Jack Nicklaus Club Specs

[golfdude300]

Does anyone know where I can find Jack's irons club specs from the 70's or 80's. Lofts and length. I am particulary interested in the length because I'm thinking his clubs were 1/4 inch shorter than todays Pings even though he was 5-11" when he was younger. I read he played his wedges at 35". 52 and 58

 

Looked all over the net even his web site. Found some of this info on WRX and filled in the rest.

 

Are these numbers accurate? Thanks!

 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jack Nicklaus 1976 specs

 

Wood lies 2 upright. 60 degrees

 

Driver 43. D3. 13.7

 

Three wood 42. D3. 14.1

One-7 2 degrees up

 

One iron. 39 long irons 1/2 down through 7

 

7-9. 1/4 down

Short irons one degree up

Wedges 35

 

1i=39 at 15*

2i=38.5 at 18*

3i=38

4i=37.5

5i=37

6i=36.5

7i=36

8i=35.75

9i=35.5

PW=35

[astamm8]

That's about right. But a 37" 5 iron is a lot more than 1/4" shorter than today's standard.

Driver 9.5, 1 iron 15, 2 iron 18, and then I'm sure they're pretty much (old) standard until the P with is a high 52.

You're not going to get better info than the article in this [url="http://www.golfwrx.com/forums/topic/544619-the-bear-and-his-bats/"]thread[/url], at least for 86, with the only like change from earlier the driver being 43.5" and at some point he went from 50 to 52 in the pw.

[birly-shirly]

Back stampings aside - does anyone know how closely the Muirfield irons resemble the 67 VIPs?

[golfdude300]

[quote name='astamm8' timestamp='1395411182' post='8917583']
That's about right. But a 37" 5 iron is a lot more than 1/4" shorter than today's standard.

Driver 9.5, 1 iron 15, 2 iron 18, and then I'm sure they're pretty much (old) standard until the P with is a high 52.

You're not going to get better info than the article in this [url="http://www.golfwrx.com/forums/topic/544619-the-bear-and-his-bats/"]thread[/url], at least for 86, with the only like change from earlier the driver being 43.5" and at some point he went from 50 to 52 in the pw.
[/quote]

Most definitely. Ping standard 5 iron is 37.75" at 27 degrees. But his 5 iron's loft was probably closer to today's 6 iron. Ping 6 iron is 37.25" at 30 degrees. That's why it's just a guess that he was playing shorter irons than even Ping or Mizuno standard of today.

[astamm8]

[quote name='golfdude300' timestamp='1395421475' post='8918883']
[quote name='astamm8' timestamp='1395411182' post='8917583']
That's about right. But a 37" 5 iron is a lot more than 1/4" shorter than today's standard.

Driver 9.5, 1 iron 15, 2 iron 18, and then I'm sure they're pretty much (old) standard until the P with is a high 52.

You're not going to get better info than the article in this [url="http://www.golfwrx.com/forums/topic/544619-the-bear-and-his-bats/"]thread[/url], at least for 86, with the only like change from earlier the driver being 43.5" and at some point he went from 50 to 52 in the pw.
[/quote]

Most definitely. Ping standard 5 iron is 37.75" at 27 degrees. But his 5 iron's loft was probably closer to today's 6 iron. Ping 6 iron is 37.25" at 30 degrees. That's why it's just a guess that he was playing shorter irons than even Ping or Mizuno standard of today.
[/quote]

Yes, I bet his 5 iron was about 30* and as you say, .25" below Ping's standard 6 iron. His were also a little upright, which would be just about right for someone tallish with shortish shafts.

[duffer888]

i thought i heard somewhere that since he counterbalanced his shafts, his SW was in the high Cs?

[dlygrisse]

[quote name='duffer888' timestamp='1395422695' post='8919041']
i thought i heard somewhere that since he counterbalanced his shafts, his SW was in the high Cs?
[/quote]

I think he just counterbalanced his driver, in Golf My Way he explains the whole deal. Don't remember the specifics but the swingweights came out pretty standard as I recall.

Actually here are the answers to your questions. [url="http://www.golfwrx.com/forums/topic/544619-the-bear-and-his-bats/"]http://www.golfwrx.c...r-and-his-bats/ [/url]

The first article which I posted a long time ago is good, but scroll down to post #15 for even better info.

