A DIY One Length Adventure

[kleydejong]

After some reflection on my bag, my swing, and my scoring stats - I've concluded that the clubs from 3 wood down to 6 iron or so are a weak point for me. I've chewed on the idea of going One Length - mostly to try and sure up this area of my bag. I also really enjoy experimentation and learning more about club building. So I decided to take an old set of Mizuno T Zoid Pro II heads I have collecting dust in my basement, and attempt to make them into a One Length set. This is mostly for experimentation. If it goes well I'll likely look at Cobra or Wishon or Pinhawk. If not I'll be out some lead tape and have hopefully gained a lot of knowledge and had a little fun mucking about in my workshop.

In this spirit I found this gem and got a lot of great information - https://forums.golfwrx.com/discussion/1201714/how-you-can-build-a-single-length-or-close-to-it-set-of-irons/p1

Step 1 - Picking the set makeup

My Mizuno's are 3-PW with DG S300 sensicore shafts. I hit the 7 iron a lot into my hitting net in the back yard and find it very comfortable. I'm pretty committed to making the 3-6 iron heads heavier, more upright lie angle, and shafted at 37" (7 iron length). I'm not as committed to mucking with the 8-PW. My understanding is that I'd need to remove weight by grinding or drilling holes, and then bending them flatter. I'm not that thrilled about doing that, but could probably find a way to get it done. Also 37" 7 iron length.

I'd be curious to hear feedback from others. Is partial Single Length like I'm proposing to sure up a weakness a viable choice? Or is it better to commit all in down to the PW or even further? Mostly from the perspective that Single Length is about making one swing motion. Even if I feel confident with my lower irons, I am not gaining the benefit. Thoughts?

I will weigh the heads, but my target weight will be the 7 iron's actual weight. Guessing somewhere in the 270g - ish ball park. I'll probably use some inexpensive FST 115 7 iron shafts. 62* lie angle, thought I may go a bit upright as my swing benefits from a bit upright lie angle. I currently don't have this skill or the tools to bend lie angle though.

Midsize Karma grips.Step 2 - An initial test

I got kinda fired up about this just now over my lunch break. I grabbed the 3 iron head and started lathering it in lead tape. It weighed at 235g.

 

 

Target weight is about 270g. Woof. My remaining roll of tape weighed in at 41g!

 

 

 

 

I ended up using every last bit. I tried to focus on the sole and lower back. I put some all over to try and keep some semblance of COG. I finally got it to 266g and am calling it good.

 

 

I'm going to stick a 7 iron shaft in it and hit some balls!Questions

See the question above. Do you think going SL in 3-7 iron and then standard VL in 8-PW is fine? Or do you think committing to SL all the way from 3-PW is needed?Basically I'm just mucking with head weight via lead tape and then will adjust lie angle - then stick them all in an identical 7 iron spec shaft and my preferred grip. Any other considerations I should be making?What are my other options to increase headweight? Lead tape? Tip weights? Something crazy like drill a hole in the head and epoxy in some Derby Car Tungsten weights?

[ARL67]

I keep 2 bags of MP-18 MMC and had both sets done in 1/4" increments. Those sets had PW-G-S-L all SL at 36.25", and going up in 1/4" lengths from there, so the so 7i remained at stock 37.0"

I changed it up a bit of this season and did a 3/8" MOI build. My 9-PW-G-S-L are now 36.125, then stock 8i at 36.5 , 7i at 36.875, and the 6-5-4 are SL at 37.25. So I'm SL at top and bottom of the bag, with a bit of length for the 3 clubs in the middle. I like this setup better as the 8i and 9i are shorter than with the previous 1/4" build. To help with distance spread / height at the top, I use the MMC Fli-Hi 6 & 5. My 4i is a Cobra One Length Adjustable 4i ( 21*-24* ) which happens to come in stock length of 37.25" with a non-Arccos grip ( FYI that head weighs 265g ). This set is working great for me so far.

Unless you have super high SS ( like Bryson ) you will struggle to get your 4i & 3i in the air and create a distance gap from your 5i. Hence why I "cheated" by combo'ing with the 6 & 5 Fli-Hi heads and the Cobra OL Utility. Tom Wishon's upcoming EQ1-NX SL heads no longer offer a 4i -> Tom said his typical client lacked the SS to make use of it.

For tip weights 10g is pretty much the max you can get. Start with that and add lead tape as needed.

It's fun to try an alternate approach to club set makeup. Experiment away and you'll come up with something you really like as you build, play, revise, repeat.

