Miura 1957 Small Blade/Baby Blade enthusiasts thread! (Lots of enabling and physics lessons inside)

[rebby]

rebby I get everything you are saying and will respond in much more detail later, but LOL please note that's why I said "all other things equal". (It's because I know there are other factors to consider like launch angle and smash factor.)

 

I read your longer post but quoted this one to keep things a little shorter. ;)

 

At the end of the day, it sounds like we really agree on all points. As I was reading your earlier post I just kept nodding in agreement.

 

You couldn't be more spot on about the sole thickness either. I have the exact same experience. In fact, I had a shot tonight where I pondered this exact thing. I was in a tightly mowed fairway sitting 256y from the hole. Due to the layout of the hole, I needed to hit a soft draw to have any chance of getting anywhere close. Going long was dead, a large waste area that virtually guaranteed a lost ball, thus trying to take something off a 4-wood was out of the question. Short was fine, as long as I didn't get too far to the right (bunker). This left me with 2 choices, hit my 20' P730 3-iron (that I carry 230y) or try to pick my 18' P790 3-iron clean (that I carry 245y). I was significantly more comfortable hitting the P730 due to the slimmer sole but knew that I wouldn't be able to chase that up to the green so I hit the P790 instead (and pulled it off but that sort of contradicts the point that I'm trying to make so ignore that part).

 

That partially answers your question. My 3-iron is a P730 w/20' of loft built at 39" with a KBS $-Taper 125 shaft that tips the SW scale at D2.7. Total weight of this one is 419.2g. This carries 230y for me with those specs (my 1957 is virtually identical to this, with a Tour-V 125 instead). My other 3-iron is a P790 bent to 18' of loft built to 39.5" with a KBS $-Taper 125 shaft that tips the SW scale at D3.9 (mainly due to the length). Total weight of this one is actually a touch lighter at 416.7g. My carry distance for this is the aforementioned 245y (when struck flush, of course). So the extra 1/2" in length and 2' lower loft nets me another 15y of carry which I partially attribute to the hotter face. In contrast my 1957 2-iron is also bent to 18' of loft is built to 39.5" with a KBS Tour-V 125 that swing weights out to D2.7, static weight of 412.6g. I get 236y of carry out of the Miura 2-iron. In my experience with the Miura's I'd need ~15.5' of loft on that club to net the same 245y that I get out of my P790. That's getting a little strong for my comfort zone.

 

As I mentioned above, I use my P790 more like an extra fairway wood than I do an iron. I use it when I know that I have more room for error on all sides of my designated target. I accept the greater dispersion as a trade off for an extra 9 yards (over what I'd get out of my equally lofted, yet more precise, Miura 2-iron), in effect, it puts another shot in my bag.

 

I compare the P790 that I've been trying out to a hybrid more than I do a long iron. Compared to a hybrid the sole is pretty narrow and I have a little more control over the ball flight. I can't say if it's true or not (I've never carried a hybrid) but I also feel as if the P790 is more versatile than a hybrid.

 

As for your other comments per Blade vs "CB-style", I couldn't agree more. I could go on a rant about loft-jacking here too but I won't. Irons, true irons, are about precision, being able to place a ball as close to a specific target as humanly possible in a repeatable fashion. Using an iron design that introduces any deliberate deviations from that goal defies any logic that I can come up with.

 

Essentially, we're saying the same thing in a different way. When precision matters, play as consistent of a design as you possibly can (a nice compact blade fits the bill here perfectly). If you can sacrifice some degree of dispersion and/or you NEED the additional ARTIFICIAL ball speed for one reason or another, another iron design might fit your need, just don't expect the same level of PRECISION.

[DeNinny]

rebby, amen!!! (And OMG don't get me started on loft jacking and hybrids... I can rant for days about both)

 

With all of that alignment, here is how I see irons, ball flight and why it is ALWAYS better to simply play as many blades as possible when faced with alternatives.

