Offset... Is this really necessary anymore?

[ChaosTheory]

Maltby and Wishon have nice forged CBs with blade-like offset. You rarely see much offset on forged clubs, and I think part of that has to do with the softness of the metal versus the stresses where the offset hosel meets the blade.

[Stuart_G]

I didnt realize that all irons have offset. it certainly doesnt look obvious to naked eye with my Rac Mb

Im surprised that SW has the least and 2iron has the most.

Thought it might be the other way around.

I think that reason might be how much the hosel sticks out in front of the middle of the face making it easier to shank a wedge than an 2 iron so to "offset' that

the lower lofted irons are offset more so equal amount of hosel is availble as there is in a SW.

 

My guess (and it is just a guess) is that as the loft increases, the c.g. will move rearward if the offset stayed the same (think - more loft, more of the face and head projects behind the shaft). The offset progression would compensate for that (at least some) and help keep the c.g. position more consistent relative to the shaft line.

[harolease]

I didnt realize that all irons have offset. it certainly doesnt look obvious to naked eye with my Rac Mb

Im surprised that SW has the least and 2iron has the most.

Thought it might be the other way around.

I think that reason might be how much the hosel sticks out in front of the middle of the face making it easier to shank a wedge than an 2 iron so to "offset' that

the lower lofted irons are offset more so equal amount of hosel is availble as there is in a SW.

 

My guess (and it is just a guess) is that as the loft increases, the c.g. will move rearward if the offset stayed the same (think - more loft, more of the face and head projects behind the shaft). The offset progression would compensate for that (at least some) and help keep the c.g. position more consistent relative to the shaft line.

 

yes might be correct. I was thinking along the same lines. The ball contact in the wedge would more rearward compared to a 2 iron if no offset. .

[Cwebb]

Maltby and Wishon have nice forged CBs with blade-like offset. You rarely see much offset on forged clubs, and I think part of that has to do with the softness of the metal versus the stresses where the offset hosel meets the blade.

 

Yeah, the 2 best constant offset sets available and still in production

[dlygrisse]

KZG used to make a zero offset iron. Might be worth checking out if you really can't stand offset.

 

Those still have 1.75MM of offset in the long irons and 1.25MM in the short irons. very minimal but not zero as the name implies.

[Cwebb]

I didnt realize that all irons have offset. it certainly doesnt look obvious to naked eye with my Rac Mb

 

 

To acheive a look where the leading edge appears to lineup with the front of the hosel, most iron designs need 1-2mm of measured "offset". This will look like "no offset" to most players.

 

A measured offset of '0' can look like the leading edge is in front of the hosel, which most would not prefer

[EddieEdwards]

I've played both well but prefer minimal offset.

 

 

Maltby makes minimal offset game improvement irons.

[EmperorPenguin]

I am of the old school that offset is one of the most disgusting things that can ruin an iron at setup. When I was playing for the first seventeen years of my golfing life I was so vehemently opposed to offset that I played straight blades and even a Bulls Eye Old Standard putter because I hated offset that much.

 

Now that my hair is looking more gray my opinions have slightly changed. I have an eclectic set of irons from twelve makes and all the clubs are game-improvement. Some have offset and some do not. After playing a couple years with this motley crew I declare that there is little difference between offset and non-offset clubs. You must still make a good pass at the ball.

 

One thing I can report with regard to this zero offset matter is that clubs with true zero offset will give the look of the leading edge ahead of the left edge of the shaft at address. I prefer offset such that, looking down at address, the leading edge is dead on line to the left edge of the shaft. Question: exactly what is the offset length to get the leading edge square on line to the left edge of the shaft? Maybe 0.1"? Whatever it is, that should be constant through the set.

 

Some game-improvement junks have the leading edge behind the right edge of the shaft, which is so disgusting I feel nauseous when I look down at address. Such clubs should be banned from golf.

[KRW59]

I'm too lazy to actually bend and measure a club to see for myself.

But if I were to take a forged iron, and increase the loft 4* what

would the decrease in offset be ?. With modern lofts being so strong,

this would make a high bounce traditional lofted set,

with reduced offset.

[Cwebb]

 

 

One thing I can report with regard to this zero offset matter is that such clubs will give the look of the leading edge ahead of the hosel at address. I prefer offset such that, looking down at address, the leading edge is dead on line to the left edge of the hosel. Question: exactly what is the offset length to get the leading edge square on line to the left edge of the hosel? Maybe 0.1"? Whatever it is, that should be constant through the set.

