The technology is getting so much better

[mahonie]

...and the next stage is fully autonomous vehicles and driving skill is not a factor at all.

Taking your analogy back a stage, it turns out the peak of human skill is being able to hit a blade...everything else is further down the slope?

[Nels55]

 

"Tiger didn't just wake up one day and started puring a golf ball".

I guess that is true in a way as I believe that Tiger has woken up every day of his life since he was toddler puring the ball! Especially compared to the average Joe!

[Red4282]

Yooooo you aren't paying attention- at all. Technology is the subject of discussion. as pointed out, cgs arent any different from 20 years ago, there were tungsten inserts in some of those callaways in the early 2000s and DEFINITELY as forgiving as anything today. The ONLY thing that has changed is the hot face(and stronger lofts), period. Thats not technology. Thats just taking an idea from something that already exists and utilizing it elsewhere. It has drawbacks as i have pointed out numerous times. As everything in club design has.

Urethane dampening inserts i guess you can say is new technology, but only contributes to feel, and has no performance benefits. I feel like a broke record here... at least understand what I'm saying so i don't have to explain it over and over again.

[brew4eagle]

"...Tiger...purring...Joe...". Are we still talking about golf technology, or Carole Baskin?

[TKS]

I just finished Tom Wishons newest book. I'd recommend all equipment junkies and fitters pick it up when you can. Great stories and insight

[driveandputtmachine]

Irons have finally started to catch up to woods with retaining ballspee on off center hits. That is the biggest thing I have noticed.

However my favorite line is i play x because I can’t work the ball as easily with x GI iron. I call b.s., as a former Div 1 college golfer, mini, mini tour player and former state amateur player that is just wrong. I can fade and draw the 4,5,6 Cobra sppedzone irons in my bag just fine. I can also fade or draw the cobra forged tour 7-pw just fine. You are playing blades or player CB’s because you like them. I have access to a trackman and know for a fact that loft for loft with the same shaft and same headweight a 2 degree in to out path with a 2 degree clubface closed to path produces almost exactly the same amount of sidespin. I have seen it when comparing my current irons with everything from my MP-14’s to my x tours to my J40 CB’s. Maybe, just maybe your blades are a good fit for you (shaft weight, launch, spin, head weight)to be able to work the ball and all the GI or SHI irons you have tried aren’t a good fit, therefore you can’t work the ball as well, but it’s not because there’s a cavity on the head.

You don’t need an excuse to play what you like and what you feel performs the best for yourself. All you have to do is have fun and enjoy yourself, who cares if its with blades, GI or SGI irons? I play what I play because my scores are lower and I win more money from the guys I am betting with.

[Lincoln_Arcadia]

Ping Eye2 versus i20 is not that significantly different, but a few of my buddies seem to think so? When I swing opposite hand with their blades as far as my i20, they generally just mumble something to the effect that technology makes this game too easy... even though I proved to them otherwise.

It’s a hopeless argument.

[WristySwing]

I am understanding what you are saying, just fine. I feel like you aren't reading what I am saying either and are shutting down because you can't see past LOFT. You keep coming back to cupfaces and loft. There are several irons on the market that utilize cup faces for forgiveness with completely traditional lofts and they spout off about MOI, forgiveness, and ball speed. You are using an example of 1 club to say that nothing has changed at all. The BB02 was a great iron, I'll give you that. But it is not AS FORGIVING AS TODAY'S CLUBS. Period. It is a product of it's time. Any club hit in the middle of the face reacts perfectly. I'm not talking about that. I'm talking about strikes off the middle which is where things count as "forgiving" because none of us are robots and will have mishits from time to time. I explained that the MPF, which you used as your baseline, only talks about "forgiveness" (in their terms this is equated with vertical COG) when it is in line with the COG of a golf ball. This is great for people who are neutral to shallow angle of attack but does nothing for you when you have a negative angle of attack on an iron, which is what you are supposed to do. This automatically places the CoG of the head above the golf ball, which Maltby penalizes severely in head design and deems these types of clubs "conventional" or worse. By definition to Maltby's forumla, if you have a good swing and do what you are supposed to do, you have automatically negated any sort of "forgiveness" a club can have, which is absolute trash and not even remotely true.

