Forgiving Irons with weak lofts

[moadhia]

21 minutes ago, kepeollie said:

 

but not sure how this works in real life, as they say the Blueprints are more forgiving than the i500s. 

I look at the MOI number , that is what I associate with forgiveness . The MOI of i500 is much higher than blueprints. The MPF number throws some wonky results like the blueprints vs i500 numbers

[Golf64]

JPX 921 forged, Hot metal/pros, weaken the lofts if need be.

[payerasjl]

id probably buy a normal set and ignore the number on the bottom. just play the distance/loft.

[RacineBoxer]

I agree with several others in this thread: get a AW and stop caring about what the number on the bottom of the club is. 

[youngwaldo]

I will have to agree with JPX921 Forged with 2*weak on the lofts.

 

Wk

[cgasucks]

1 hour ago, RacineBoxer said:

I agree with several others in this thread: get a AW and stop caring about what the number on the bottom of the club is. 

 

Yeah.  The number stamped on the sole of the club may change, but the lofts and lengths of the irons still stay the same.

[NRJyzr]

15 minutes ago, cgasucks said:

 

Yeah.  The number stamped on the sole of the club may change, but the lofts and lengths of the irons still stay the same.

 

I agree with this line of thought.  Especially switching between sets from 1980 and 2005.   LOL

 

But it's interesting....   I see this mentioned not infrequently here on WRX, but at the same time, you see people rarely going with anything other than the stronger lofted editions.  🙂 🤔

 

[nsxguy]

1 hour ago, cgasucks said:

 

Yeah.  The number stamped on the sole of the club may change, but the lofts and lengths of the irons still stay the same.

 

49 minutes ago, NRJyzr said:

 

I agree with this line of thought.  Especially switching between sets from 1980 and 2005.   LOL

 

But it's interesting....   I see this mentioned not infrequently here on WRX, but at the same time, you see people rarely going with anything other than the stronger lofted editions.  🙂 🤔

 

 

Never underestimate the "value" of "You hit a 7 ? I only hit an 8 !!!"  

 

 

 

Edited December 22, 2020 by nsxguy

[Fairway14]

On 12/20/2020 at 11:08 AM, Grant5029 said:

I am looking to upgrade my current set of irons and want some thoughts on forgiving or game improvement sets that have weak lofts. I don’t need the distance, just help on miss hits. 

 

What difference does it make if the 7-iron has 34* of loft or 30* of loft?

[kiwihacker]

7 hours ago, cgasucks said:

 

Yeah.  The number stamped on the sole of the club may change, but the lofts and lengths of the irons still stay the same.

Ok enough already. Here are the iron lofts of the Callaway Mavriks 5-AW vs my old Taylormade R7TP 3-AW. Lets just call it the 21° club to the 51° wedge comparison.

 

Callaway/TM

21°/21°

24°/24°

27°/27°

31.5°/31°

36°/35°

41°/39°

46°/43°

51°/47°

--° /51° 

 

So as you can see they start and finish with the same loft but the gap progressions to get there are somewhat different. 

 

 

Edited December 22, 2020 by kiwihacker

[kiwihacker]

Or if you prefer the Cobra Speedzones. They don't even have a 51° club just jumping from the 48° GW to the 54° SW

 

Cobra/TM

21°/21°

24°/24°

27.5°/27°

32°/31°

37°/35°

42.5°/39°

48°/43°

54°/47°

--° /51° 

[8602081]

Can't go wrong with Wilson Staff FG series..

 

[Funkytee75]

On 12/20/2020 at 12:42 PM, NRJyzr said:

 

Some of the answer will depend on what you call "weak lofts."   And, as nsxguy mentioned, how forgiving do you want to go?  Do you want them to be G410 level forgiving, or is i200/i210 level forgiving enough?

 

The ultimate answer might be original Eye2 irons.  They're only marginally less forgiving than the i210 based on the measured MOI, and the lofts are pretty old school with a 50.5* pitching wedge.  They also have a lower CG than the i200/i210.  All about whether you can stand the offset at that point (some don't like looking down at them).