 

 

It's between 1-2mm for most designs, depending on how the hosel is shaped into the face

[gioreeko]

What pros are using irons with a lot of offset? Haven't seen any

[EmperorPenguin]

This, my friends, is the most severe case of offset I have ever seen in a club. At address, the leading edge is in line with an imaginary line about 2 mm right of the right edge of the shaft. Utterly disgusting!

[Cwebb]

This, my friends, is the most severe case of offset I have ever seen in a club. At address, the leading edge is in line with an imaginary line about 2 mm right of the right edge of the shaft. Utterly disgusting!

 

Full grown goose neck ;)

[Nessism]

I'm too lazy to actually bend and measure a club to see for myself.

But if I were to take a forged iron, and increase the loft 4* what

would the decrease in offset be ?. With modern lofts being so strong,

this would make a high bounce traditional lofted set,

with reduced offset.

 

I did an experiment one time and bending weak 2* reduced offset by .74mm.

[harolease]

This, my friends, is the most severe case of offset I have ever seen in a club. At address, the leading edge is in line with an imaginary line about 2 mm right of the right edge of the shaft. Utterly disgusting!

 

How do you feel about the full shaft offset anser(plumbers neck) putters ?

They do work well for long distance putting

[EmperorPenguin]

How do you feel about the full shaft offset anser(plumbers neck) putters ?

They do work well for long distance putting

For the first seventeen years of my golfing life I used a Bulls Eye Old Standard, which has zero offset. I putted quite well with it. When I started using an Anser putter it took a little while to get used to the totally different feel, but I realized that offset for a putter makes it easier to take the putterhead back smoothly. It was odd to have to lead the putterhead with my hands more forward than with the Bulls Eye, but after a while I got used to the feel and it works fine for me today. My only rationale to allow an exception for the putter is that Jack won all but one of his majors with an offset putter (the only exception was White Fang, which he used to win at the 1967 US Open at Baltusrol), so I if offset is good enough for Jack, it is good enough for me.

 

Recently I decided to give the old Bulls Eye a try. Immediately it felt a little awkward, but after a few holes I got used to it again. I can play both now.

[Kelco]

What pros are using irons with a lot of offset? Haven't seen any

 

Sorry, I don't get your point. What does what the pros are using have to do with me or 99.9% of other golfers? (I play about an 8 handicap.)

 

I once saw Jim Furyk give an on-course interview and he was talking about shot-making around the green and the balls that the pros use. He said (I'm paraphrasing), "Many people are using the wrong ball because they see a ball that we pros use, so they use it too. Let me tell you, if you see a pro using a certain ball, that should be your first clue that it's a ball you shouldn't be using." (When I heard him say this, I had an image in my mind of the president of Srixon spitting his beer across the room and yelling at his assistant to get Jim Furyk's agent on the phone.) I think the same thing can basically be said about clubs. If you see a pro playing a club, particularly an iron, it's probably a club you shouldn't be playing.

 

I have a friend who I golf with and no matter what club you talk about he says, "Is anyone on the tour playing that/those?" It drives me crazy. He did it to me a couple games ago when I was telling him about the SL concept and Wishon's success with the Sterlings. Then, the other day I was telling him that I had found a couple of Perfect Clubs in my basement that I had bought for my wife a few years back (an 18* and a 24*). She wasn't using them so I threw them in my bag about a month ago just to see what they were all about. They have now kicked my 5-wood and 4-iron out of my bag for good. Talk about a point and shoot club (and a huge offset, by the way). When I told him how much I liked hitting them, he came out with the same line: Are any pros using them? I looked at him and said, "No! Never, ever, ever, and they never will. Why would anyone on the tour play these? They don't have to. They can hit a 4-iron, and they hit it about 240 yards. What does that have to do with me and my game?"

 

As for offsets in irons, they are going to have very little impact on your ball flight. You need to have a late release and some good swing speed to have them affect your dynamic loft, and the slight delay for closing the face is so minimal that there won't be much affect from that either. As much as anything, I think it just a matter of what you like to see at address (the same can be said for a thick versus thin top line). I like the way an offset iron frames the ball at address. I really like my Wishon 560MCs (2.5 mm in the 3-iron down to 1.5 in the PW), but I think I prefer the slightly greater offset of my SMT 303s, which I played previously (4 mm in the 3-iron down to 2 mm in the PW). To each their own.

