Blade users thread (NO DEBATING CLUBHEADS! NO Buy Sell Trade!)

[bodhi555]

They look very tasty, bodhi, and in good condition. It's more than I would pay, but I imagine that "limited edition" thing bumps up the value.

 

Agreed - if I wasn;t getting married in May, then I would find it very difficult not to make a purchase.

 

They also had a limited edition set of VR Pros, finished in Satin direct from The Oven - think they were up at $2700!

[No_Catchy_Nickname]

They look very tasty, bodhi, and in good condition. It's more than I would pay, but I imagine that "limited edition" thing bumps up the value.

 

Agreed - if I wasn;t getting married in May, then I would find it very difficult not to make a purchase.

 

They also had a limited edition set of VR Pros, finished in Satin direct from The Oven - think they were up at $2700!

 

Getting married in May? Congratulations....but it's easier to get the purchases in BEFORE the marriage than after!

 

/trust me...

[bodhi555]

They look very tasty, bodhi, and in good condition. It's more than I would pay, but I imagine that "limited edition" thing bumps up the value.

 

Agreed - if I wasn;t getting married in May, then I would find it very difficult not to make a purchase.

 

They also had a limited edition set of VR Pros, finished in Satin direct from The Oven - think they were up at $2700!

 

Getting married in May? Congratulations....but it's easier to get the purchases in BEFORE the marriage than after!

 

/trust me...

 

Thank you, although just to make it even more complex, the ceremony is in May, but the wedding itself isn't until the May after! We're taking advantage of a trip to Vegas to do the "admin", then having the party next year when we can afford it, so lots of saving. Luckily she's sanctioned me playing golf on both wedding days, and she was happy for me to buy the Vapor Pros, but only becuase I could get them on Interest Free Credit and pay £15 a month :)

 

So new clubs will still be possible, I'll just have to be crafty on how they are paid for :)

[NRJyzr]

NRJ, I don't have the TaylorMade version, but I have the aftermarket version of the Motore F1 and it is an excellent shaft. I have it in all my TEE woods (per my sig). It is stout but not boardy.

 

I have an F1 75 in my Adams driver, have toyed with buying more of them but never bit. Seeing this SuperDeep with the F1 85 caught my attention; I love me some heavier shafts.

 

I found out last night the SuperDeep came standard with a 16g/1g weight configuration, so it wasn't weighted up as much as I thought. Also wondering if this F1 85 was a fairway wood shaft someone stuffed in the driver. It will be interesting. If it turns out to be a bit on the stiff side by way of being tipped, I have a few shafts for my R11s I can plug in there, including a Motore Speeder 7.0. I could also likely find a 7m3 with R11 tip out there without spending too much.

 

I also have three new F1 85 shafts on the way, found an ebay auction where someone was selling a few, same day I bought the SuperDeep. Was going to buy one, impulse bought an extra couple. LOL

[No_Catchy_Nickname]

They look very tasty, bodhi, and in good condition. It's more than I would pay, but I imagine that "limited edition" thing bumps up the value.

 

Agreed - if I wasn;t getting married in May, then I would find it very difficult not to make a purchase.

 

They also had a limited edition set of VR Pros, finished in Satin direct from The Oven - think they were up at $2700!

 

Getting married in May? Congratulations....but it's easier to get the purchases in BEFORE the marriage than after!

 

/trust me...

 

Thank you, although just to make it even more complex, the ceremony is in May, but the wedding itself isn't until the May after! We're taking advantage of a trip to Vegas to do the "admin", then having the party next year when we can afford it, so lots of saving. Luckily she's sanctioned me playing golf on both wedding days, and she was happy for me to buy the Vapor Pros, but only becuase I could get them on Interest Free Credit and pay £15 a month :)

 

So new clubs will still be possible, I'll just have to be crafty on how they are paid for :)

 

Good grief, you realise this means you will have TWO wedding anniversaries to remember?