 

1) The superior technology is sound across all lofts. In all of what I ever post about the superiority of the blade design over a CB's, I never mention the loft. The technical reason is because I don't have to. All loft does is change the face angle coming into the ball, and the physics of the face flex stays the same regardless. It is a complete fallacy to think that longer blade irons all of a sudden get harder to hit than their CB counter part just because they are long. Meaning, if you justify that you are fine with playing a blade short iron, the exact same logic applies to the longer ones. LOL it's a carney shame to believe otherwise.

 

2) I simply accept the fact that my next longer and stronger lofted iron is going to simply launch the ball lower, send it farther, check it up less, and have exacerbated feedback and feel. <- This is all that happens with the physics of going to the next longer iron. And so with this, I just accept that at some point my longest iron is going to go too low for practical distance purposes. Luckily this isn't the case with my 2i.

 

3) My set up and swing from club to club is simplified. Call me OCD like that but I like the simplicity of setting up between irons. To change to a hybrid all of a sudden is an unnecessary discontinuity that changes more variables in my swing and set up, so my philosophy is to keep as many clubs of a similar type in the bag as possible.

 

4) The baby blade design is the best club design ever so it will always be better to have as many in the bag as possible. LOL for numerous reasons stated.

 

So with all this I don't really care or understand why there is some "need" to play "forgiving" and/or high launching long irons.

 

Thanks so much for all that club detail too. It gives me much better context. On that 2i, instead of looking at jacking the loft to get the distance you crave, have you thought about putting a lighter and stiffer shaft in it? With a lighter shaft you will be able to generate higher clubhead speed because there is less total weight to turn.

[DeNinny]

...

You couldn't be more spot on about the sole thickness either. I have the exact same experience. In fact, I had a shot tonight where I pondered this exact thing. I was in a tightly mowed fairway sitting 256y from the hole. Due to the layout of the hole, I needed to hit a soft draw to have any chance of getting anywhere close. Going long was dead, a large waste area that virtually guaranteed a lost ball, thus trying to take something off a 4-wood was out of the question. Short was fine, as long as I didn't get too far to the right (bunker). This left me with 2 choices, hit my 20' P730 3-iron (that I carry 230y) or try to pick my 18' P790 3-iron clean (that I carry 245y). I was significantly more comfortable hitting the P730 due to the slimmer sole but knew that I wouldn't be able to chase that up to the green so I hit the P790 instead (and pulled it off but that sort of contradicts the point that I'm trying to make so ignore that part).

...

 

Clean ball contact is only possible when the clubface contacts the ball before any other part of the clubhead contacts anything else like grass or turf or sand. All of these are 'media' that resist the path of the clubhead and will slow it down which will not be good for the shot, so even before a clubhead's "forgiving technology" comes into effect at impact, a miss hit (i.e. the fat shot) can happen. And as such, it is so fundamental that the sole be designed with minimal surface area such that there is the least amount of chance of it contacting the ground before the face contacts the ball. And so any clubhead that has a high surface area sole automatically will be an issue as compared to one with a significantly less surface area sole. And this is true in all dimensions: length, width, and bounce (or rather curvature). All these dimensions will define the magnitude of the exposed surface area to the ground, and the more the surface area, the more probability that the sole will contact the ground before the face contacts the ball. This is both just common sense and laws of physics based, but ROFLMAO the "forgiving" clubhead manufacturers are missing or rather IGNORING this glaring issue when their "forgiving" clubs are marketed.

 

I drew this sketch up a while back to illustrate the issues with high bounce and a rounded leading edge, but it also applies as an example of the issue with a higher sole surface area club.

 

 

 

Club A represents a club with low bounce and a sharp leading edge. Club B represents a club with high bounce and blunted leading edge. And now if you envision both clubs taking the same slowly arcing path into the ball, it should be visually clear that Club A can literally fit its leading edge deeper under the ball in the 'corner' formed by the ball and the ground more so than Club B's leading edge can fit. And what this means is that Club A has more margin for error in fitting its leading edge under the ball properly, and conversely Club B has less margin for error and there is a higher chance that it will contact the ball with that rounded leading edge or it will contact the ground before Club A will, making Club B LESS FORGIVING in terms of enabling clean ball contact.

