One length irons WOW!!!

[Quasimoto]

Interesting concept. At 67 I have no interest in learning a new club design like this, and no doubt there is a learning curve.

I enjoy the traditional lengths.

[lefthack]

So there are a couple component setups. The Heater 3.0, Heater F35, Pinehawk, Turner LX22, there is a set from One, but they are $400. The others are less than $200 basic, $250 built out nicely. I can't seem to find any real reviews of any of them. 

[Snakster]

16 hours ago, lefthack said:

So there are a couple component setups. The Heater 3.0, Heater F35, Pinehawk, Turner LX22, there is a set from One, but they are $400. The others are less than $200 basic, $250 built out nicely. I can't seem to find any real reviews of any of them. 

I've been thinking of getting a set of Pinhawks for proof of concept.  I'm a high handicapper, so I'm not worried about consequences of a 'not perfectly fitted' clubset or 'lesser quality'.  My goal would be to see if SL clubs would allow me to hit more consistently from fairway (rough) to green than traditional length.  If That is a successful proof of concept, then I would be more than happy to drop some dollars on a 'better' and professionally fitted set.

[abenjami]

I have never played a SL set of irons but I'm definitely curious as it pertains to the longer irons.  I think the issue for me is that I have spent a decent amount of time hitting the Cobra's in a store on a simulator and quite frankly I don't like the heads being a long time Mizuno guy.

 

Unless you are really trying to become a single plane swinger like Bryson and thus want all your irons to be the same length for that reason, the SL logic doesn't make a lot of sense to me.  Well at least for my game anyway.

 

I'm completely comfortable hitting my 6-PW at their traditional decreasing lengths.  But where my consistency struggles is with my 4i and 5i.  I like the idea of a shorter shaft on those clubs and I'm considering just ordering a custom 4i and 5i cut at the same length as my 6i.  Any opinions on that? 

[lefthack]

1 hour ago, Snakster said:

I've been thinking of getting a set of Pinhawks for proof of concept.  I'm a high handicapper, so I'm not worried about consequences of a 'not perfectly fitted' clubset or 'lesser quality'.  My goal would be to see if SL clubs would allow me to hit more consistently from fairway (rough) to green than traditional length.  If That is a successful proof of concept, then I would be more than happy to drop some dollars on a 'better' and professionally fitted set.

 

My fear is I'm kinda good and if I use single length shovels, I'm not going to have the best experience. If I get bored enough, I'll drop a couple hundred on a set to try. 

[ojosdegatonegro]

2 hours ago, Snakster said:

I've been thinking of getting a set of Pinhawks for proof of concept.  I'm a high handicapper, so I'm not worried about consequences of a 'not perfectly fitted' clubset or 'lesser quality'.  My goal would be to see if SL clubs would allow me to hit more consistently from fairway (rough) to green than traditional length.  If That is a successful proof of concept, then I would be more than happy to drop some dollars on a 'better' and professionally fitted set.

I'm a high handicapper too and decided to gave Sterling irons a try. No regrets. In two months handicap went down 10 strokes. No learning curve, just a regular 8i swing all the times I have an iron in my hands. For sure a high handicapper can take advantage of single lenght irons.

[clinkinfo]

On 3/14/2021 at 8:18 AM, Wooderson said:

Why would I ever care what Brandon thinks?

 

With that said, I think SL is flawed because of the long wedges but will be giving the Wishon 3/8 length increment a shot to hopefully enhance consistency with the longer clubs. 

I played them for half a season, the long wedges are not the problem.  They just go higher, with a little more spin.

 

The problem is the difficulty in getting the longer irons high enough to be effective coming into greens.  They just don't hold anything firm or fast, they are too low with too low spin.  Just watch the reviews on youtube and compare the long iron numbers. They have a much flatter trajectory.

 

[Rich Douglas]

On 4/15/2021 at 10:34 AM, betarhoalphadelta said:

And I'm not sure how the aftermarket is for used clubs

For Wishon and Edel, not good. For Cobra, about what you'd expect.

