***ATTENTION***IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT***ATTENTION***IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT***ATTENTION

Last year, in an effort to improve the capability of our forums, we switched to new software. We expected tremendous scalability and rapid customization that would significantly improve each Member's experience across multiple devices and integrate flawlessly with social media platforms.

Unfortunately, after a significant capital expense, we have decided that the length of time and the additional cost to reach our goals make this enterprise untenable.

Thus, we have made the difficult decision to transition the forums to our original software platform. We’re excited that, in the nearly two years since we began the process of our most recent switch, our original platform has been upgraded significantly, and we are confident that the reversion will not only provide the stability that we desperately needed prior to our last move but will also return to the Membership the high level of customization that made our online community so great. We have also added technical resources to the GolfWRX staff that will allow us to build custom modules and modifications that we are confident will take the forums to the next level.

We remain the world's largest online golf community, and we still hold true to our core values and mission statement as written in 2005. Bearing both of those elements in mind, being the best and offering our Members a platform that is world-class are both requirements, not options, and it is that spirit that has motivated this decision.

So, please pardon our mess over the next five days or so while we transition the forums.

A few important notes: Current content will be accessible during that time, but the forums will be READ ONLY, and you will not be able to start new threads or reply to posts. Personal Messaging is enabled but PMs sent/received from the time the board was frozen will not carry over. We know this is inconvenient, and we apologize, and we greatly appreciate GolfWRXers bearing with us through the transition.

We are very excited about starting this next chapter for GolfWRX and getting back to the high-quality Member experience we all expect as soon as possible.

Kevin Na vs WRX

11718192022
23

Comments

  • ThinkingPlusThinkingPlus South TexasClubWRX  2656WRX Points: 1,668Handicap: +2.2Posts: 2,656 ClubWRX
    Joined:  #632

    Droop is not a clubhead performance characteristic. A steel brick of the same weight on the end of the shaft will deflect the same as the clubhead. Thus, nothing specific about clubhead design changes droop. The shaft torsional and longitudinal stiffness slightly affects droop. The shaft impacts the ball speed coming off the clubface slightly per the paper @mahonie posted earlier in this thread for drivers (primarily poor, well off center hits). I speculated that something similar probably occurs with irons, although the magnitude of the effect is likely even less due to the smaller face area and dramatically different mass distribution.

    Posted:
    Driver: Callaway GBB Epic 8° w/Project X HZRDUS T800 65 gm 6.0 flex
    3W: Callaway Rogue w/Project X Evenflow 5.5 Graphite R-flex
    Hybrids: Callaway Apex 3h, 4h w/MR Kuro Kage 80HY S-flex
    Irons: Maltby TS-1 5i-GW w/KBS Tour R-flex
    Sand Wedge: Jim Kronus JK-1 Custom Grind 54/06 w/DG S200
    Lob Wedge: Titleist Vokey SM6 58/04 L Grind w/TT Wedge Flex
    Putter: Scotty Cameron Futura X w/Super Stroke Claw 1.0
    Ball: Titleist Pro V1X in yellow
  • GolfWRXGolfWRX Warning Points: 0  11 Members Posts: 11 #ad
    Joined:  ...

    Advertisement
  • Red4282Red4282 Members  1076WRX Points: 436Handicap: +0.2Posts: 1,076 Platinum Tees
    Joined:  edited May 24, 2020 4:43pm #633

    absolutely false. Blade length, cg location (further from shaft) and lie angle can absolutely increase toe droop. Shaft and clubhead design can both affect toe droop.

    Posted:
  • ThinkingPlusThinkingPlus South TexasClubWRX  2656WRX Points: 1,668Handicap: +2.2Posts: 2,656 ClubWRX
    Joined:  #634

    Apparently we will have to agree to disagree on this one.

    Posted:
    Driver: Callaway GBB Epic 8° w/Project X HZRDUS T800 65 gm 6.0 flex
    3W: Callaway Rogue w/Project X Evenflow 5.5 Graphite R-flex
    Hybrids: Callaway Apex 3h, 4h w/MR Kuro Kage 80HY S-flex
    Irons: Maltby TS-1 5i-GW w/KBS Tour R-flex
    Sand Wedge: Jim Kronus JK-1 Custom Grind 54/06 w/DG S200
    Lob Wedge: Titleist Vokey SM6 58/04 L Grind w/TT Wedge Flex
    Putter: Scotty Cameron Futura X w/Super Stroke Claw 1.0
    Ball: Titleist Pro V1X in yellow
  • Red4282Red4282 Members  1076WRX Points: 436Handicap: +0.2Posts: 1,076 Platinum Tees
    Joined:  #635

    Mmmk, but physics dont lie.

