Shortening my irons?

[ecfritts]

I have a set of Nike VPC with KBS $ 120 stiff shafts - standard length, swing weighted to D2 ish. I like them just fine. Well the other day I hit some Callaway Apex CF 16's with PX 5.5's in them. They felt really good (weight wise). Come to find out they were -1/2". I'm not the tallest guy so standard length to -1/2" would suit me fine. The overall weight of the Callaway's felt good and with them being a little shorter than normal, well that felt good too (felt kind of easier to control, if that make sense). Now, I'm not normally someone who has to have lighter weight clubs or shafts - my driver shaft is around 70 grams, I have tried a different diver with a 56 gram shaft that feel too light. To me, it almost feels / seems like if my clubs are a little heavier that will slow my swing down somewhat, in a good way (not sure that makes sense).

 

I say all that to ask - I'm now thinking of shortening my current irons by 1/4" to 1/2". Just not sure what that will do to the swing weights. I read on another post that every inch = 6 swing weight points. I don't want to jack up my current irons and make them too light but the shorter irons felt pretty good (overall weight wise). Just looking for some suggestions from folks on here with more experience in this department. Part of me wants to cut them down, the other part of me says choke down a little and don't mess with them.

 

Hopefully all this gibberish make some sense to you all.

 

Thanks in advance.

[jacobEDGE]

I play my irons at 1/2" short of TaylorMade's standard. I didn't do anything to adjust the swing weight, and I never really gave it much thought until right now. I've been gaming them for over a year now, and at first, I noticed a loss in distance. They were about 5 yards short of my previous iron set that had similar lofts. But after using them for 50+ rounds, I'm actually hitting them further than my previous iron set. I used to choke up on everything, played with standard specs for over 20 years. I'll tell you what, having them actually cut down instead of choking down makes a lot of difference. I love them.

[Jagpilotohio]

You are correct. 3 points per half inch.

 

The only thing you may be overlooking is that you don’t know what the SW was of the CF16’s.

 

You are assuming that they were lighter but they could have been made with heavier heads or tip weights. It’s possible they were “standard”, or near standard swingweghts and you were responding more to the shaft than the SW.

 

Just throwing that out there to think about. I play all my woods and hybrids an inch short but I weight them back to D-2 with hotmelt. You’d never know to look at them.

 

 

[evoviiiyou]

I play all my irons minus 1/2” and always get either HD tape or tip weights depending on the head weights to get back to D2 in the 4-9 and D3-4 in the PW-GW respectively. I didn’t do this onece back on a set of Mizuno JPX825 Tours and it was the worst ball striking season I had and my index went up 6 strokes. On my next set of irons I had a local club builder order them to spec and then swing weight them to specs listed and got back to almost single digit handy with my iron play back to where it was before the prior season. I think some are more mental with swing weight and then throw in the actual static weight of all of the components and it can either be good or really bad.

 

I would get them built to specs that you like then prioritize on the length, then the lie, then the SW and feel complete that when you step into the shot it’s all on you and not the equipment. Prolly mostly mental but it is what it is.

[Howard_Jones]

I have a set of Nike VPC with KBS $ 120 stiff shafts - standard length, swing weighted to D2 ish. I like them just fine. Well the other day I hit some Callaway Apex CF 16's with PX 5.5's in them. They felt really good (weight wise). Come to find out they were -1/2". I'm not the tallest guy so standard length to -1/2" would suit me fine. The overall weight of the Callaway's felt good and with them being a little shorter than normal, well that felt good too (felt kind of easier to control, if that make sense). Now, I'm not normally someone who has to have lighter weight clubs or shafts - my driver shaft is around 70 grams, I have tried a different diver with a 56 gram shaft that feel too light. To me, it almost feels / seems like if my clubs are a little heavier that will slow my swing down somewhat, in a good way (not sure that makes sense).