 

And again the issue is the same when it comes to overall sole surface area in addition to high bounce and a rounded leading edge.

 

Furthermore, *if* either club contacted grass, water, dirt, sand, or whatever first, before the face contacted the ball, still Club A is better than Club B. Because of the sharper leading edge and more streamlined design, Club A will 'cut' through all media faster than Club B. It will retain clubhead speed better and the result of a fat shot with Club A will be better because the clubhead will not slow down as much. It is simple fluid mechanics!

 

And to be clear, no, Club B will NOT reroute and "dig less" than Club A and skid along the ground like the supposed "forgiving theory" of higher bounce. High bounce is one of the worst carney sham(e)s of "forgiveness". There is way too much momentum for grass, dirt, water, sand, etc. to make a clubhead reroute. Instead all those media will simply slow the clubhead down.

 

And so with all this, this is why the BB design is so superior and super forgiving when you hit shots fat and in the deep rough with them. They have the smallest sole surface area, a pretty small leading edge and also minimal bounce. All of this helps when there is media that the clubhead has to pass through on the way into impact. I noticed this benefit with my BBs almost right away with my first set. I kept hitting shots out of rough that flew the green because I played for more distance loss than was necessary because of past experience with bigger clubheads. Also I would hit some shots fat and would end up with a decent result that was unexpected at first (again from past experience with bigger clubheads).

[zigfread]

I see this support group is successful, everyone is keeping their BB’s and adding 2nd and 3rd sets, some very cool and informative posts

[3riC]

The baby blade is the best design for all players and all golf clubs. I have two sets of BBs and a set of Retro TBs (which are the same design, minus conforming grooves, as the standard TBs) and the BB sets are superior in all ways.

 

I could get into a lot more detail than this but the smaller head is what makes the BBs better. Because of that design difference, they have a better chance of making clean ball contact and there is less torque put on the hands from the force of impact.

 

BBs...FTW!!!

 

I for one would support you going into a lot more detail if you decided you wanted to. I'll read it and appreciate it :) With that said you are preaching to the choir. I never realized how many negative situations thicker soles can create until playing these. As a sweeper these are extremely forgiving in that context.

 

Details? LOL you say you want some details? Oooookaaaay...

 

....

 

In short...

 

...BBs...FTW!!!

 

This is an amazing post, glad i didn't read it before i got my BBs otherwise i wouldn't have bothered to haggle the price and went straight to payment.

 

Fantastic clubs the BB. I have a set of CB501 which isn't bad at all, but the BBs are definitely worth it.

[DeNinny]

The baby blade is the best design for all players and all golf clubs. I have two sets of BBs and a set of Retro TBs (which are the same design, minus conforming grooves, as the standard TBs) and the BB sets are superior in all ways.

 

I could get into a lot more detail than this but the smaller head is what makes the BBs better. Because of that design difference, they have a better chance of making clean ball contact and there is less torque put on the hands from the force of impact.

 

BBs...FTW!!!

 

I for one would support you going into a lot more detail if you decided you wanted to. I'll read it and appreciate it :) With that said you are preaching to the choir. I never realized how many negative situations thicker soles can create until playing these. As a sweeper these are extremely forgiving in that context.

 

Details? LOL you say you want some details? Oooookaaaay...

 

....

 

In short...

 

...BBs...FTW!!!

 

This is an amazing post, glad i didn't read it before i got my BBs otherwise i wouldn't have bothered to haggle the price and went straight to payment.

 

Fantastic clubs the BB. I have a set of CB501 which isn't bad at all, but the BBs are definitely worth it.

 

Thank you for the kind words, but LMAO I'm just giving you all the true and exact physics. The only reason it is "amazing" is because of years of carney sham(e) "forgiving" club manufacturers capitalizing on the technical ignorance of most golfers.

 

And to that I say...