[Nels55]

I have built 3 sets of SL irons over the years. None made any difference in my scoring. I found it difficult to get the long irons to perform well as the trajectory was always a bit low in spite of my best efforts to lower the center of gravity and find a shaft that would work better. On the other side of the equation I am already a high ball hitter and I tended to hit to hit moon balls with the wedges at 6 iron length.

Anyway if you are doing this experiment for fun then I would say go for it but if you are really trying to improve your game then I would recommend practicing with your current set and forgetting about the SL siren song. I also think that if you really want it to work you would be better off building up a set of purpose made heads or buying a set of completed clubs from one of the manufacturers.

As for leaving the short irons and wedges alone and not lengthening them that will work just fine and won't make any difference. Just my two cents...

[Noodler]

I read these SL "adventure" threads with interest and always come away with the same thought: too bad MBI matching just doesn't seem to have enough interest to catch fire. I guess everyone "gets" what SL irons/wedges are about, but MBI (MOI Balance Index) is harder to wrap your head around. MBI matched clubs have almost all of the benefits of SL sets without any of the drawbacks.

What SL sets provide is a guaranteed MBI match without needing to do any "heavy lifting" on the build calculations. However, with SL sets you cannot easily use off-the-shelf components (as you're finding out) and you really need the "long" iron heads to have hotter tech to help them gap properly and provide expected ball flight trajectories.

MBI sets not only match the MOI, but also the weight distribution of the clubs so that they all actually truly "feel" the same when swung. MOI is the dynamic heft required to swing each club... what many golfers thinks is swingweight, but swingweight is only a static measurement of the balance of a club taken at a 14" fulcrum. MBI has its foundations in pendulum physics and theory. It is an interesting approach for club building; one that I am now using for all of my own personal builds.

Building MBI matched sets has become dramatically easier now that we have choices for ascending weight shafts (TT AMT, Ping AWT, Nippon AMC). You can also strategically apply lead tape to shafts to create the needed weight increments.

I'd be happy to provide more details if anyone is interested.

[ChaosTheory]

I’m very interested and would love to know more. Whenever I’ve tried to figure out MBI, I’ve been left wanting a good understanding of the principles involved.

[Nels55]

Somewhere around 10 years ago I made a MOI matching swing set device. I would clamp two clubs on hinges and then start them swinging to see that they swung back and forth at the same pace. I would add weight to the faster club until it swung the same as the reference club. I did think that this helped my game at the time but I could not prove that now as I quit worrying about it. A pro club builder told me I was wasting my time with my swing matcher because all had to do was increase swing weight by something like .2 points for each club from the longest iron to the shortest club(s) assuming .5 inch increment and I would get the same effect. I believe that theory was based on some Tuttleman calculations. Don't remember for sure.

I have heard varying points of view on whether or not matching clubs for moment of inertia does any good. What has been your experience? Has matching your clubs in this way lowered your scores?

[Noodler]

Whether or not MOI (or MBI) matching will help a golfer depends a bit on their past experience and mindset about what they expect from their set of clubs. If a golfer has been playing traditionally swingweight matched clubs for many years, then they've become quite accustomed to need to swing a bit harder (more effort) for each club as they get longer. In that situation, a builder versed in MOI matching can create a perfectly progressive set that has a nice linear increase in MOI for every club from the wedges to the irons and up through the hybrids/woods and driver.

For a golfer that is attracted to the idea that they won't have to swing with more effort as each club gets longer, MOI matching has more of a chance to work well for that golfer. I find that golfers who tend to have a favorite iron or two, but are quite inconsistent with the others, are prime candidates for moving to MOI matching (or even better MBI).

I have played MOI matched (and now MBI matched) for so many years that I cannot differentiate between what my own improved skills have provided versus what the clubs are doing for me. What I can show you though is that when you are properly fit for the right MOI/MBI combination, your on-center strike accuracy is unbelievably fantastic. I can post a picture of an impact label of my new MP-20 HMB build that I just completed. To validate the fit, I hit 5 shots in a row with an impact label on the face. Almost every hit was in the exact same spot on the face. It's hard to tell that 5 shots were even taken when you look at it.

[Noodler]

It's late, but I'll give you a bit more info now...