 

I say all that to ask - I'm now thinking of shortening my current irons by 1/4" to 1/2". Just not sure what that will do to the swing weights. I read on another post that every inch = 6 swing weight points. I don't want to jack up my current irons and make them too light but the shorter irons felt pretty good (overall weight wise). Just looking for some suggestions from folks on here with more experience in this department. Part of me wants to cut them down, the other part of me says choke down a little and don't mess with them.

 

Hopefully all this gibberish make some sense to you all.

 

Thanks in advance.

 

This is NOT what you asked for, but its my suggestion anyway when you are thinking about going shorter.

Most players is only familiar with sets made to 4/8" difference between clubs and a flat SW value.

This is not ideal for the majority of Golfers, but it works for some.

 

The "problem" is the SW scale we use, it cant "see" play length, so it dont to the math right, we end up with clubs we thought would be the same or equal in resistance but they actually goes up in resistance the longer the club is.

 

Since 2003 we have had access to digital MOI scales who can match a set so all clubs in the set has the same actual resistance.

When we measure a MOI matched set on the SW scale, it would look like a progressive SW slope with a progression of 2/3 SWP between clubs, so no clubs in the set has the same SW value.

 

Building 4/8" sets to MOI or progressive SW is not easy since we often need to remove weight from the longest iron heads, and thats not a DIY job, but there is a solution here....

 

We simply rebuild the set to 3/8" between clubs, and then the 7 grams head weight difference get us very close to flat MOI or progressive SW, so there will be no need to remove weight from any heads.

 

You can start from what ever iron you like, and make shorter clubs progressively 1/8 shorter, and then adjust the other way too, so if we start from our #8 a set of 3-PW will now get this play lengths.

 

PW = standard (and compared to std)

#9 = Plus 1/8"

#8 = standard

#7 = minus 1/8"

#6 = minus 2/8"

#5 = minus 3/8"

#4 = minus 4/8 ("one clubs shorter in", without buying a new driver)

#3 = minus 5/8

 

This set is VERY EASY to play, all clubs feels the same and has the same actual resistance, and we DONT loose any distance by going shorter, its compensated by a better impact on those clubs, so most players who goes this way can add both 1 or 2 longer clubs to the bag they could not handle before, since they was both too long, and had way to high actual resistance

 

You can start the slope from what ever iron in the set you want, but it makes a difference to either the long or the short end, so we have to look at how will the short end be (can we go shorter without problems, or is they just fine as they are?)

 

We often use our favorite club in the set at "fitting club", that could be the 8 iron as example.

Then we take that #8 iron, and tune it up with lead tape on the head until it really works as it should.

Now measure SW value on that favorite club and do the math.

 

On sets with 3/8" between clubs, SW progression to MOI is 0.5 SWP between clubs, so if you ends up with a #8 iron that measure D3, the rest of your clubs would have a target SW to MOi that looks like this.

 

PW D4

#9 - D3.5

#8 - D3

#7 = D2.5

#6 = D2

#5 = D1.5

#4 = D1

#3 = D0.5

 

It looks like a mess, but this is how a set matched to actual MOI will look like on the SW scale when we go 3/8" so dont worry about the numbers, all those club will feel the same as your favorite the #8 iron, even if SW values seems to be "all over the place"

 

All this takes, is a new set of grips you would need anyway when we go shorter, a chop saw, and some lead tape to tune it up again, so this can be done at home without much tools at all, and i advocate this as strong as i can, 3/8" sets is the way to go when we want to improve our iron play, and its very easy to do it.

[5hort5tuff]

Howard. Amazing info. I have a very similar set build right now but had never took into consideration the varying SW. Organically it seems I've been doing something similar...in that I can never play my long irons and hybrids with a heavy swingweight. Even my driver cut down to 43.5 never feels quite right to me at D4...The sweet spot for me is d1/D2.

 

What is the science/rationale behind this progressive swingweight?

