What if most of what you know about irons is wrong?

[Nspiel58]

I just received the latest email from Ben Hogan golf and thought I should share it below. What comes to mind for me in the explanation is the sensibility of having the majority of weight in the centre of the club in order to maximize impact, rather than having the weight around the perimeter of the head. I know people will say that not all golfers are "capable" of hitting the sweetspot, and that's fine, but I think anyone who plays the game and wants to do well (we all do), and would like to make better and more consistent contact with the ball, needs to have a club which forces you to do that. Am I being too condescending? I don't think so. Obviously, golfers will decide what type of head they're going to play with, what shaft, grip, etc., is most appropriate to the type of swing each each has, swingspeed, and the more accurate the fitting the better the total club is going to be. My thinking is that, if you have all the other issues addressed, the head itself should be the most effective design for hitting the ball. Has the Ben Hogan Company come up with the "ideal" head design? The discussion surrounding persimmon wood heads appears to focus on how little difference there is in flight and distance when the ball is struck well. Is golf trending back to a more "traditional approach, with hickory shafts, wood woods and forged muscleback irons? What are your thoughts?

 

 

 

What if most of what you know about irons is wrong?

 

 

 

 

Mr. Hogan put great stake in the feel of an iron, so he insisted on forging the heads and putting plenty of mass behind the impact point.

That’s why one of the driving principles behind the development of the new Ben Hogan FORT WORTH 15 irons and TK 15 wedges was to challenge perimeter weighting as it has been “taught” to us over the past 30+ years. We just could not make sense of moving all the mass of the club away from the impact area of the face.

Both robot and live golfer testing has proven to us that much of what we’ve all been told about perimeter weighting isn’t exactly as it seems. We found that moving all the mass as far from the center of the face as possible is going too far. And the trend toward ever thinner faces has caused very clear problems with distance consistency, not to mention a feeling of impact that is anything but solid. Not at all what Mr. Hogan cherished.

The best example of why can be found in the simple claw hammer.

It drives nails very efficiently, because all the mass is in line with the impact area. Even an off-center hit delivers sufficient energy to do the job. But turn that

hammer on its side and try to drive a nail with the thin area where the hammer

head and handle meet -- it doesn’t work well at all, does it?

That simple hammer turned on its side is very similar to a modern ‘game improvement’ golf club head, wherein all the mass has been moved far away from the impact zone. The impact efficiency (i.e. “smash factor”) is compromised, along with your ability to hit the shots you want – draws, fades, taking a few yards off . . .

That’s why Ben Hogan Golf has completely re-defined perimeter weighting . . . to move mass back closer to the primary impact zone. Our deceptively simple-looking design provides more mass behind a slight miss than even behind a center hit. That makes your misses as good as or better than even most of the so-called “game improvement” irons, while giving you a solid “Hogan” feel and responsiveness to your shotmaking skills.

Re-defined perimeter weighting is just one of the technologies in the new Hogans. You’ll find the FORT WORTH 15 irons and TK 15 wedges to be the most innovative approach to your prime scoring clubs in many years.

[stevemcgee99]

I still don't understand why they don't fill that belly-button on the back of their blade-on-blade with LEAD?

But, good for these guys! I'm glad a company, not just curmudgeons, is shining a light on the marketing / technology BS that is so rampant.

[Forged4ever]

Great post!!

My only comment would be that I wish that this was posted in the Equipment section where we'd get a larger audience and where the fan bois hang out.

I love to listen to em when they start chirpin

Thanks for posting!!

Fairways & Greens My Friend,
Richard

[birly-shirly]

I dunno. This isn't a knock on the clubs per se, but I hate that hammer analogy. I'll bow to anyone with the physics or engineering background to contradict me, but that smells strongly of BS to me.

If Hogan are going to talk "impact efficiency" then surely they're saying that a pure blade with its mass "centered" behind the ball is going to hit the ball further than a cavity back. That's just not true, is it? Because, if there's one thing I don't doubt of the big OEMs, it's that they're trying to sell drivers that hit the ball as far as they legally can. And the modern driver has the least amount of mass directly behind the ball of any club in history that hasn't just whiffed.