[golfdude300]

I read as much as could before I posted and read those great links you guys provided. The numbers I posted in the first post is information mostly pulled from WRX. I had an old copy of [i]Golf My Way[/i] that I gave away. I don't remember if his iron specs (Loft & Length) are published in that book.

Anyone know if it is?

According to the article post#15 he played the 2 iron at 38.5" instead of the norm of the time which was 39". (1986)

[url="http://www.golfwrx.com/forums/topic/544619-the-bear-and-his-bats/"]http://www.golfwrx.com/forums/topic/544619-the-bear-and-his-bats/[/url]

Playing shorter than normal for the time indicates he may have done so throughout the set, but I don't know for sure.

Thanks!

[dlygrisse]

[quote name='golfdude300' timestamp='1395430668' post='8920045']
I read as much as could before I posted and read those great links you guys provided. The numbers I posted in the first post is information mostly pulled from WRX. I had an old copy of [i]Golf My Way[/i] that I gave away. I don't remember if his iron specs (Loft & Length) are published in that book.

Anyone know if it is? Thanks!
[/quote]From memory: he said his irons are a couple of degrees upright. Don't remember mention of lofts and lengths. Then he talks about his various driver set ups over the years, going from a really stiff shaft, to a softer shaft that is back-weighted to give it a different feel and slow the hands down a bit. He says in the book he uses S flex now.....but if the posted article from Golf Digest is correct they are S flex tipped. If I recall correctly he discusses going from a 43" driver to a 42 3/4 inch driver to hit his desired swing weight with the shaft flex and head weight he wanted with the counter balancing.

[astamm8]

[quote name='golfdude300' timestamp='1395430668' post='8920045']
I read as much as could before I posted and read those great links you guys provided. The numbers I posted in the first post is information mostly pulled from WRX. I had an old copy of [i]Golf My Way[/i] that I gave away. I don't remember if his iron specs (Loft & Length) are published in that book.

Anyone know if it is?

According to the article post#15 he played the 2 iron at 38.5" instead of the norm of the time which was 39". (1986)

[url="http://www.golfwrx.com/forums/topic/544619-the-bear-and-his-bats/"]http://www.golfwrx.c...r-and-his-bats/[/url]

Playing shorter than normal for the time indicates he may have done so throughout the set, but I don't know for sure.

Thanks!
[/quote]

The deal is that he didn't really change specs from probably when he was 15 or so. In the 60s a 38.5" 2 iron was standard. He never changed, and I'd bet anything that those beautiful blades that he played at the father/son [i]this year [/i]are exactly the same (although he did take out the long irons). I bet there's basically no difference between the 7 iron that's in his bag today, the one from '86, the one from '75, and so on. At some point someone other than Don White was making them so, they might have a little different look, but I bet the specs are just the same.

Between '60 and '86 "standard" added about a 1/2" and lost some loft. Jack stayed the same. If you want to say that his clubs were then short in '86 fair enough, but I think it really demonstrates that "standard" just doesn't mean much.

As noted somewhere along the way, Jack did some small tweaking with the driver reducing bulge and roll and then later adding some back and adding 1/2". He obviously changed putters and he changed the specs on his wedges going to a 52, 58 set up and flattening them. He played around with some different grinds on the 58. But I bet the specs on the 1-9 never really changed at all, and the clubs were nearly identical muscle and all as well from whenever he went to the regular muscle, probably mid 60s, to today). So overall I'd say he barely changed anything (until metal woods) in a 30 year (and then a few more great years with metals) career of great golf. And in the metal age, his irons and set make up 1,3 and 1-S, still didn't change.

He backweighted the driver and 3 wood.

[Guia]

I have seen Nicklaus up close several times and don't think he was ever 5'11", closer to just under 5'10" at best. I am 6' and was easily taller standing side by side. Regardless of his stature he was a great golfer and I am sure you are correct that the clubs were
shorter in that era.

[Shallowface]

[quote name='birly-shirly' timestamp='1395411981' post='8917681']
Back stampings aside - does anyone know how closely the Muirfield irons resemble the 67 VIPs?
[/quote]

It's been a while since I've seen a set of Muirfields, but the main difference was in the soles. If memory serves, the Muirfields are slightly more rounded from front to back and heel to toe.