 

Right. That’s why I like the idea of the i210 instead of the G410.  I can learn to shape shots - don’t want the relentless forgiveness to straighten all shots.  Feel in the clubs should tell you about miss hits and possible swing corrections needed.  Numb clinks and clunks don’t seem helpful. 

BTW, I game the EYE2 Gorge 61 deg LW. There’s a reason for the high toe resurgence. Buttery in the bunkers. 

[Funkytee75]

On 12/22/2020 at 9:28 AM, Fairway14 said:

 

What difference does it make if the 7-iron has 34* of loft or 30* of loft?

Gapping checks - getting used to more clubs manufacturers call Wedges and alternatives to longer irons which high handicappers struggle with. 

[TheDeanAbides]

On 12/21/2020 at 3:09 PM, Greg_B said:

You want forgiving? Buy these (not mine). And they're almost free. Outstanding under-the-radar irons.

 

https://www.ebay.com/c/606769047

I had a set of those. Dead easy to hit but the sound (feel) was horrible and tinny. 

[Tree Levino]

6 hours ago, Funkytee75 said:

Right. That’s why I like the idea of the i210 instead of the G410.  I can learn to shape shots - don’t want the relentless forgiveness to straighten all shots.  Feel in the clubs should tell you about miss hits and possible swing corrections needed.  Numb clinks and clunks don’t seem helpful. 

BTW, I game the EYE2 Gorge 61 deg LW. There’s a reason for the high toe resurgence. Buttery in the bunkers. 

The Ping G won’t “straighten all shots”. Working the ball is about delivering a face to a given path. You can do that with any club. A set of Cleveland launcher hybrid irons can hit any shape you want them to. In fact, it’s easier to curve a ball with less loft so one could argue the ping G “7 iron”would actually be more workable than the i210 7 iron. Further to that, the i210 is filled with their elastomer crap which makes the feedback very “soft” for a cast club but muted. 
 

I play blades and don’t really believe in iron forgiveness that much but still you shouldn’t perpetuate myths. GI irons are plenty capable of hitting any shot shape. 

[Funkytee75]

2 hours ago, TigerInTheWoods said:

The Ping G won’t “straighten all shots”. Working the ball is about delivering a face to a given path. You can do that with any club. A set of Cleveland launcher hybrid irons can hit any shape you want them to. In fact, it’s easier to curve a ball with less loft so one could argue the ping G “7 iron”would actually be more workable than the i210 7 iron. Further to that, the i210 is filled with their elastomer crap which makes the feedback very “soft” for a cast club but muted. 
 

I play blades and don’t really believe in iron forgiveness that much but still you shouldn’t perpetuate myths. GI irons are plenty capable of hitting any shot shape. 

I’ll recant that the g410 will straighten all shots.  The question is the degree comparison. I will look into this more at my fitting today. But I don’t buy the argument that this G7iron is more workable than the i210 7 iron. Based on the 3 deg of loft difference in the specs?  

 The shape and design of the head will restrict or promote certain behaviors from that object struck. If a majority of that weight and mass is in the sole, the club will promote or restrict certain movement.

Edited January 2, 2021 by Funkytee75
Spelling

[TheDeanAbides]

1 minute ago, Funkytee75 said:

I’ll recant that the g410 will straighten all shots.  The question it the degree comparison. I will look into this more at my fitting today. But I don’t buy the argument that this G7iron is more workable than the i210. No real facts there. The shape and design of the head will restrict or promote certain behaviors from that object struck. If a majority of that weight and mass is in the sole, the club will promote or restrict certain movement.

This is simply not true, I'm afraid - it's a myth created by the industry. The golf ball and physics do not care how much weight is positioned in the perimeter - they only care about the path, AoA, clubface orientation and dynamic loft. The benefits, for the sake of this discussion, of GI and SGI clubs are in maintaining speed across the face. That is, you'll lose less distance as the ball is struck further from the COG. 

[Funkytee75]

2 minutes ago, TheDeanAbides said:

This is simply not true, I'm afraid - it's a myth created by the industry. The golf ball and physics do not care how much weight is positioned in the perimeter - they only care about the path, AoA, clubface orientation and dynamic loft. The benefits, for the sake of this discussion, of GI and SGI clubs are in maintaining speed across the face. That is, you'll lose less distance as the ball is struck further from the COG. 