[stevemcgee99]

But it's not just a question of hitting it as far as possible. We need to hit it to the right place. That means it can't go too far, too left or too right, either.

These are irons.

To me, it's pretty ridiculous to remove loft from a club, and still call it 'x' iron. People play modern clubs and are so surprised that I use a 2 iron as a relative beginner. But isn't that just a 4 iron? Although I think it's a little gimmicky, I can totally understand why Hogan put lofts instead of numbers on their irons.

Time to start making sense again.

[Forged4ever]

[quote name='birly-shirly' timestamp='1430256736' post='11461019']
I dunno. This isn't a knock on the clubs per se, but I hate that hammer analogy. I'll bow to anyone with the physics or engineering background to contradict me, but that smells strongly of BS to me.
[/quote]THIS would be my only question and I'm not challenging the analogy(Hammer), because I do not have enough knowledge in this area to intelligently challenge. However I do have extensive knowledge/experience in the Orthopedic Implant Industry(Only non-MD to be on Orthopedic Grand Rounds Lecture schedule(Normal Biomechanics of a Pre-Op knee vs. a Post-Op knee)at UPMC, and no that's not a PB, simply a fact, lol) and the Implant companies use a lot of inaccurate analogies with the public and they skirt a very fine line due to it being a "surgical/medical device."

Later Ed: 04/28/15, 6:59-> "Innacurate" might be a tad strong- "Incomplete" would be a better word. There is much much more to designing/choosing an implant for an individual than what these companies are telling the public and then "John Smith" runs into Dr Jones' office with either a computer generated "article(in reality an ad)" or a page that he's torn out of SI, lol, TELLING Dr. Jones that he thinks that this is the best implant for him, LMAO. Thanx, RP II

I think the world of Terry, Barry, et al., I'm just asking someone with club experience, like Birley, is this an accurate analogy/theory?

Nice post Bro!!

Have a nice evening

My Best,
Richard

[HoganApexBlades]

Thanks N! I enjoyed reading the email from the "Golf Company" I wish them many years of success!

[GWD]

Theory is great, of course. But the proof is in the performance. A great ball striker could hit just about anything. Many of the rest of us are not great ball strikers.

If someone (Hogan Inc. For instance) came up with an iron design that proved their theory, then people would stand in line for the product.

I read a lot of equipment posts here on WRX and some like the Hogan clubs. Not many love them. There is hardly a stampede to own them.

[Fellaheen51]

Wasn't the original Hogan "blade on blade" design a means of concentrating mass behind the sweet spot AND extending the mass horizontally along the back of the clubhead, thus achieving a relatively more forgiving iron? Compared with blade designs of the period and predating Karsten perimeter weighting. If one was to accept this premise, then the "hammer" analogy would seem to be a valid argument.

Were irons during the time of Mr. Hogan's design involvement being advertised as "our irons are longer than yours"? I don't have that answer. Seems as though the focus was on accuracy, feel and forgiveness (i.e. enhanced sweet spot).

Then Karsten comes along and moves all that mass to the perimeter, taking the forgiveness quotient to the next level. Also into a cast head design that had to have a lower cost of production factor compared with a forged head. But lofts were still similar so that a well struck ball with either would still fly the same relative distance. That very subjective factor of feel is what may have been lost along the way. Then along comes "loft jacking", which to me is nothing more than marketing boolah. If I have a 150 yard shot to make, what possible difference does it make if I'm using a 6i or an 8i.

Steve was exactly right when he said that it was not how far you hit an iron, "it's hitting it to the right spot". Interesting topic for discussion folks which, I believe, will be conducted in a civilized and respectful manner here. My .02.

Edit note on above: Maybe the performance enhancement of the new Hogan irons is not being realized relative to the price they're asking for them. Law of diminishing returns is in effect. Or is there a cache factor involved with finding their market niche? Lord knows thats never happened before in golfdom.