    When a golfer commences their down swing and the club head accelerates towards the ball, the effect of centrifugal force kicks in and the centre of gravity of the club head tries to align itself with the shaft, this causes the shaft to flex and bow, flattening the lie angle between 0.5 or 2deg's depending on the following :




    1. The swing speed of the golfer


    2. The length and flex of the shaft (particularly the tip flex)


    3. Club head length (the position of its centre of gravity)”

    And from Tom Wishon, note the part in bold:





    Wishon 




    Over the past 2 yrs we have done a LOT of work in this area of understanding exactly HOW the shaft bends and under what conditions for each golfer. I really do believe that we have a good level of understanding about this to be able to explain and predict shaft performance.




    The droop bending of the shaft is caused initially by the force of the transition move the golfer makes between the end of the backswing and the beginning of the downswing. When the club is at the top of the backswing, the golfer has rotated the club and shaft about 90 degrees open from the position the club was in at the address position. This means that the 12 o'clock/6 o'clock plane of the shaft is pretty much lined up so that plane is straight up/down with respect to the ground. Thus when the golfer starts the club down, the weight of the head presents resistance to this reversed movement of the club to start the downswing.




    That causes the shaft to bend in a "toe up" position initially. The amount of bending from the transition is determined by three things - 1) the transition force of the golfer 2) the overall stiffness of the shaft compared to the golfer's transition force, 3) the weight of the head.




    As the club now starts down toward the ball, the golfer has to rotate the club back around as he turns his body back toward the target. In a good golf swing as you know, the golfer is able to keep accelerating the club and retain the angle between the arms and the shaft (wrist-hinge angle). If this happens, the golfer is now applying a good amount of radial acceleration (AKA tangential acceleration) all through the downswing and this keeps a bending force on the shaft.




    As the club gets closer to impact, there comes a time when the golfer has to unhinge the wrist-hinge angle to straighten out the club so it can hit the ball. when this release happens, now you have centrifugal force being applied to the club in addition to the radial acceleration. Now also remember, during this time in the downswing, the club has been rotated back around toward being square at impact. Thus if the golfer is still applying a good deal of radial acceleration to the club when they release the wrist-hinge and also start applying the centrifugal force, these forces now act on the weight of the head to now cause bending of the shaft in a droop manner (toe down bending). This happens because the head reacts to the force by trying to get its CG in line with the axis of the shaft, which thus causes the toe down bending just prior to impact.




    And again, the amount of droop is determined by 1) amount of radial acceleration and centrifugal force applied by the golfer, 2) stiffness design of the shaft in relation to those forces, 3) weight of the head, 4) distance that the CG of the head is away from the centerline of the shaft.

    Posted:
  • ThinkingPlusThinkingPlus South TexasClubWRX  2656WRX Points: 1,668Handicap: +2.2Posts: 2,656 ClubWRX
    Joined:  #636

    I would be the last person on this site to dispute the physics. However, the real issue is how much difference in droop would you find between any two iron head designs you wish to choose (same loft/number). Given the minimal differences in mass and CG location, I don't believe there will be a significant difference in droop between two different clubhead designs. Once again I would agree to disagree.

    Posted:
    Driver: Callaway GBB Epic 8° w/Project X HZRDUS T800 65 gm 6.0 flex
    3W: Callaway Rogue w/Project X Evenflow 5.5 Graphite R-flex
    Hybrids: Callaway Apex 3h, 4h w/MR Kuro Kage 80HY S-flex
    Irons: Maltby TS-1 5i-GW w/KBS Tour R-flex
    Sand Wedge: Jim Kronus JK-1 Custom Grind 54/06 w/DG S200
    Lob Wedge: Titleist Vokey SM6 58/04 L Grind w/TT Wedge Flex
    Putter: Scotty Cameron Futura X w/Super Stroke Claw 1.0
    Ball: Titleist Pro V1X in yellow
  • Red4282Red4282 Members  1076WRX Points: 436Handicap: +0.2Posts: 1,076 Platinum Tees
    Joined:  #637

    one more physics titbit which this relates to:


    The magnitude of the torque depends on:

    Radius r: Increasing the radius increases the torque. Angle between the force and lever arm θ: Directing a force perpendicular to the lever arm increases the torque.

    therefor the further away the cg (increased radius) the more torque it creates.

