dec 10, 2018 #3
    Sometimes, if you have the resources, try not to be too rigid on the numbers. Play around with the equipment to see if the numbers from the spread sheet really is the best for your game.

    Let us know how you like the set after one full season of keeping it in the bag .





    I once played with a golf club fitter and his bag is not exactly the standard gap for loft and length with the iron set.

    His 9 iron length was closer to the PW length ( 3 degrees stronger then the std 9 iron loft ), throughout the set there was no std 1/2" or 3/8" gap between the irons.

    I asked him why was his set look so different ?

    He said, the result was what he was after, not just to make the set look conforming to the industry measure. He was not going after the industry 10 yards gap between the irons, more like 13-15 yards between the iron.

    What a golfer, he must have been a scratch index at the time. He also showed us a trick shot on a long par 4, Put a towel down on the ground and teed of with both his knees on the towel and flew the golf ball over all of ours.

    He was over the conventional wisdom, not a lot of us would venture into where he was because we have to understand the result really is the goal.
  • ninjabninjab Posts: 120 ✭✭

    Finally got around to finishing this build, trying them out and liking them so far. Gaps are pretty good, 10-15yrds, ended up using the 5iron instead of 4iron and bent it strong 25->23.5 (decided to use the 5 because it weighs more and would need less lead tape).

    I used a maximum of 10gm tungsten tip weights in the Recoil 660 F3 R. So I did have to add lead tape to the 5/6/7/8 irons. I did go with 1/4" tip trim progression to compensate for the 1/4" length progression.

    With the 1/4" progression the 5 iron and LW are only 2" different in length, the 5/6 irons are much more playable for me at this length and the wedges are very comfortable. So far I like this length progression better than 1/2, 3/8, and single length.

  • ninjabninjab Posts: 120 ✭✭

    quick 9 with the walking bag, enjoying the shorter long irons.

  • ninjabninjab Posts: 120 ✭✭
    edited Apr 16, 2019 7:39pm #6

    8iron
    edit: can't get upload feature to work now...

  • cardoustiecardoustie haha, we don't play for 5's Members Posts: 11,606 ✭✭

    well I go 1" over in PW and then increase 1/4" to 9 iron and then 3/8" per club down to 5 iron. LOVE IT
    good work

    Ping G400 LST 11* Mitsu TI BB Matte 53x
    Callaway GBB 3w 14* Mitsu Blueboard 63x
    Ping G400 5w 17* Fubuki Tour 73x
    Callaway V-series Hwood Fuji TS 8.2s
    Callaway Apex 4h 23* Fujikura 904HBs
    Ping Rapture 5-PW Aldila NV MLTi Pro105x
    Ping iWedge 50* Aldila NV 105x
    Ping Glide SS 53* & ES 59* Wrx SF125s
    Piretti Matera Elite (torched)
  • Snowman9000Snowman9000 Members Posts: 1,062 ✭✭

    My main set for the past few years has been a 1/4" iron set. I see no downsides to it. And I find it easier to play than a conventional set.

    Driver 915 D2
    5W Wilson Fybrid
    4h, 5h Adams Idea Tech 2015
    5-AW Snake Eyes Viper MS, graphite
    58º Callaway MD2 Forged S grind
    Putter TM Rossa Daytona 6
  • Howard JonesHoward Jones Members Posts: 8,467 ✭✭
    edited Apr 17, 2019 12:37am #9

    im very late to this party, and its nice to see when someone make it on their own, but there is lots of other readers who might be thinking about the same or similar, but might be insecure about what options we got when we start from a "standard set", so ive made a small Excel VBA app where we move it all into the METRIC system who gives us TONS of options, not only 3/8" or 2/8", but ANY number between 12.7 mm (4/8") and down, like 8.0 mm who is close to 5/16 or in the middle of 3/8" and 2/8"... (8.0 or 5/16 needs a little less weight added on the longest clubs vs 2/8")

    The app uses the #8 iron as "stating point", so my suggestion is, if you play "standard play length", keep the #8 iron as it is, and use what ever progression you like both ways (yes into wedges too), and if you play "plus 0.5", keep the #8 like it is at plus 0.5" and the what ever progression you want both ways.

