Hitting "players" clubs better than G.I. clubs?

[WristySwing]

Well....my advice would be go for the irons you got fit for. You were fit for Mizuno or Taylormade, now why in the heck do you want Titleist with a shaft that is completely different in weight, spin, bend profile, and stiffness? If they don't work then you'll likely be b** that you were ill fit. The 760 with the CTL would be the slightly more forgiving model if you are interested in protecting yourself a little bit.

[nsxguy]

Typically a fitter would fit a 20 'capper into a GI iron, possibly even a SGI iron. Yet there's not a single one of them mentioned in your entire post, either by the fitter or yourself. That is interesting.

Personally, I've never seen the 20 handicapper with a decent/consistent/repeating swing so unless you are this guy I would suggest, until you take lessons (assuming you haven't yet otherwise I'd think you'd have mentioned it), take your current Pings to a fitter/repair place, have them fit to you and then take lessons. Once your lessons produce a somewhat decent swing then you should consider a new set.

Then again, given the irons that Golftec FIT you into, I'm thinking the fitter saw at least something of a competent swing, or at least the beginnings of same. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Good luck,,,,,,,, and try to keep from tearing your hair out playing this silly game. LOL

 

[randywall]

This thread has made me even more excited for the Seattle Golf Show. I want to try not so much different brands, but different skill level irons. I'm thinking all the different flavors of Mizunos, and then because they were mentioned in several different categories on the 2019 Irons lists, the P790.

I started playing with my Dad's old Sears, women's flex, and realized too late (a season or 2) that they were too whippy for me. So I researched, and determined the Callaway X Hot was probably good for my skill level, and because they were old (2013 bought in 2015), I paid about 1/2 price at Puetz Golf.

But I got ahold of a Miura sand wedge, and discovered the joy of a forged club. I'm money with that thing nearly every time - consistent distance, and it's the only club I can count on the ball stopping on the green.

So I replaced my gap wedge with a forged club, and am looking forward to seeing if the forging makes a difference. Bad time to put new clubs in the bag in the Northwest, it's been especially rainy this year.

I think I'll probably end up with a forged CB, but not so pronounced. I tried to hit a true blade once, and lack of sweet spot hit felt terrible.

[Ovalles593]

That’s what I thought too going into the fitting. We started off the M5/M6 and HMB then slowly started moving down and eventually we were going back and forth between GI and the 919 Tour and 760s. All he said was that my swing was consistent with the exception of a few miss hits and with the CPT I was able to increase my swing speed and ball speed up to get more carry distance.

 

i know I was I’m a 20 handicap but I also practice my irons about 3 times a weak. It’s my driver that I can’t control and occasional short game yips. Lol

[Ovalles593]

well I wanted to go get fit for Titleist, Mizuno, Taylormade but apparently the Golftec in my area is not authorized to fit for Titleist because it is an indoor fitting. Had I gotten fitted for them I wouldn’t be asking what y’all think about putting the KBS CPT shaft I got fit into both JPX Tour/ P760 into a T100 head or T200.

[MBBG]

Up until the lesson part at the end I thought you were talking about me ?

[WristySwing]

Okay, that's fine about the Titleist. But why the change in the shafts? Again the C-taper and C-Taper lite are similar in name only. The C-Taper is heavier across the board, features a much stiffer overall profile, is lower torque, and launches on a different flight pattern. See the image below of the EI profiles that generally give you an idea of the overall stiffness of shafts across different zones of the shaft across the length. If you are a 20 handicapper that means you are at best shooting around 92 on about 1/5 games. I would probably stick with the T200 and bend them a bit weak to match the lofts you were fit for in the 919 and P760, as there is likely a reason the traditional lofts worked for you.

 

[Ovalles593]

Sorry about the confusion. Yeah I’m gonna stick with the C Taper lite shaft I got placed into. My confusion is what head to go with. Your right in my last 10 rounds I’ve shot a 92 seven times. My 7i iron loft right now is 34° so if I went with the T200 I’d probably get the lofts closer to what I’m used too. Regardless I plan on getting a Titleist fitting before pulling the trigger on buying my next set of irons.

[WristySwing]

Good luck! You know your game better than any fitter, and I always tell my clients this when they come and see. I let them know they are in charge for the most part and that they know their game better than any sort of snapshot our 60-90 minutes is giving me. So if something is way off base I want them to cry foul. I've only had 1 person disagree with me on a choice of something, he wanted heavier shafts than what I thought he should play. So I suggest you identify what weak spots are in your game. If you shoot 92 because you can't hit a 4-7 iron to save your life, then looks be darned, you should definitely jump on something more forgiving like the T300s or some other brand. If you are a 20 cap because you 3 putt every green and hit your irons okay, not great, but okay, then you could probably get away with the T200s. You know your game best and you can 10000% use that your advantage to identify the holes in your game that need plugging and should seek out equipment to stabilize you, not hurt you.