I briefly had a set of the 67 VIPs that I picked up cheap. Other than a couple of 5 irons off my basement range mat, I had no interest in playing them. I'm pretty sure I could have shaved with the leading edges. I wouldn't have any problem playing the Muirfields.

[Shallowface]

[quote name='Guia' timestamp='1395457761' post='8923035']
I have seen Nicklaus up close several times and don't think he was ever 5'11", closer to just under 5'10" at best. I am 6' and was easily taller standing side by side. Regardless of his stature he was a great golfer and I am sure you are correct that the clubs were
shorter in that era.
[/quote]

Jack has mentioned that he has lost height over the years as discs in his back have shrunken. I think he described one part of his spine as haveing fused on its own.

My nearly 80 year old dad is the same way. 20 years ago he was a good three inches taller than me. Now I can look him right in the eye.

I stopped growing at 13. I blame it on coffee.

[Guia]

When I stood next to him was in 1970, he was under 5'11"

[golfdude300]

[quote name='astamm8' timestamp='1395456557' post='8922877']
[quote name='golfdude300' timestamp='1395430668' post='8920045']
I read as much as could before I posted and read those great links you guys provided. The numbers I posted in the first post is information mostly pulled from WRX. I had an old copy of [i]Golf My Way[/i] that I gave away. I don't remember if his iron specs (Loft & Length) are published in that book.

Anyone know if it is?

According to the article post#15 he played the 2 iron at 38.5" instead of the norm of the time which was 39". (1986)

[url="http://www.golfwrx.com/forums/topic/544619-the-bear-and-his-bats/"]http://www.golfwrx.c...r-and-his-bats/[/url]

Playing shorter than normal for the time indicates he may have done so throughout the set, but I don't know for sure.

Thanks!
[/quote]

The deal is that he didn't really change specs from probably when he was 15 or so. In the 60s a 38.5" 2 iron was standard. He never changed, and I'd bet anything that those beautiful blades that he played at the father/son [i]this year [/i]are exactly the same (although he did take out the long irons). I bet there's basically no difference between the 7 iron that's in his bag today, the one from '86, the one from '75, and so on. At some point someone other than Don White was making them so, they might have a little different look, but I bet the specs are just the same.

Between '60 and '86 "standard" added about a 1/2" and lost some loft. Jack stayed the same. If you want to say that his clubs were then short in '86 fair enough, but I think it really demonstrates that "standard" just doesn't mean much.

[/quote]

If we use current True Temper iron steel standard then it looks like Jack's clubs were probably shorter than today. We don't know for sure until we find out the loft and length of each club. I read Tom Weiskopf played below standard length although he was taller. I don't know too many pro's today that play irons below let's say TT standard. In fact, can't think of one.

So not only was Jack a unique player, but so was his equipment.

[astamm8]

I'm sure they're out there, but I don't know enough players' iron shaft lengths to be sure. Tiger's 3 wood is 42.5. Patrick Reed and Sergio have short drivers. As you've correctly realized length means nothing without loft. TT gives a 37.75" 5 iron recommendation [i]without [/i]loft. Tiger plays that length in his 5 iron, but it's at least 2* weaker than today's "standard," so there's an example if you want it.

Jack's clubs were definitely shorter than today, no question about that. But "standard" was also different when Jack played. Jack's clubs/specs are absolutely unique when compared to today's clubs but weren't that unique when he was playing.

[birly-shirly]

I agree. In spite of the presentation of that Golf Digest article (which was otherwise great, I thought), Jack's clubs were pretty standard for the era he grew up in.

Search for the Perfect Swing (published 1968) describes a standard 5 iron as being 37" long and having 31* loft - right in line with Jack's iron specs, give or take 1* in loft.

Hogan took advantage of their development of the lightweight Apex shaft to make their clubs 1/2 inch longer than was the standard of the day with a heavier shaft. I would think though that, at least since the '80s, "standard"length with a heavy TTDG shaft fitted has been the same as the "extended" clubs that Hogan built. Of the half dozen or so sets of irons to pass through my hands, I've only had one set play at the 1968 "standard" length - and as an average, maybe even 1968 average, height guy, I really liked the shorter, more manageable, length. Graphite shafted irons tend to be longer again. Either to hit the ball further, or to save the manufacturing hassle of changing the weight of the clubhead depending on what shaft is being fitted...