I do find their marketing slogan a little disingenuous. Wrong for the scratch golfer as well as the high capper?

[HoganApexBlades]

[quote name='Fellaheen51' timestamp='1430268916' post='11462145']
Wasn't the original Hogan "blade on blade" design a means of concentrating mass behind the sweet spot AND extending the mass horizontally along the back of the clubhead, thus achieving a relatively more forgiving iron? Compared with blade designs of the period and predating Karsten perimeter weighting. If one was to accept this premise, then the "hammer" analogy would seem to be a valid argument.

Were irons during the time of Mr. Hogan's design involvement being advertised as "our irons are longer than yours"? I don't have that answer. Seems as though the focus was on accuracy, feel and forgiveness (i.e. enhanced sweet spot).

Then Karsten comes along and moves all that mass to the perimeter, taking the forgiveness quotient to the next level. Also into a cast head design that had to have a lower cost of production factor compared with a forged head. But lofts were still similar so that a well struck ball with either would still fly the same relative distance. That very subjective factor of feel is what may have been lost along the way. Then along comes "loft jacking", which to me is nothing more than marketing boolah. If I have a 150 yard shot to make, what possible difference does it make if I'm using a 6i or an 8i.

Steve was exactly right when he said that it was not how far you hit an iron, "it's hitting it to the right spot". Interesting topic for discussion folks which, I believe, will be conducted in a civilized and respectful manner here. My .02.

Edit note on above: Maybe the performance enhancement of the new Hogan irons is not being realized relative to the price they're asking for them. Law of diminishing returns is in effect. Or is there a cache factor involved with finding their market niche? Lord knows thats never happened before in golfdom.
[/quote]

Fella, Great Post!

[TheLarch]

If most of what I know about irons is wrong it would just mean I know as much about irons as I know about women.

[Shambles]

More interesting to me is their V sole technology. It seems to espouse a direct opposite of my thinking on a proper flange and encourages a swing contact that would have destroyed the balatas of old for full swings. I'm wondering if that would also be the case with the modern ball. Offhand, it seems to encourage skulling. I really feel the need to find one of them and play around with it for a few months.

Hogan had a muscle back way back when in the Percussion Center Irons. It was in the late fifties I think, and reasonably popular. The hammer image is something I kept in my mind when dealing with tall grass in front of my ball. Its a good image for me as it helps me focus on striking that ball accurately and way hard. Nothing really new in the ad involved other than their V sole technology and even then it would not surprise me too much if someone came out with an example from way back. Playing with the bounce, and other parts of the club, is an old skill. Something somewhat similar might be in the W of the Eye 2's but this is just off the top of my head and a rather careless thought. Best would be to find one of these clubs and try it out for a few months.

Personally I doubt the mass behind impact as against perimeter weighting is worth all the noise. Experience tells me that all clubs work well once they are assembled fit for your swing. There will be some small differences depending on design but that is better described as small trade offs and those only become important if those aspects are important to your game.



Shambles

[farmer]

I think that all the cavity does is move the center of gravity. If it's away from the heel, more in the center of the face, mishits go better because they are closer to the COG. The old Hogan irons had to be nearly shanked to hit them really solidly, or at least the two sets I owned were this way. I also think that Hogan saying was made up by some marketing guy.

[Shambles]

[quote name='farmer' timestamp='1430278190' post='11463095']
I think that all the cavity does is move the center of gravity. If it's away from the heel, more in the center of the face, mishits go better because they are closer to the COG. The old Hogan irons had to be nearly shanked to hit them really solidly, or at least the two sets I owned were this way. I also think that Hogan saying was made up by some marketing guy.
[/quote]

My thinking on this is that with the small heads, tall hosels, low toes and heavy shafts plus the pins and plenty of epoxy, it shouldn't be all that surprising that the COG moved left of center. There was also the then popular thought that players needed to know how to bend the ball left, right, high and low as a basic skill, which meant clubs needed a slightly higher COG with a more neutral orientation. Throw in the fact that club specs were more often eyeballed and you have a game with a face that only a mother could love.