 

Zero is the limit for most men...

[bodhi555]

They look very tasty, bodhi, and in good condition. It's more than I would pay, but I imagine that "limited edition" thing bumps up the value.

 

Agreed - if I wasn;t getting married in May, then I would find it very difficult not to make a purchase.

 

They also had a limited edition set of VR Pros, finished in Satin direct from The Oven - think they were up at $2700!

 

Getting married in May? Congratulations....but it's easier to get the purchases in BEFORE the marriage than after!

 

/trust me...

 

Thank you, although just to make it even more complex, the ceremony is in May, but the wedding itself isn't until the May after! We're taking advantage of a trip to Vegas to do the "admin", then having the party next year when we can afford it, so lots of saving. Luckily she's sanctioned me playing golf on both wedding days, and she was happy for me to buy the Vapor Pros, but only becuase I could get them on Interest Free Credit and pay £15 a month :)

 

So new clubs will still be possible, I'll just have to be crafty on how they are paid for :)

 

Good grief, you realise this means you will have TWO wedding anniversaries to remember?

 

Zero is the limit for most men...

 

Heh, it's not the wedding anniversaries that are troubling me, it's the 12 months discussing what decorations we're having on the tables that is going to do it for me :)

[DeNinny]

NRJ, I don't have the TaylorMade version, but I have the aftermarket version of the Motore F1 and it is an excellent shaft. I have it in all my TEE woods (per my sig). It is stout but not boardy.

 

I have an F1 75 in my Adams driver, have toyed with buying more of them but never bit. Seeing this SuperDeep with the F1 85 caught my attention; I love me some heavier shafts.

 

I found out last night the SuperDeep came standard with a 16g/1g weight configuration, so it wasn't weighted up as much as I thought. Also wondering if this F1 85 was a fairway wood shaft someone stuffed in the driver. It will be interesting. If it turns out to be a bit on the stiff side by way of being tipped, I have a few shafts for my R11s I can plug in there, including a Motore Speeder 7.0. I could also likely find a 7m3 with R11 tip out there without spending too much.

 

I also have three new F1 85 shafts on the way, found an ebay auction where someone was selling a few, same day I bought the SuperDeep. Was going to buy one, impulse bought an extra couple. LOL

 

I have the red and black F1s without yellow. I think it is the 2nd generation and the ones with the yellow were the first generation F1s. Have you played both and do you notice a difference in how they play? Over time it gets harder and harder to get this shaft on ebay.

[No_Catchy_Nickname]

Heh, it's not the wedding anniversaries that are troubling me, it's the 12 months discussing what decorations we're having on the tables that is going to do it for me :)

 

Oh crap, yes, I remember that. Good luck with that. Just agree with whatever she says, but sound committed!

[NRJyzr]

NRJ, I don't have the TaylorMade version, but I have the aftermarket version of the Motore F1 and it is an excellent shaft. I have it in all my TEE woods (per my sig). It is stout but not boardy.

 

I have an F1 75 in my Adams driver, have toyed with buying more of them but never bit. Seeing this SuperDeep with the F1 85 caught my attention; I love me some heavier shafts.

 

I found out last night the SuperDeep came standard with a 16g/1g weight configuration, so it wasn't weighted up as much as I thought. Also wondering if this F1 85 was a fairway wood shaft someone stuffed in the driver. It will be interesting. If it turns out to be a bit on the stiff side by way of being tipped, I have a few shafts for my R11s I can plug in there, including a Motore Speeder 7.0. I could also likely find a 7m3 with R11 tip out there without spending too much.

 

I also have three new F1 85 shafts on the way, found an ebay auction where someone was selling a few, same day I bought the SuperDeep. Was going to buy one, impulse bought an extra couple. LOL

 

I have the red and black F1s without yellow. I think it is the 2nd generation and the ones with the yellow were the first generation F1s. Have you played both and do you notice a difference in how they play? Over time it gets harder and harder to get this shaft on ebay.