    So now your saying its so small, its insignificant. But significant enough for wishon to mention it. i cant back it up with proof but id say its almost as important as the torque handling of the shaft. Thats why you have to marry the two together.

    heres an interesting video in the subject:

    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=G6a1Sr6gb98&t=631s

    When the lie angle is bent so the cg got further away from the shaft, the toe droop increased.

    Posted:
  • GolfWRXGolfWRX Warning Points: 0  11 Members Posts: 11 #ad
    Joined:  ...

    Advertisement
  • clinkinfoclinkinfo Members  941WRX Points: 230Posts: 941 Golden Tee
    Joined:  #638

    Here’s the fundamental question, which helps you score better, accuracy or distance? This test shows, cavity backs give more distance, blades give more accuracy:


    https://pluggedingolf.com/are-distance-irons-longer-than-blades-golf-myths-unplugged/

    Posted:
  • clinkinfoclinkinfo Members  941WRX Points: 230Posts: 941 Golden Tee
    Joined:  edited May 26, 2020 1:31am #639

    You guys have gotten into the insignificant/irrelevant weeds. You can assume for the sake of the discussion, shafts are identical. This is a club head design discussion, not a shaft discussion. Come back to the fundamental question above. Does more distance or more accuracy improve your score? That’s the discussion in a nutshell. And it’s probably a complicated answer. For a high handicap golfer who isn’t accurate or long at all, some extra distance probably has a better chance of improving their score. A low handicap golfer who hits it far already will score better with more accurate club heads. That’s Probably why you see so many pros in blades disagreeing with Na.


    And I’ve lived on both sides of this argument. I once played my best golf playing blades, but it was also when I played the most. So at the time, the accuracy and shotmaking was definitely more important and had a greater impact on my ability to score. I slowly was enticed over to the cavity back side of the world, and I don’t really play as well if I’m being honest. Yes, I can hit it further, and maybe I get forgiven a touch more on a bad shot (but I’m honestly not even sure), but for a better golfer a “bad” shot is normally a little to the toe, or a little to the heel. For a higher handicap golfer that “bad” shot could be all the way to the edge of the face, just barely on the face. Those are 2 very different misses and also explain part of why this discussion cannot be so easily generalized. The ability of the player probably has a big impact on which element (distance, or accuracy) is a more important benefit in scoring. But I’m slowly starting to head back to the blade side of the golf world because I never really saw an “improvement” in scoring with the increased “forgiveness/distance”. Said even stronger, I’m not even sure how much more forgiveness I’m really getting in the cavity back, since I’m not generally missing the center by a ton. And in the end, I already hit it far enough. So shaping and shot control seems to have a bigger impact on my score than more distance. So I think I’m swinging back over to the new crossfield argument that blades are actually a better scoring tool.

    Posted:
  • PepperturboPepperturbo Midwest and SouthwestMembers  16996WRX Points: 1,082Handicap: 4-5Posts: 16,996 Titanium Tees
    Joined:  #640

    @dekez On Golfwrx anything can be argued, whether the argument has merit is another discussion.

    IMO - Pro's, in general, want all the help they can get to make cuts which also promotes equipment; like Na. If they don't make money and get on camera, it eventually leads to concerned sponsors saying do better or else we rethink the contract.

    Interesting how many pros play blades and appear to be doing fine with them, yet they tend not to discuss their irons much. Doing so doesn't sell core product lines where the margins are. From what I see OEM's are changing how they market and to whom. Titleist seldom promoted 714CB or 716CBs or similar, and nothing has been said about TM-TW irons. Today, 620CBs and MBs are getting air time. And some OEM's that never bothered with blades, like Tour Edge, are bringing blades to market. Me thinks that segment of golfers is growing contrary to what's said on Golfwrx db.

    Posted:
    Titleist TS2 9.5, Ventus 5 "S"
    Titleist TS2 16.5*, Ventus 7 "S"
    Titleist 718 T-MB 17* 2i, Steelfiber i95cw "S"
    Titleist 620 3i i95cw "S"
    Titleist 620 4i-PW, Steelfiber i110 "S"
    SM6 F-52/8, Steelfiber i125 "S"
    SM6 M-58/8, DG-S200
    SC California Monterey
    ProV1 & AVX





  • dekezdekez Dr. Strangelove Members  485WRX Points: 91Posts: 485 Greens
    Joined:  #641


    You bring up some interesting points. I don't have a firm opinion on the matter. I'm neither a blade nor a cavity back guy. I just wouldn't have picked that stat to argue that everyone should be playing blades. The top 20 players in the entire world don't need much help. The guy 120th on the money list probably needs a little more. The 1,000th, a little more than that. Maybe those stats would have been better. Anyway, that was just my reaction. You countered that perhaps they ARE getting more help by playing blades as evidenced by how well they are playing. I've not thought of it that way... which is the entire point of these forums.

