Lofts: Traditional vs Weak vs Strong

[MelloYello]

19 hours ago, scooterhd2 said:

I love my Srixon combo set right now. Best irons I have hit, but admittedly coming from more GI and SGI irons that were even stronger lofted with higher VCOG. First forged irons I have owned. And I am playing the best golf of my life. Ball flight is so consistent and I dont see a height problem off well struck shots.  Ive been amazed that the 785 7 iron is 2 degrees weaker than the irons I was coming from and I lost 0 distance and dont seem lower. And these gap so well into the 585 which seems to have really good MPF ratings for VCOG. I'm sure knowing how often these would be comboed enticed Srixon to keep the lofts similar. 

 

So maybe it depends which way you are coming from? For me I have just been so intrigued by the benefits to my game that more loft and lower VCOG while retaining MOI, seems like the next progression for me. 

 

This is also something I've begun to think about--how is it different to land in something like a z785 if you're coming from a GI club versus say, a blade? 

 

I think the guys who are used to small heads, pure feel and limited offset have a MUCH tougher time adapting versus the folks who are used to larger clubs, some amount of offset as well as lofts that are somewhat stronger. 

Edited October 3, 2020 by MelloYello

[Titleist_PT23]

5 hours ago, MelloYello said:

 

I definitely appreciate your take and your participation but I wish you wouldn't be so quick to talk about emotions, ego and other tangential stuff like that which isn't part of my thinking. If I cared about ego I'd still be using blades like I was in the past. I'm open to small, traditionally-lofted CBs like my 716s as well as larger, more progressively-lofted CBs like these z785s. 

 

I'm trying to find a set that fits my eye and my swing and that allows me to hit the trajectories I know aren't too high or low. That's the very definition of proper fitting as opposed to the kind of egoist approach you're right to admonish but which is not under discussion here. There's no one here worry about badges of honor. I don't understand your obsession with restating that. 

 

Since I like the overall size of the z785 (which is a bit larger than the 716CB) I want to give it a good try. I know they too strong for my liking and have a touch too much offset so I'm thinking that weakening the z785 might be the best solution as opposed to sticking with the 716 CB. That way, I'll get the loft & trajectory that I want while still getting the benefits of the slightly larger z785 with their already-installed Modus3 shafts which I think are a slightly better fit for my swing than the S300 profile that currently sits in the 716 CB. 

OK, understand.  I'm just saying you can't focus on the club number when you are defining trajectory too high or low (which you seem to be doing, especially in your earlier posts, even if that isn't your main focus).

 

The Titleist irons are 31-47 6-iron to PW vs. 28-46 for the z785s.  I can see why that may  not be ideal from a gapping standpoint.  But it's not like the Srixons are a hollow body GI Distance iron.  I'm just surprised anyone that has tried tons of clubs would be shocked when an iron with 3 degrees less loft doesn't fly as high.  I'd bet 90%+ of people here would know that this club (28 degree z785 6-iron) is going to fly much closer to your 27 degree 5-iron.

 

And I'm all for weakening lofts if that makes everything work better together.  But I also don't care if I buy a different set of clubs with the desired lofts that come with different labels (labeled either stronger or weaker).  Most people still seem to draw a strong distinction between these two. 

[North Butte]

19 minutes ago, agolf1 said:

And I'm all for weakening lofts if that makes everything work better together.  But I also don't care if I buy a different set of clubs with the desired lofts that come with different labels (labeled either stronger or weaker).  Most people still seem to draw a strong distinction between these two. 

I think it's a very minority preference but there seems to be a certain group of golfers who are absolutely wedded to the idea that "6 iron" should go a certain distance and have a certain trajectory and they get completely out of their comfort zone if that club has some other number on it. Even now in the third decade of the migration of iron numbers, they consider it an outrage. It's the darndest thing to get worked up about that I can imagine but for some people it's a really big deal, apparently.

 

I also think that small minority of golfers must be over-represented on golf forums. Because I've seen them whining *constantly* about "jacked lofts" for more than 20 years now. Yet in Real Life, as opposed to online, I've heard complaints about that maybe two or three times, ever. 