I want to know what samples you are using. Are you just going off of Maltby's data? Who are these golfers you have worked with that are being sold lies? I've seen this stuff in action. I've been to the robot testing labs where they prototype new clubs. I have GEARS and head tracking software from a GCQuad. I can map every inch of a person's golf swing and correlate to a strike and ball flight as accurately as anybody. I can tell you flat out that technology has improved on MOI and forgiveness. Sure, maybe the capability was there 20 years ago, it doesn't mean it was utilized properly or done well. The first cell phones came out 30 years ago or so and had the same inner guts, but I think we can all agree that reception and base capabilities have improved with the same core components. Same with computers. The machine gun was introduced around the Civil War. I don't think anyone can argue that a Civil War era machine gun was equal to a machine gun from WWI or WWII. It's the same thing. The core might be there, both load bullets and have a firing pin etc., but one was much more effective and far more accurate. I think we can all agree which one that was.

[Red4282]

Simple question- whats more forgiving, a 6 iron or an 8 iron? And why? Think carefully about your answer.

[WristySwing]

It depends on how you look at it, and no hard thinking needed, trust me. I know how you have set this up, but I'll bite anyways. If you are talking length, then obviously the 8i. It has a shorter shaft, which most people will find easier to square up the face and find the middle. The 8i by definition will also have higher MOI at the same weight shaft because of the heavier head. If we are talking lofts, technically the 6i because the face angle error is much larger on a higher lofted club than a lower lofted club, but that can be negated with more spin. However, more spin is only beneficial upwards of about 6 feet all else being equal, as a 3i is roughly equal to a 9i when we account for face angle error, spin rate, and distance traveled. But jumping into this a little more the 8i will spin about 1000 RPMs more than the 6i for your average speed player, and by definition more back spin typically leads to less side spin, all else being equal. If we are using club design as our metric, probably the 6i as well. Most modern 6i's will have some sort of tungsten heel/toe weighting these days and some sort of injection-molded super speed thing that shorter irons will lack that regulates ball speed and spin so the flights will be more similar across a wider portion of the face and a slightly lower VCOG and more offset, again, generally a better thing for more people that struggle with maintaining middle contact.

If you ask Tiger Woods, he will say his 8i as per Mike Taylor. If you ask Joe Hack on the first tee of your local muni, he will likely say his 4i or 3i because of god knows why. So all things considered, from a purely hunk of steel on a rod of steel perspective, a shorter, heavier club 10000% is more forgiving. From a technological standpoint, both should be relatively equal as they have modified faces and weighting and such to deliver "ideal" flights across the set....and trust me I've done enough fits where I watch some guy shank a wedge into the corner of my bay for 20 minutes but can stripe a 6i no problem. And vice versa.

Let me ask you this again. Where are you getting your data points from to have proof that golfers are only seeing placebos and no real gain in performance? I have nothing to prove to you or anyone here. I know I know what I'm doing and have the job and credentials to back it up. As an engineer you should understand this. Far as I can tell you have a) no fitting experience, b) no empirical evidence that you have done on your own, and c) have no anecdotal evidence either to support your claims. As far as I can see it, from a science background myself, you haven't done your due diligence to prove your methodology of how you know what you know and don't seem to be willing to share how you came to your conclusions when I have. It literally means nothing to me what people do with their equipment and you are free to do what you want with your own clubs. What does bother me though is when armchair intellectuals spout off thin truths and pretend to come off from a position of knowledge when they really don't know what they are talking about. I know you think I sit firmly in this cateogry, but I won't lose sleep over it as I know what I do and have a huge list of clients waiting to see me at any given moment in time (majority repeats and word of mouth) because of how I have helped them or someone they know have lower scores.

 

[Red4282]

Lol i have to say it was a pleasure seeing you maneuver around that one. Lets throw everything out the window and just look at total dispersion. Which has less and 8 iron or a 6 iron within the same set?

One more question for you- does a traditional iron-( not “hot face”, i better specify so not confused with talking about blades...) offer ANY andvantages over hotface irons? If so, what is it?