    I think the marketing is about establishing brand credibility via exposure on the tour rather than promoting specific iron heads. There is absolutely nothing that my game has in common with a professional golfer. So what irons they play couldn't possibly matter. But the average Joe probably takes some comfort in getting a brand that they see the players using as opposed to a Kmart branded club.

    Posted:
    Ping G410 Plus driver
    Cobra F8 and F6 Baffler woods
    Callaway XR hybrids
    PXG 0211 irons 
    Ping Glide 2.0 Stealth 54/14 and Zing Lob wedges
    Ping Sigma G Craz-E putter
  • 1Mordrid11Mordrid1 Members  1016WRX Points: 398Posts: 1,016 Platinum Tees
    Joined:  #642

    He is correct that the effect would be minimal or insignificant in a properly fitted club. If "toe droop" was that significant then everyone would be all over the place on a strike board. I can take a regular flex and a stiff flex shaft that are to my "static" fitting specs(loft and lie), and the strikes on the tape or strike board will be the same. If toe droop was that significant between shaft flexes we would all see significantly different strike patterns on a strike board during fittings when switching out shafts.

    IMO fitters who put significant weight into "toe droop" are generally the ones that are trying to upsell some form of "puring".

    Posted:
  • GolfWRXGolfWRX Warning Points: 0  11 Members Posts: 11 #ad
    Joined:  ...

    Advertisement
  • Red4282Red4282 Members  1076WRX Points: 436Handicap: +0.2Posts: 1,076 Platinum Tees
    Joined:  #643

    Well you certainly make an argument for shafts having a very small role in toe droop. Keep in mind that if you get 1 or 2 degrees of toe droop, thats essentially the same as having irons bent 1-2 degrees flat, and im pretty sure that alot of people would say thats significant. I think it definitely is something that needs to be considered with big sgi irons (large blade lengths) with weaker shafts. That combo could have a decent amount of droop, and a fitter should bend irons upright to counter it. Im not a fitter and i have no proof of any if this, but just purely speaking on a physics standpoint. Could be just incidental but Txg had shown in that video that simply bending flat increased droop.

    Posted:
  • braincramp52braincramp52 Freeport, IllinoisMembers  6632WRX Points: 1,923Handicap: 8Posts: 6,632 Titanium Tees
    Joined:  #644

    This thread makes me feel like there's going to be a test at the end.

    Posted:
    Titleist TS2
    Titleist 917 F2 3 wood
    Titleist 818 H2 19 Hybrid
    Titleist 816 H2 23 Hybrid
    Wilson Staff MB's 6-PW
    Ping Glide 3.0 50*
    TM ATV grind 56
    KZG Forged 60 LW
    Bettenardi Studio Stock #3 F.I.T.
    Snell MTB 


    Just because you're offended doesn't mean you're right
  • Nard_SNard_S Members  3954WRX Points: 907Handicap: 9Posts: 3,954 Titanium Tees
    Joined:  #645

    My GIR average hovered around 7-8 for several years. Last year it was over 10. What changed? Not the iron type, but the shaft, not just the profile but more importantly the weight class. Isolating shaft or head to determine their "value" is near pointless. They work together, even on an Iron Byron. If engineers were to program the acceleration on one that does not match design intent of shaft the numbers will be of little use. A guy like Crossfiled would hit a blade better but a duffer might get completely contradictory numbers from same "test", In large part this is because an MB is tuned a certain way and a SGI is tuned another. Faldo reviewed 2017 Mizuno lineup long with older MS11, all with same exact shaft specs. The big dividing line came down to the spin to launch ratio. How that ratio relates to player is probably the biggest difference in GI and traditional clubs. A sweet spot that's a dime or nickel is not really major factor. If one "is all over the face" even if that is marginal, you can either get a bigger hit zone via GI or you can shrink the cluster of impact with better tune in shaft weight and profile. 45 minute fittings may find that zip code, but extensive testing truly buys the house.