Appreciate the feedback - the topic is getting me hunting for understanding!

[PuffyC]

On 12/20/2020 at 11:30 PM, gwelfgulfer said:

Just buy a set with a GW, loft isn't changing, just the numbers on the bottom of the clubs.

 

This ^

 

Honest question here, but I'm curious why you care what the lofts are. I ask because I don't see why that would be a factor when purchasing irons. On the course you play to distance, so if you need to hit 150 to the green you pick the club that you hit 150 regardless of the number stamped on the sole. I actually carry two different 50 degree clubs - one that matches my set and one an SM6 - because they go different distances and have different uses. You could scratch the numbers off both and I wouldn't care because all that matters is how I use them and how far I hit them.

[moadhia]

15 minutes ago, TheDeanAbides said:

This is simply not true, I'm afraid - it's a myth created by the industry. The golf ball and physics do not care how much weight is positioned in the perimeter - they only care about the path, AoA, clubface orientation and dynamic loft. The benefits, for the sake of this discussion, of GI and SGI clubs are in maintaining speed across the face. That is, you'll lose less distance as the ball is struck further from the COG. 

Correct left/right spin is a function of path, AoA, face and dynamic loft. Although GI clubs make it harder to launch lower because of head design so I guess one could say it’s less ‘workable’. 

[NRJyzr]

2 hours ago, TigerInTheWoods said:

The Ping G won’t “straighten all shots”. Working the ball is about delivering a face to a given path. You can do that with any club. A set of Cleveland launcher hybrid irons can hit any shape you want them to. In fact, it’s easier to curve a ball with less loft so one could argue the ping G “7 iron”would actually be more workable than the i210 7 iron. Further to that, the i210 is filled with their elastomer crap which makes the feedback very “soft” for a cast club but muted. 
 

I play blades and don’t really believe in iron forgiveness that much but still you shouldn’t perpetuate myths. GI irons are plenty capable of hitting any shot shape. 

 

My experience is the higher the MOI, the less the lateral movement.  Really found this when I switched back to Rams from the Eye2+ I played for a year.

 

It's not that it doesn't draw/fade, it just does so somewhat less than the lower MOI heads.

 

[TheDeanAbides]

8 minutes ago, moadhia said:

Correct left/right spin is a function of path, AoA, face and dynamic loft. Although GI clubs make it harder to launch lower because of head design so I guess one could say it’s less ‘workable’. 

Workable up and down maybe. 👍🏻

[j_giesler]

+1 for the retro spec i210

[Funkytee75]

25 minutes ago, TheDeanAbides said:

This is simply not true, I'm afraid - it's a myth created by the industry. The golf ball and physics do not care how much weight is positioned in the perimeter - they only care about the path, AoA, clubface orientation and dynamic loft. The benefits, for the sake of this discussion, of GI and SGI clubs are in maintaining speed across the face. That is, you'll lose less distance as the ball is struck further from the COG. 

https://pluggedingolf.com/iron-buyers-guide/
 

Just injecting another opinion here from the author who appears to be out of the industry. 

[braincramp52]

You want forgiving and weak lofts?

 

 

[tets]

Ping eye 2

[TheDeanAbides]

25 minutes ago, Funkytee75 said:

https://pluggedingolf.com/iron-buyers-guide/
 

Just injecting another opinion here from the author who appears to be out of the industry. 

This is an exact example of the industry myth. Physics cannot be influenced by opinion or anecdotal evidence. 

[Funkytee75]

1 hour ago, TheDeanAbides said:

Workable up and down maybe. 👍🏻

Does working the ball higher lower side spin?  Does back spin lower side spin?

Side spin takes away distance in the air as well as when the ball hits the turf, right?  Just asking. 

[TheDeanAbides]

22 minutes ago, Funkytee75 said:

Does working the ball higher lower side spin?  Does back spin lower side spin?

Side spin takes away distance in the air as well as when the ball hits the turf, right?  Just asking. 

This will help.