Let's start with why MOI/MBI is even needed. The problem with the swingweight measurement is that it's not a measure of weight, but rather of the static balance of the club when taken about a fulcrum 14" from the butt of the club. Since it's just balance, you could build a club that is 400g total weight and another that is 300g, but both can be made to "balance" at a swingweight of D2. There's no way any golfer would mistake which club was which when swinging them, yet they're both at D2. A heavier club will always take more effort. The added challenge is that there is no "standard" for headweight across club manufacturers although they must stay within a certain range due to traditional club lengths and available shaft weights. However, it's not uncommon to find a variance of up to 10g or more between the #6 iron head from one manufacturer versus another. 10g at the end of the club results in a major change in the final club build. So a #6 iron from Titleist built to a D2 swingweight, not only won't match a Mizuno club built to D2, but it mostly likely doesn't even match other Titleist models when it comes to the effort/force it takes to swing the clubs. Once you change the head, the shaft, or the grip, the swingweight measurement is no longer comparable between clubs.

MOI does provide an absolute measurement of the amount of effort to swing the club, but matching the effort across clubs does not necessarily also match the feel of those clubs when swung. MOI matching also can be "fooled" in a similar way as swingweight matching. It is possible to build one club with a heavy head coupled to a light shaft and another club with a light head and a heavy shaft and have both clubs measure at the exact same MOI value. Once again, when actually swinging these clubs, the difference in feel will be quite apparent. This is because the weight distribution of the components and the total weight of the club is what we feel when we swing a golf club. So how can we actually match feel across our clubs? That's where MBI comes in.

More later...

 

[Nels55]

@Noodler, thanks for the info! Sigh, you have me thinking about trying to MOI match my clubs up again. I would kind of enjoy having lead tape on the back of my PXG irons LOL.
MBI matching looks interesting. You try to match the ratio of the weight of the shaft and grip to the weight of the head? I don't believe I have heard of this before or if I did I did not pay it much attention. Looks like something that would be done during a build? How would MBI matched clubs do on my swingset device?

[ChaosTheory]

@Noodler Thanks and bring it on. I'm very interested.

[kleydejong]

Thanks for the input guys. I glued a 7 iron DG S300 shaft into this head and let her dry overnight. Then I hit a few balls on the range this morning before work. Look and Aesthetics
I was expecting it to be very offputting and feel very odd. I honestly did not experience this to a great degree. It is different, but I tried to give it an honest shot with an open mind. I hit some of my standard 7 irons to get a baseline feel for the swing plane, ball position, and tempo. Then I hit some 3 irons. I'd go back and forth every so often. From this perspective I actually felt that I was very quickly able to acclimate to the look and feel of the swing.Performance
In a standard set I have a 22* hybrid. The T Zoid 3 iron spec sheet lists 21* of loft. I expect the hybrid to go about 190. My typical 7 iron carries 155-160. I was on the range using crappy range balls and I didn't get an exact feel for distance. It was also early in the morning and I wasn't super loose or swinging terribly hard. I had read that it is a trap to try and hit the SL long irons with greater effort.
Immediately the ball was coming out like a low rocket. @ARL67 's comment was pretty spot on - I don't believe I have high enough clubhead speed to make 21* work at 37" with a T Zoid Pro II head. I estimate the balls were flying maybe 170 and would land at a shallow decent angle with a lot of speed. On a firm fairway they would roll out significantly. I feel I need to his some Pro V1's on a course with a range finder to confirm. But I think I can say with confidence that I need a differently designed head at the bottom of that shaft at that loft.
All that said I still tried to get a feel for how the club performed. I would say I noticed that I hit a lot of shots very solidly on the center of the clubface. The T Zoid is pretty much a blade, and I have a few sets of old blades that I bring out from time to time for fun. This 3 iron feels a LOT easier to find the sweet spot compared to my MP14 'normal length' 3 iron. Solid strikes were very accurate and repeatable. I still had some poor strikes that were penalized.
Lastly I will note that I have not yet adjusted lie angle, so that would also be required to improve accuracy.Next Steps
I am going to continue testing and I think I'm just going to build out the full set from 3-PW. I'm thinking 5 iron next as that might be a good place to transition with enough swing speed. I know I said I am not that interested in going below 7 iron into the wedges, but I think it would be worth it to build them out for the sake of science!

[kleydejong]

What kind of equipment is needed to to an MBI setup?

[Howard_Jones]

We are about to high jack the OPs tread, but if you think of MOI matching of your IRONS, ive made some "DIY set ups", where anyone can modify a standard set at home (the set they got).