    Posted:
  • gretzky17gretzky17 Members  36WRX Points: 45Posts: 36 Bunkers
    Joined:  edited May 27, 2020 3:55pm #646

    Speaking as a fitter, one of the advantages we have is that we can experiment/test during the fitting. So if a player is testing a lighter/softer shaft with a toe-biased CG head, I can see how much that's affecting their dynamic lie, if its getting too flat. If the ball-flight is still repeatable and the strike is efficient, you don't necessarily need to "fix" lie angle. If it's leaking right, or there's glancing blows due to heel strikes coupled with toe-down lie, or the toe is getting stuck in the turf, then we will go upright until those variables are balanced out.

    Shaft droop and deflection are consequential measurements, but just like swingweight, you really shouldn't fit to those parameters. Like TXG says, centerness of strike is king. If we can achieve a fairly solid strike, then we focus on a consistent ball-flight, and then launch/spin optimization are the icing on top. You can't really skip any steps though. That's why devices like GCQuad still outpace GEARS in terms of fitting, at this very moment.

    Posted:
    Post edited by gretzky17 on
  • PepperturboPepperturbo Midwest and SouthwestMembers  16996WRX Points: 1,082Handicap: 4-5Posts: 16,996 Titanium Tees
    Joined:  edited May 27, 2020 5:08pm #647

    You're correct about brand credibility resulting from tour use. However, IMO, today, tour use drives discussion boards such as Golfwrx, which indirectly affects consumer buying. What's talked about here after the fact, gets communicated to others. Though none of my close buddies play blades, I am often asked about equipment because friends know little to nothing. They watch me play and know I am knowledgeable about my equipment plus trust my judgment.

    Unless stipulated in the contract, tour guys care only about making cuts, otherwise they eventually lose sponsors. Some are so successful if they miss a cut no biggy. Brand ambassadors like JT, AScott and WSimpson are known Titleist blade players and they miss cuts. JSpieth and IPoulter are known for GI player clubs and they miss cuts. The key is they can only miss so many cuts until the hammer comes down. Taylor Made has a similar but larger diverse stable. Yet, for all of them, regardless of equipment, a stroke difference makes the cut and a paycheck and helps to meet contract obligations which are surprisingly diverse.

    Reason I give little credence to what tour guys chose to play. Tour motivation IS the cut, whereas many amateurs just want to hit some fairways and find some greens, and of course insecurities are masked. I chose to play more difficult clubs because they demand my focus which helps to overcome my dyslexia. It really comes down to a persons frame of mind and how each of us tackles golf, maybe even life.

    Posted:
    Titleist TS2 9.5, Ventus 5 "S"
    Titleist TS2 16.5*, Ventus 7 "S"
    Titleist 718 T-MB 17* 2i, Steelfiber i95cw "S"
    Titleist 620 3i i95cw "S"
    Titleist 620 4i-PW, Steelfiber i110 "S"
    SM6 F-52/8, Steelfiber i125 "S"
    SM6 M-58/8, DG-S200
    SC California Monterey
    ProV1 & AVX





  • GolfWRXGolfWRX Warning Points: 0  11 Members Posts: 11 #ad
    Joined:  ...

    Advertisement
  • Sean2Sean2 Members  32920WRX Points: 3,500Posts: 32,920 Titanium Tees
    Joined:  #648

    I've never purchased a club(s), or anything else for that matter, based on what some professional uses or endorses. I play what works for me, not what works for him. And, it's not like I will play like him if I buy the same clubs he uses, lol.

    Posted:

    Treat yourself as if you were someone you are responsible for helping. Jordan Peterson

    Too much sanity may be madness and the maddest thing of all is to see life as it is, and not as it should be. Cervantes

    In golf, the human mind has much higher capabilities to screw things up than the physics has to make things better. Unknown

     

  • dekezdekez Dr. Strangelove Members  485WRX Points: 91Posts: 485 Greens
    Joined:  #649

    Despite what I previously said (a pros game and mine have no similarity at all), I will admit that it piques my interest when it comes out that a pro is playing a "hacker" club. For example, Lee Westwood playing Zing 2's for the longest time.

    Posted:
    Ping G410 Plus driver
    Cobra F8 and F6 Baffler woods
    Callaway XR hybrids
    PXG 0211 irons 
    Ping Glide 2.0 Stealth 54/14 and Zing Lob wedges
    Ping Sigma G Craz-E putter
  • Sean2Sean2 Members  32920WRX Points: 3,500Posts: 32,920 Titanium Tees
    Joined:  #650

    I agree, but for the professionals it's about how many, not what kind or how far...unlike GolfWRX, lol.