[Pigems]

I play my irons 1/2” short and they SW to D0, I added the weight back to get them back to D2 but found no difference so I took the lead tape off.

[Stuart_G]

What is the science/rational behind this progressive swingweight?

 

He actually already explained that in his post. It results in set that has a better MOI match across the set then what we get with SW matching.

 

MOI (Moment of Inertia) is the measure of the clubs resistance to accelerating the club in rotation about an axis through the butt. Just like mass is a measure of the resistance to accelerate something for linear motion. Sort of a "rotational mass".

[Howard_Jones]

What is the science/rational behind this progressive swingweight?

 

He actually already explained that in his post. It results in set that has a better MOI match across the set then what we get with SW matching.

 

MOI (Moment of Inertia) is the measure of the clubs resistance to accelerating the club in rotation about an axis through the butt. Just like mass is a measure of the resistance to accelerate something for linear motion. Sort of a "rotational mass".

 

Correct, and with other words, The SW scale was meant to be a "mechanical short cut" to get clubs matched to the same resistance or MOI.

They new about MOI back in the 1930 too, but this is the time before the microprocessor, and the math behind is way to complicated to do on a piece of paper since 1 single error mess it all up. They did as best as they could, and we ended up with the instrument we call the Swing Weight Scale.

 

Its a good instrument when we know its limitations and when it return errors, and thats what we found out when we compare SW matched to a flat SW value like the tradition is, vs clubs build to actual MOI.

 

To use the SW scale to ACTUAL MOI match of clubs, we have to use a progressive slope to compensate for the error the instrument gives.

For short, the SW scale has a rather constant error of 1.33 SWP for each inch, so if we as example wanted to mach a 3W and a 5W to be the same, and those clubs had a play length difference of 1 inch, the SW value of the 5W must be 1.33 points over the 3W, then they are equal on actual MOI.

 

The "progression" we see is simply a correction factor we have to use to get the instrument to do the job right, so actual resistance is NOT progressive like the SW numbers seems to indicate, its FLAT like it was meant to be when we used flat SW (same value for all clubs).

 

So this is simply the way to match clubs like they was always meant to be, but the SW scale could not do the job right, but now it can when we have the correction factor for the error it makes.

[jacobEDGE]

That's basically what the AMT shafts do, right? Lighter shafts as you go up into your long irons.

 

I have the AMT's in my iron sets, and it's super easy to hit my long irons, and elevate them enough to hold greens.

[Stuart_G]

That's basically what the AMT shafts do, right? Lighter shafts as you go up into your long irons.

 

I have the AMT's in my iron sets, and it's super easy to hit my long irons, and elevate them enough to hold greens.

 

Probably meant to address the same "problem" but in a different way. The static weight of each club is reduced but the SW stays the same.

[Howard_Jones]

We can build clubs to actual MOI, but with a different total weight progression depending on shaft choice.

 

For irons, a set with descending wgt shaft will have a total wgt progression of about 15 grams pr inch (13.5-14 grams on SW matched)

If we use constant wgt tapers, we get up to about 16 grams pr inch (vs 14 grams on SW matched)

and if we use a shaft with ascending wgt like AMT we get a total wgt progression of 18-19 grams depending on AMT model

 

Total weight, and total weight progression is fitting parameter #2 in importance, but maybe the hardest parameter of them all to get right, since we have to look on what shaft wgt system our shafts belong to, to be able to see how total wgt progression becomes.

 

Total wgt progression and MOI is 2 different parameters, and makes a difference for different parts of the swing.

From transition and down, its mostly MOI, while in the bottom of the swing, (below 7 o clock), its total wgt thats pulling the shaft away from the player

 

Thats why i used "the one arm swing" to check for total wgt vs the players strength.

Let the player take a "back hand" tennis stroke only using his left arm.

Pay attention to his shoulder down at 7 o clock in the swing.