 

My F1 75 is the red/yellow. Unfortunately, it's the only one that I've tried.

 

I have an F3 80 with a TEE adapter for the XCG7 Beta. Played it at 44" or so. I can't compare directly to the F1 because that XCG7 Beta was such a crazy driver for me, found it tough to keep it in the air at times. An Aldila VS Proto helped with that.

 

It's quite possible I am punching above my weight, figuratively speaking, with these F1 85s; the three shafts and the one in the SuperDeep are all Xstiff, while the F1 75 I put in my Adams Fast 12LS was a stiff that I tipped a bit. I think I have to try, my round this past weekend showed I can actually overload the HZRDUS 75 in my LTD if I lean on it too much. Meaning, I may still be loading shafts (or overloading, lol) as I always have.

 

At the end of last season, i was worried I was losing it a bit, I was leaving stuff out to the right and could tell I wasn't quite loading the shaft. I was also fighting my swing, at the time. My round this past weekend showed that it was a temporary issue and not the sign of age related decline I thought it could be. ;)

 

Hence, the purchase of F1 85 shafts in X.

 

Sorry, kind of all over the place there. :)

[Sir Slicealot]

NRJ, I don't have the TaylorMade version, but I have the aftermarket version of the Motore F1 and it is an excellent shaft. I have it in all my TEE woods (per my sig). It is stout but not boardy.

 

In other news, I just got another accessory for my Porn Star set. I needed something to haul them around in that matched, so I got an all black 2017 Impreza Sport sedan. The upholstery matches the grip stitching just perfectly. As planned. Here's a pic of Mistress Katana straddling the steering wheel:

 

 

 

Oh good your new car will be impossible to steal...You've got "The Club!" :haha: :rofl: :cheesy:

 

 

Sorry, but it was right there in the open...

[NRJyzr]

For "DeNinny auto security," I think this might be more fitting

 

[media=]

[/media]

[kiddzizzle]

With all of these new advancements and "more forgiving" blades, are these new clubs like the Mizuno MP-5 and the Srixon 965 considered blades anymore?

 

I seem to see a blurred line between a true blade versus a "forgiving" blade. Any thoughts on this?

[No_Catchy_Nickname]

Well, I finally got to hit my first ever Miura blade today, although it was indoors off a mat and into a net. The local second hand shop has a load of new old clubs in, including the Nike VR Pros and MP-68s I mentioned the other day. Well, among the various unsorted sets was a set of Miura MB 5003 (think I got the number right), 3-PW with DGX100. I tried the 5i and PW in the net. There is definitely a difference between them and the Mizunos, in that I think the Miuras feel a little denser. Nice clubs, but I doubt I will buy them (they haven't priced them yet), because if I go the Miura route I will be going all out for SB-01s, the JDM equivalent of the Baby Blades. That's a pretty big "if", though.

[No_Catchy_Nickname]

kiddzizzle, I don't think a blade is defined by how difficult it is to hit, but rather by its design and shape.

 

That said, I think a club like the Yonex TC forged iron, which looks 100% like a blade but includes titanium inserts to distribute more weight to the perimeter, is a head scratcher. I've hit it, and want to say that it's a blade, but not as we know it.

[DeNinny]

With all of these new advancements and "more forgiving" blades, are these new clubs like the Mizuno MP-5 and the Srixon 965 considered blades anymore?

 

I seem to see a blurred line between a true blade versus a "forgiving" blade. Any thoughts on this?

 

I totally agree that lines are blurred. Based on that same logic, you could consider the mp32 and mp67 as 'blurred line' blades too. That cut in the muscle compromises the blade design too.

 

If I had to start defining a blade exactly I would say it should meet the following criteria at a minimum:

 

- head made from a single block of steel (no multiple materials in the head)

 

- a muscle present that is the thickest in the area where the ball contacts the face and that thickness spans from heel to toe

 

- absolutely no additional perimeter weighting anywhere around the entire head (including the upper non-muscle part)

 

This is just a starting point. Already this disqualifies the mp32, mp67 and a slew of other 'blurred line' blades as 'true' blades.

