Iron Shaft length effect on lie angle question

[Old_Lefty]

This may by a dumb question but if a guy were to extended an iron length 1" what would the effect be on lie angle?

Thanks gb

[johngalt312]

No change to the static (measured) lie angle - what the player may need the lie angle adjusted to dynamically would need to be determined. With that said, I will add: if I took my 4 iron and made it longer for my use, I’d then need to bend it flatter, otherwise it’d be too upright, assuming that my effective lie angle was correct at the pre-extension club length.

[b.helts]

Of course it doesn’t have any effect on the lie angle. However, the club will effectively play 1.5-2 degrees upright from what it was previously.

[Old_Lefty]

Thanks guys

[StillCantPutt]

Don’t you mean it would pay flatter? If you lengthen a club, let’s say a 5 iron by 1/2”, it is effectively playing 2 degrees flatter unless you bend it upright. @Howard_Jones - right?

[Philomathesq]

No. If you maintain your setup position with your body, a longer club will force the toe of the club up, hence making it play more upright.

[brew4eagle]

If you lengthen a 5 iron by 1/2" it basically becomes a 4 iron, but with a 5 iron lie angle. A 4 iron is typically flatter than a 5 iron, so the lengthened club should be flattened. At least that's how it works in my head.

[StillCantPutt]

I don’t think that’s right.

[b.helts]

Think about it this way. If you took a 60 degree wedge and put a 60” shaft on it, addressed a ball in your normal posture (obviously ball a long way away from you), would it be toe up or toe down?

 

it would be drastically toe up, which means too upright.

[Philomathesq]

Well, explain why. Numerous people in this thread have already explained that, functionally, lengthening a club makes it play more upright. If you believe otherwise, please explain why.
But, @brew4eagle explained it perfectly. In a standard set, lie angles decrease as lengths get longer. If you lengthen a club, you need to flatten it (because it effectively becomes more upright) to get back to “normal.”
Edit: Here is an article in Golfweek explaining that shortening a club effectively flattens it. As we’ve said in this thread, the converse is true (lengthening effectively makes the club more upright). How to Shorten Golf Club Shafts

[Howard_Jones]

Lie angle is toe drop and hand position combined.

You the player dont change, so your hand position remains the same, and the only place that longer club can go now is further out and away from you RAISING the toe so DYNAMIC lie angle becomes more up right than it was, and we go flat on static lie to get back to a neutral lie at impact. Just look at your iron set, clubs got 0.5 to 0.75 lie angle progression as they change in length. If hand position is exactly the same for all clubs, this lie angle progression would have been 1.0* between clubs, so going 1.0" longer = 2* on lie angle before we take to drop into it, then we ends at 1.0 to 1.5* flat on static lie to compensate for 1.0* longer shafts.

[Awainer1]

? you’re not winning this one

[Howard_Jones]

Maybe this explains it better. Like im writing above, Lie angles is a product of TOE DROP & HANDS POSITION COMBINED.

The example shows of a #9 iron as 36.00", then as 37.00" - To remain the same hand position, we must go down 3* on lie angle, but due to the longer shaft, the higher SW when using the same heads, TOE DROP goes up, so we ends at about half only to remain the same hand position (green field). For a #3 iron, the same extension of 1.0" inch moves lie angle 2.4* to remain the same hand position, and again, DYNAMIC lie would be about half due to toe drop.

This is where the old rule of thumb comes from. 0.5* inch is 1.0* on lie, but today we know a bit more about toe drop, so actual STATIC lie is set to 0.5* to 0.75* between clubs, or 1.0* to 1.5* pr inch to remain the same hand position.

The other way, using a standard #3 iron thats 39.00 either as 59* (1* flat) - 60* (standard) or 61* ( 1* upright)

Pay attention to the GREEN FIELDs again, we deliver the grip higher or lower = we adjust lie angle due to the players hand position or hand height if you like, plus we move the distance from the players feets and out to the ball. (lower case B)

As Club-fitters we must judge the players "swing mechanics", AND the effects (positive and negatives), by going longer or shorter, since we can get to the same "hand height" by using lie angles, BUT the players swing mechanics might be bad if the ball comes to close to his feets, so we have to make a choice of whats the best compromise of going longer (ball further out, and added SW), or go upright (ball closer to his feets, same SW area).

SW values DOES moves with lie angles, we can count 4* change of lie as 1 SWP, so its not much, and easy to solve, while going longer a full inch raises SW with 6 SWP, and B weight heads is for the most limited to 7 grams lighter, so if we DONT want the SW effect of going 1.0 inch longer, we can stop at 0.5" or 5/8" and use lie angles to deliver the handle in the height needed to the player.