If total wgt is higher than the player can handle, we will clearly see a drop in his left shoulder around 7 o clock

During play he will have to use his right hand to "hold the club back" and by that he looses club speed and gets drained from energy since the right hand was meant to close up face angle only, not prevent the club from hitting the ground because its to heavy to control with the left arm only.

[ecfritts]

Wow, thanks everyone for your replies - especially Howard and Stewart. So a little more info is - I only use up to a 5 iron (I have the 4 but don't use it). I got the irons from a really good friend who plays for a living and was fortunate enough to have the clubs cut down and swing weighted to D 2 ish on one of the tour van's (when I got them they were + 1/2", so they cut them down and added lead tape to achieve D2 - obviously the longer irons required more lead tape where as the PW has none). I'm not writing this to brag, just to provide as much info as possible. So now I'm worried if I start cutting them down that I will mess them up. I want to make them better not worse. There is a local golf shop I can take them to but I'm sure all they will do is swing weight them. I like to work on my own clubs when I can - I just don't have a lot of equipment to do certain things.

 

Thanks again everyone!

[dsmil]

I did basically what Howard suggests and I like how it feels. If you want to do the lead tape yourself after the shop cuts the shafts, just buy $10 of lead tape off ebay and a cheap SW scale.

[Alhawkeye]

So Howard and Stewert, I have a set that is 1/2" progression currently. I really want to try this 3/8" progression. My 8 iron is my favorite club and it is 36.5" long. So following this I would have to lengthen my 9 iron by 1/8 and my PW by 1/4", is that correct?

 

Or is it better to begin with the PW and make all the longer irons in 3/8" increments then get the SW back to where it was on the 8 iron and move each clubs SW by 0.5 pts from there?

 

I really want to try this but am just a little confused by using my "favorite" club to start.

 

Thanks

[NicholasP]

I'd like to piggyback a question, if using AMT shafts, can you still use the 3/8" length difference to build an MOI matched set? I thought they were made to match SW throughout the set? Thanks for any thoughts.

[Howard_Jones]

So Howard and Stewert, I have a set that is 1/2" progression currently. I really want to try this 3/8" progression. My 8 iron is my favorite club and it is 36.5" long. So following this I would have to lengthen my 9 iron by 1/8 and my PW by 1/4", is that correct?

 

Or is it better to begin with the PW and make all the longer irons in 3/8" increments then get the SW back to where it was on the 8 iron and move each clubs SW by 0.5 pts from there?

 

I really want to try this but am just a little confused by using my "favorite" club to start.

 

Thanks

 

Play length is important, so we need to judge how each end of the set is now, and where we can use some improvements. If we use the PW (or the #8 ) as starting point, we get a set where the 3 iron is 6/8 shorter than standard.

 

For each club longer (than #8) we use as starting point, that #3 iron becomes 1/8 longer (vs cut down 6/8), so if we used the #7 iron that #3 iron become 5/8" shorter than standard, and if we started from #6, that #3 iron becomes 4/8 shorter than standard.

 

Starting from the #9 iron makes the shortest set overall, look at the chart below in another post.

 

Use excel to get all possible options, so you get to see how the set as a whole will look like, both the long and the short end.

 

Going shorter in the long end is for most of us good, while going shorter in the short end might be bad and make them to short, so when we have done the numbers, we have to ask our self what set up of the options we got will make the best set for YOU, (based on the new play lengths), so when you ask if its better to start from the PW, it depend on where we want to go with it all.

[Howard_Jones]

I'd like to piggyback a question, if using AMT shafts, can you still use the 3/8" length difference to build an MOI matched set? I thought they were made to match SW throughout the set? Thanks for any thoughts.

 

We can use what ever shaft model we like, it does not matter for what matching system we wants to use, the only difference would be total wgt progression, who gets higher when we use AMT shafts vs constant wgt or descending wgt.

[Howard_Jones]

Since this goes over the head of many readers, ive made this small chart with comments so we get to see what we have to consider when we choose starting point. Depending on what club we start the slope from, we get a different play length to either the short or the long end or both.