[kiddzizzle]

With all of these new advancements and "more forgiving" blades, are these new clubs like the Mizuno MP-5 and the Srixon 965 considered blades anymore?

 

I seem to see a blurred line between a true blade versus a "forgiving" blade. Any thoughts on this?

 

I totally agree that lines are blurred. Based on that same logic, you could consider the mp32 and mp67 as 'blurred line' blades too. That cut in the muscle compromises the blade design too.

 

If I had to start defining a blade exactly I would say it should meet the following criteria at a minimum:

 

- head made from a single block of steel (no multiple materials in the head)

 

- a muscle present that is the thickest in the area where the ball contacts the face and that thickness spans from heel to toe

 

- absolutely no additional perimeter weighting anywhere around the entire head (including the upper non-muscle part)

 

This is just a starting point. Already this disqualifies the mp32, mp67 and a slew of other 'blurred line' blades as 'true' blades.

 

So if one were to say that they play blades and they pull out a mp67 there is some truth to it where as it is a blade but it isn't a true blade? I guess this is where I am the most confused in terms of true blades from the past compared to the blades now. I feel like most blades now are made with some sort of forgiveness elements.

 

When was the last true blade made where they met all of that criteria that you seek? I ask not to nitpick blades but I genuinely would like to know as a consumer and a supporter of blades.

[DeNinny]

With all of these new advancements and "more forgiving" blades, are these new clubs like the Mizuno MP-5 and the Srixon 965 considered blades anymore?

 

I seem to see a blurred line between a true blade versus a "forgiving" blade. Any thoughts on this?

 

I totally agree that lines are blurred. Based on that same logic, you could consider the mp32 and mp67 as 'blurred line' blades too. That cut in the muscle compromises the blade design too.

 

If I had to start defining a blade exactly I would say it should meet the following criteria at a minimum:

 

- head made from a single block of steel (no multiple materials in the head)

 

- a muscle present that is the thickest in the area where the ball contacts the face and that thickness spans from heel to toe

 

- absolutely no additional perimeter weighting anywhere around the entire head (including the upper non-muscle part)

 

This is just a starting point. Already this disqualifies the mp32, mp67 and a slew of other 'blurred line' blades as 'true' blades.

 

So if one were to say that they play blades and they pull out a mp67 there is some truth to it where as it is a blade but it isn't a true blade? I guess this is where I am the most confused in terms of true blades from the past compared to the blades now. I feel like most blades now are made with some sort of forgiveness elements.

 

When was the last true blade made where they met all of that criteria that you seek? I ask not to nitpick blades but I genuinely would like to know as a consumer and a supporter of blades.

 

I'm loving this open ended discussion.

 

Well since I joined this thread as an mp67 user as my only blades, I can tell you that I fully questioned and admitted to not knowing whether or not I was a true blade user. I think the general thread consensus (besides "who cares?" and "close enough") was that the mp67 was a blade but we really didn't get into a technical definition of it. But to your point, that cut muscle was supposedly a "forgiveness" element as you mentioned.

 

But I don't see it as a recent thing. Those blade muscles with some concavity in the backside of the muscle could be challenged as not 'true' blades because that small concave shape actually creates a small amount of perimeter weighting. And that design at least goes back as far as NRJ's beloved Ram Tour Grind which is not at all a modern blade. And this design has been copied with the mp68, mp69, and 714 MB.

 

Remember too, my initial thoughts were just that. I think it is a solid starting point, but please note that nobody really has defined a true blade to exacting detail like you are asking. So the definition or rather specifications for what is a blade is open ended and only a generalization. And what I stated is more of a proposal to the thread participants rather than an unequivocal definition.