Again, the #3 iron as example. The standard #3 iron with 60* lie angle, delivers the handle at 857.9 mm or 33.64 inch. - BALL POSITION 49.5 cm out

If we go 1.0" longer, with the same lie angle, the handle is delivered at 879..9 or 22 mm higher than as standard. - BALL POSITION moves to 50.8 cm out.

If we "compromise" due to SW values (we want to prevent too high SW), we can reduce the extension to 5/8" and go 1* upright. That will deliver the grip at 880.2 mm (0.3 mm higher than 1.0" standard lie), IF we can accept a ball position thats 48.8 cm out only. (most is fine with that, the change is 7 mm further in vs standard)

So, going a full inch longer aint always the smartest, we have to consider the effect for SW values, if we are fine with that, move on, if thats a issue, moderate the extension to 5/8" and go 1* up right to deliver the club in the same height as 1.0* extensions with standard lie angles would.

 

 

[Howard_Jones]

 

The question is WHY do the player go longer? will the same head weight be used?,

if its ONLY to move ball position further out, and hand position remains the same, then you are right. In a SET of irons 3 to PW, 1.0" inch longer shafts, "needs" a change in static lie from 2.4 to 3.0* against flat , depending on club (to remain the same hand position or hand height if you like), but since the longer shafts bends more, and we most often use the same heads = Higher SW and by that more toe drop, then actual change needed is about the half, or 1.2 to 1.5* against flat (with the same hand position.).Toe drop is average 0.5* for each 3 SWP, so 1 inch longer = 6 SWP or a added toe drop of 1.0*

BUT, if the player goes longer because of his "size" and hand height above ground, and we use the same heads (higher SW and more toe drop) . We might not need a change in static lie angles at all since the player needs the club delivered higher, and combined with toe drop = Out and home = same distance....

Summary, Lie angles is Hand height/position at impact and toe drop combined,and a dynamic test (NOT lie board) is always needed to set them correct for each player.

[StillCantPutt]

Super helpful and makes perfect sense. Still wondering how I would know if my length is correct for ME and then I can use your method to determine the correct lie angle. Topic for another thread, most likely. Appreciate the clarification provided.

[KMeloney]

Interested to know what you weren't clear on that had you looking at this backward.

[Howard_Jones]

Use the ball marker test for lie angles, we cant do the numbers right on the paper no matter how hard we try. The "triangle" method is only useful to see what happens to delivery of the grip (height), and to do the numbers for what way to go, only longer, or only upright, or a mix of both, but no matter choice we make, we have to take a dynamic test of lie angles. The norm is that we address the ball with lower hands than we have at impact, but non of use swing the same, so a dynamic test is needed, and then the ball marker test is the way to do that right, NOT lie boards.

[StillCantPutt]

Might sound funny, but I had a club “fitter” tell me that because I’m ordering irons +1/2” longer, I need to bend 2 degrees upright to get back to standard. The visual in my head made sense and I never questioned the physics of it. That’s all.

[Howard_Jones]

Its to bad anyone can call himself "club fitter", most of them is anything but that, but the specs sounds very familiar....taller players very often came to me with clubs that was plus 0.5" and 2* upright and they all had the left side as a issue, thinking it was the shafts....i hope you can see why the left side was a issue with those specs? hitting a fade was close to impossible.

[JCAG]

There are two lies per sic. Actual and effective. Actual lie is a true measurement that does not change regardless of the club length. Effective lie is how the golfer delivers the club to the ball. When given a longer club a golfer will assume their normal stance and when they place the club down, its toe will be in the air. When given a shorter club a golfer will assume their normal stance and when they place the club down, its heel will be in the air. In some cases, the actual lie of the shorter/longer club might be a better fit. If the actual lie was correct , then when a club is lengthened or shortened, the lie should be adjusted to compensate. Longer club, adjust toe down. Shorter club, adjust the toe up.

Best lie test is a vertical ink line on the ball. When the ball is struck, an impression of the ink line will end up on the face. Search Howard Jones posts for a better explanation and actual face labels one can use.

Length can also affect where on the face the ball is struck as in toward the toe, in the middle, toward the heel. Another subject but one that can be more important then lie change based on length change.

Same with loft. Actual and effective. Actual is a true measurement. Effective is how the golfer delivers the face to the ball. Another subject.

[Howard_Jones]

I agree with the most, except your choice of terms, even if i have no problems to understand them.