 

..."SHAME ON YOU, 'FORGIVING' CLUB MANUFACTURER! YOUR 'TECHNOLOGY' IS A COMPLETE AND CARNEY SHAM!!! (AND YOU KNOW IT!!!)"

 

Long live the BB design. Best. Clubs. Ever.

 

And yeah I remember you from the Blade users thread. Also I hit the CB-501 alongside BB, mb001, and Tournament Blades during my first BB set fitting. It's a nice feeling CB and all, but definitely does not compare in feel and performance to the BB (for numerous reasons stated).

[DeNinny]

Ok so since BB brother Bigmean has not posted in here, I will share some measurement data that he took with precision calipers one day (in the 'Blade users' thread) and compared various measurements between his BBs and mp-14s. Being the engineer that I am, I took the data and graphically plotted it. Here it is:

 

 

 

We called the "sweetspot" the point at the very middle of the groove area which is pretty much the middle of the entire head length. And then he measured the thickness of the muscle at the "sweetspot" and at the toe and at the heel. And also he measured the total head length and the total height of the face again at the "sweetspot" and at the toe and at the heel.

 

Out of all the data, what was the most interesting to me is that the BB is truly thicker at the middle area, the point that has to support impact by direct contact with the ball. This is truly structurally superior to even the mp-14 which already has a great muscle. And so again what this means is that the BB simply will not bend and temporarily deform under the force of the ball compressing against it as much as even the mp-14. And because of this, it is an even more consistent surface for producing consistent ball spin.

 

And then when you compare either of these two muscle thicknesses against any "forgiving" CB out there they will be significantly bigger. And as such they both will produce significantly more consistent ball spin and flight from shot to shot and over all various quality of shots. Trampoline and flexing face = more random ball spin from shot to shot = higher dispersion and inconsistent ball control.

 

Also just for the heck of it here are some side by side comparison pics of my Cal Hottie 3i and an mp-29 3i. Visually the head sizes are pretty close but the BB sole is thinner and shorter by a little.

 

 

 

 

[zigfread]

My mixed bag for golf league tonight. Just showing you guys aren’t the only ones with TK wedge love. The 4&5 cb’s have bag time till my new shafts come in for the babies.

[DeNinny]

I removed the white paint fill from my 2i 'MIURA' stamping. Then I refilled it with clear epoxy. Here is what she looks like with the 3i above her.

 

 

 

Dark chocolate vs white frosting. I can't decide what I like better. Thoughts? I like how it makes my 2i unique.

 

Also for those interested that is after a year of playing the black borons with some bag chatter and the coating wearing out a little. Here is how the she looked brand new (with epoxy fill).

 

 

[A.G. Pennypacker]

Finally got mine done. They're shafted with PX6.0. Took them to the range today, and they're definitely demanding and will take a bit of getting used to, but I really like them. I will have to get them bent a couple degrees flat soon too, will report back after that.

 

As mentioned, the long irons are fantastic. I can hit the 4i more consistently than my 7i for some reason haha.

[DeNinny]

Finally got mine done. They're shafted with PX6.0. Took them to the range today, and they're definitely demanding and will take a bit of getting used to, but I really like them. I will have to get them bent a couple degrees flat soon too, will report back after that.

 

As mentioned, the long irons are fantastic. I can hit the 4i more consistently than my 7i for some reason haha.

 

If it helps...

 

...at the start they are going to seem "demanding" but to me it is a product of simply needing an adjustment period to get used to the small head shape. By design the smaller head is going to visually change how you address the ball and moreover you have to be really precise on both your face angle and its intended position behind the ball at address. Also the smaller head affects how your hands and arms control the clubface position both at address and during the swing. So if anything is slightly off at address it really does change the shot a little. To me this was the "demanding" thing about them. They demand that I set up precisely because they are so precise.

 

When I first got mine I do admit that I hit way more shanks than I ever did with any other club, but after I adjusted my set up and got real specific at address I didn't shank it as much.

 

Also the ability to work the ball is improved by them and, like going from driving a decent sports car to a Ferrari F12, at first it's like you have too much control and as such I would tend to overdo any worked shot (compared to executing it the exact same way with a larger head).