 

But if you apply my proposal as-is, it will encompass many many blades and really only a few would be left out (LOL but not my baby blades or Retro TBs!) And LMAO who cares if you are close enough and only have one minor deviation to the criteria? And if we want to get to exact detail, then we need to somehow figure out how to include a design like a Ram Tour Grind convex muscle in to the criteria and also encompass the mp32 and mp67 'cut'. LOL as a guy that writes engineering specifications, I'm at a loss. So LOL right now I say the Ram Tour Grind is NOT a blade!!! (LOL this is chum for NRJ to propose a counter to this...NOT as a debate, but just as a healthy, open ended DISCUSSION.) And for the record, I'm fine with the mp67 no longer being considered a blade! With my Miuras there's no question they are classic 'true' blades. I may have been an early poser in this thread with my mp67, but not anymore!

[No_Catchy_Nickname]

Thing with the cut muscle or bullet-back is that it is supposed to shift the sweet-spot out towards the toe, so that it is in the center of the face where most golfers aim to strike the ball, rather than a few millimetres towards the toe. At least, that is the explanation I have heard. So if you go by that, it doesn't totally counter DeNinny's condition that the muscle should be thickest where the ball contacts the face.

The convex muscle is certainly an effort to spread more weight towards the perimeter, but not actually to the perimeter, so I would say the RAM Tour Grinds and 714 MBs are safe!

 

Interesting discussion, so long as it doesn't devolve into an ideological "Blade purity" argument (BINO- "Blade In Name Only"!).

[DeNinny]

The logic of choosing a "forgiving" blade doesn't make sense in the context that "forgiveness" is already a marginal thing at best. When it is already understood that a CB or SGI club with all of its "forgiving" features doesn't help worth a hoot, then there is no way those little "forgiving" features on a blade are going to make a difference.

 

And yes I did exactly this on my blades journey. I chose the mp67 because at the time that cut muscle was supposed to "forgive" miss hits a little. LMAO now having played mp67s and bbs and Retro TBs, there is no way that that mp67 cut muscle and whatever it supposedly does to the CG location is doing anything "forgiving" in terms of performance as compared to the Miuras with more "unforgiving" designs. No way. No how. The only thing the mp67 cut muscle does is change the FEEL to be more CB like.

[themr.r.hodgson.8]

PING iBlades are great! Currently playing them now... not to hard and not to soft. They look fantastic and the initial address at the ball is stunning. They offer a tad bit of forgiveness but not much.

[NRJyzr]

DeNinny, I see what you're doing. You may be getting a visit :)

 

[Nard_S]

I'm at a loss. So LOL right now I say the Ram Tour Grind is NOT a blade!!! (LOL this is chum for NRJ to propose a counter to this...NOT as a debate, but just as a healthy, open ended DISCUSSION.) -DN

 

The Ram Tour Grind is way more blade than you surmise here my friend.

 

I have owned a set for almost 20 years and when compared to the other half dozen sets that I later acquired, it is a more demanding club, with a smaller sweet spot than most all of them. Top it off, it truly has a compact head, that is no bigger than your beloved Miura 1957's.

 

The concave radius on the back does little in terms of perimeter weighting. The club has a high CG and a sweet spot on the heel side. It's old school blade that happens to be gorgeous.

 

In my book what delineates traditional blades of yesteryear and blades of the last dozen or so is the trend of placing the sweet spot in the direct middle of face and the lowering of CG to get better performance off of low face, thin shots. Not a bad trend imo. If there is a trade off to doing that, it is that they are smidgen harder to curve the ball with than old school designs.The difference is very nuanced and not much to quibble about.

 

 

Cheers.

[NRJyzr]

For what little it's worth, I see the cut muscle as an offshoot of the famous Wilson Staff Bullet backs.

 

 

Such as it seems to me, it's really about mass distribution, but in terms of CG location, not perimeter weighting. It's always a good idea to have your CG as close to the center of the face as one can get it. The Wilson version above, as well as their muscle shapes sloping towards the toe, were an effort to get the CG closer to that clubface center.