 

Some players will benefit from a more upright stance when they play their short irons, but they can still get the longest clubs shorter to improve ball striking on them too. For this players, using the #7 or #6 iron as starting point is the way to go.

 

If we want to keep the short end as close to what it is as possible, but go shorter against the long end, Using the PW or #8 irons makes the same set who fits that need.

 

If we want them all a tad shorter, we start from the #9 iron who gives us the shortest set of them all.

 

Ask yourself how the short end of the set is now, and you have the answer for what club to start from.

 

I never made 3/8" sets with a starting club longer than the #6 iron, but we do have that option when the long end is good, but the short end is too short. This could be a player who fits 0.5" plus from std, but have standard play length now, so he will make good contact with his long clubs, but struggle in the short end since he have to bend to much over the ball.

 

For each club longer than the #9 we use as starting point, the whole set becomes 1/8" longer, so pa attention to what happen to play length on the #9 iron depending on what club we start the play length slope from.

 

 

 

Ive made a update on the photo (no color lower photo volume), and a chart for each club as starting point in this post below.

http://www.golfwrx.c...0#entry18252834

[ecfritts]

Man, my head is spinning with all this info. Great stuff. If I do decide to go the -3/8" route how weird / odd will it be when transitioning to my hybrids and fairway woods. There would seem to be a rather large gap as far as length is concerned - or would I need to trim those down as well? Sorry for all the questions, just trying to wrap my head around all this.

 

Again, thanks so much for the responses!

[5hort5tuff]

Man, my head is spinning with all this info. Great stuff. If I do decide to go the -3/8" route how weird / odd will it be when transitioning to my hybrids and fairway woods. There would seem to be a rather large gap as far as length is concerned - or would I need to trim those down as well? Sorry for all the questions, just trying to wrap my head around all this.

 

Again, thanks so much for the responses!

 

It would be personal preference probably. I generally play my hybrids at their iron length...and usually around d0.

 

Admittedly I don't know, in terms of MOI, how to build hybrids and woods.

[Howard_Jones]

Man, my head is spinning with all this info. Great stuff. If I do decide to go the -3/8" route how weird / odd will it be when transitioning to my hybrids and fairway woods. There would seem to be a rather large gap as far as length is concerned - or would I need to trim those down as well? Sorry for all the questions, just trying to wrap my head around all this.

 

Again, thanks so much for the responses!

 

That question is only natural, and those who goes this way adjust not only their irons, we should give all clubs from driver to iron this attention, since most drivers "off the rack" is way longer than they should be. For players who fits to play a standard #6 iron of 37.50" the driver should not be longer than 44.00". Now you can draw a slope form that club to your longest iron, and put your woods and hybrids in that slope (for play length).

 

But...if any of those clubs is really good as they are, leave them as they are, we should not try to please a piece of paper with numbers that "looks good", its what works the best we want no matter how it looks on the paper.

[CaseyDan]

So I have question.

 

When I had my irons built by my local guy, we did -1/2" under Callaway standard and then he swing weighted them to D2 with Project X 5.5's. I can play anything from D0 to D2 and notice little difference. Heck, I played -1" last year with the Modus 105 and it didn't feel to light and I actually played pretty well.

 

So, with that, I am interested in going with the -3/8th approach but can I do this if I am starting from the following specs already?

 

And if so, how much would I need to cut off each shaft to do so?

 

PW - 35.5"

9 - 35.5"

8 - 36"

7 - 36.5"

6 - 37"

5 - 37.5"

4 - 38"

 

***All currently swing weighted to D2

 

I do like playing irons that are shorter overall and I am tempted to go back to -1" but thought I would give this a try as another option.

 

Thank you for any feedback.

[Howard_Jones]

So I have question.