The most surprising thing I think about Jack's specs is how standard they are. S flex shafts (even if they are tipped a half inch) seem modest for the horsepower that Jack could bring to bear - but I think goes along with his very full swing. (I believe John Daly used, relative to his clubhead speed, fairly soft shafts too).

Leather grips were always going to be non-standard compared to the more economical rubber grip - but Jack clearly didn't enjoy change for change's sake, and he was clearly in a position to request what he was used to.

I have heard that, during the '70s when he began to lose some of the advantage in clubhead speed that he held against the field, Jack experimented with some fairly drastically de-lofted drivers to try and maintain his yardage. From that article, I would guess that was maybe when the slightly longer driver shaft came in. Although Wulkotte described Jack's driver going from 43" to 43.5" and up to D6 in swingweight, in Golf My Way Jack describes his current driver as slightly shorter, at 42.75" and only D1, so it looks like as the years went by he added length and weight.

Deadweight of his driver doesn't sound anything special. Again, in Golf my Way he describes his driver as being 13.9oz - but including a 1oz counter-weight. I have an 80's MacGregor driver that's 13.4 oz with no lead under the grip.

Does anyone know how old school leather grips compare in weight to 50g standard rubber grips?

[xgolfx]

A leather grip is merely a strip of leather. Think of a belt. The plastic cap was a contributor to the shorter length. The rubber grip is heavier and longer because of the built in cap. Even a leather slip on , like Neumann, is lighter than rubber. Clubs were not like tires. Everyone's 5 iron was a different loft, lie , and length. Pings were designed to not slice. I have told this before, but again

At the PGA at Kemper Lakes, Jack hosted an exhibiton before the tournament. When Bob Tway was requested by a fan to hit a fade with a two iron, Jack said,"he can't because he plays Ping"

CHARLEY PENNA

[birly-shirly]

[quote name='xgolfx' timestamp='1395619906' post='8934391']
A leather grip is merely a strip of leather. Think of a belt. The plastic cap was a contributor to the shorter length. The rubber grip is heavier and longer because of the built in cap. Even a leather slip on , like Neumann, is lighter than rubber. [...]
CHARLEY PENNA
[/quote]

Thanks Charley. The only leather gripped club I have is a 8813 reissue putter, but your explanation makes sense to me.

The reason I asked was the quote, attributed on another thread to Harvey Penick, about how he thought tour players in the '80s were making a mistake playing '50s era Mac drivers with modern, lighter weight grips that would change the balance of the club.

Do you know whether the original Burke rubber and cord grips were heavier?

[Baby Blue]

Very very cool to read.....

[xgolfx]

[quote name='birly-shirly' timestamp='1395620906' post='8934505']
[quote name='xgolfx' timestamp='1395619906' post='8934391']
A leather grip is merely a strip of leather. Think of a belt. The plastic cap was a contributor to the shorter length. The rubber grip is heavier and longer because of the built in cap. Even a leather slip on , like Neumann, is lighter than rubber. [...]
CHARLEY PENNA
[/quote]

Thanks Charley. The only leather gripped club I have is a 8813 reissue putter, but your explanation makes sense to me.

The reason I asked was the quote, attributed on another thread to Harvey Penick, about how he thought tour players in the '80s were making a mistake playing '50s era Mac drivers with modern, lighter weight grips that would change the balance of the club.

Do you know whether the original Burke rubber and cord grips were heavier?

The Burke-par grip was applied in the same manner as a tire was "vulcanized". That is a term from the time when automobile tires had tubes. The grips were difficult to remove. A blow torch was often used to burn them off the shaft. After cooling, white gas was used to remove the residue. My guess would be that they were heavier than the later golf pride and Lamkin rubber grips but I am not positive

CHARLEY PENNA
[/quote]

[astamm8]

Jack's leather grips (and many others from that era) were 10.5" long, which is longer than today's rubber slip ons. They involved the strip of leather, a bunch of listing paper, some friction tape, a little pitch, a plastic ring, and an end collar and butt cap. I don't know the weight, but I'd be pretty surprised if it's notably lighter than 52g, although it could be. Modern leather grips start at around 60g which is pretty heavy and are much shorter.