Just like we use Static and Dynamic loft, the correct terms for lie angles is to call them Static and Dynamic lie angles.

Static is how we measure loft or lie in a bending machine or what ever tool we use for that, Dynamic is the value either loft or lie has delivered to the ball.

 

....but even Trackman is messing with it, their latest models measure "Dynamic lie angle", but what they actually do, is to suggest a static lie angle that delivers the club head with neutral lie angle to the ball.

 

Definitions from English dictionary

STATIC - lacking in movement, action, or change

DYNAMIC - (of a process or system) characterized by constant change, activity, or progress.

 

[mgoblue83]

Everyone saying that a longer club plays more upright is technically correct but only if the golfer stands in the same posture and makes the same swing (Hint: They don't). Personally when I hit clubs that are +1 inch I stand taller in my posture and have a more upright swing than normal so bending the clubs flat would be a disaster.

Instead of worrying about it now you should just hit balls and do the vertical line test to see how they need to be adjusted.

[KMeloney]

"When" you hit clubs that are +1"? What does that mean? Why would you sometimes hit clubs that are too long?

BTW, you might stand up taller with clubs that are too long, but then that's a compensation (or the way you should be setting up, in which case the clubs aren't too long). Isn't the idea of having properly-fit clubs to allow you to swing freely without having to make needless compensations?

[mgoblue83]

That is exactly the point. If a golfer is able to assume a taller posture and swing freely with a longer club because of proper fit then in fact the lie angle does not become more upright like theory would suggest. The theory is based on the idea that a longer club requires the ball position to be moved farther away which creates a toe up effect and a flat swing plane. It doesn't happen for all or even most golfers so shouldn't be assumed to be true.

To answer your first question I have experimented with irons of different lengths trying to find the most comfortable setup. What I found was that +1in short irons and wedges allowed me to stand taller and swing freely without changing ball position or lie angle but became uncomfortably long in the top end. I settled on longer wedges and 3/8ths gaps between clubs for the best of both worlds.

[JCAG]

Are you saying one should adjust their stance/swing to accommodate the club?

[mgoblue83]

No, I'm saying improper length clubs require compensation. If someone is playing clubs that are too short they are most likely bending over more than optimal in order to reach the ball. Give them a properly fit club and they will most likely stand taller in a normal and comfortable posture which means the club will not play upright like it would if they kept the same posture.

[Howard_Jones]

You are both right and wrong at the same time, you are right when you say we should use the vertical line test, and you are right when you say we stand taller...but still.

From a standard LOB wedge at 35.00" with a standard lie of 64* to a #3 iron at 39.00" we have 4 inches, and what direction do lie angles goes? they goes against flat with about 4* over those 4 inches, even if toe drop is larger on the longer clubs than the short clubs, so even if we stand taller with the #3 vs our LW, our hand position dont move much, or enough to use the same lie angle on all clubs, so to prevent lie angles to be upright at impact, we go flat when we go longer. Thats the general ruling here, how much will depend on actual head weight, C-Dim, shaft flex , the players load and release and hand position at impact.

(look at COBRA SL, lie angle progression goes "the wrong way", due to softer "long iron shafts" vs "short iron shafts", and the players use of power, so even SL clubs is affected of the players swing and shaft flex, even with the same play length and head weight, so its many factors involved here)

What i have seen from 3/8" sets where we start from the #8 or #9, is that we can leave the standard lie angles as they are for a 4/8" set, even if our #3 iron becomes 0.75* shorter and by theory should get a lie angle 0.75* upright vs what it was. I explain that with lower SW value and a shorter shaft who bends less than it did, so out and home becomes the same distance, but in general, going longer = need for a lower lie angle just like we see from LOB to the #3 iron

PS! the ball marker test can be used for all clubs, including the driver, many is not aware of that since they think of lie boards when we talk lie angles.

[mgoblue83]

Totally agree with the theory but my point was based on someone who plays clubs too short needing to bend over more than they would with properly fitting clubs. Get them in properly fit clubs and they will stand taller and their hand position will be higher with every club which counters the idea they need flatter clubs.

[Howard_Jones]

We are "in line" here, but often talks over each other heads when we try to explain our point, and im not any better than others on that, my posts can sometimes seems as a contradiction to themselves, so its not easy to make all points clear and explain all scenarios correct without room for misunderstandings.

 

[Duper]

Shaft droop may not be a significant factor if,  when building the club,  you tip it more to bring the frequency back up ( same stiffness) as when the shaft was shorter and then butt trim to the longer length ... if you are just lengthening it at the butt end without adjusting the tip,  then yes , there will be more shaft droop ....