Is This a Classic Club in 30 Years?

These look pretty darn pretty.

Actually looking for more info on these led me to a website that discusses how Wilson Staff's sales are up across the board in all product categories this year in a substantial way (like 80-200%). Also surprised to see that it was mentioned that the Wilson Staff Duo was only being outsold by the ProV at PGA superstores at times this past year.

Good on Wilson!

Could be Scooter, they've incorporated some of the classic 'lines' typically found in vintage WSs. Gotta give Wilson credit, for trying to keep an MB in their catalog for years, even while so much of the competition has gone to, uh, well, whatever?

that's a good one and i only wish i was still good enough to game them..

my first brand new golf set were wilson staff fluid feels way back in 1960 and i still look at the newer models with a bit of nostalgia..

Good to see, and somewhat amazing, that Wilson seems to have survived the Fatshaft years. My guess would be that the idea, if it had any merit at all, had its application in graphite shafted woods - but none in steel shafted irons. I dread to think how much volume Wilson must have lost from years of not having a high end iron in its range with a recognisable shaft.

I think what Wilson has had to survive is having their name on cheap full sets, marketed to the once in a while golfer. Why buy Wilson irons for $500 when you can get a full set for $169? Ugh.

I see your point - and that was what many people think did Macgregor in. And none of TM, Titleist, Ping or Callaway has ever to my knowledge made a cheap club. Then again, sheltering at the high end didn't do Hogan any good.

However, Wilson has always tried to cover both ends of the market - at least in the last 30 - 40 years. Even when Wilson staff bags were ubiquitous on tour - they had cheap clubs available like the Snead Blue Ridges, Augustas and other assorted "entry-level" clubs. That didn't seem to hurt them until the market started to evolve with cavity backs and metal woods, and endorsement money became much more expensive.

In five years when those FG tours are on the wall in Galaxy/Golfsmith I'll pick up a set for cheap. I can see them being a classic in a few Decades, really like the design especially the spiral milled top line area. I wonder what alloy they're made of.

Funny, the comments on Wilson diluting their brand. I put this in a post a few years ago - that for Joe Consumer, it's difficult to know the difference between "Wilson" and "Wilson Staff".

In contrast, Callaway marketed their cheap stuff under ”Top Flite" - no mistaking that for Callaway. Even balls - Acushnet used Pinnacle for its low end, completely separate from Titleist.

I think their business model in the "Wilson" stuff is bad too - "Hey Mr. Chinese conglomerate. Make me a ball that costs me $3/doz and a full set that costs me $50"

When you use target pricing as your main design impetus, crap is soon to follow.

These Wilson Staff irons seem to incorporate the classic "buttonback" and knurling features of the Wilson Staff '71s.

Even though Wilson turns 100 next year, these irons (like those FG Tour Blade 59s) are probably RH only.....

There's a big difference between a Sam Snead Blue Ridge set of irons from say 1969 or so, and the stuff Wilson was putting into Target the past few years. When I was a kid, the Blue Ridge model was the top of the line line for sporting goods stores, and some of the older guys I knew played them even though they easily (money wise) could have gamed WS Bulletbacks. They were not considered cheap clubs, just retail as opposed to pro shop. I think Wilson took retail pretty seriously then.

In my mind the problem of Wilson was when they were sold to an offshore company and lost their American identity. The powers to be had to turn a profit to pay for their investment. They became a marketing driven company not engineering driven as in the past years. Remember also MacGregor was owned by the same people at the same time. Both survived by playing both ends of the market and MacGregor after it was sold again and again did away with the value line and then went straight down.
I do feel that Wilson is trying. I have no idea who is there now but the latest clubs do have some nice features and are played by some good players. I think they will survive and continue to improve. Tad

[quote name='majic' timestamp='1377971316' post='7777477']
In my mind the problem of Wilson was when they were sold to an offshore company and lost their American identity. The powers to be had to turn a profit to pay for their investment. They became a marketing driven company not engineering driven as in the past years. Remember also MacGregor was owned by the same people at the same time. Both survived by playing both ends of the market and MacGregor after it was sold again and again did away with the value line and then went straight down.
I do feel that Wilson is trying. I have no idea who is there now but the latest clubs do have some nice features and are played by some good players. I think they will survive and continue to improve. Tad
[/quote]
My exact sentiments.