    Posted:

    Treat yourself as if you were someone you are responsible for helping. Jordan Peterson

    Too much sanity may be madness and the maddest thing of all is to see life as it is, and not as it should be. Cervantes

    In golf, the human mind has much higher capabilities to screw things up than the physics has to make things better. Unknown

     

  • chipachipa Florida/Caribbean Members  373WRX Points: 96Handicap: Dec. '20Posts: 373 Greens
    Joined:  #651

    With all due respect the deflection of the shaft is directly related to the force exerted on it. Therefore an object with a greater mass will cause the shaft to deflect more than an object with a smaller mass, all thing being equal. This is standard physics and the governing equations for a static or dynamic scenarios can be found at many physics or engineering websites.

    Posted:

    Macgregor 9.5 - F-35 16.5 - Acer XV Tour 23, 26, 33, 41, 50, 55. - Bionik 105

  • chipachipa Florida/Caribbean Members  373WRX Points: 96Handicap: Dec. '20Posts: 373 Greens
    Joined:  #652

    Regarding club droop, shaft flex during the downswing, etc and how it can affect one's swing performance imo for most people parameters like these will not affect their scoring results near as much as their swing. After all look at what Bobby Jones and the like had to work with and still could shoot under par. This not to say equipment can't help of course, I'm sure plenty of people can drop there scoring average at least 10-15 strokes with the good equipment, but that will probably only get them in the mid 80's on average.

    Posted:

    Macgregor 9.5 - F-35 16.5 - Acer XV Tour 23, 26, 33, 41, 50, 55. - Bionik 105

  • GolfWRXGolfWRX Warning Points: 0  11 Members Posts: 11 #ad
    Joined:  ...

    Advertisement
  • RichieHuntRichieHunt Members  4094WRX Points: 796Posts: 4,094 Titanium Tees
    Joined:  #653

    Long time blade player, tried cavity backs numerous times and struggled with them and just recently found CB's (Honma TW737) that work well throughout the bag. I've played a lot of different blades everything from 1963 Hogan IPT's to Ram FX Tour Grinds to Yonex EZone.


    Kevin Na really isn't off base, but some things I think he's not quite accurate on.


    Blades don't go as far as CB's. You can see this with radar data quite easily. Blades launch lower and spin more and thus don't carry as far as higher launching, lower spinning CB's.


    I tend to think that forgiveness with irons is over-inflated by many golfers. If you want to hit quality golf shots with any iron, you have to strike the ball either on the sweetspot or close to it. Most do not understand that the sweetspot on any club is roughly the size of a needle point. Instead they think the sweetspot is the size of a dime for blades and a nickel with player CB's and a quarter with GI irons. Nope...they are all the same size and it's extremely small. The difference is the MOI around the sweetspot. But if you strike a shot towards the end of the scorelines with a CB, GI or blades, it's going to be a lousy shot. The same with thin or fat shots. If you get pretty good at the game you start to grab the concept that you're not going to save strokes by making awful strikes with your clubs...you save shots by avoiding those awful strikes altogether.


    Furthermore, much of this is overblown these days as modern blades are far more forgiving. Even the 1963 Hogan IPT's I had weren't that unforgiving. Some of the other blades from the 70's that I have owned were very unforgiving on shots towards the toe, but even in that era those were not very popular clubs because they were poorly designed. These days the ridiciulous lack of forgiveness on shots even a hair out towards the toe just doesn't exist with modern blades.


    But the lack of distance is real and can hurt confidence. But that also comes at the expense of distance control. That's one of the things I found interesting in the TaylorMade documentary they made about Tiger's irons. Tiger would test irons and if he is hitting his 6-iron 192 yards he said that he didn't want one shot to go longer than 192 yards. And that he could only do that with blades. With cavity backs you run the risk of the launch and spin conditions altering too much and one might go 195 yards (according to Tiger, that was completely unacceptable for him and he's arguably the greatest iron player of all time).


    There was a study a while back that showed the same thing using mis-hits on blades vs. cb's. With blades, the direction dispersion was smaller and the distance control dispersion was better, but the shots largely missed short. With CB's the directional and distance dispersion was worse, but quite a few mis-hits went long of the target and overall the ball traveled further.