Shambles

[Oldplayer]

If Hogan are talking about mass behind the sweet spot then why are the heads scalloped out?
Secondly, cavity back or perimeter weighted irons inherently going inconsistent distances is a myth. Modern cb designs with modern casting techniques do not have this issue.
This statement alone reduces the credibility of what the company is saying about these irons and makes their utterances seem more like marketing BS than useful info.
I think it is fine and commendable that they are making an effort to re-establish the Hogan name in the equipment industry but not sure I like the way they are going about it.

[Fellaheen51]

Was of the opinion that COG in irons is a design parameter used to influence trajectory. Not feel or forgiveness. But I'm fast approaching using up my limited knowledge base on such things. The googles took me to a posting on the WRX on said topic. So I totally defer to the experts, especially post #14 by TW.

http://www.golfwrx.com/forums/topic/755567-the-physics-of-cog/

Agree with Oldplayer when he comments on inconsistent distances with CB (i.e. perimeter weighted) irons. A "perfectly" struck ball goes X yards. Every time. Not X yards this time and Y yards the next. With all factors being equal. Seems as though the physics behind this would not allow for variable outcomes.

[Pigems]

You can drive a nail with the side of a hammer just fine, I've been doing construction for over 15 years and do it all the time in tight spaces.

[Oldplayer]

[quote name='Pigems' timestamp='1430303601' post='11463971']
You can drive a nail with the side of a hammer just fine, I've been doing construction for over 15 years and do it all the time in tight spaces.
[/quote]
Yeah +1
These guys who think this stuff up are definitely not carpenters. I was in the game 35 years and could drive a nail just as well with the head side on. The weight was still there. Lol.

[KYMAR]

Too condescending? Not at all OP. I think your being the perfect amount of condescending.

I like to play golf score. Enjoy playing golf swing.

[Pigems]

[quote name='Oldplayer' timestamp='1430304137' post='11463985']
[quote name='Pigems' timestamp='1430303601' post='11463971']
You can drive a nail with the side of a hammer just fine, I've been doing construction for over 15 years and do it all the time in tight spaces.
[/quote]
Yeah +1
These guys who think this stuff up are definitely not carpenters. I was in the game 35 years and could drive a nail just as well with the head side on. The weight was still there. Lol.
[/quote]

Exactly, your still swinging 20/22/24oz of steel at the nail.

The new Hogan irons are sweet looking though

[HackerD]

Yeah +2
I'm NOT an experienced carpenter and the side of the hammer is less likely to miss the nail LOL. But the analogy holds for golf if you don't hit the ball right on the sweet spot every time.

[Pigems]

[quote name='Forged4ever' timestamp='1430261711' post='11461395']
[quote name='birly-shirly' timestamp='1430256736' post='11461019']
I dunno. This isn't a knock on the clubs per se, but I hate that hammer analogy. I'll bow to anyone with the physics or engineering background to contradict me, but that smells strongly of BS to me.
[/quote]THIS would be my only question and I'm not challenging the analogy(Hammer), because I do not have enough knowledge in this area to intelligently challenge. However I do have extensive knowledge/experience in the Orthopedic Implant Industry(Only non-MD to be on Orthopedic Grand Rounds Lecture schedule(Normal Biomechanics of a Pre-Op knee vs. a Post-Op knee)at UPMC, and no that's not a PB, simply a fact, lol) and the Implant companies use a lot of inaccurate analogies with the public and they skirt a very fine line due to it being a "surgical/medical device."

Later Ed: 04/28/15, 6:59-> "Innacurate" might be a tad strong- "Incomplete" would be a better word. There is much much more to designing/choosing an implant for an individual than what these companies are telling the public and then "John Smith" runs into Dr Jones' office with either a computer generated "article(in reality an ad)" or a page that he's torn out of SI, lol, TELLING Dr. Jones that he thinks that this is the best implant for him, LMAO. Thanx, RP II

I think the world of Terry, Barry, et al., I'm just asking someone with club experience, like Birley, is this an accurate analogy/theory?