[NRJyzr]

1 hour ago, North Butte said:

I think it's a very minority preference but there seems to be a certain group of golfers who are absolutely wedded to the idea that "6 iron" should go a certain distance and have a certain trajectory and they get completely out of their comfort zone if that club has some other number on it. Even now in the third decade of the migration of iron numbers, they consider it an outrage. It's the darndest thing to get worked up about that I can imagine but for some people it's a really big deal, apparently.

 

I also think that small minority of golfers must be over-represented on golf forums. Because I've seen them whining *constantly* about "jacked lofts" for more than 20 years now. Yet in Real Life, as opposed to online, I've heard complaints about that maybe two or three times, ever. 

 

That's certainly a colorful post.  Not so close to target, but at least it's amusing.  LOL

[North Butte]

17 minutes ago, NRJyzr said:

 

That's certainly a colorful post.  Not so close to target, but at least it's amusing.  LOL

There's plenty of stuff complained about or discussed every single day on this forum that I never hear a word about in Real Life. I've long since learned that the world of Golf includes a lot of stuff that I would never know existed if not for being on this forum. The phrase "jacked lofts" is just one among many such things.

[MelloYello]

2 hours ago, agolf1 said:

OK, understand.  I'm just saying you can't focus on the club number when you are defining trajectory too high or low (which you seem to be doing, especially in your earlier posts, even if that isn't your main focus).

 

The Titleist irons are 31-47 6-iron to PW vs. 28-46 for the z785s.  I can see why that may  not be ideal from a gapping standpoint.  But it's not like the Srixons are a hollow body GI Distance iron.  I'm just surprised anyone that has tried tons of clubs would be shocked when an iron with 3 degrees less loft doesn't fly as high.  I'd bet 90%+ of people here would know that this club (28 degree z785 6-iron) is going to fly much closer to your 27 degree 5-iron.

 

And I'm all for weakening lofts if that makes everything work better together.  But I also don't care if I buy a different set of clubs with the desired lofts that come with different labels (labeled either stronger or weaker).  Most people still seem to draw a strong distinction between these two. 

 

I agree. Still, that begs an obvious question--why are we seeing this trend amongst the better player's irons?

 

This new step in the evolution of player's CBs surprises me. I'll throw my hands up and admit I bought this set of z785s thinking it was just a little larger in size. That's what I originally found appealing. I didn't realize it had stronger lofts. On the upside, it's been interesting to try that out. 

 

Nevertheless, the fact that this type of strong-lofted player's CB is becoming the new normal really surprises me. Titleist and Ping and I'm sure others are producing models to compete. It's clearly a market. I'm just surprised this market exists at all. Apparently A LOT of better players are selecting these stronger lofts. Makes me think that I should maybe get with the trend, IDK. 🙂 

 

FWIW, I took these z785s to the range again today and had a little more luck with getting them where I want to see them trajectory-wise. I think if one really tries, they can still launch the ball adequately. Still, I'm probably trying too hard to elevate the ball if I'm thinking about that at all during a stock shot so I'll probably bend them a smidge weak when it's all said and done. 

[MelloYello]

1 hour ago, North Butte said:

I think it's a very minority preference but there seems to be a certain group of golfers who are absolutely wedded to the idea that "6 iron" should go a certain distance and have a certain trajectory and they get completely out of their comfort zone if that club has some other number on it. Even now in the third decade of the migration of iron numbers, they consider it an outrage. It's the darndest thing to get worked up about that I can imagine but for some people it's a really big deal, apparently.

 

I also think that small minority of golfers must be over-represented on golf forums. Because I've seen them whining *constantly* about "jacked lofts" for more than 20 years now. Yet in Real Life, as opposed to online, I've heard complaints about that maybe two or three times, ever. 

 

Honestly, trajectory is one of my top priorities when it comes to irons. 

 

If you keep the shaft length where it is and start messing with lofts and you don't notice that, I think you're the unique one. Again, we're talking about clubs where virtually all factors are identical except for the loft. 

 

I think you're imagining a scenario where the loft is stronger but the shaft length is longer and the CG is lower and a bunch of things all come together to compensate. That's not really what we're talking about. 