Its 6 options here, non of them is SL or the classic 4/8" between clubs, they are all "butt cut to play length", and the needed head weight reset is specified. (9.4 grams as the max)

To find the right option for you, take the longest iron in your set, (#3,#4,#5), "tape down" play length like suggested butt cut for that club is, add the needed head weight as lead tape, and try off that club. If your #9 works good as it is, we can make all clubs like that one using this chart:

[Stuart_G]

@Noodler said However, it's not uncommon to find a variance of up to 10g or more between the #6 iron head from one manufacturer versus another. 10g at the end of the club results in a major change in the final club build. So a #6 iron from Titleist built to a D2 swingweight, not only won't match a Mizuno club built to D2, but it mostly likely doesn't even match other Titleist models when it comes to the effort/force it takes to swing the clubs.

Sorry but that's not really correct. It's certainly true that the swing weight scale was not intended to match feel in the context of different static weights - either from a grip weight change or a shaft weight change (or the use of counterbalancing weights). And it's also true that it's an imperfect tool for adjusting headweight for different playing lengths. It's not bad for shorter length changes but more error comes in as the length changes gets longer. But in the context of the exact same shaft, same grip, and same playing length, with only the heads being different, the swing weight scale is an excellent tool to manage head weight and match the clubs. That's the scale's 'bread and butter' so to speak.

[Noodler]

Not sure what you're trying to say here. I was just repeating the often noted observation that the swingweight values are not comparable across different clubs when there is a change in the grip, shaft, or head. The point also being that D2 is meaningless if you're comparing clubs from one manufacturer to another. Manufacturers do not follow any standard for head weights other than needing them to work for swingweighting with the other available club components. Case in point, Miura and Vega are two examples of heads that run to the heavy side versus manufacturers that are now using longer shaft lengths which necessitate that they produce their heads at lighter weights so that they look "good" on a swingweight scale.

[Stuart_G]

Not sure what you didn't understand - or was it a case of understanding and not believing?

But I'll say it again in a slightly different way. The often noted observations of swing weight values not comparable do include different shaft weights, different grip weights, even different lengths, but they generally do not (or should not) include different head models or different head manufacturers.

And while raw head weights can vary quite a bit, it's not the raw head weight that matters, it's the head weight after it's been adjusted with tip weights or lead tape or other means that matters.

So, in the context of everything else but the head being the same (shaft, length, grip all the same), if the final adjusted head weights aren't the same, then the swing weight wont be the same - and therefore the swing weight scale is correctly showing a difference. And If the swing weight is the same, then the adjusted head weights will be the same and so will the effort to swing the club. So again the swing weight scale is showing an accurate duplication of the effort.

Well if you want to nit-pick there could be small but usually insignificant differences due to small variations in the c.g. location or mass distribution on the head. But as long as they are comparable club types, then the differences are going to be negligible.

But the bottom line is that, same shaft, same grip and same length is one context where the swing weight scale (and values) works very well to reproduce feel.

Remember that it was specifically in the context of everyone using the same shaft and same grip that the swing weight concept came to be developed.

 

[Noodler]

OK - I get what you're saying. If the grips, shafts, and club lengths are identical then, and only then, can swingweight be compared across different heads of the SAME TYPE. This of course does not apply when comparing heads of significantly different designs where the CG location could be quite different.

[Stuart_G]

Yes. and by significantly different head designs, I'm refering to say comparing an iron to a wood or driver, I'm not talking about say the difference between a GI cavity back and a tour blade.

And it's not even too bad when comparing same shaft and grip over small length changes. That's why swing weight matching in an iron set may not be perfect but still works fairly well for most people.

It's really the grip weight changes and the total club static weight changes in general that mess up the swing weight concept the most.

[kleydejong]

I have been reviewing all my options for manually adding head weight. I have more lead tape on order, but I also have a bottle of lead powder. I saw someone in another thread mix epoxy with lead powder and glue that to the back of the head of an iron. Seems like a nice way to dial in that head weight, and perhaps more economical than using gobs of lead tape. Honestly I don't care about the aesthetics of these clubs, but that seems to be the big downside to gluing lead powder. Is it safe to assume that gluing lead powder to the rear cavity is a fairly 'permanent' mod? We're going full Frankenstein!

 

[Howard_Jones]

Just keep in mind that when you deal with as much as 35 grams, you might influence the heads VCOG.....keep it as low as possible in the long heads.