[tembolo1284]

[quote name='astamm8' timestamp='1395675228' post='8938557']
Jack's leather grips (and many others from that era) were 10.5" long, which is longer than today's rubber slip ons. They involved the strip of leather, a bunch of listing paper, some friction tape, a little pitch, a plastic ring, and an end collar and butt cap. I don't know the weight, but I'd be pretty surprised if it's notably lighter than 52g, although it could be. Modern leather grips start at around 60g which is pretty heavy and are much shorter.
[/quote]

Awesome info sir! I wish grips today could be longer. At the very least leather grips. Would love to have those old grips from nelson's and jones's time where they go what looks like a foot+ down the shaft!

[golfdude300]

[quote name='astamm8' timestamp='1395594999' post='8931553']
I'm sure they're out there, but I don't know enough player's iron shafts lengths to be sure. Tiger's 3 wood is 42.5. Patrick Reed and Sergio have short drivers. As you've correctly realized length means nothing without loft. TT gives a 37.75" 5 iron recommendation [i]without [/i]loft. Tiger plays that length in his 5 iron, but it's at least 2* weaker than today's "standard," so there's an example if you want it.

Jack's clubs were definitely shorter than today, no question about that. But "standard" was also different when Jack played. Jack's clubs/specs are absolutely unique when compared to today's clubs but weren't that unique when he was playing.
[/quote]

Jacks club specs are currently not available at the Nicklaus Museum, Golf Hall of Fame, or the USGA Museum.

I could be wrong, but I read the MacGregor Muirfields from the 80's had a standard 5 iron at 37.75. Curtis Strange was playing those blades. So even by 80's standards it looks like he was playing irons shorter than everyone else. Keep in mind he easily could have played them longer if he wanted.

Tiger's specs are allegedly posted here on WRX. His 5 iron is at 37.81 at 29 degrees.

[golfdude300]

[quote name='duffer888' timestamp='1395422695' post='8919041']
i thought i heard somewhere that since he counterbalanced his shafts, his SW was in the high Cs?
[/quote]

I had read somewhere that he played his irons at C9. I would have assumed they were counterbalanced since he CB his driver and 3 wood. Then I learned that his irons were not CB and he played them at D3 straight up.

[xgolfx]

MacGregor specs were 9 1/2 to 11 inch grips for 1965.
Jack 's specs
D3 driver 13.7 oz. 43 inches
3wood 14oz. 42inches
1iron 39 inches. Long irons 1/2 down through 7
7-9. 1/4 down
Wedge 35 inches
Wood lies 60 degrees 2 upright
1-7 iron 2 up
Short irons 1 up

CHARLEY PENNA

[Texsport]

I have one of Mr Nicklaus'1-irons and it's exactly 39" long.

Texsport

[golfdude300]

[quote name='astamm8' timestamp='1395675228' post='8938557']
Jack's leather grips (and many others from that era) were 10.5" long, which is longer than today's rubber slip ons. They involved the strip of leather, a bunch of listing paper, some friction tape, a little pitch, a plastic ring, and an end collar and butt cap. I don't know the weight, but I'd be pretty surprised if it's notably lighter than 52g, although it could be. Modern leather grips start at around 60g which is pretty heavy and are much shorter.
[/quote]

I would be surprised as well and it's interesting you pointed that out. Many of todays grips are less than 50 grams. Jack's grips may have been 60 grams or more. That's a big difference and certainly enough to change the feel of any club. However, if his clubs were indeed shorter..I don't see how his clubs could have been played at D3 with a heavier grip.

Thanks!

[Soloman1]

I'm very surprised about having a 37" 5-iron. That's amazing. Where's my hacksaw?

[HoldenCornfield]

[quote name='birly-shirly' timestamp='1395618910' post='8934275']
...Search for the Perfect Swing (published 1968) describes a standard 5 iron as being 37" long and having 31* loft - right in line with Jack's iron specs, give or take 1* in loft.