[WristySwing]

Again, I know where you are going with this, but I will play ball so the viewers at home have the answer and not potentially get fed any bad information later on. Absolutely the 8 iron, normalized head weights, properly fitted shafts across the board, I would say 100% of the time the 8i is going to be more consistent in a set that is the same from top to bottom. In a blended set like the Cleveland CBX or whatever it is, then I'd argue the 6 iron because of its hollow head, slightly lower CoG, and face. In a traditional set I would be pretty terrible at my job if I didn't say 8i. Also the 6i will be more consistent because of the face angle penalty I detailed above that is less on a 6 compared to an 8, so combined with the higher tech head and less angle penalty in theory it could be more forgiving.

What are you defining as traditional? If it is size, then a thinner sole or pre-worn leading edge typically found on these is better for people who need less bounce/play firmer courses. If loft is your designation as traditional, then those who lean the shaft and deloft a fair bit will benefit from this as it will get their launch and spin and apex into more agreeable positions. If it is strickly those without a cupface, then nothing and they will likely perform worse overall than something without such face tech more most.

I'll ask again for a 3rd time, what are your credentials? How do you know what you know and claim to have data on placebos? I can answer all the questions you want to throw at me till the day you and I both die and I will still stand by what I know (with evidence), whether or not it supports my general belief that forgiving, hot irons are more beneficial to more people and will help them score better than harder to hit, less techy irons. There is a time for a traditional iron and there is a time for a hot iron. I know when to use both to benefit a player. I am not going to compromise my integrity to prove a point when I know there is a time and place for something.

[Red4282]

so we agree that generally as lofts get stronger, consistency and forgiveness drops. Got it, thank you for conceding that.

If it is strickly those without a cupface, then nothing and they will likely perform worse overall than something without such face tech more most.

So what you are saying is that all the pga tour pros are playing inferior equipment? Are they dumb? Stubborn? Perhaps the so called advantages arent so great, and perhaps there is an advantage to playing a traditional iron. They have millions of dollars on the line and they continue to play non “hot face” irons. There is a reason for that. And dont give me oh so and so has a hot face 4 iron. Thats not the same thing.

Dont even start on credentials. You are selling something, which throws all your credentials out. You are essentially a car dealer salesman for golf.

Ill repeat. These clubs have their place for some golfers. In MY OPINION, too many golfers are going to these types, that shouldn’t be.

[Valtiel]

They aren't inferior and he said nothing about pros, you are twisting his words and creating an argument. The average Joe benefits from hotter faced irons because they are going to be longer an average and better on mishits, two things that will benefit the average amateur who does not hit the sweet spot as often and will statistically be coming up short over going long. Pros don't need any of that because they are looking for consistency, not distance, and even then we are seeing more and more hot faced irons creeping in to the tops of their bags. The hotter faced irons also tend to be stronger lofted, another thing a pro doesn't need because they want launch and spin windows to be hit.

Just because he is "selling something" does not also mean his experience and data are somehow invalid. Bottom line is that the weekend duffer will do better, on average, with modern hot faced irons. As their skill level improves and a level of consistency is reached that no longer warrants a focus on distance and forgiveness then you start fading towards more traditional clubs which will be more conducive to hitting those launch and spin windows that better players want.

[Red4282]

I agree with everything you said, but see he isnt saying that at all. He denies the consistency argument...and the lower spin being a problem for some.

[WristySwing]

For the 100000000th time they play those clubs because 1) they deloft them because of their shaft lean and need traditional lofts on their golf clubs to get the ball in a proper launch and spin window. 2) Tour pros play on ridiculously hard and fast surfaces that you can't comprehend. until you have actually played on some. I've played courses right before and right after an event and the speed of the greens is ridiculous. Unless you plan on playing in the US Open sometime I think you'll be just fine. 3) Sure, there's probably a tour pro or two who is a bit stupid, I'll give you that. 4) There are a lot of tour pros who play hot faced irons. Let's look at the Ladies Tour the top 15 players, which perfectly aligns with the average male swing speed. I have starred all the clubs that in their description from the OEM have some sort of ball speed tech, aka "a hot face". These were all the most recent WITBs I could find for each player:

1) Jin Young Ko - Bridgestone Tour B XB2) Nelly Korda - PXG 0311T3) Sung Hyun Park - Taylormade P760

4) Nasa Hataoka - Srixon Z745

5) Danielle Kang - Titleist 718 CBs

6) Sei Young Kim - Mizuno JPX 919 Tour7) Brooke Henderson - Ping i210

8) Minjee Lee - Srixon 7859) Lexi Thompson - Cobra S2 Forged10) Jeongeun Lee6 - Apex CF'19 Pro11) Inbee Park - XXIO X12) Hinaki Shibuno - Ping i21013) Hyo-Joo Kim - Yonex EZone XPG14) Ai Suzuki - Ping i200

15) Carlota Ciganda - X-Forged '18 (maybe? tough to tell from the Instagram pictures)

 

So sure your "top" players are about 2/3rd traditional, but the vast majority of your consistent players year-in year-out are using tech irons. I'm done with this. If you can't see how these work after all of this you aren't ever going to learn. You laugh and say my credentials are meaningless but I'm not losing any sleep over it. I'll happily help my 300+ person waiting list enjoy the game more while you bitterly rant on about loft and the "truth". I'm out of this thread and any other thread I see you posting in. Not worth the trouble.

[Valtiel]

I think the consistency thing is a sticky subject. We have the somewhat common perception that hot faced irons are prone to "fliers", which I honestly have not experienced. Then we have the nature of how hollow, hot faced irons are constructed which some people feel leaves room for certain ball speed inconsistencies based on particular types of strike. I have not experienced this either, but my use of these irons is strictly as long distance tee clubs and the occasional par 5 approach.

What I HAVE experienced and have a little bit of data to possibly back up, is that the recipe of stronger lofts + higher CG creates a formula than can lead to what I think people are perceiving as these distance inconsistencies. Contrary to the popular narrative, iron CG has been moving up in the last decade in an effort to increase spin against the strengthening lofts that are obviously decreasing spin. A lot of these hot distance irons already sit precariously low in the spin department for a lot of people, and with the higher CG contributing to the total spin, then the odd "high" strike on the face may actually be closer to the real sweet spot than most people think. They are used to striking it what would technically be considered a bit low due to the higher CG, so when that strike moves up they are actually truly flushing it and would see in increase in ball speed, an increase in launch, and a decrease in spin. This is where I think these mythical "fliers" are coming from, and it is a combination of all three factors; loft, CG, and face construction that are leading to them. If you took a more traditional players cavity back or even a blade, strengthened the loft, and raised the CG, I think you might see something somewhat similar.

Now if any of that is accurate, I imagine most OEMs wouldn't really care because for most weekend golfers, longer is better. But for the low handicapper/scratch player, that could mean missing your landing area by a full club of you catch a shot like that. That is why refuse to use any of these hot hollow irons that I can't add hot melt to and prefer the forged ones for ease of bending. Both of my X-forged UTs are loaded with hot melt at the bottom and bent 2* weaker just so I have more control in that area.

[Red4282]

hahahha best response yet ?they need the extra loft to get the ball up because of their shaft lean ?‍♂️ I guess they could just club up with the hot faced strong lofts, no? Are you saying you automatically rule out strong lofts for any golfer who has shaft lean? Cause there are quite a few ams who do...last the ladies tour as an example??? Dude... just stop.

with all due respect to clubfitters, we have to tske in account that some of you have a vested interest in sales. It does you no good to have someone bring their own irons in to go, welp those are great so just keep them. Strong lofts and hot faces are cheap ways to show “launch monitor improvements” namely, they go farther. What a joke.

[TKS]

You guys got away from the original discussion about the "tech".

Loft, lie bounce, cg etc etc are not tech. I'd agree that the modern manufacturing is hitting specs better (that's good tech) our Launch Monitors and video capture capabilities are great. But the tech in irons is still limited and we've hit most of the limits. Moving weight around with tungsten, or filling hollow areas with silly putty is not tech, weight is weight. Hot faced irons have been around since 2000-2001. Shafts seem to have some more advances by going lighter, but that will have its limits.