(in cases we add weight to the shorter heads, we add weight as high as possible since VCOG goes up and down with loft, more loft lower VCOG, so to compensate the right way, we add the weight high on high lofted clubs, and low on low lofted clubs)

[kleydejong]

I was able to do some testing this week, including having several friends hit it as well. It seems like 21" of loft at 7 iron length really requires a certain level of clubhead speed to make work. If you have speed and hit it high, this may be really great. I have somewhat average speed and it just doesn't really work for me. I'm planning on building the set 3-PW, but I also have a few old hybrid heads sitting around I may frankenstein as well...

[kleydejong]

I got a lot of work done on the heads this weekend. I ended up mixing epoxy with lead powder to add weight to the 4, 5, and 6 iron heads. More economical than pure lead tape. I'm a little concerned that the 4 iron will be unusable as the mass I'm adding is not very low. Then I drilled and grinded the 8, 9, and PW heads down to 270g. This was a big of a bear of a job as I don't really have the best tools to get it done without hassle. My bench grinder is underpowered. I had the most success using a hand drill and some brand new titanium bits. 3 in one oil was also essential as the heads get really hot. I got them all to with 2 grams of 270.

This was before I had finished the 9 iron.

Not the prettiest work in the world. I may fill the drilled holes with epoxy so they're smoother to handle.

 

I also received my shafts in the mail. I'm using FST 115 steel shafts. Plan is to tip trim to 7 iron spec, then butt trim to 37". That's my current plan. However, thinking about my experiences so far with ball flight - should I be looking at NOT using uniform shafts to tweak launch conditions? I.e. using tip trimming or different shaft weights or other variables to get the 4 and 5 irons to launch higher or the 9 and PW to launch lower? Might be something to experiment with moving forward. I see Cobra uses a little lighter shaft in the 'long' irons. Then it looks like Cobra and Wishon use head design to move COG through the set. I have a few old hybrid heads sitting around that I may throw a bunch of weight on.

[PowderedToastMan]

This looks really fun. It’s the kind of stuff I tell my wife about, then she tells me if I had just worked my regular job instead, I could buy a shiny new set instead of a pieced together old one.

She doesn’t get it...

[kleydejong]

Haha thanks. I am having a lot of fun with this build. Learning a lot too. Ryan Barath was talking about how a great way to learn how to build clubs is to attempt and fail a number of times. Ian Fraser was talking about how a great way to learn how to club fit is to do traveling demo days where you see hundreds of golfers per week.

 

The economics start to fall apart pretty quickly, especially if you factor no only the clubs - but also the tools and consumable supplies. But, I think it is pretty worth it.

[kleydejong]

I got all clubs shafted. I chose to go with uniformity and each shaft is tip trimmed to stiff flex and butt trimmed to 7 iron length of 37". My favorite grip is the Royal V Sand wrap. I like more of a midsize feel though, so I build it up pretty significantly. One layer of masking tape, two layers of duct tape, one final layer of masking tape. Then I blow the grips on with minral spirits and an air compressor.

I am borrowing a swingweight scale from my local pro. I threw the 9 iron on there quick before work this morning. Total weight came to about 418g. Swingweight came to just shy of C7. This is a little low for my preferences as my gamer irons are more around D3. A quick pickup and waggle confirms they feel light. I think this is probably a good thing as I can add lead tape to target COG a little bit. Low on the 'long' irons and high on the 'short' irons.

[driveandputtmachine]

Looks very familiar. I was a bit different though.

I play 1/4 increments do to a shafting mishap when I was in high school by the local club guy. MaxFli VHL's had varying hosel lengths throughout the set and unbeknownst to me, he asked if I was standard(I was 16 at the time and said yes) it appeared he precut everything and installed. I was a lead tape master that year as I played around with everything to get it how I liked.

Fast forward to my first college set and they copied the specs into a set of Mizuno MP-14's, then when I went to Dana Upshaw he discovered the issue, and we made the set very similar. I have played every set similar since then. Luckily I was able to get light heads for my 9 iron down through a relationship I had with the club manufacturer and get the heaviest 4,5,6 iron they had. At 1/4 inch I didn't have to add a ton of weight on those. I did have to drill my LW, SW, and GW to get them where I wanted.

My new 50.54.58.62 just arrived and I haven't even begun work on them yet, but here are my heads until I get my new ones built. I am hoping I can drill a good bit out of the hosel(not full width to affect insertion depth) before hacking up the backs. The 50 and 54 are Cleveland CB2, and the head weight is light enough I may be able to get the little bit of weight out the hosel on them.

[kleydejong]

Three updates.