 

When I had my irons built by my local guy, we did -1/2" under Callaway standard and then he swing weighted them to D2 with Project X 5.5's. I can play anything from D0 to D2 and notice little difference. Heck, I played -1" last year with the Modus 105 and it didn't feel to light and I actually played pretty well.

 

So, with that, I am interested in going with the -3/8th approach but can I do this if I am starting from the following specs already?

 

And if so, how much would I need to cut off each shaft to do so?

 

PW - 35.5"

9 - 35.5"

8 - 36"

7 - 36.5"

6 - 37"

5 - 37.5"

4 - 38"

 

***All currently swing weighted to D2

 

I do like playing irons that are shorter overall and I am tempted to go back to -1" but thought I would give this a try as another option.

 

Thank you for any feedback.

 

Its the same considerations as for someone using standard or over length now, so look on the small chart above, and try to figure out what end to start from to make it work for you. As i understand you, - 0.5" is what you play now, but how was - 1.0 in the short end when you tried that? still good? if thats so, you can go all the way and start from the #9 iron who makes the shortest set, we can even adjust down the #9 iron before we draw the slope for the others, so its no right or wrong here, only "good or bad fit" and you are the closest to answer for whats good with the clubs you play now, and where is improvements needed or wanted. (short or long end or both)

 

So, if your starting point is a set -0.5" from std. just subtract that from all numbers above to get your new target specs.

 

i have not mentioned LIE ANGLES, but we should adjust a tad on them to when we go shorter, and the easy way is to follow the slope the set has now, so if 0.5" shorter is 0.5* more upright (factory specs from one iron to the next), use that slope. That means if we started from the #9 iron who makes the shortest set, and the longest club is a #3 iron, that #3 iron is close to "2 iron shorter", so we should adjust lie angle 1* more upright and go from here with the others

[CaseyDan]

So I have question.

 

When I had my irons built by my local guy, we did -1/2" under Callaway standard and then he swing weighted them to D2 with Project X 5.5's. I can play anything from D0 to D2 and notice little difference. Heck, I played -1" last year with the Modus 105 and it didn't feel to light and I actually played pretty well.

 

So, with that, I am interested in going with the -3/8th approach but can I do this if I am starting from the following specs already?

 

And if so, how much would I need to cut off each shaft to do so?

 

PW - 35.5"

9 - 35.5"

8 - 36"

7 - 36.5"

6 - 37"

5 - 37.5"

4 - 38"

 

***All currently swing weighted to D2

 

I do like playing irons that are shorter overall and I am tempted to go back to -1" but thought I would give this a try as another option.

 

Thank you for any feedback.

 

Its the same considerations as for someone using standard or over length now, so look on the small chart above, and try to figure out what end to start from to make it work for you. As i understand you, - 0.5" is what you play now, but how was - 1.0 in the short end when you tried that? still good? if thats so, you can go all the way and start from the #9 iron who makes the shortest set, we can even adjust down the #9 iron before we draw the slope for the others, so its no right or wrong here, only "good or bad fit" and you are the closest to answer for whats good with the clubs you play now, and where is improvements needed or wanted. (short or long end or both)

 

So, if your starting point is a set -0.5" from std. just subtract that from all numbers above to get your new target specs.

 

i have not mentioned LIE ANGLES, but we should adjust a tad on them to when we go shorter, and the easy way is to follow the slope the set has now, so if 0.5" shorter is 0.5* more upright (factory specs from one iron to the next), use that slope. That means if we started from the #9 iron who makes the shortest set, and the longest club is a #3 iron, that #3 iron is close to "2 iron shorter", so we should adjust lie angle 1* more upright and go from here with the others

 

Howard, thank you for the great information as it was very helpful. When I played -1" I did have more success with the long irons than any set I have played at -1/2 or standard. The short irons played well and I had not concerns either way. Ball striking was very good with the -1" and I don't remember having any distance loss but it was over a year ago.