Agreed Tad, and found a good article on a different golf site about the improvement in Wilson Staff sales last year. Not sure that they turned the corner completely, but their GI, Blade and golf ball offerings are second to no-one in my opinion. Unfortunately, they'll need to put some marketing muscle into this too, and get some PGA players playing their gear and balls to make an imprint on the market.

I thought when Padraig was doing well about 6-7 years ago with Staff gear that that might be a watershed - unfortunately, it wasn't in North America where stayle and flash still seem to dominate the market.

[quote name='ScooterMcTavish' timestamp='1376567069' post='7680538']

... for Joe Consumer, it's difficult to know the difference between "Wilson" and "Wilson Staff".

In contrast, Callaway marketed their cheap stuff under ”Top Flite" - no mistaking that for Callaway. Even balls - Acushnet used Pinnacle for its low end, completely separate from Titleist.

[/quote]

I agree that the worst thing they did was dilute their domain name.

- [b]Wilson & Wilson Pro[/b] are the cheap, big-box brands; recreational golf gear and a bunch of other sports; why both I don't know because I see no distinctions

- [b]Wilson Staff [/b]the tour-grade and serious golfer lines

Who could ever distinguish at a glance? Cheap golf gear needs to be branded entirely differently than the serious lines. Golfers are very sensitized about brands, as NIKE learned when they first got in the game.

I bag a Wilson putter. Its like a Soviet version of an Anser. I like the weight. I think it was part of a box set, but I found at a thrift store.

wilson now lacks the deep pockets to lure away pros from nike and tm . this despite more traditional offerings that apeal to the pros. they may end up like hogan and macgregor. this is why cally wont make a modern hogan blade. would cause cally staff members to jump ship . john q public would then see hogan bags on tv and would find them filled with irons they cant hit and wouldnt buy them

maybe a generous win bonus, rather than "pay to play" money might lure some good guys into the fold. I'm pretty sure the Dunlop name and badge on Dazza Clarke and Westwood (still?) was for no cash up front, but a serious wedge if either won a major

thats the way ping did it in the old days

I haven't hit any of the wilsons from the last 10 years but I hope they make to the classic status. They certainly are beautiful.

They are a good looking iron in the classic sense. I think Wilson is on the comeback they do have some good looking wedges also. The new ball seems to have a good following in this area. I guage the latter by the fact I deal some on the side by wholeselling used balls to flea market dealers and such. I have had an increase in demand lately with my customers wanting the new Wilson balls. I think the down fall in the USA was not enough exposure on the US tours. Even when Padraig was winning his majors he was not gaming the Wilson Ball he was gaming the Pro V. I think if their staffers that they have in the US start winning and finishing on top of the leader boards their sales will increase. This day in time it is all about exposure and marketing. Personally I have never went for a product line because of who was playing it. I played what I liked and could hit. But I think that Wilson is on the right track for a comeback.
One note I reshafted a set of old Blue Ridge irons for a fellow a couple of years ago with TT R300s I actually went to the range to try them out with him Other than the shaft stiffness for me they hit as good as any of my old Mac blades with modern shafts. In fact this guy is still gaming them today happy as a lark

[quote name='LOVE4LPGA' timestamp='1385232202' post='8195946']
I bag a Wilson putter. Its like a Soviet version of an Anser. I like the weight. I think it was part of a box set, but I found at a thrift store.
[/quote]

Can't believe I missed this first time through. Soviet Anser....LOL.

[quote name='ScooterMcTavish' timestamp='1385829939' post='8228578']
[quote name='LOVE4LPGA' timestamp='1385232202' post='8195946']
I bag a Wilson putter. Its like a Soviet version of an Anser. I like the weight. I think it was part of a box set, but I found at a thrift store.
[/quote]

Can't believe I missed this first time through. Soviet Anser....LOL.
[/quote]

From the gulag to the bag!