 

Wishon and Edel sit in that "component" category which, unfortunately, is loaded with a lot of cheap junk poorly assembled. Even though there are real and significant distinctions to be made, they're not. The trade-in value is next-to-zilch. How that correlates to re-sale, I don't know, but I have to think it is not good.

 

I owned and played a set of Wishon Sterling irons for 4 years. I switched to the new EQ1-NX primarily because I wanted to switch to graphite shafts anyway, so I plunked down and upgraded. Well, a lone clubfitter can get you the irons you want, but he can't really take a trade. And guess what? You can't get a trade-in value above "generic" anyway. It's not worth the effort to sell them on EBay, so they sit in my closet.

[Rich Douglas]

On 4/15/2021 at 4:14 PM, Spankapotamus redux said:

I think the whole idea of fitting is overrated for noncompetitive golfers, but to each their own. I don't want to spend a ton of money on golf equipment.

The second sentence explains the first.

 

I used to think like that. I would chase one design after another, wondering why I wasn't improving. Then I got fitted and realized that I needed a narrow sole design, low-torque shafts, and my irons to be 2-degrees upright. None of that would have come through without a proper fitting. Same with the driver. It took a fitting to realize why I was ballooning my drives. That extra 1200 rpm I was putting on each shot was the likely suspect. This meant a change in drivers to one I would never have considered off-the-rack. Problem solved.

 

I'm glad your off-the-rack clubs work for you. You are a very rare one...assuming you're correct.

[Rich Douglas]

19 hours ago, Snakster said:

I'm a high handicapper, so I'm not worried about consequences of a 'not perfectly fitted' clubset or 'lesser quality'.

This is a fallacy. Higher-handicap players need to be properly fitted even more than do lower-handicap players. Your swing flaws are subject to being grossly exaggerated by improper club fitting. 

 

There's an old saying: "I'll beat you with my clubs, then I'll beat you with yours." There's a reason for that.

[Rich Douglas]

19 hours ago, Snakster said:

If That is a successful proof of concept, then I would be more than happy to drop some dollars on a 'better' and professionally fitted set.

You'll likely learn a lot by doing that. You can learn a lot about single-length irons simply by trying them, even if they're not well-fitted. (Unless they're something grossly out of line, like a crazy swing weight or goofy grips.)

 

The two biggest adjustments in using single-length clubs are both mental. At first, it seems strange to stand over a 5-iron that's the length of an 8-iron. Some players, initially, end up trying to hit it too hard. 

 

The opposite is true for the higher-lofted irons and wedges. The subconscious sometimes wants to get you to back off because the club seems so long. But both of these phenomena are very short-lived and you quickly get used to seeing the same setup and swing on every full shot.

 

I guess there is a third adjustment--and it's mental also--and that's ball position. We've been conditioned for a long time to move the ball position forward or back depending on the club we're using. But in single-length sets you don't move it, because the ball position is a function of club length. (Actually, it's a function of the steepness or shallowness of your swing which, in turn, is driven by the club length. You get the idea.)

 

You should swing every club in the set with the same setup, swing plane(s), etc. You can test that idea with a crummy set and see if its something you can get used to. But pay more attention to those adjustments and less to actual outcomes, outcomes you cannot determine accurately until you're hitting a properly fitted set. Happy hunting!

[Rich Douglas]

19 hours ago, abenjami said:

Unless you are really trying to become a single plane swinger like Bryson and thus want all your irons to be the same length for that reason, the SL logic doesn't make a lot of sense to me. 

This is a common fallacy. You can be a one-plane swinger with either variable- or single-length sets. You can be a two-plane swinger with either set, too. The two concepts are unrelated--entirely. Here's why.

 

The advantage to single-length irons is that you put the same swing (say, your 8-iron swing) on every shot in the set. But some players use a one-plane swing while most others use a two-plane swing. Fine. Use either one on a traditional 8-iron, right? So use either one on a single-length set, where every club sets up like an 8-iron (or 7-iron or 6-iron, depending on your individual choice).