    For me, the biggest issues I have had with CB's is the following:


    1. I don't like the grinds on a lot of CB's
    2. I tend to really struggle with the 9-iron and PW's.
    3. The ball's axis will tilt harder and there tends to be more curvature than I am comfortable with.


    I have been using Honma TW737's for almost a year now. They are the first CB's I've found that have a grind that I feel comfortable with and perform well throughout the bag.


    They have a very hot face. While they don't look likeit, they perform like a player's distance iron. At times the axis tilt of the ball will tilt harder than I like, but since I hit them so much further and can hit 2-clubs less than a blade (yeah, I know the lofts are jacked), it's not entirely that bad. Even still, I get some hankering to go back to blades and I would really like to experiment with the Tiger blades from TaylorMade.


    To me, I think blades work best with high club head speed players that launch it low. They have the speed to not need help with distance and the more consistent launch conditions will prevent them from air-mailing greens.That's why I'm a little surprised Kevin is so anti-blade. He generates a good amount of speed (he hits it short because he hits so much down on the ball). I'm guessing that Kevin grew up in the era when Ping Eye 2+ was still strong or they were phasing out and going to the Ping Zing and then the Ping Zing 2 model. He may have grown up on Ping (or a similar model) and got comfortable with them and when he tried blades it was a completely new world that he didn't like.






    RH

    Posted:
  • mahoniemahonie EnglandMembers  3088WRX Points: 701Handicap: 11Posts: 3,088 Titanium Tees
    Joined:  #654

    Very good post overall.

    The only nit-pick is that “MOI around the sweetspot” is not a thing. MOI cannot be isolated to the clubhead, it applies to the whole of the club because the shaft has some impact on a club’s MOI as evidenced in previous posts. Comparing the MOI of clubheads in isolation is a fools errand. Until the OEMs start publishing the data for overall MOI of combinations of their various clubheads with various shafts, picking the right clubhead and shaft combination for your game relies on nothing more than trying as many clubhead and shaft combinations until you find one that fits your game.

    Posted:
    Callaway Big Bertha Alpha Fubuki ZT Stiff
    Callaway XR Speed 3W Project X HZRDUS T800 65 Stiff
    Wilson Staff FG Tour M3 21* Hybrid Aldila RIP Stiff
    Cobra King CB/MB Flow 4-6, 7-PW C-Taper Stiff
    Wilson Staff PMP wedges 50/54/58 KBS Hi-Rev 2.0
    Radius Classic 8
  • mahoniemahonie EnglandMembers  3088WRX Points: 701Handicap: 11Posts: 3,088 Titanium Tees
    Joined:  #655


    Posted:
    Callaway Big Bertha Alpha Fubuki ZT Stiff
    Callaway XR Speed 3W Project X HZRDUS T800 65 Stiff
    Wilson Staff FG Tour M3 21* Hybrid Aldila RIP Stiff
    Cobra King CB/MB Flow 4-6, 7-PW C-Taper Stiff
    Wilson Staff PMP wedges 50/54/58 KBS Hi-Rev 2.0
    Radius Classic 8
  • ThinkingPlusThinkingPlus South TexasClubWRX  2656WRX Points: 1,668Handicap: +2.2Posts: 2,656 ClubWRX
    Joined:  #656

    You apparently misunderstood my comment. I don't believe I ever said the mass of the clubhead did not contribute or impact the amount of droop. What I tried to say is that clubhead mass isn't a clubhead performance parameter that significantly affects droop. Basically take the droop from a 90 mph swing of any 6 iron clubhead with the same shaft and it will be generally the same within a percent or so. Insignificant.

    Also the same is true for CG location. Droop is proportional to the centrifugal force (pseudo) exerted at the CG location of the clubhead. The CG location can be quite different between different clubhead designs (SGI vs. blade for example). Since Fc = m * w^2 * r where Fc is centrifugal force m is clubhead mass, w is omega the angular rate, and r is the rotation radius. A large CG location difference between clubhead designs would be roughly 0.5". Let the club length be 38" for a 6 iron making r for one clubhead be 38" and 38.5" for the other. Also assume that our club swinger can swing these 6 irons at the same angular rate. Thus, since droop is proportional to Fc, then the change in droop between clubs with the same shaft, but two different clubhead designs would be about 1/76 or 1.3%. Once again I don't find that to be a significant change in droop. So design a clubhead any way you like, but if it has notionally the same mass as a normal 6 iron and the CG location is somewhere playable then the droop is going to be about the same if using the same shaft.