I saw someone post something a couple of days ago that really resonated with me. Something about an ex-PGA pro that now does lessons as a head pro or something, and someone asked about fitting for irons and questioned why they got fit into X when they really like the looks and feel of Y, especially because they plan on getting better. He answered: "get clubs for the game you have now, not for the game you want." It totally makes sense as there is no guarantee that there is going to be any sort of fundamentals change great enough to usurp the complete playabilty (or lack thereof) of some clubs vs others. A good player can play anything due to good muscle memory and athletic moves...a less skilled player cannot discern these feels and has to rely significantly more on timing the strike...which is where fitting for the proper clubs helps so much more.

It's likely in this thread I'm just too lazy to go back and quote the person. So anonymous if you are here, take your credit!

[flip flappy]

I have enjoyed reading through this thread. I have played several sets of Mizuno's in the past from the GI type JPX800 to MP 62's. I got fit for a set of Ping ie1's about 4-5 years ago with Nippon Modus 105 shafts and have played them ever since. I do try my 62's out occasionally on the range and have not been able to get the consistent ball striking I used to have. The 62's do have Project X 6.0 Rifle shafts. I would love to try them with Nippon 105's.

[txgolfer45]

It really depends on the individual and what he is looking for from the irons. Being on the older side at 63, I want more distance with good dispersion. While I still like my current gamers that have a forged face and light steel shafts, my distance has decreased over time. The newer technology in shafts and heads allow me to regain lost distance. I will give up some feel to achieve that. I can play anything but choose to take advantage of the new technology.

[Gohigh]

Long story short.

Its the turf interaction and how it influences strike location on club face.

This conversation should not be about BLADE vs GI irons, but rather how each iron's sole design (Bounce, Camber, Leading Edge) can influence how the iron enters and exits through the turf, therefore influencing strike location on clubface.

Regardless of player ability, if an iron cant effectively enter and exit through the turf, then GI or Blade, it will be difficult to hit the ball consistently.

[Ovalles593]

That's where I am at right now. get T100 and assume I'm going to get better no guarantees or get T200 and see the forgiveness right away. since February I dropped my handicap from a 40 to 20 just by focusing on my short game more during my practice sessions. I hit my wedges through 6i well and my 5i is 50/50. maybe even a possible combo set of the irons.

[Ovalles593]

when using GI irons that’s what I’ve noticed that the club isn’t cutting through the grass as it does with my irons that have thin soles. A lot of people say they lose feel with GI irons but I can feel the club bounce off the turf

[txgolfer45]

Having played blades and various cavity backs, the most important feedback is ball flight. Play whatever gets you the best ball flight and best result on mishits. Play the percentages. Which iron gets you on the green most consistently is the one to play. Period.

[4rightmike]

I've owned 10 plus sets of irons over the last 20 years from SGI to blades all with the same boring old s300 shafts (can't and won't get away from the profile). I've figured out over that more or less offset doesn't effect me at all really... Blade length does (longer is better for me) and leading edge is the biggest factor (for me I like almost no relief) while sole width rankes a bit below those but still very picky. I hit Nike VR pro blades (6-pw) better than just about anything because of how they fit my eye with blade length and how they cut through the turf. I then have a p770 5 and 4 iron for a little extra MOI but stay true to what I've figured out what works for me....blade length and sharper leading edge with narrow to thin/medium blade width . It's just what suits you and some people figure out what works for the early or later on in there golfing world...you just have to experiment, the whole SGI/GI/players thing is just a label and has nothing to do with real life experiences, gotta learn that "in the dirt".

[PuttforDoh]

At the end of the day it's always going to come down to what gives you the most confidence right before making the swing- I've been the same way the last 10 years

[Kgglonghorn]

Blades are the sexy supermodel of irons and I like the way they feel in my hands. What more do we need in this conversation??

[lakecowboy]

This!

 

My fitter explained while I’ve always struck the ball better with blade like irons, he said it was because of my attack angle, I’m able to interact better with the turf and have cleaner strikes. He said he tries to put players in the most forgiving club possible that suits their eye and swing, sometimes it’s a SGI, sometimes it’s a tour like iron. Puts all abilities in all different types of heads. He broke down why I would always strike it better (not further, haha) with a MB and after looking at strike location, angle of attack and everything else on Trackman put me in the PXG T’s because of their forgiveness in a smaller profile head that interacts favorably with the ball/turf for my swing.

[BobaDefett]

So trackman put you in the pxg tour iron, what did your wallet put you into? Those things are ridiculously expensive, even with my military discount.

[lakecowboy]

The GEN3 0311T’s

[Thats two thus far Shooter]

Absolutely blades make you better. Large clunky heads turn people into sweepers and teach them poor mechanics of not taking a divot. I put my Mp18 blades into my brothers hands from his 714 AP1s and he was hitting them significantly better. Missing the sweetspot on the blade but hitting the face will always be better than a fat or thin shot with a clunky iron.