    The APP does ALL the numbers for you, so you get to see how many grams you need to replace on each head depending on what values you want (SW), and you can also choose resistance progression, not only classic flat SW matched or progressive to "poor mans MOI match", but any number in-between (pull down menus), so if you are of those who means the point of rotation is 4 inch below the butt, the app handles that to.

    Link to the tread its in, including a small "user manual"....
    https://forums.golfwrx.com/discussion/1751610/metric-irons-excel-vba-app/p1

  • ninjabninjab Posts: 120 ✭✭

    @Howard Jones said:
    im very late to this party, and its nice to see when someone make it on their own, but there is lots of other readers who might be thinking about the same or similar, but might be insecure about what options we got when we start from a "standard set", so ive made a small Excel VBA app where we move it all into the METRIC system who gives us TONS of options, not only 3/8" or 2/8", but ANY number between 12.7 mm (4/8") and down, like 8.0 mm who is close to 5/16 or in the middle of 3/8" and 2/8"... (8.0 or 5/16 needs a little less weight added on the longest clubs vs 2/8")

    Link to the tread its in, including a small "user manual"....
    https://forums.golfwrx.com/discussion/1751610/metric-irons-excel-vba-app/p1

    That's a great tool for working out these custom progression sets!

    I chose 1/4" by chance. I took the 58* Wedge shaft length I like then took the longest iron shaft length I felt I could reliably hit and made these lengths the top and bottom. Divided the difference by the number of clubs I wanted and it came out exactly 1/4". My SW progression I decided similarly, took my ideal 7iron SW and my Ideal 58* wedge SW and created the SW progression based on those 2 clubs. MOI matching should be about 0.33 SW/club and I am at 0.25 SW/club, so slightly less progression than an MOI matched set.

    -Using that APP anyone can choose their longest iron length and shortest wedge length and create a custom length and SW progression fairly easily.

  • ninjabninjab Posts: 120 ✭✭
    edited Apr 17, 2019 2:32am #11

    My build did require 10gm tip weights on many of the irons and some additional lead tape. Fortunately, I did not have to shave/drill off any metal. My SW are on the heavier side though, as I am playing midsize grips (they would be about 2 SW higher with standard grips).

    This is my first full iron set to build myself, very happy with it so far!

  • Howard JonesHoward Jones Members Posts: 8,467 ✭✭
    edited Apr 17, 2019 3:07am #12

    @ninjab said:

    @Howard Jones said:
    im very late to this party, and its nice to see when someone make it on their own, but there is lots of other readers who might be thinking about the same or similar, but might be insecure about what options we got when we start from a "standard set", so ive made a small Excel VBA app where we move it all into the METRIC system who gives us TONS of options, not only 3/8" or 2/8", but ANY number between 12.7 mm (4/8") and down, like 8.0 mm who is close to 5/16 or in the middle of 3/8" and 2/8"... (8.0 or 5/16 needs a little less weight added on the longest clubs vs 2/8")

    Link to the tread its in, including a small "user manual"....
    https://forums.golfwrx.com/discussion/1751610/metric-irons-excel-vba-app/p1

    That's a great tool for working out these custom progression sets!

    I chose 1/4" by chance. I took the 58* Wedge shaft length I like then took the longest iron shaft length I felt I could reliably hit and made these lengths the top and bottom. Divided the difference by the number of clubs I wanted and it came out exactly 1/4". My SW progression I decided similarly, took my ideal 7iron SW and my Ideal 58* wedge SW and created the SW progression based on those 2 clubs. MOI matching should be about 0.33 SW/club and I am at 0.25 SW/club, so slightly less progression than an MOI matched set.

    -Using that APP anyone can choose their longest iron length and shortest wedge length and create a custom length and SW progression fairly easily.

    The way you did it, is the way it should be done, we need to judge the longest and the shortest in the set, just like you did, both for length, total wgt and (SW or MOI), so that CANT go wrong, its way better than most places that offer fitting can offer. Its also interesting to see all those players who ends up with a slightly different Resistance slope than flat MOI or standard FLAT SW, and thats why i built in all those options in between those 2 in the app. .....its down in those small details we need to go to make it all as it should be.

