Bigger iron = easier to hit?

[morgan1819]

Do you play a 330cc driver, rather than the bigger, more forgiving 460cc?  There are tradeoffs to GI clubs … less workable, don't look as good to the eye, etc..  But, a Ping G410 iron is just plain going to be easier to hit for a beginner golfer than the smaller BluePrint. 

[nsxguy]

Bigger irons are generally more forgiving.

That does NOT mean they're "easier to hit".

[bladehunter]

I love how each time this comes up the same few poo poo on the topic by stating how many times this topic has came up. As if that somehow validated their opinions. It actually does the opposite doesn’t it? If so many think this. Are they all nuts ? Or ..... just maybe ...the vocal minority are mistaken.

[MtlJeff]

There are many ways to look at who the vocal minority is. You could just as easily argue that the vocal minority is the people on an internet site saying "players" clubs are better for higher indexes, when I imagine sales data would suggest that is not actually what the majority of people in that range are buying.

[bladehunter]

I don’t really see people saying that though.

 

The conversation isn’t “ in a 20 handicap and I score better with blades “.

 

Its about how a smaller clubhead is easier to get good contact with for some folks. If you’ve tried both , and find that to be true. What do you do ? According to some here you play the bigger clubhead and struggle. Why because “ moi man “. Lol.

 

I just resent the fact that that the conversation can’t be had minus the irrational diatribe that inevitably comes inside of 10 posts when this is brought up. It comes minus any real facts , data , or actual thought for what the OP is saying.

[pinestreetgolf]

Well, to be fair, the OP didn't use any facts, data or actual thought. He just said he "felt" like he hits better with a smaller head. So I'm not sure why you think we'd be debating facts and data given the first post in the thread, which had none or any subsequent posts in the thread, which also had none.

OP: I feel like this is true.

Others: You're probably wrong, but who knows.

You: Why are we not using facts and data!!?? WHY DO WE NEVER USE FACTS OR DATA!!!!!!!!!!

[rawdog]

Hi, friend. Long time no see. Keep fighting the good fight.

[scomac2002]

Okay then, let's have a conversation about my anecdotal experience playing "players" clubs versus "helpful" clubs. I'm a senior and I'm a higher handicap player at an 18.

First of all, I think it's pretty much in your head that big SGI type clubs are harder to hit than compact blade like clubs. The SGI's have a lot of room to get a useful result from a mediocre strike. You don't get anywhere near the same sort of forgiveness from a blade-like club. I've played both types over full seasons so that has been my experience.

The one area where the small players type iron has an advantage is in turf interaction because of the narrower sole and less bounce that is typical with SGI clubs to prevent digging. That also prevents nipping the ball off the turf which leads to more consistent chips and pitches, but that isn't generally the type of shot I'm going to measure iron performance on. At this point in my golfing life I struggle with any iron that has less than 30° loft on full swing regardless of type, so I want all the help I can get. So, I end up playing what's in my signature which is a classic big and chunky, wide soled SGI iron that launches the ball easily and just wants to go straight. I don't work the ball and I don't flight the ball because I don't hit it high to start with.

I like to play around with classic clubs and vintage golf gear from time-to-time so I've had my fair share of games with older less forgiving designs. I played the better part of a full season three years ago playing with 98 Hogan Apex Plus forged irons. They call them cavity back, but they're a whole lot closer to a muscle back than a modern version of a CB. I got around the course just fine with those as long as I played hybrids for the 3, 4 and 5 irons. Scored pretty well too which just goes to show that your drive and play around the greens have more to do with scoring than the type of iron you play, but they had stiff steel shafts and were a bit of a load on my ailing back so they got sold.

I've even played full blades in the form of Golden Ram Axial Tour Grinds that I play in a blades and persimmon short set using the 3, 5, 7 & 9 along with a 2W and a 5W. I can hit them, sometimes surprisingly well, other times not so much, but it's not about how well I play when those clubs are in the bag. So in my short and inauspicious golfing life I've pretty much run the gamut in iron types. I'll take the big chunky clubs if I can only have one set, thank you very much! And no, they're not harder to hit!

[BlkNGld]

That's one to use for your signature line. Timeless! Golf clap in your general direction!

[bladehunter]

Yes. But you and I both know the opinions flung from the other side aren’t as tame as what you said. The OP by right can only be accused of sharing his feeling or findings. They weren’t rebutting anything except the marketing of today’s clubs

 

The fact is. No data exists. So the OPs opinion weighs just as much as yours or mine.

 

All I’m basically saying is that forgiveness for one swing isn’t forgiveness for another. If someone has a shallow aoa , and hits it on the face , a thinner iron may well forgive their miss if its slightly heavy vs a wide soled iron designed to forgive steep swingers who are digging ditches. Nobody asked that. They just assume , I’d just like to see choices be explorable without the BS notion that bigger equals easier to hit. It absolutely is not a universal truth.

[Hawkeye77]

Back when I went from my Staff Tour Blades (that was the name!) to Ping Eye2+ irons I found the larger and more offset irons very much easier to hit and played them for a long time, but started drifting back to less offset in particular and somewhat smaller heads. AP2 varieties I've played are still game improvement to an extent IMO and the Legacy Blacks I've been playing are cavity backs, but the profiles of both have been more on the smaller side I guess. Some thread on here have me thinking I may look at, gasp, Pings again. Sometimes I'll take out some old Macgregors or Hogans (an iron or wedge or two at a time for fun) - I don't find them any harder to find the sweet spot just as often as I do on larger heads (not saying I have dime marks in my clubs, lol). I will say I'm definitely testing some smaller headed drivers as available - I really don't care for big and elongated drivers. With irons and wedges, give me more compact heads for pitches and chips for sure.