    Posted:
    Driver: Callaway GBB Epic 8° w/Project X HZRDUS T800 65 gm 6.0 flex
    3W: Callaway Rogue w/Project X Evenflow 5.5 Graphite R-flex
    Hybrids: Callaway Apex 3h, 4h w/MR Kuro Kage 80HY S-flex
    Irons: Maltby TS-1 5i-GW w/KBS Tour R-flex
    Sand Wedge: Jim Kronus JK-1 Custom Grind 54/06 w/DG S200
    Lob Wedge: Titleist Vokey SM6 58/04 L Grind w/TT Wedge Flex
    Putter: Scotty Cameron Futura X w/Super Stroke Claw 1.0
    Ball: Titleist Pro V1X in yellow
  • MUNIGRITMUNIGRIT Members  351WRX Points: 188Handicap: 7Posts: 351 Greens
    Joined:  #657

    If you are good enough to be on tour you are good enough for blades. Then again if you gain a 1/4 per round using a players cavity back you would be dumb to not do it with the money out there.

    Posted:
  • GolfWRXGolfWRX Warning Points: 0  11 Members Posts: 11 #ad
    Joined:  ...

    Advertisement
  • RogerinNewZealandRogerinNewZealand Maungakeikei Auckland New ZealandMembers  2919WRX Points: 305Posts: 2,919 Titanium Tees
    Joined:  #658

    RichieH

    thanks for always posting great sensible info..my MP100s are strangely accurate in distance/trajectory vs past mp60/63 cbs.This was immediately noticeable...

    Posted:
    2020 18 July mid winterNZ

    Ping Rapture 2006 10.5
    Nike VrS 3wood
    Callaway Razr Edge5 wood


    MP100=33 9876 5/mp63

    54     RTX2
    60     RTX2

    ProPlatinum NewportTwo
    2002 325gram +8.NewGrip
    Dont hesitate to buy one!







  • Chuck905Chuck905 Members  1645WRX Points: 343Handicap: 7Posts: 1,645 Platinum Tees
    Joined:  #659

    I would not agree that blades are shorter than cavity backs.

    I jump back and forth with my i210 and Apex MB; I do notice more height and forgiveness with the i210. MB definitely more spin but not short in distance by any means.

    Posted:
    Mizuno ST200 Diamana Blue 7.5*
    Epic SZ Strong 3 Wood, 12.5*
    Ping G410 Crossover 17* Tour Shaft
    Ping i210 (3-PW), Px LZ 6.0
    Wilson Staff Model 54* SW and 58* LW
    Odyssey RX9 Putter
  • BlueDragonKoreaBlueDragonKorea SeattleMembers  51WRX Points: 47Handicap: 2.5Posts: 51 Bunkers
    Joined:  #660

    Apex Pros aren’t even that big of an iron, it’s not like Kevin Na is playing a Rogue X in 4-P. His irons aren’t that far off of most modern blades today in terms of size.

    Posted:
  • GolfWRXGolfWRX Warning Points: 0  11 Members Posts: 11 #ad
    Joined:  ...

    Advertisement
  • SwingManSwingMan SwingMan Members  6852WRX Points: 98Handicap: 9.8Posts: 6,852 Titanium Tees
    Joined:  #661

    Since I can hit a 48 PW well, I'm thinking that I can hit a 42 and 46 - 9i and PW Blade in MP20 well. But that's it. The rest of my bag is either 919F or HMP in 4-7i for distance. I do not like the 919F PW that much - I may order an MP 20 Blade in 45 and see what happens.

    Posted:
    "My swing is so bad, I look like a caveman killing his lunch" - Lee Trevino

    Bag: Ping G400 Max 9/TPT Red 17 ● Exotics EXS 220 16.5 wd, 19 Hy, PXG 22 Hy ● Mizuno HotMetalPro 5i/Accra i70 ● Mizuno 919F 6-PW/Accra i80 ● Mizuno MP T20 48, 53, 58 Nippon Pro Modus 3 Wedge 115 ● SeeMore Nashville
23

Leave a Comment

Rich Text Editor. To edit a paragraph's style, hit tab to get to the paragraph menu. From there you will be able to pick one style. Nothing defaults to paragraph. An inline formatting menu will show up when you select text. Hit tab to get into that menu. Some elements, such as rich link embeds, images, loading indicators, and error messages may get inserted into the editor. You may navigate to these using the arrow keys inside of the editor and delete them with the delete or backspace key.