 

Over the years, I'd never thought the Rams were an attempt along those lines, but it could well be. I can see where the cut muscle appears to be a cross between the Rams and the Wilson Staff Bullet backs.

 

The whole "blade purist" line of thought is something I'm not particularly worried about. Frankly, there are folks out there who have disdain for the clubs we refer to as blades, saying the only true blades are something like this:

 

[DeNinny]

I'm at a loss. So LOL right now I say the Ram Tour Grind is NOT a blade!!! (LOL this is chum for NRJ to propose a counter to this...NOT as a debate, but just as a healthy, open ended DISCUSSION.) -DN

 

The Ram Tour Grind is way more blade than you surmise here my friend.

 

I have owned a set for over 20 years and when compared to the other half dozen sets that I later acquired, it is a more demanding club, with a smaller sweet spot than most all of them. Top it off, it truly has a compact head, that is no bigger than your beloved Miura 1957's.

 

The concave radius on the back does little in terms of perimeter weighting. The club has a high CG and a sweet spot on the heel side. It's old school blade that happens to be gorgeous.

 

The blurred line that is being discussed comes about because CG is lowered and moved to the direct middle of face (Wilson FG 59, MP4's). This blurring is not terrible, it does make thin shots perform better and makes it easier to find sweet spot.

 

Cheers.

 

All I'm saying or proposing is how do you specify it as a blade? I'm NOT trying to argue. I know it is a blade. Please just propose a specification! Like a physical spec. You effectively just said it was a blade without one and effectively said the perimeter weighting of the concave muscle "doesn't make it NOT a blade". The question is how do you specify that concave muscle as a blade that also excludes CBs with this design? I kniw what you are trying to say, just pushing for a "blade spec".

 

NOT arguing. I know the Ram Tour Grind is a blade.

 

 

[NRJyzr]

I'm at a loss. So LOL right now I say the Ram Tour Grind is NOT a blade!!! (LOL this is chum for NRJ to propose a counter to this...NOT as a debate, but just as a healthy, open ended DISCUSSION.) -DN

 

The Ram Tour Grind is way more blade than you surmise here my friend.

 

I have owned a set for over 20 years and when compared to the other half dozen sets that I later acquired, it is a more demanding club, with a smaller sweet spot than most all of them. Top it off, it truly has a compact head, that is no bigger than your beloved Miura 1957's.

 

The concave radius on the back does little in terms of perimeter weighting. The club has a high CG and a sweet spot on the heel side. It's old school blade that happens to be gorgeous.

 

The blurred line that is being discussed comes about because CG is lowered and moved to the direct middle of face (Wilson FG 59, MP4's). This blurring is not terrible, it does make thin shots perform better and makes it easier to find sweet spot.

 

Cheers.

 

I knew there was something else I was going to bring up in my previous post, and reading Nard's post reminded me....

 

It's actually a couple things. The first is, I've never thought the Rams were particularly tough to hit. I've heard others say that over the years, but I've not found them that way. They weren't quite in the Palmer Standards class, but I didn't think they were in the Apex PC range, either.

 

Which is funny, as I've heard some Apex PC players say they didn't think their PCs were as bad as their rep, either. LOL

 

The second item is the CG location... as it happens, GolfWorks has measured the actual CG location of the TG-898 Ram Tour Grinds. Me being me, I had to grab my calipers and see if I could find said CG location on the actual 5 iron.

 

It turns out to be much closer to the center of the face than one might expect, based on "blade reputation." It's not quite dead center of the face of the clubhead (though it's actually pretty close), but it *is* largely centered in the blasted portion of the face. Which I'm guessing most folks are looking at as they line up each shot.