I spent some time on the range hitting several shots with the 3 iron, 5 iron, and PW. The 3 iron is pretty unusable for me. It launches like a low bullet, has 170 carry and a ton of roll. I have two friends with higher clubhead speed and it performed quite well for them. One of them is a very good player who took a shot at going pro just out of college. He hit some 240 yd lazers. He didn't have a ton of interest though. I perceive it is because he has already reached a high level of proficiency, so I don't know if there would be a lot of benefit for him on the 'one swing' concept. Having an open mind certainly seems to be a big part of this experiment.

The SL 5 iron was pretty money for me. I am not noticing much difference with my VL 5 iron. I think I will experience some limitation just because these T Zoids are basically pure blades now that the cavities are filled with epoxy + lead powder. But the shorter shaft feels nice to me after some committment to push through the strange first impression feeling. The PW launches very high. At the time of the test the swingweight was low at about C6, and should be taken into consideration. I have since added a fair bit of lead tape above the COG to bring it up to D2. But the launch was noticabley higher than a VL PW. My head pro has been very interested in my experience. He felt like the PW had a very hollow and clicky feel. I did a fair bit of drilling right under the sweet spot, so I wonder about removing that mass and its affect on feel. I need to test the PW again after the changes I've made since to get SW up and move COG.

Since that range session I have added weight either as lead tape or more epoxy + lead powder to normalize swingweight at D2 across the board. I think this will be critical.

Lastly, I also grabbed an old Adams Pro 23* hybrid. I removed the 6 gram screw in weight and gobbed it with epoxy + lead powder to take the headweight from 228g to 270g. Last night I shafted it with the same FST115 cut to 7 iron spec and 37" length. I'm pretty eager to see how this club performs for me. I think I could slot this in for the 4 iron and then go 5-PW in the T Zoids - and play some golf for a bit to really get a feel for its performance. I also have an 18* model that I kind of want to frankenstein as well - but realistically I just don't think 18" of loft at 37" will work in almost any type of head configuration.

One final thought I have is this. Seems like a lot of my evaluation, and the thoughts I'm hearing from my friends on the range - is to always compare how the SL iron functions against its VL counterpart. My observation is that with VL you use a somewhat uniform head design and rely on the increased shaft length combined with tighter loft gapping to 'gap' the set. SL kind of flips the equation. You standardize shaft length, lie angle, and swing - but you really need to vary head design pretty aggressively through the set so your launch conditions don't go out of whack. Therefore I think my experiment is kind of trying to take a square peg through a round hole. There just isn't enough capability to move COG around like I really need to be able to do to make this really work.

All that being said it is still a fun experiment. My next goal is to play golf and see how I score.

[kleydejong]

I have had a chance to play with the one length clubs a bit now and have some conclusions. The 3 and 4 irons are unusable for me. The shorter length and slower clubhead speed just doesn't work for me. The 23* hybrid is money, I quite like hitting that club. It launches moderately high and carries nicely. The 5 and 6 irons are very solid. The 8-9 irons are solid as well. The PW is okay, sometimes it launches overly high and has a bit of an odd feel to it. Swingweight is D2, but it is almost like an optical illusion that it feels strange being long and light. My standard PW is a money club for me, and while this PW doesn't perform poorly - I don't have the same confidence. I also wonder about the way I removed weight behind the sweet spot giving it a 'hollow' feel. There just isn't as much concentrated mass behind the sweet spot.

I think the biggest downfall is that I'm using 20 year old heads that are pretty much blades. That part hasn't changed. I am still intrigued by the Single Length concept and may consider something like the Pinhawks, Cobras, or WIshons in the future. Ultimately I think these clubs require commitment for a period of time, so my dabbling as an experiment isn't quite the right approach.

This was a lot of fun overall though, and I have learned a TON about club building - so I'm calling it a success.

 

 

[Howard_Jones]

Nice story, and you have learned the hard way that its more to it to make it work, so if you will proceed and keep playing SL irons, i suggest you go Wishon since those heads is both tuned on VCOG and a mix of conventional and HIGH COR heads to make this work more like conventional irons does.

Another idea might be trying "the golden middle way", and make a set thats not SL or 4/8" between clubs, but 3/8" or 5/16", you can make both from standard components without the need for head weight mods like you been doing now (reduction), so its possible to order a standard set with grips loose in the box, and modify them very easy at home before you put them to play.

[dnong]

Which club is standard length for the 5/16 gap between clubs?