Nice post Bro!!

Have a nice evening

My Best,
Richard
[/quote]

It ain't braggin' if you done it Richard

[Pigems]

One thing we COULD maybe take from hammers is this. Heavier heads and lighter shafts. I had a Stilletto Titanium hammer that was only 15oz, but struck with the force of a 24oz hammer because it has a steel face with a titanium head and shaft. So it basically had a super heavy swing weight. So it required less force in theory to drive the nail the same distance on a given swing.

So maybe we should be trying super heavy heads with lightweight shafts instead??

[Oldplayer]

[quote name='Pigems' timestamp='1430304750' post='11463991']
[quote name='Oldplayer' timestamp='1430304137' post='11463985']
[quote name='Pigems' timestamp='1430303601' post='11463971']
You can drive a nail with the side of a hammer just fine, I've been doing construction for over 15 years and do it all the time in tight spaces.
[/quote]
Yeah +1
These guys who think this stuff up are definitely not carpenters. I was in the game 35 years and could drive a nail just as well with the head side on. The weight was still there. Lol.
[/quote]

Exactly, your still swinging 20/22/24oz of steel at the nail.

The new Hogan irons are sweet looking though
[/quote]
Yeah I'm sort of meh at the looks myself although I have not seen them in the flesh.
I guess to me they look functional but are a long way from classic blade art IMO.

[CheckJV]

[size=5]Is this a GolfWRX sponsor's post? I am confused.[/size]

[Fellaheen51]

Ever since I saw the new Hogans, couldn't get the similarity out of my mind. Different yes, but how much different?

[attachment=2735147:image.jpg][attachment=2735149:image.jpg]

[birly-shirly]

[quote name='Fellaheen51' timestamp='1430268916' post='11462145']
Wasn't the original Hogan "blade on blade" design a means of concentrating mass behind the sweet spot AND extending the mass horizontally along the back of the clubhead, thus achieving a relatively more forgiving iron? Compared with blade designs of the period and predating Karsten perimeter weighting. If one was to accept this premise, then the "hammer" analogy would seem to be a valid argument.

[b]Were irons during the time of Mr. Hogan's design involvement being advertised as "our irons are longer than yours"? I don't have that answer. Seems as though the focus was on accuracy, feel and forgiveness (i.e. enhanced sweet spot).[/b]

[/quote]

Absolutely they were. There were even irons called "1+" to denote that they would hit the ball 1 club further than other companies' clubs.

Hogan pioneered the lightweight steel shaft, which they used to build irons at a longer length than was the standard at the time. And, if you compare the specs here [url="http://persimmongolftoday.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/Hogan-Iron-History.pdf"]http://persimmongolftoday.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/Hogan-Iron-History.pdf[/url] to the industry standards that pdgolferman put up recently, Hogan irons look strong lofted too.

So there you have it, overlength lightweight shafts and jacked lofts!

[Fellaheen51]

Well done BS. Thanks for the answer to the question. Guess the "mine is longer than yours" has always been part of the male (golfer) psyche.

[nova6868]

I don't know if I really like their analogy, but the truth is that iron "tech" hasn't really changed so much that playing SGI irons definitively lowers your score.

Woods... Yes. Who still plays persimmons or even 250cc drivers? The new ones are definitely better.

Who still plays blades and muscle backs? Lots of people including many pros.

[Bad9]

[quote name='Shambles' timestamp='1430274833' post='11462773']. Nothing really new in the ad involved other than their V sole technology and even then it would not surprise me too much if someone came out with an example from way back.


Shambles
[/quote]

I played Zero Tolerance Z Wedges back in 2002-2003 and they had this exact same sole. This was before Eidolon, Scor and maybe even Reid Lockhart. So you are right it is not new or unique.