 

The long irons feel is fantastic because a long iron exacerbates feel and feedback by compressing the ball the most due to the stronger loft. Couple that with high quality Miura forged steel and you get a feel that is truly unreal in a good way. (And yeah the 2i feel and feedback is even better!)

 

Congratulations on becoming a unicorn rider!

[DeNinny]

Great, I thought it was just DeNinny but now I see it's an epidemic.

 

If I have MIura BBs with Nippon shafts before the end of 2018 I blame all posters in this thread. Not just DeNinny.

 

:busted_cop: WARNING :busted_cop:

EXTREME BB PR0N ALERT!!!

 

Project 'Ice Queens' is underway. The paint fill is complete but not the epoxy fill, so just as a tease, here is some softcore pr0n.

 

 

 

(Stay tuned for their hardcore pr0n debut.)

[DeNinny]

So I met up with dan360 and another golf buddy at a range today. When I arrived I set my bag down to go inside the clubhouse and behind me was another golfer that did a double take when he saw my Cal Hotties and out of the blue he said they were really nice irons. I thanked him and said they play and feel even more beautiful than they look and were the best irons ever. Nothing better. He asked about the model because he knew about Miuras. As I've played my BBs I am noticing that they get spotted and asked about by random golfers every now and then. Not every time I play but it certainly occurs more than when I played my mp67s.

 

Anyhow at the range, dan360 and my buddy were all able to club swap (like a bunch of "swingers", yuk yuk) and hit balls. It was great because I got to hit dan360's mp33s and my buddy's Miura-Giken special 'Hagane' blades to put my BBs into perspective.

 

Of course the first club that I try is the mp33 2i with S300. A little too heavy for my taste but wow it is a nice club and feels great. The mp33 is such a solid blade. I hit a few others but went back to my BBs. And LOL as I was hitting his Mizzys I also had to watch dan360 just blast shots with my BBs longer than I can hit the same club.

 

But the real treat to me, taking nothing away from the mp33s, was getting to hit my buddy's Haganes. Here is an old pic of one below my Retro TB:

 

 

 

The Hagane muscle is more rounded for sure than the Retro's, and OMFG the thing produces a really solid feel. No click and just a solid "thunk" into the ball. Definitely a heavier feel than my BBs. They felt closer to my Retros than the BBs, but because of the more rounded back muscle they have their own unique feel. I got to hit the 6i with an S200 and the 3i with a Modus 105.

 

But still, even though I thoroughly enjoyed hitting both, I could not see either of them replacing my BBs for any reason. Towards the end of my bucket I finally grooved my swing and hit a lot of really great shots with my BB 7i, 5i, and 3i, and each one just put a big smile on my face.

 

The other interesting thing I noticed was that, as I switched back and forth between them and the two other irons, I hit some shanks whenever I had just switched back to them after hitting either the mp33 or Hagane. Set up behind the ball is definitely different.

[DeNinny]

Here's some Sunday morning girl-on-girl (amputee) action for all you BB enthusiasts...

 

 

 

Pictures don't do them justice. Freaking gorgeous heads. dan360 will be a happy man soon.

[dan360]

From Ice Queens to White Trash Hotties in one second.

 

Nice scratch on the 6 iron. #that'llbuffout

 

Forged by hands of God. Paint-filled by DeNinny "All Thumbs" DeBunker

 

It's okay. The first time they ride to the course in the bed of an old Ford pickup worse things will happen.

 

Just wait until I swing the black ones.

[dan360]

Passive aggression for being two clubs longer than you with your own stuff ice cold with a stiff back. In denim jeans. (OMG)

 

 

[DeNinny]

From Ice Queens to White Trash Hotties in one second.

 

Nice scratch on the 6 iron. #that'llbuffout

 

Forged by hands of God. Paint-filled by DeNinny "All Thumbs" DeBunker

 

It's okay. The first time they ride to the course in the bed of an old Ford pickup worse things will happen.

 

Just wait until I swing the black ones.