Hogan took advantage of their development of the lightweight Apex shaft to make their clubs 1/2 inch longer than was the standard of the day with a heavier shaft. I would think though that, at least since the '80s, "standard"length with a heavy TTDG shaft fitted has been the same as the "extended" clubs that Hogan built. Of the half dozen or so sets of irons to pass through my hands, I've only had one set play at the 1968 "standard" length - and as an average, maybe even 1968 average, height guy, [b]I really liked the shorter, more manageable, length.[/b] Graphite shafted irons tend to be longer again. Either to hit the ball further, or to save the manufacturing hassle of changing the weight of the clubhead depending on what shaft is being fitted...
[/quote]

I like that idea as well. It's one of the reasons I'm looking for an older (50's-60's) set at present -- to put it to the test. I'm a little hesitant to lop off my still-original Hogans at the moment. My 67's are a 1/2 inch longer and the 78's 1 full inch longer. Of course, my 2005's are a 1/2 longer again than the 78's. And If I still had modern graphite shafted irons they'd grow another 1/2 inch, being a full 2 inches longer than the 50's/60's standards.

I think that's why you will read/hear comments about how vintage irons, "Are just too short me for." Really? If you can't hit a vintage 37" 5 iron how can you hit your modern 37" 7 iron? The answer, of course, is the lie angle of the club. The key is to make the lie angle of the vintage club match what you're used to in your equivalent-length modern club.

I recently came across some information on the typical Wilson and Spalding iron specs from this era. I can't recall the source now (Maltby?) but I remember thinking it seemed pretty reliable so I wrote them down:

[i]Iron - length/loft/lie[/i]
2 -- 38.5" / 20* / 57*
3 -- 38.0" / 24* / 58*
4 -- 37.5" / 28* / 59*
5 -- 37.0" / 32* / 60*
6 -- 36.5" / 36* / 61*
7 -- 36.0" / 40* / 62*
8 -- 35.5" / 44* / 63*
9 -- 35.0" / 48* / 64*
Pw- 35.0" / 52* / 64*
Sw- 35.0" / 56* / 64*

- I love how the clubs have a nice consistent graduation in loft, and the incremental changes in length and lie all make perfect sense. Only the 2 iron violates the old 24/38 industry saw (recreational golfers cannot consistently hit and therefore, should not carry, any iron with less than 24* of loft or more than 38" of length).

- There are no gaps here that would create untenable yardages for full iron shots. I played with a guy recently who carried four wedges; a pitching wedge from his full set and then individually purchased (and unmatching) 52*, 54*, and 56* wedges. He didn't know the loft on the pw. I asked him how far he normally hit it -- "145 yards." How far do you hit the 52* -- "About 125". So what do you do when you're 135 yards out? "Well, its a problem...I either have to let up on the pw or really step on the 52." He didn't carry his 3 iron -- because he can't hit it, and mentioned that he really didn't need the 4 iron either -- "Because it goes the same distance as my 5." This guy was the poster child for what's wrong with the modern club setup, and he wasn't a hack, either, probably about a 6-8 handicap. I went home and looked up the specs on his irons (Callaway) and found that his pw was 45*, creating a 7* gap between it and his 52* wedge. And his 3-4-5 irons only had 2* gaps between them.

Instead of a 3 iron, he carried a 3 hybrid, but of course he did not know the loft on it, it was 1.5" longer than his 4 iron, and had a graphite shaft (his irons were steel). He also had a 46" driver with an ultralite graphite shaft, and a 3w that was longer than my driver. His hybrid, 3w, and driver were all different makes, as were the graphite shafts that also had different flexes and weights.

It just astounds me that people will pay $1500-2000 for what is essentially a broken set of clubs. You could go to the local thrift store and pick out 13 random clubs that would have about as much logic and forethought to the set makeup as what the typical recreational golfer carries these days.

He was especially proud of his new $200 putter. "Look at the milling on this thing, you just know its a great piece of metal. No offense, but this has to be better than that old thing you use." He was referring, of course, to my recently acquired $6 bullseye.

BTW, we played 9 holes and shot the same score. And I have spent less money on the 14 clubs I carried, the new grips I put on them, and the vintage bag that I carried them in, than he spent on his putter.

All more reasons why I LOVE vintage golf clubs.