[Truok]

I know this is an old post but one way to tackle the offset issue is to bend your irons weaker in loft. Pretty sure 1 degree weak = .6 mm reducing in offset so bending them 2-3 degrees weak would reduce offset significantly. I’m actually on the opposite end of the spectrum and I like offset. I play wishons sterling single length irons bent 2 degrees strong to increase offset a bit. I like to hit a hold off cut and it makes it easier in my opinion and helps launch a bit higher without swinging so hard. I play to a +2 handicap, but I know plenty of players that hate offset so that’s kind of a way to get around it and enjoy more modern players cavity irons.

[Rich Douglas]

I play Sterlings, too. I had grown used to a lot of offset with various Ping sets over the years; it was a bit of an adjustment to use less offset. But the feeling disappeared quickly.

 

As for looks, remember that you don't see the club as it strikes the ball, only at address. Get over it!

 

Back in the day when I first started playing this game, I purchased a set of Bullet woods. These had a closed face and a ton of offset. It was really fun to see the ball go straight instead of the slice I was used to hitting. That lasted about a year until I developed a swing (and switched to the just-introduced Big Bertha). Those clubs wouldn't cut it today; we compensate players these days by moving weights and CG, but the principles are the same.

[Curious]

Set up will be different. Good video showing the set up differences.

[Nessism]

Pretty sure 1 degree weak = .6 mm reducing in offset so bending them 2-3 degrees weak would reduce offset significantly. I

 

Your numbers are too high. I measured .74mm reduction after bending 2* weak as mentioned four posts above.

[b.helts]

Pretty sure 1 degree weak = .6 mm reducing in offset so bending them 2-3 degrees weak would reduce offset significantly. I

 

Your numbers are too high. I measured .74" (1.85mm) reduction after bending 2* weak as mentioned four posts above.

 

His numbers are lower than yours. .6mm * 2 is 1.2mm. You said 1.85mm for 2*.

[Truok]

Pretty sure 1 degree weak = .6 mm reducing in offset so bending them 2-3 degrees weak would reduce offset significantly. I

 

Your numbers are too high. I measured .74" (1.85mm) reduction after bending 2* weak as mentioned four posts above.

 

His numbers are lower than yours. .6mm * 2 is 1.2mm. You said 1.85mm for 2*.

 

They aren’t my numbers they were given to me from Tom Wishon a few months back, I’ve never actually measured them but he has and so I trust his information.

[Nessism]

Pretty sure 1 degree weak = .6 mm reducing in offset so bending them 2-3 degrees weak would reduce offset significantly. I

 

Your numbers are too high. I measured .74" (1.85mm) reduction after bending 2* weak as mentioned four posts above.

 

His numbers are lower than yours. .6mm * 2 is 1.2mm. You said 1.85mm for 2*.

 

My bad, got the units messed up. My original post was correct: 2* = .74mm

 

I learned this by bending a club myself and measuring on my spec gauge. I know that Tom says there was more but that was not my experience. I've got photos in support of this finding (I think) and could dig them up if necessary.

[TomWishon]

So, it is a proven fact that offset helps golfers close the club face at impact. If anyone refutes this, please tell me more.

 

What I don't get is that players, tour pros include, play game improvement irons, with more offset than I can bear to look at, then play hybrids, fairways and drivers with no offset... none what so ever! If it is so darn helpful, why don't golfers play it through the whole set, from LW to Driver?

 

You basically train your release to hold off at impact cause you have a half inch of offset to help close the club face, then you get to the driver and slice the crap out of it. (not everyone does this, but its safe to say a majority of golfers fit this category)

 

Honestly, I think people are just more comfortable looking at offset irons and now companies sell it as "inspires confidence at address." Well then, why aren't they trying to inspire confidence at address on their drivers?

 

But, the same golfers can't stand looking at drivers with offset. Possibly because it's anti aesthetic or its an ego thing. But who am I kidding, golfers don't have egos...

 

I think golfers in general would benefit from learning how to play golf with irons that have little to no offset (when I say little, I mean less then .08 inches, which is pretty much the offset for a standard pitching wedge)

 

This doesn't mean that everyone needs to play blades... heavens no. I'm just saying it would be really awesome to play a set of game improvement irons, game enjoyment irons, or even oversized clubs with no offset.