 

These z785s have standard length shafts and a relatively high VCOG. The strong lofts are therefore somewhat noticeable. 

[MelloYello]

1 hour ago, North Butte said:

There's plenty of stuff complained about or discussed every single day on this forum that I never hear a word about in Real Life. I've long since learned that the world of Golf includes a lot of stuff that I would never know existed if not for being on this forum. The phrase "jacked lofts" is just one among many such things.

 

The number of intellectual or otherwise technical conversations I've had on the internet dwarfs the number I will ever have in "real life." 

 

I'm not saying real life sucks in totality. Human interaction is healthy. But when I have a technical question or want to discuss something that requires a degree of familiarity the average person doesn't have, I don't / can't go to "real life" for that. 

 

So careful just what you criticize. 

 

 

 

Edited October 4, 2020 by MelloYello

[grm24]

2 hours ago, NRJyzr said:

 

That's certainly a colorful post.  Not so close to target, but at least it's amusing.  LOL

Preach it Ed!

[NoTimeToDie]

This isn't so simple, there are many things that make the ball go longer, loft and shaft length, spin, tech, launch, strike, ability, strength etc.. So I suppose as BD showed you can hit the ball longer or shorter without changing club length and I bet he gapped out his lofts at something other than "traditional" and got spin / launch / dispersion numbers he liked. It's personal preference on this, I like the P790 lofts because the shaft lengths are more "traditional" but still go longer. I don't think one size fits all and distance gapping / spin / dispersion etc... are all issues, whatever gives the best distance gap, stopping power and is the easiest to hit the most consistently. That's what BD and Bobby Jones and Moe Norman showed, not for everyone but the idea is clear, you can either use shaft length or loft or a combination with other things such as tech and ball and swing the best most consistent way for you.

Edited October 4, 2020 by NoTimeToDie

[Nard_S]

It's somewhat rationale to ask why does anybody needs  a #7i that goes 200 yards & why the industry is bee lining for such an absurd equipment specification.

 

So you buy your hi-tech GI set with super duper mega graphite shafts, then you need full suite of hybrids for long end, then a full suite of Vokey's to "score" and the next thing you know you have three distinct setups with three weight and shaft profiles that are all to their own.

 

All done to replace one coherent set of irons. I'll pass on that.

[Titleist_PT23]

11 hours ago, Nard_S said:

It's somewhat rationale to ask why does anybody needs  a #7i that goes 200 yards & why the industry is bee lining for such an absurd equipment specification.

 

So you buy your hi-tech GI set with super duper mega graphite shafts, then you need full suite of hybrids for long end, then a full suite of Vokey's to "score" and the next thing you know you have three distinct setups with three weight and shaft profiles that are all to their own.

 

All done to replace one coherent set of irons. I'll pass on that.

Another moron that's fixated on "#7."  

 

Just find irons that fit the lofts and gaps that are appropriate for you.  For me, that's ~25 degrees to 50 degrees.  4-PW, 5-GW, 6-GW2.  Eventually it will be GW-GW6.  Who cares?

 

I'm all for a consistent makeup of clubs.  I don't dislike hybrids but I prefer either all fairways or all hybrids.  And people since the beginning of time have had a "different wedge" (defined as anything over 50 degrees).

 

Not surprising, Chairman Emeritus of the Loft Police @NRJyzrhas liked your post.  Let's talk about club labels that were designed before 1/2 the people here were even born.

[Titleist_PT23]

5 minutes ago, agolf1 said:

Another moron that's fixated on "#7."  

 

Just find irons that fit the lofts and gaps that are appropriate for you.  For me, that's ~25 degrees to 50 degrees.  4-PW, 5-GW, 6-GW2.  Eventually it will be GW-GW6.  Who cares?

 

I'm all for a consistent makeup of clubs.  I don't dislike hybrids but I prefer either all fairways or all hybrids.  And people since the beginning of time have had a "different wedge" (defined as anything over 50 degrees).

 

Not surprising, Chairman Emeritus of the Loft Police @NRJyzrhas liked your post.  Let's talk about club labels that were designed before 1/2 the people here were even born.

To apologize to @Nard_S.  Comment was not meant directly.  I just don't get why #7 can or can't fly whatever distance.