[WristySwing]

What data do you have to support this besides anecdotal evidence of your brother? Most of what you claim isn't very truthful and not even comparable. What matters is strike location to strike location on different irons. GI irons have more bounce than players irons do, so a fat shot with a player's iron is always going to dig significantly worse than a GI iron will. This is especially bad for sweepers, since as the name implies, sweep across the top of the grass for longer than someone who hits down on it, have a higher chance of hittig it fat; so why would you want an iron that is going to dig significantly more with a swing style that does that? Turf conditions also matter a lot. You don't want a bouncy iron when you are playing off of hardpan, clay, or rocky soil, while wetter conditions/"grabbier" grass will require more bounce. This is why most tour pros have 3-4 different sets of wedges for when they play in California vs. Arizona vs. Florida. This is also why Srixon and other OEMs are now pre-wearing the leading on their irons. They are built for that sweeper style player but they maintain the bounce for when they hit it fat, giving them so much more shot protection.

Next, GI have ball speed tech that most players irons lack (save for a very small handful; P760, C300 Forged, Apex Pro, I500) that maintain ball speeds across the face so much better than any sort of true player's club. I've seen smash factors drop by 0.1 on misstrikes with a blade/true player's club in my fits, which is massive. That's just shy of 10mph in ball speed, and what's that 25 yards of carry at least? Further, the MOI on players irons is usually a lot less than a GI iron, meaning as you draw the strike further and further from the sweetspot the tilt axis of the golf ball becomes more and more extreme. What helps protect that is friendlier lofts for sure (30* vs. typically 26-27*), but I have yet to see a single test on accuracy of a 30* GI iron vs a 30* pure blade, same lie, same shaft, same length, same swing weight. Truthfully I haven't looked very hard but I'd wager the lateral dispersion is far better on the club that doesn't twist as much. Most of these tests are so gung ho on claiming that the distance is the same, who cares? I want to know about the dispersion.

I don't doubt that blades and players do work well for certain styles of players, as I mentioned above, but to claim that mishits are significantly better across the face isn't true. I would also like to see a longitudinal study of your brother playing the blades for 15 rounds and the GI irons for 15 rounds, rotating back and forth with accurate stat-tracking. That is a test I wish someone would do en masse as I am willing to bet it would make a lot more people consider GI irons. Or I'm completely wrong and it proves that tech means nothing and all of you are right...either way it would be definitive proof.

[Tree Levino]

Agreed the CT and CTL and completely different animals. CTL is mid to high launch with lots of spin for me - VERY easy to load. C taper stiff plays like X in a lot of other shafts at a slightly lighter weight. 760 is a fair bit more forgiving than 919T but still plenty workable. Flat out, no way I’d give a 20HC the 919t. There’s just no point. The 760 is a combo set in itself so you’ll get playability close to the 919t in the short irons with help in the long end. Buy what you were fit for.

[braincramp52]

Wrist, I respect your opinion but I've never lost 25 yards on a bad mishit of a blade. Extreme toe hits with my Wilson blades lose between 5-10 yards over my 410's I played last season.

[WristySwing]

Yeah, maybe I was a bit over-zealous on that. But I have seen efficiency drop from 1.38 to 1.26-1.3 on a misstrike with a small, players CB vs. something like a P790, G410, etc. It's a small sample size for sure as I don't have the exact data from every fit. However, I would still be interested in some longitudinal data usng something like Arccos or Game Golf that tracks actual shot distance and direction over a period of time. I think there is a lot of data to be mined there. Likely useless data that won't change the buying habits of many, but data nonetheless.

[Tree Levino]

Oh man. Don't know where to start on this one. You guys are going on and on about turf interaction and musclebacks when the guy is shooting above 90 and presumably still in the 100s at times. It is quite likely he is literally topping and chunking shots a foot behind the ball. Flat out, there is no way a 20 HC is hitting irons like a single digit but just can't drive or putt. That idea that is perpetuated on here is just ridiculous. To shoot above 90 while being an avid golfer, all aspects of your game need work and the most important thing is spending on lessons. If you want to drop a some coin on clubs do it, but don't buy something brand new that you weren't fit for - i.e T100 which is basically a tour iron with a little bit of help. Lots of scratch players on here using the T200 so don't write that off because it might help you a bit more. Point is, if you're spending the money buy the P760 with CTL and see if it helps your game. Personally, I'd buy a used set of semi helpful irons like Ping i E1, P790, Mizuno hot metals etc with the C Taper Lite for a few hundred bucks and spend $1000 on lessons. Guaranteed you're breaking 90 nearly every time by the end of next season.

[NMarko]

[NMarko]

Agree. In a few of their videos the TXG guys discuss how "fitting" the sole width for someone who is shallow can be as critical as other factors/considerations.

[Thats two thus far Shooter]

Not really talking about t100 or t200 (Gorgeous irons) when taking about GI irons but more so ping Gs or TM RBZs for example, where you have these MASSIVE head shapes that are a lot to look down at and don’t really help much to improve a golfers strike in my opinion.

so before getting into these “longitudinal” studies, all I’m simply saying is “aim small, miss small” in my experience with 10-20 handicaps has significantly improved strike and confidence (with practice) and therefore iron play. But I’m not a club fitter so take my opinions with a grain of salt.

Playing GI irons is like bowling with bumpers.