 

LMAO 'White Trash Hotties'!!! They are just my type. I've been looking for a set to replace my Dirty Girls. :wub:

My bad, bro. She slipped and fell on the edge of the 9i hosel. I was checking out all that junk in her trunk after I painted on her 'tramp stamp' and lost my concentration.

 

LOL nobody touches my Porn Stars. :aikido:

 

Passive aggression for being two clubs longer than you with your own stuff ice cold with a stiff back. In denim jeans. (OMG)

 

It was a club and a half!

[PopIt&DropIt]

Man those ice queens are shaping up to be the sexiest BBs in this thread so far, sorry DeNinny...lol

[DeNinny]

Man those ice queens are shaping up to be the sexiest BBs in this thread so far, sorry DeNinney...lol

I know! And by my own doing!!! Sexy AF!!!

 

Ice Queens is a working title. It's either that or White Trash Hotties.

[PopIt&DropIt]

Considering you guys are friends I have to vote for white trash hottie because it's so congruent with how you name yours. But the name wont matter in the end as they are looking like their appearance will do all the talking and then some. Looking forward to the finished product.

[A.G. Pennypacker]

Finally played the first 18 with these today. Now that I'm getting used to them, I'm really liking them. Very surprised with the distances I'm getting. Club for club, they are 2* weaker than my Z765, but shots go almost the exact same distances. Just awesome.

[DeNinny]

Considering you guys are friends I have to vote for white trash hottie because it's so congruent with how you name yours. But the name wont matter in the end as they are looking like their appearance will do all the talking and then some. Looking forward to the finished product.

 

I think we have settled on White Trash Sluts but dan360 has the final say. I am looking forward to the final build too. LOL I have already chosen his grip, shaft, and ferrule, but I'm going to leave it to him to show the final build. And no matter what they are going to be absolutely gorgeous. When the sunlight hits that satin and also the metallic blue wreath they are going to sparkle beautifully.

 

And yeah it doesn't matter how pretty they look because their true beauty is their performance and feel. LOL it is good to see huddledtoast starting to fall in love with his.

[rebby]

Finally played the first 18 with these today. Now that I'm getting used to them, I'm really liking them. Very surprised with the distances I'm getting. Club for club, they are 2* weaker than my Z765, but shots go almost the exact same distances. Just awesome.

 

A long time ago, I tested the 1957 side by side w/the Miura Tournament Blade. With equal lofts I was seeing ~1.5mph of additional ball speed with the 1957. I attributed this due to the more compact head and, thus, additional mass directly impacting the ball. This was a MB to MB side by side so the "trampoline effect" would essentially be zero for both irons making mass the primary influencer.

[DeNinny]

Finally played the first 18 with these today. Now that I'm getting used to them, I'm really liking them. Very surprised with the distances I'm getting. Club for club, they are 2* weaker than my Z765, but shots go almost the exact same distances. Just awesome.

 

A long time ago, I tested the 1957 side by side w/the Miura Tournament Blade. With equal lofts I was seeing ~1.5mph of additional ball speed with the 1957. I attributed this due to the more compact head and, thus, additional mass directly impacting the ball. This was a MB to MB side by side so the "trampoline effect" would essentially be zero for both irons making mass the primary influencer.

 

I would look at total club weight and swing weight differences first. It may simply be that the BB head and total weight of the club is lower than the TB so you end up with a higher swing speed with the BB.

 

With the exception of only the PW, my Retro TB set has the same lofts as my BB sets, and it is also heavier overall. As a result I swing the BBs faster and thus hit them farther.