[Red4282]

All very good points, and i agree entirely. Like everything in club design, when you start moving lofts, cgs, there will benefits and drawbacks. Also to be added is partial shots. How much will a hotface iron give a player control, when say im in between clubs, and need to hit a softer full shot, or flighting a wedge?

for this reason i believe you will never see the best the world playing hot face irons anythjng above a 7 iron, at least very very rarely.

[Valtiel]

I agree regarding the best players, but I will add that the best FAST players will likely stay away from iron types. The reason @WristySwing mentioned the LPGA players was that they are a much better direct comparison to the speed of your average male golfer. The fact that hotter faced clubs are more common on the LPGA Tours supports the idea that the the weekend warriors with similar speed would benefit as well.

[mahonie]

Hot faced irons were around in the 1970s: Wilson Reflex Irons Had A Slot In 1978 | GolfBlogger Golf BlogThere is nothing new...just regurgitation of old ideas.

[rgk5]

As was the Haig Ultra Ultraflex. Both sets flopped as they were ugly and very hard feeling. I'll ask some of the fellas here a couple of questions. How many of you would drive a car from the 1970s, given it is in good shape vs your present vehicle? Do the current vehicles add "nothing new"? Still use a rotary phone? I know the questions are rhetorical but will serve the point.

As to the point made above about selling new clubs to make money.

I get no spiffs or commission on my sales and fittings whether clubs are bought or not.Sometimes the prospect's current clubs are the best fit and I will show them why.Numbers do not lie. The Foresight/GC Quad data on the old and new set is quite visible and easy to compare.I'll take the feedback from my customers over the philosophy from some random person with no experience in the fitting business. The OEMs employ some very smart people; Masters and PHD holders at their research facilities. As for For those that feel it is all marketing Ping has exactly TWO people in their marketing department but a ton more in R+D. I've been there.

[WristySwing]

https://blog.trackmangolf.com/dynamic-loft/

Read it. Have fun. PM me when you have some actual data to back up your claims. Peace, homie.

[mahonie]

Looking back at the 25+ cars I’ve owned, the only one that put a smile on my face every time I drove it was a 1973 Mini (closely followed by a modern Alfa Romeo)...so there is that.

I rate Ping as a company as they seem to have proper engineering behind nearly everything they do, however, I couldn’t tell you the last time I saw any advertising and only knew about the Blueprint because of the chatter in the blades thread on here.

I do not know which i or G Series is current or what the latest line of putters is. We did have some Ping gear in our pro shop for a while, but we seem to be carrying Wilson Staff hardware only at the minute (and it seems to be selling well). Perhaps they need to step the marketing up a bit ?

[rgk5]

Funny, my first car was a 1960 Mini, all 850 cc and 48 hp IIRC. Had to cover the distributor cap with rubber a glove to keep it from cracking and shorting out in a cold rain or snow! I followed that with a 1963 Triumph TR4. Spared no expense as I paid $600 for it. Loved that car.

Ping writes their own unique symphonies when it comes to marketing.

[Howard_Jones]

Good debate, but here is my stand in this....

For irons its 3 factors that really matters

#1 - Dispersion

#2 - Dispersion

#3 - Dispersion

If all 3 is good, you are good to go, its that easy.

[Red4282]

arent you claiming when comparing loft for loft that hot face irons have higher launch? Shaft lean or not, if he is hitting a 42 degree traditional 9 iron or a 42 degree hot faced PW....Your statement is super contradictory...absolutely clueless.

[mahonie]

Had much the same issues with my 998cc. However, I got really good at tuning the SU carburettor to make up for its deficiencies. Floorpan was rusted through so it was a bit of a Flintstone’s car, but boy the handling made up for everything. Handling has since been the single most important factor for me in any car purchase. Same with golf clubs if that makes sense.

[rgk5]

If one 42* iron or pw has a lower center of gravity it will launch higher given the same angle of attack. Typically thin face irons have that engineering feature. Trackman and GC Quad will illustrate that easily. I've done it with demo irons. It is not excessive but 1-2 degrees is easy to achieve even with a shallow swing like mine which is -2 to 0 degrees at impact.