 

I would honestly love to hear others opinions about this, because it seriously baffles me.

 

Happy to help with my observations based on 36 yrs of clubhead design and research studies. And BTW, you posed a VERY good question.

 

Offset was actually first seen on clubheads way back in the later 1800s. An old famous player and clubmaker by the name of Willie Park designed a set of irons called the Park Wrye-Neck in circa 1870 or so. From what I could tell from my historical research in late 1800s golf magazines it never really caught on because virtually no other clubmakers made similar type models.

 

Modern offset irons first came about some 50 yrs ago thanks to Ping based on the scientific reasoning that some here in this thread have posted - moving the hosel back from the blade portion of the iron increases the distance that the center of gravity (CG) is back from the center line (CL) of the shaft. 50 yrs ago it was just thought that increasing this distance would increase launch angle and shot trajectory.

 

Much later in the 90s came the real explanation for why this could happen. The farther back the CG from the shaft CL the more the shaft could bend forward to increase dynamic loft at the moment of impact when the golfer releases the club.

 

However, numerous tests not to mention use of offset irons by millions of golfers soon showed that there was no guarantee that a higher flight could happen with offset irons for several reasons.

 

1) not all golfers have a late enough release to allow the shaft to achieve its maximum forward bending right at the moment of impact;

 

2) iron shafts are twice as resistant to actual bending than are wood shafts. So the slower speed of an iron swing coupled with a more bending resistant shaft greatly reduced the actual amount a late release player could cause the shaft to bend forward at impact.

 

3) the actual difference in the distance of the CG to the CL of the shaft between a fully offset and non offset ironhead is no more than 8mm (0.31") at the most - this when coupled with points #1 and 2 here means a big change to the eyes in offset is not likely to create much of a visible change in shot height for more than a very tiny percentage of the golf population.

 

Meaning you would only see it clearly from a player with a higher speed and a very late release - and how many players with these characteristics are going to prefer to play with an iron with a huge amount of offset? Not many.

 

Then came the second explanation of offset around 10-15 yrs ago. That being the one others here have posted about concerning the premise that more offset allows the rotation of the club to continue for a split second longer before impact to have the effect of closing the face a little more than if the iron had much less offset.

 

This one can happen but here again it won't do that for all golfers. Not all golfers actually pronate the hands fully through impact to get the right (upper) hand on top of the left (lower) at the moment of impact. Some, actually many, keep the right (upper) hand more under the left (lower) hand as they swing the club through impact. Think over the top slasher or fall-back types, many who chronically slice the ball. And at the end of the day, the far more sure way to reduce a slice through a custom fitting change is to give the slicer clubs with the face angle more closed than the face angle of what he is playing with currently. No matter the release move or swing type, a face angle change will work the same for EVERY SINGLE GOLFER in terms of reducing how open he delivers the clubface to the ball.

 

Now the guy who can leave the face 15* open at impact will still slice the ball a lot with a 4* closed face head but it won't be as much as before. While the guy who leaves the face 4* open at impact may hit the ball straight with the 4* closed face head. Point is, face angle is a degree for degree change in how much the player leaves the face open (or closed in the case of a guy who hooks the ball and needs a more open face).

 

Offset works only when the release is made in a specific manner coming into the ball. Which is something not everyone does the same.

 

So - from a pure performance standpoint, the OP's point is well taken. Irons could all be designed with no offset, which by specs measurement standards is really an offset between 1mm and 2mm. True 0 offset tricks the eyes and makes the leading edge look as if it is in front of the hosel. That's why you never see a clubhead marketed as no offset or zero offset actually having 0* of offset.

 

BUT. . . . and yes there is always a BUT to an explanation like this !!

 

Irons with as much as 10mm of offset have been around for 50 yrs or so. Gazillions of golfers have bought and played with them AND GOTTEN USED TO THE VISUAL APPEARANCE OF THE HEAD BEING BEHIND THE SHAFT. For many of these players, changing to a non offset iron could bring about enough trepidation, unrest or lack of confidence to have a real effect on their swing and swing repeatibility.

 

And then you would have those who do have the release move with the arms and hands that can close the face of an offset iron a little more than with a non offset iron. For those golfers, going from offset to non offset might bring a whole 'nother situation of accuracy control or lack thereof.

