Jump to content

Jeff58

Advanced Members
  • Content Count

    365
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

53 Excellent

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. For those who may be interested and/or haven’t heard it before, the Hoofer series base folds as a complete unit when the legs are extended. Other bags either have a foot/extension, or the base is segmented, and only part articulates. The Hoofer system makes them very stable on the ground. The downside is that the dividers crease and the volume in the base decreases significantly, resulting in club drag. The solution is to move clubs in or out when the bag is upright. It’s not quite as convenient, but it’s not a difficult habit to cultivate.
  2. Here you go. Several years ago I used this. V1’s and V1x’s were virtually always essentially perfect. The TP5 family was also very good, though with less ‘perfect’ balls. Some others were not at all good or consistent. They may be better now.
  3. At least to start, just changeout your 52 for a 50, and practice hitting 3/4 shots with it. As you correctly state, hitting partial shots is generally more effective with a blade-type club, in this case with a heavier swing weight. To me, this type of shot is something that I naturally do as part of warm-up, and find them at least as easy as a full shot with a gap wedge.
  4. Your current wedges are examples of Roger Cleveland’s earlier work. The current Callaway models are not. If you prefer the Cleveland design, the new (wait for it...) Cleveland Zip Core models appear to be as close as he has put out in several generations.
  5. If you check the Spyy site, they show the Bridgestone as slightly longer off the driver. The important question is really ‘which will be longer for my swing and equipment setup?’. The QST launches significantly higher and spins less. If you’re already using a high-loft driver, say at 12 degrees, with a positive angle of attack, the RX could be significantly longer for you, as the QST will launch too high and have minimal roll-out after landing. Conversely, if you’re using a 9 degree club with minimal upwards attack, the QST may be exactly what you need.
  6. 921 club head speed was 2 mph higher, 1 degree stronger, 600 rpm less spin. It’s now closer to the P790 performance if that’s what they were targeting (though the P790 flies higher in most testing). It does look like a great club, though the ‘forged CrMo’ is a little outside the Mizuno envelope IMO.
  7. Big Bertha’s, pretty much any model. Just like Annika used to play. TM R9. Still one of the best iron sets ever produced. In no way inferior to current models. The KBS 90 shafts are a great fit for a player with average swing speed.
  8. The M6’s significant trait is forgiveness. It’s forgiving because it has a high MOI. It has has a high MOI because there is an abnormally high amount of weight towards the toe, making the head more resistant to twisting on off-center impacts. That’s all for the good, except that it makes it significantly fade-biased. Given that your typical miss is a fade, or slice, the M6, particularly in a lower loft, probably isn’t the best solution. Consider a G410, which is essentially neutral.
  9. The two variables are descent angle and spin. A combination of a 50 degree angle and 10,000 rpm spin will typically give a zero forward carry, given no wind. An increase in one variable obviously allows a decrease in the other.
  10. @Tanner25 has the ticket IMO. As long as your swing speed isn’t much over 100mph or so, there’s no ball even close for the current price. Srixon Q-STAR Tour 2 Golf Balls | PGA TOUR Superstore
  11. As you’ve seen, lofts on newer iron sets can be substantially stronger than traditional models. To some extent, that’s correct and appropriate, as their center of gravity has been moved back and down, such that they naturally launch higher, and the stronger lofts are merely counteracting that effect. Some models, the Mavrik and Sim being perhaps the two most glaring examples, have taken loft jacking to a new level of abstraction. There is a price to pay, which is typically the loss of spin, as well as distance precision. IMO consider something like the Ping i210, which is about as close to a
  12. IMO - The most advanced technically and best overall performance wedge is the 2008 Cleveland CG-14. They carry further, stop faster, have a larger impact zone, and are equally capable with full or partial swings. After the change/rollback in groove performance, creation of an actual “better mousetrap “ was virtually abandoned. The current changes in weight distribution and groove configuration that are heralded as breakthrough products are sad obituaries to actual change.
  13. My 3 cents- After the initial formative stage of swing development, where your flexibility and timing produce a repeatable form, attempts to recreate a significantly different form through instruction, regardless of the instructor’s skill, as often as not results in disaster, at least in the short term. Your results are normal. The driver and irons require different swing planes. Higher level golfers choose shorter driver shafts to the most part because it minimizes the differences in swing mechanics. Selling bogey golfers 46ish inch drivers because they test out 4 yards longer isn’t in anyone
  14. Picture says, not so much... The Hoofer and Hoofer Lite have been reincarnated and adjusted to the point that the differences between them are not particularly clear. In this regard they’re very similar to Titleist V1 and V1x balls. The manufacturer is very reluctant to call one of them ‘better’ than another in any regard, since that might indicate weakness in the other product. They therefore both have enhanced spin, greater feel, control, etc. The descriptions on the Ping website describe the Hoofer as having more pockets, more gadgets, and a 5-way top, at the expense of slightly greater
×
×
  • Create New...