[MysteryV]

Hey folks - I already know the answer here - but I'll ask anyway. Is there any consensus around good / bad shaft combos with the BBs? I'm probably going with Modus 3 120s as I have them in my Epon's and *think* I love them, however I tend to be a pretty high spin / high launch player, and have been curious about other shafts recently

 

Thank you

[DeNinny]

Hey folks - I already know the answer here - but I'll ask anyway. Is there any consensus around good / bad shaft combos with the BBs? I'm probably going with Modus 3 120s as I have them in my Epon's and *think* I love them, however I tend to be a pretty high spin / high launch player, and have been curious about other shafts recently

 

Thank you

 

Modus and Nippon overall go well with BBs. I have hit BBs with Nippon Modus and NS Pro, KBS Tours, KBS C Tapers, and Aerotek Steelfibers. All are fine and BB will perform with any shaft. I say put your absolute favorite shaft on BBs and have no fear of it. The only shaft I didn't like because the feel was so different was the Steelfibers. Performance was fine but the graphite just kills the feel.

 

Moreover I say put the best of everything in your BBs. Don't cut corners and simply build them as best and as high quality as possible.

[EaglesGolf99]

Hey folks - I already know the answer here - but I'll ask anyway. Is there any consensus around good / bad shaft combos with the BBs? I'm probably going with Modus 3 120s as I have them in my Epon's and *think* I love them, however I tend to be a pretty high spin / high launch player, and have been curious about other shafts recently

 

Thank you

 

Modus and Nippon overall go well with BBs. I have hit BBs with Nippon Modus and NS Pro, KBS Tours, KBS C Tapers, and Aerotek Steelfibers. All are fine and BB will perform with any shaft. I say put your absolute favorite shaft on BBs and have no fear of it. The only shaft I didn't like because the feel was so different was the Steelfibers. Performance was fine but the graphite just kills the feel.

 

Moreover I say put the best of everything in your BBs. Don't cut corners and simply build them as best and as high quality as possible.

 

I don't find that to be the case with the SteelFibers at all.

 

Been playing SteelFibers in Baby Blades, CB-57s, 1957 Y and C Grind Wedges and last but not least, all my Hand Grind Wedges.

 

No issues. At all.

 

As a matter of fact, I've never been more perfectly fit on Iron and Shaft Combo in 23 years playing the game. Multiple opinions there, not just my own.

 

To the original question, if your only issue is high spin / high launch, I would make the SteelFibers my first choice to demo!

[DeNinny]

Hey folks - I already know the answer here - but I'll ask anyway. Is there any consensus around good / bad shaft combos with the BBs? I'm probably going with Modus 3 120s as I have them in my Epon's and *think* I love them, however I tend to be a pretty high spin / high launch player, and have been curious about other shafts recently

 

Thank you

 

Modus and Nippon overall go well with BBs. I have hit BBs with Nippon Modus and NS Pro, KBS Tours, KBS C Tapers, and Aerotek Steelfibers. All are fine and BB will perform with any shaft. I say put your absolute favorite shaft on BBs and have no fear of it. The only shaft I didn't like because the feel was so different was the Steelfibers. Performance was fine but the graphite just kills the feel.

 

Moreover I say put the best of everything in your BBs. Don't cut corners and simply build them as best and as high quality as possible.

 

I don't find that to be the case with the SteelFibers at all.

 

Been playing SteelFibers in Baby Blades, CB-57s, 1957 Y and C Grind Wedges and last but not least, all my Hand Grind Wedges.

 

No issues. At all.

 

As a matter of fact, I've never been more perfectly fit on Iron and Shaft Combo in 23 years playing the game. Multiple opinions there, not just my own.

 

To the original question, if your only issue is high spin / high launch, I would make the SteelFibers my first choice to demo!

 

All I'm saying is that when I compared BBs side by side with steel and Steelfibers shafts, the FEEL of Steelfibers was just simply inferior. The graphite dulls the feel. Definitely not the same and worse than steel. IMHO only.

[rebby]

Finally played the first 18 with these today. Now that I'm getting used to them, I'm really liking them. Very surprised with the distances I'm getting. Club for club, they are 2* weaker than my Z765, but shots go almost the exact same distances. Just awesome.

 

A long time ago, I tested the 1957 side by side w/the Miura Tournament Blade. With equal lofts I was seeing ~1.5mph of additional ball speed with the 1957. I attributed this due to the more compact head and, thus, additional mass directly impacting the ball. This was a MB to MB side by side so the "trampoline effect" would essentially be zero for both irons making mass the primary influencer.