 

Said CG is also low enough that you don't have to be essentially hitting the ball fat in order to get the CG on the ball; the TG-898 vertical CG is .778", the midpoint of the diameter of a golf ball is .84". Unless you're using the Top Flite Magna. ;)

[DeNinny]

Small head size could easily be the main reason the RTG is so easy to hit.

[No_Catchy_Nickname]

I got where you're coming from, DeNinny. It's pretty hard to define a blade conclusivel, and it can wind up a bit like the No True Scotsman argument. I know what it is, but I'm not always sure what it isn't. Incidentally, I liked Bigmean's comment somewhere here which said that thread is for people who are mentally hitting blades. Well, he phrased it a lot better than that, but that was the gist of it.

 

Anyway, went to the range this evening, and Hey! Hey! Hey! The swing is back!!! I've truly worked out what was causing the hooking that crept in sometime in the spring last year, and I've got back the feel of my old swing. The really good news is that the loss of distance I was suffering was purely down to the swing mechanics, and not ageing...I was hitting the distances tonight that I was able to hit 2 years ago.

My problem was somewhere along the way I was not rotating my arms and was hooding the club face. With no arm rotation, I was swinging really, really flat, leading to a shallow strike and massive hooks. Now with a proper takeaway, I am getting steeper on the backswing and compressing the ball properly on impact. God, it feels great!

 

Anyway, I took along the Masda Prototype PW, 7i, and 4i to hit alongside my VIPs. The Masdas are shafted with PXi 6.0, and the VIPs with ProjectX 6.0 Rifles. The difference in ball flight was stunning! The Masda PW (46*) went noticeably lower than my VIP 9i (45*). The Masda 7i (34*) was much, much lower than the VIP 6i (33*). From the tee, I would say there was at least a 20ft difference in their apex, but I would love to get this measured on a Trackman. The two 4i are pretty similar in loft, the Masda is 24* and the VIP 25*, but I could barely get the Masda airborne. I actually like the ball flight of the Masda PW and 7i, but the 4i is going to need some work. That said, the range has "low-flight" balls, and hitting them with anything longer than a 5i has always been difficult for me.

 

On a final note, I love these VIPs. I wasn't totally sold on them when I first hit them, but now I just love the look at set up, the way they feel, and the high, penetrating ball flight.

[NRJyzr]

Small head size could easily be the main reason the RTG is so easy to hit.

 

I sometimes wish I'd not gotten rid of the TW Custom Grind irons I'd picked up. They were a reshaft project, but sold them to a gent as his intro to blades. Super square toe, not unlike the TW282 set, which made them smaller than the usual Golden Rams. They were in the Frequency Matched line of Golden Rams.

 

Adding a pic, but there's something funny about this, also. I did a Google search for an image of the TW Custom Grinds, one of the images that shows up is the below. It's in my Photobucket account and I'd linked it to a post asking about square toe compact size blades. Makes me laugh that Googling takes me to my own pic. LOL

 

[Nard_S]

I own 1995 vintage Ram Tour Grinds same model Nick Price played.

 

Clubs are compact and CG is higher than most any MB sold in the last dozen years, the sweet spot is not dead center, it is a tad to heel side. They are not supremely difficult to hit but they are in no way GI or perimeter weighted. The concave back does little to create grand sweet spot.

 

Titelist 681, Wilson FG 59, Macgregor V-Foils all have a lower and more centered sweet spot than the Rams and are easier to play.

 

1999 Hogans have a similar CG location to Rams but are easier to hit and have a bigger sweet zone. These are my favorites.

 

Norman Signatures and Maxfli Australians represent a truer old school design in terms of CG location, they are the least forgiving in my collection.

 

What definitively defines a "blade" in my book, is thin profile with minimal offset and higher CG. What also defines a blade is traditional heft and weighting that is noticeably missing from most GI designs. So clubs like the Titleist 962B, a cast CB iron qualifies as a blade to me.

[Kingcat990]

Has anyone here ever hit a bladed iron with a hickory shaft?