 

So, let's see if I followed your instructions correctly to find my target specs for going the 3/8th route. In the image below I have listed standard specs of the Callaway irons, then my current specs and then the 3/8th specs according to your chart. Is this correct?

 

 

[ecfritts]

OK - so I just want to make sure I have this correct (for me and my preferences)...I am considering the 3/8" progression but I am confused about the info from post 5 and the chart of post 19.

 

From the way I read it on post 5 my irons would be (if starting with the PW):

 

4 iron - 38.5" standard minus 6/8" = 37.75 (37 3/4")

5 iron - 38" standard minus 5/8" = 37.375 (37 3/8")

6 iron - 37.5" standard minus 4/8" = 37

7 iron - 37" standard minus 3/8" = 36.625 (36 5/8")

8 iron - 36.5" standard minus 2/8" = 36.250 (36 1/4")

9 iron - 36" standard minus 1/8" = 35.875 (35 7/8")

PW - 35.75 standard

 

But these numbers don't equal what the chart on post 19 says (I could completely be misreading these posts).

 

I'm sorry for all the confusion and questions. Thanks for your patience.

[Howard_Jones]

OK - so I just want to make sure I have this correct (for me and my preferences)...I am considering the 3/8" progression but I am confused about the info from post 5 and the chart of post 19.

 

From the way I read it on post 5 my irons would be (if starting with the PW):

 

4 iron - 38.5" standard minus 6/8" = 37.75 (37 3/4")

5 iron - 38" standard minus 5/8" = 37.375 (37 3/8")

6 iron - 37.5" standard minus 4/8" = 37

7 iron - 37" standard minus 3/8" = 36.625 (36 5/8")

8 iron - 36.5" standard minus 2/8" = 36.250 (36 1/4")

9 iron - 36" standard minus 1/8" = 35.875 (35 7/8")

PW - 35.75 standard

 

But these numbers don't equal what the chart on post 19 says (I could completely be misreading these posts).

 

I'm sorry for all the confusion and questions. Thanks for your patience.

 

you made a small mistake, thats why the numbers dont match

If your PW is your starting point at 35.75 (35 6/8), your new #9 iron must be 3/8" longer.

35 6/8 plus 3/8 = 36 1/8 or 36.125

 

then just add 3/8 to each club from there, and then your numbers should be just like that chart

 

We often mess up when we mix /4 with /8 so convert all numbers to be /8 where 3/4 is the same as 6/8, then we can do the math by ease

[Howard_Jones]

So I have question.

 

When I had my irons built by my local guy, we did -1/2" under Callaway standard and then he swing weighted them to D2 with Project X 5.5's. I can play anything from D0 to D2 and notice little difference. Heck, I played -1" last year with the Modus 105 and it didn't feel to light and I actually played pretty well.

 

So, with that, I am interested in going with the -3/8th approach but can I do this if I am starting from the following specs already?

 

And if so, how much would I need to cut off each shaft to do so?

 

PW - 35.5"

9 - 35.5"

8 - 36"

7 - 36.5"

6 - 37"

5 - 37.5"

4 - 38"

 

***All currently swing weighted to D2

 

I do like playing irons that are shorter overall and I am tempted to go back to -1" but thought I would give this a try as another option.

 

Thank you for any feedback.

 

Its the same considerations as for someone using standard or over length now, so look on the small chart above, and try to figure out what end to start from to make it work for you. As i understand you, - 0.5" is what you play now, but how was - 1.0 in the short end when you tried that? still good? if thats so, you can go all the way and start from the #9 iron who makes the shortest set, we can even adjust down the #9 iron before we draw the slope for the others, so its no right or wrong here, only "good or bad fit" and you are the closest to answer for whats good with the clubs you play now, and where is improvements needed or wanted. (short or long end or both)

 

So, if your starting point is a set -0.5" from std. just subtract that from all numbers above to get your new target specs.