I get the take, OP, and I guess it's what you are hearing - play what suits you and if you find smaller heads speak to you, play them.

The rest - no comment here, lol, I can jump to conclusions on occasion and really do tire of some of the same old stuff, but I see where OP is coming from and why.

[IamMarkMac]

And even if facts exist, facts do not outweigh a person's opinion. We've learned that from climate change, creationists and flat earthers, among others.

[bladehunter]

Can’t argue with you there. YOU do seem to be fairly confident in YOUR opinions.

[IamMarkMac]

Absolutely. I've learned that if a man can't be dissuaded from a flat earth or faked moon landing regardless of what facts or science are presented to him, how can you argue if he says a smaller golf iron head is easier to hit than a large one?

[bladehunter]

Kind of speechless ? to be honest. The fact that iron heads aren’t the size of drivers should tell you there is a point of diminishing returns even in your theory of larger is better. As far as I know there is no iron head size limit. So why not larger ? Like this. Only metal.

 

Now before you say it. Yes. That suggestion is a bit absurd. But I’ve found that the best way to fight absurd comments is to reply with equal or greater absurdity. It tends to translate.

 

But seriously Please answer this . In detail . Why do you not play fairway woods or hybrids down to pitching wedge ? They are easier to hit , larger and more forgiving . But it’s really rare to see someone go driver 3 wood 3h-pw-h Yet these are produced . Why not ?

[chippa13]

And yet the opening line of the ad is, "Oversized for greater success".

[mtg]

Interesting you bring up the Blueprint - I've heard Ping engineers say that when they developed that club the small size was a purposeful design element. Ping found that "aim small, miss small" is a legitimate concept and they had no qualms reducing the dimensions of the head.

 

[IamMarkMac]

There is a point of diminishing returns, it's not found between a blade and a GI iron. It's more likely found between a golfer's ears.

Why not a large club? Assuming you haven't hit the point where a size of club where aerodynamic drag becomes a factor: Part ego, part training. You've seen other golfers play and so you have an idea of what constitutes a "proper" club., you learned on traditional clubs so that's what you're used to.

But say you have no idea what golf is and you've never seen a golf club before. Then you're told to hit a small ball to a target a hundred yards away with either an oversize club or a regular one. I don't know who would pick up the smaller club.

[buzlin]

This^

Unlike 440+cc drivers, but like putters, iron style isn't as simple as more forgiving equals better. Too many variables go into what works for some people. The variations in professionals bags, even though we don't play like them, are still a valid example of different equipment working for different folks, for what ever reason. Large drivers with graphite shafts are the only place where you have unanimous consensus.

Aim small miss small? Nope, that doesn't make sense to me, so therefore it's impossible for you.

Smaller clubs are easier to square up and I hit them on target more. Nope, giant heads are more forgiving, you don't know what you're talking about.

I focus more and swing under control more with smaller irons. Nope, you should tell your brain to swing the same regardless, so you're wrong.

No one is claiming smaller irons work for everyone. Jeez, we're talking anomalies. "for me X is better" says one. and the response is, "Nope, impossible, because most people like Y, so you have to as well". Just because someone favors one parameter over another, doesn't mean they're dismissing everything else. We each make choices based on the balance of how things work for us as individuals. Get over yourselves telling people how they should think/feel/etc....

[HaggisPXG]

It is certainly true for my G400 crossovers - excellent irons and really forgiving.

[chippa13]

They also don't intend the Blueprint for the average Joe hacker. Here is their own marketing speak on the irons.Fully forged from 8620 carbon steel, the blade-style, tour-inspired design is engineered for the highly skilled player who puts a premium on workability and trajectory control. Shorter blade lengths, less offset and narrow sole widths optimized to perform in all conditions give elite shotmakers unmatched precision to attack any pin with confidence. A machined tungsten toe screw helps provide forgiveness.

I'm pretty sure most 12+ hcp golfers aren't necessarily considered highly skilled or elite shotmakers.

[chippa13]

[dciccoritti]

Well since you posted that statement...do you buy it? Is it marketing fluff or based on engineered tests of equipment designed by engineers. Just curious.

[bladehunter]

You didn’t address my question. Why not a bag of actual forgiveness (hybrids )?

[mtg]

Point wasn't that 15 cappers should play the Blueprint. It was to show that Ping, a company with some resources at its disposal who are in a position to figure such things out, did in fact come to the conclusion that "aim small, miss small" has merit. Seems to go to the heart of this discussion.

[chippa13]

Sure, they determined that it has merit for those highly skilled, elite shotmakers, a very specific segment of the golfing population. If they believed that it was a universal truth then they would've included a statement such as, "designed to help golfers of all levels perform at their best" or the like.

[IamMarkMac]

Because no one wants to play those. Even if they were proven to be more forgiving, I don't think you'd find many people who'd want that product. Opinion/perception trumps all.

[ode1]

I need it defined so I can understand what you and other blade people mean when you refer to "smaller" blade size. Is there a prototype somewhere? A manual? What's the measurement? Please be specific.......I want it all, blade length, sole width, etc. So when I get this info I can know the perfect club size to look for!

[IamMarkMac]

Did they really find scientific evidence to back the physics of "aim small, miss small"? Or did they just want to come up with a slogan that would speak to better players and those who want to play better player equipment?

[bladehunter]

Thank you for the honesty.

 

all I’m saying is that it’s a sliding scale of just that , based on swing mechanics ( AOA) etc and ability. So why is my opinion wrong and your opinion correct ?