 

I would look at total club weight and swing weight differences first. It may simply be that the BB head and total weight of the club is lower than the TB so you end up with a higher swing speed with the BB.

 

With the exception of only the PW, my Retro TB set has the same lofts as my BB sets, and it is also heavier overall. As a result I swing the BBs faster and thus hit them farther.

 

You make a really good point here and unfortunaly I don’t have the numbers from my old set of TBs to say for sure. I do recall however, that both sets were built with Tour Issue S400s and they were both swing weighted to D4 with an old school slide scale. IIRC, both of the PWs ended up D5 and none of them needed any tip weights. Thus, the builds were pretty close, not near as close as I’d build them today (I’m much more meticulous now and have better equipment) but still pretty acceptable. Going into the test itself, I really should have payed closer attention. I was mainly interested in gapping for yardage and just happened to notice that the baby blades were going a little further and had a bit more ball speed. Now I’m really curious about the details, too bad I didn’t keep better records. Oh well, long story short, baby blades are better. If you have the choice between the TBs and the BB, go BB every time.

[DeNinny]

Finally played the first 18 with these today. Now that I'm getting used to them, I'm really liking them. Very surprised with the distances I'm getting. Club for club, they are 2* weaker than my Z765, but shots go almost the exact same distances. Just awesome.

 

A long time ago, I tested the 1957 side by side w/the Miura Tournament Blade. With equal lofts I was seeing ~1.5mph of additional ball speed with the 1957. I attributed this due to the more compact head and, thus, additional mass directly impacting the ball. This was a MB to MB side by side so the "trampoline effect" would essentially be zero for both irons making mass the primary influencer.

 

I would look at total club weight and swing weight differences first. It may simply be that the BB head and total weight of the club is lower than the TB so you end up with a higher swing speed with the BB.

 

With the exception of only the PW, my Retro TB set has the same lofts as my BB sets, and it is also heavier overall. As a result I swing the BBs faster and thus hit them farther.

 

You make a really good point here and unfortunaly I don’t have the numbers from my old set of TBs to say for sure. I do recall however, that both sets were built with Tour Issue S400s and they were both swing weighted to D4 with an old school slide scale. IIRC, both of the PWs ended up D5 and none of them needed any tip weights. Thus, the builds were pretty close, not near as close as I’d build them today (I’m much more meticulous now and have better equipment) but still pretty acceptable. Going into the test itself, I really should have payed closer attention. I was mainly interested in gapping for yardage and just happened to notice that the baby blades were going a little further and had a bit more ball speed. Now I’m really curious about the details, too bad I didn’t keep better records. Oh well, long story short, baby blades are better. If you have the choice between the TBs and the BB, go BB every time.

 

It may not hurt but it also never helps if a golfer makes the wrong physics conclusions from an anecdotal observation. Call me an OCD engineer but I like to be exacting with all the physics of golf just because there's no reason not to analyze the game to one's technical limits.

 

And I'm not saying you are incorrect. I'm just saying there are other variables to consider. And also that swingweight is a lesser variable than total weight. Although you mentioned SW and shafts were the same, it is possible that the BB head weight is less than the TBs. And if we can assume that you only have a fixed amount of energy (or work) to put into a swing, this means that you will put a faster swing on the lighter BB head. Ultimately with the swing we are creating momentum (=m*v) and kinetic energy (=1/2*m*v^2) in the clubhead, and this will transfer to the ball during impact. And so even though the BB head is lighter which will drop 'm' or mass in the equations, 'v' or velocity increases because of the lighter mass and is even a squared function in the kinetic energy equation.

 

All this is irrefutable and can explain a lot in terms of why the BBs are longer than the TBs. My Retro TB heads (and Rifle 5.0 shafts) for sure are heavier than my BB heads (and Nippon NS Pro 950/850 shafts). And not coincidentally I am half to a full club longer with the BBs.

 

But LOL all that said, BBs over TBs always. FTW every time.