 

Thus after all this diatribe of verbosity, the answer to the OP's proposition is probably not - to leave things as they are but to clearly mark irons and wedges for how much they are offset whether in marketing or on the head so those who hate it or depend on it can know for sure what they are buying is what they need.

[Truok]

So, it is a proven fact that offset helps golfers close the club face at impact. If anyone refutes this, please tell me more.

 

What I don't get is that players, tour pros include, play game improvement irons, with more offset than I can bear to look at, then play hybrids, fairways and drivers with no offset... none what so ever! If it is so darn helpful, why don't golfers play it through the whole set, from LW to Driver?

 

You basically train your release to hold off at impact cause you have a half inch of offset to help close the club face, then you get to the driver and slice the crap out of it. (not everyone does this, but its safe to say a majority of golfers fit this category)

 

Honestly, I think people are just more comfortable looking at offset irons and now companies sell it as "inspires confidence at address." Well then, why aren't they trying to inspire confidence at address on their drivers?

 

But, the same golfers can't stand looking at drivers with offset. Possibly because it's anti aesthetic or its an ego thing. But who am I kidding, golfers don't have egos...

 

I think golfers in general would benefit from learning how to play golf with irons that have little to no offset (when I say little, I mean less then .08 inches, which is pretty much the offset for a standard pitching wedge)

 

This doesn't mean that everyone needs to play blades... heavens no. I'm just saying it would be really awesome to play a set of game improvement irons, game enjoyment irons, or even oversized clubs with no offset.

 

I would honestly love to hear others opinions about this, because it seriously baffles me.

 

Happy to help with my observations based on 36 yrs of clubhead design and research studies. And BTW, you posed a VERY good question.

 

Offset was actually first seen on clubheads way back in the later 1800s. An old famous player and clubmaker by the name of Willie Park designed a set of irons called the Park Wrye-Neck in circa 1870 or so. From what I could tell from my historical research in late 1800s golf magazines it never really caught on because virtually no other clubmakers made similar type models.

 

Modern offset irons first came about some 50 yrs ago thanks to Ping based on the scientific reasoning that some here in this thread have posted - moving the hosel back from the blade portion of the iron increases the distance that the center of gravity (CG) is back from the center line (CL) of the shaft. 50 yrs ago it was just thought that increasing this distance would increase launch angle and shot trajectory.

 

Much later in the 90s came the real explanation for why this could happen. The farther back the CG from the shaft CL the more the shaft could bend forward to increase dynamic loft at the moment of impact when the golfer releases the club.

 

However, numerous tests not to mention use of offset irons by millions of golfers soon showed that there was no guarantee that a higher flight could happen with offset irons for several reasons.

 

1) not all golfers have a late enough release to allow the shaft to achieve its maximum forward bending right at the moment of impact;

 

2) iron shafts are twice as resistant to actual bending than are wood shafts. So the slower speed of an iron swing coupled with a more bending resistant shaft greatly reduced the actual amount a late release player could cause the shaft to bend forward at impact.

 

3) the actual difference in the distance of the CG to the CL of the shaft between a fully offset and non offset ironhead is no more than 8mm (0.31") at the most - this when coupled with points #1 and 2 here means a big change to the eyes in offset is not likely to create much of a visible change in shot height for more than a very tiny percentage of the golf population.

 

Meaning you would only see it clearly from a player with a higher speed and a very late release - and how many players with these characteristics are going to prefer to play with an iron with a huge amount of offset? Not many.

 

Then came the second explanation of offset around 10-15 yrs ago. That being the one others here have posted about concerning the premise that more offset allows the rotation of the club to continue for a split second longer before impact to have the effect of closing the face a little more than if the iron had much less offset.

 

This one can happen but here again it won't do that for all golfers. Not all golfers actually pronate the hands fully through impact to get the right (upper) hand on top of the left (lower) at the moment of impact. Some, actually many, keep the right (upper) hand more under the left (lower) hand as they swing the club through impact. Think over the top slasher or fall-back types, many who chronically slice the ball. And at the end of the day, the far more sure way to reduce a slice through a custom fitting change is to give the slicer clubs with the face angle more closed than the face angle of what he is playing with currently. No matter the release move or swing type, a face angle change will work the same for EVERY SINGLE GOLFER in terms of reducing how open he delivers the clubface to the ball.