 

i have not mentioned LIE ANGLES, but we should adjust a tad on them to when we go shorter, and the easy way is to follow the slope the set has now, so if 0.5" shorter is 0.5* more upright (factory specs from one iron to the next), use that slope. That means if we started from the #9 iron who makes the shortest set, and the longest club is a #3 iron, that #3 iron is close to "2 iron shorter", so we should adjust lie angle 1* more upright and go from here with the others

 

Howard, thank you for the great information as it was very helpful. When I played -1" I did have more success with the long irons than any set I have played at -1/2 or standard. The short irons played well and I had not concerns either way. Ball striking was very good with the -1" and I don't remember having any distance loss but it was over a year ago.

 

So, let's see if I followed your instructions correctly to find my target specs for going the 3/8th route. In the image below I have listed standard specs of the Callaway irons, then my current specs and then the 3/8th specs according to your chart. Is this correct?

 

 

 

Those numbers looks good to me if PW or the 8 iron is starting point, but in your case, i would have used the #9 as starting point to get the whole set closer to your former - 1.0"

[ecfritts]

Awesome, thanks so much Howard. I really appreciate you taking the time to help me (all of us) out. It is really nice of you!

[CaseyDan]

So I have question.

 

When I had my irons built by my local guy, we did -1/2" under Callaway standard and then he swing weighted them to D2 with Project X 5.5's. I can play anything from D0 to D2 and notice little difference. Heck, I played -1" last year with the Modus 105 and it didn't feel to light and I actually played pretty well.

 

So, with that, I am interested in going with the -3/8th approach but can I do this if I am starting from the following specs already?

 

And if so, how much would I need to cut off each shaft to do so?

 

PW - 35.5"

9 - 35.5"

8 - 36"

7 - 36.5"

6 - 37"

5 - 37.5"

4 - 38"

 

***All currently swing weighted to D2

 

I do like playing irons that are shorter overall and I am tempted to go back to -1" but thought I would give this a try as another option.

 

Thank you for any feedback.

 

Its the same considerations as for someone using standard or over length now, so look on the small chart above, and try to figure out what end to start from to make it work for you. As i understand you, - 0.5" is what you play now, but how was - 1.0 in the short end when you tried that? still good? if thats so, you can go all the way and start from the #9 iron who makes the shortest set, we can even adjust down the #9 iron before we draw the slope for the others, so its no right or wrong here, only "good or bad fit" and you are the closest to answer for whats good with the clubs you play now, and where is improvements needed or wanted. (short or long end or both)

 

So, if your starting point is a set -0.5" from std. just subtract that from all numbers above to get your new target specs.

 

i have not mentioned LIE ANGLES, but we should adjust a tad on them to when we go shorter, and the easy way is to follow the slope the set has now, so if 0.5" shorter is 0.5* more upright (factory specs from one iron to the next), use that slope. That means if we started from the #9 iron who makes the shortest set, and the longest club is a #3 iron, that #3 iron is close to "2 iron shorter", so we should adjust lie angle 1* more upright and go from here with the others

 

Howard, thank you for the great information as it was very helpful. When I played -1" I did have more success with the long irons than any set I have played at -1/2 or standard. The short irons played well and I had not concerns either way. Ball striking was very good with the -1" and I don't remember having any distance loss but it was over a year ago.

 

So, let's see if I followed your instructions correctly to find my target specs for going the 3/8th route. In the image below I have listed standard specs of the Callaway irons, then my current specs and then the 3/8th specs according to your chart. Is this correct?

 

 

 

Those numbers looks good to me if PW or the 8 iron is starting point, but in your case, i would have used the #9 as starting point to get the whole set closer to your former - 1.0"

 

Awesome. Thank you Howard. I will keep that in mind. I was hoping to keep them a little longer than the -1" I had last year so it sounds like I did that.

 

Actually, I ran the numbers starting with the 9 iron and I think I like that better.

 

 

 

 

Thank you again for all the great information and for your time.