    PS! a little side note
    Actual resistance in your set is slightly higher as you go longer, we must judge the values as 2 different values, where 1.33 SWP pr inch = FLAT ACTUAL RESISTANCE.

    For each 0.10 we go lower on that value, clubs gets slightly higher resistance as they go longer, all the way UP to flat SW value where the actual resistance in the #3 iron is quite a bit larger than when the scale show 1.33 SWP pr inch.

    The more the player is grooved into playing SW matched clubs, the more likely it is that some actual resistance as we go longer will fit him better than FLAT MOI.
    Those players dont swing the #3 iron and their #9 the same way, its "in their body" to give the longest clubs some more power, and thats why the extra resistance in those clubs is good for them.

  • ninjabninjab Posts: 120 ✭✭

    Thanks for the comments, I've read alot of your prior fitting posts before creating this build.

    @Howard Jones said:
    The more the player is grooved into playing SW matched clubs, the more likely it is that some actual resistance as we go longer will fit him better than FLAT MOI.
    Those players dont swing the #3 iron and their #9 the same way, its "in their body" to give the longest clubs some more power, and thats why the extra resistance in those clubs is good for them.

    First time I've seen this explanation for why MOI matching isn't always the best fit. Usually I hear that some people are just too used to SW matched sets to get used to MOI sets. It really makes sense that many players swing the long irons more aggresively, so a higher MOI to tame that aggression fits better.

  • Howard JonesHoward Jones Members Posts: 8,467 ✭✭
    edited Apr 17, 2019 6:49am #14

    @ninjab said:
    Thanks for the comments, I've read alot of your prior fitting posts before creating this build.

    @Howard Jones said:
    The more the player is grooved into playing SW matched clubs, the more likely it is that some actual resistance as we go longer will fit him better than FLAT MOI.
    Those players dont swing the #3 iron and their #9 the same way, its "in their body" to give the longest clubs some more power, and thats why the extra resistance in those clubs is good for them.

    First time I've seen this explanation for why MOI matching isn't always the best fit. Usually I hear that some people are just too used to SW matched sets to get used to MOI sets. It really makes sense that many players swing the long irons more aggresively, so a higher MOI to tame that aggression fits better.

    You will find it in my DIY driver tune up from 2013, not explained this way, but as the general guideline when we make a club fitting. Its not "news" that we use added head weight for aggressive swing types, and added head weight is added MOI or resistance during both transition and release of the club.

    I look at the Golf swing like its a dance of some sort, and the club is the players dancing partner. To be able to do that dance wee need a partner of a certain weight and resistance so we dont loose our balance or timing.

    Im not sure, nobody is, but this might be the reason they found the 14" fulcrum SW scale to work good, simply because they played the clubs with more power the longer they was. They new about MOI back then too, but it was also very complicated since they did not have any computer-help to do the math, but the resistance slope itself might have been intentional, the history around the Lorry Scale dont tell much about that. What we do know is that the 14" scale was not the only one, there was 12" as one example, but in the end, Lorry Adams 14" scale was the one they all used, but nobody knows why it became that one who "won that race".

    But...since they DID try other options like the 12" who give a little less actual resistance progression, it opens for the idea that they did NOT want a flat MOi, even if we like to think so when we advocate the MOI system as "better" than the SW system.

    When we look at a whole bag matched to the same player using the MOI system, we will for most of them see a slope staring from the irons as the group of clubs with the lowest MOI value, then the hybrids a little higher, woods even higher and the driver as the club with the highest actual MOI value. This is strictly personal, so Iron to Driver could be anything from 50 to 200 MOI points. We also add a little to the wedges, but for them its the stabilizing factor on partials where the weight help us to keep the club on line, and we get a clearer feedback of where the head is at all stages of the swing who is very important for the timing.

    This MOI progression from irons to driver indicates the same, we use more power "by nature" the longer we want to move the ball, so players who goes from flat SW to flat MOI often have a adjustment time until they moderate use of power in the longer end, then they get the "ahaaaa...just swing them all the same, thats why we made them to the same MOI value.

Sign In or Register to comment.