 

Now the guy who can leave the face 15* open at impact will still slice the ball a lot with a 4* closed face head but it won't be as much as before. While the guy who leaves the face 4* open at impact may hit the ball straight with the 4* closed face head. Point is, face angle is a degree for degree change in how much the player leaves the face open (or closed in the case of a guy who hooks the ball and needs a more open face).

 

Offset works only when the release is made in a specific manner coming into the ball. Which is something not everyone does the same.

 

So - from a pure performance standpoint, the OP's point is well taken. Irons could all be designed with no offset, which by specs measurement standards is really an offset between 1mm and 2mm. True 0 offset tricks the eyes and makes the leading edge look as if it is in front of the hosel. That's why you never see a clubhead marketed as no offset or zero offset actually having 0* of offset.

 

BUT. . . . and yes there is always a BUT to an explanation like this !!

 

Irons with as much as 10mm of offset have been around for 50 yrs or so. Gazillions of golfers have bought and played with them AND GOTTEN USED TO THE VISUAL APPEARANCE OF THE HEAD BEING BEHIND THE SHAFT. For many of these players, changing to a non offset iron could bring about enough trepidation, unrest or lack of confidence to have a real effect on their swing and swing repeatibility.

 

And then you would have those who do have the release move with the arms and hands that can close the face of an offset iron a little more than with a non offset iron. For those golfers, going from offset to non offset might bring a whole 'nother situation of accuracy control or lack thereof.

 

Thus after all this diatribe of verbosity, the answer to the OP's proposition is probably not - to leave things as they are but to clearly mark irons and wedges for how much they are offset whether in marketing or on the head so those who hate it or depend on it can know for sure what they are buying is what they need.

 

Tom can you comment on how much the offset of an iron changes when you bend the clubface 1 degree weak/strong ?

[Nessism]

Tom can you comment on how much the offset of an iron changes when you bend the clubface 1 degree weak/strong ?

 

Arg...

 

Even though I personally measured and bent a club you don't believe me eh? I suppose different clubs can be slightly different (I used a Macgregor 1025M 7 iron) but still...:(

[Truok]

Tom can you comment on how much the offset of an iron changes when you bend the clubface 1 degree weak/strong ?

 

Arg...

 

Even though I personally measured and bent a club you don't believe me eh? I suppose different clubs can be slightly different (I used a Macgregor 1025M 7 iron) but still...:(

 

Not trying to offend you and at the end of the day it’s irrelevant to me because I like my clubs how they are, but I’d definitely trust his abilities to measure that more accurately than you strictly based off the fact that I don’t know you haha, but Tom seems to be the person that pays excruciating attention to detail. You may have thought you adjusted the club 1 degree but it actually was only .5 degrees or something, at adjustments that small it’s gotta be virtually impossible to know to that level of detail exactly the number without having expensive precision equipment.

[Nessism]

Tom can you comment on how much the offset of an iron changes when you bend the clubface 1 degree weak/strong ?

 

Arg...

 

Even though I personally measured and bent a club you don't believe me eh? I suppose different clubs can be slightly different (I used a Macgregor 1025M 7 iron) but still... :(

 

Not trying to offend you and at the end of the day it's irrelevant to me because I like my clubs how they are, but I'd definitely trust his abilities to measure that more accurately than you strictly based off the fact that I don't know you haha, but Tom seems to be the person that pays excruciating attention to detail. You may have thought you adjusted the club 1 degree but it actually was only .5 degrees or something, at adjustments that small it's gotta be virtually impossible to know to that level of detail exactly the number without having expensive precision equipment.

 

IMG_2706 by nessism, on Flickr

 

IMG_2982 by nessism, on Flickr

 

IMG_2985 by nessism, on Flickr

 

IMG_2989 by nessism, on Flickr

 

IMG_2991 by nessism, on Flickr

 

IMG_3009 by nessism, on Flickr

 

IMG_3006 by nessism, on Flickr

 

IMG_2993 by nessism, on Flickr

 

 

36 degrees = 0.143" offset

38 degrees = 0.1145" offset

 

0.143" - 0.1145" = 0.0285" (.713mm)

 

In other words: 2 degrees changed offset by .029" or .713mm

 

If this isn't good enough for you I give up.

[TomWishon]

 

Tom can you comment on how much the offset of an iron changes when you bend the clubface 1 degree weak/strong ?

 

I believe Nessism covered that as well as it can be shown.