 

When employing a one-plane swing, it doesn't mean every club in the set travels on the same plane. No, each club in the set travels on the different plane. More upright for shorter clubs, more flat for longer clubs. "One plane" means that the club travels on the same plane on the backswing and the downswing for each club in the bag. But that plane changes for each club. Thus, it is unrelated to whether you have a single- or variable-length set of irons. 

 

Single-length irons simply matters for both one-plane and two-plane players in exactly the same manner and to the exact same extent. The fallacy here is not with the single-length irons; it's with what people misunderstand about the one-plane swing.

[extrastiff]

19 hours ago, lefthack said:

 

My fear is I'm kinda good and if I use single length shovels, I'm not going to have the best experience. If I get bored enough, I'll drop a couple hundred on a set to try. 

I love my single length shovels as a plus cap, 120+ driver swingspeed

[Rich Douglas]

19 hours ago, abenjami said:

I like the idea of a shorter shaft on those clubs and I'm considering just ordering a custom 4i and 5i cut at the same length as my 6i.  Any opinions on that? 

Sure! It's a mistake on two different levels.

 

First, it completely negates the advantage of single-length clubs. Sure, it would be nice to be able to hit low-lofted irons with shorter shafts....to the extent that you can. But you miss out on the real advantage of single-length irons (which is discussed all over this thread, so I won't repeat it here). 

 

But let's take your concept as-is. It still fails because of clubhead design. And it fails on two significant counts--one blatant, and one more subtle. The blatant: simply cutting down the shaft of your 4-iron and 5-iron will throw off the gross weights and swing weights of those two clubs dramatically. They'll feel really weird because they'll feel so much lighter than the rest of your set. Iron clubheads get progressively lighter as the shafts get progressively longer to compensate for the additional weight of longer shafts. Cutting down the shafts takes that weight away. You'll need to add it to the clubhead to return the club's static weight and swing weight to normal levels--and to get those clubs to feel like the rest of the set. But adding that weight can change the playing characteristics of the heads of those clubs, especially now that manufacturers are already using multiple designs throughout the set. Introducing some extra weight--whether you do it with lead tape or inserting it into the weight port--might give you some unanticipated troubles. This is the subtle problem.

 

I guess there is a third one as well: the fact that single-length clubs are harder to hit at the low-lofted end of the set. In other words, if the longest iron you can hit comfortably--good ball flight and good gapping--is a 4-iron, you will likely be limited to the 5-iron in a single-length set. This is because about 85% of a ball's carry distance is generated from the loft, with the other 15% coming from the length of the club. But you lose this second element, making it much more likely the 4 iron won't carry far enough. (Good manufacturers of single-length clubs make up for this with changes in the club heads, moving the center of gravity, etc.) So what you'll have is a 5-iron that flies shorter than it did before you cut down the shaft, and a 4-iron that flies the same distance as the 5, but rolls out a bit farther. 

[Rich Douglas]

17 hours ago, ojosdegatonegro said:

I'm a high handicapper too and decided to gave Sterling irons a try. No regrets. In two months handicap went down 10 strokes. No learning curve, just a regular 8i swing all the times I have an iron in my hands. For sure a high handicapper can take advantage of single lenght irons.

So can low-handicap players, but they might have less incentive to switch. I'm a single-digit, but I made the switch 5 years ago and haven't looked back.

[Rich Douglas]

13 hours ago, clinkinfo said:

The problem is the difficulty in getting the longer irons high enough to be effective coming into greens.  They just don't hold anything firm or fast, they are too low with too low spin.  Just watch the reviews on youtube and compare the long iron numbers. They have a much flatter trajectory.

I agree with the trajectory issue, but recent advances by Wishon's line have negated that a bit. I can't speak for Edel and Cobra on that matter, and I couldn't care less about the off-brands.

 

Not sure I agree with the spins, since that is largely a function of loft. Again, newer designs have gotten better in this area--but it remains a concern. 

[betarhoalphadelta]

1 hour ago, Rich Douglas said:

This is a fallacy. Higher-handicap players need to be properly fitted even more than do lower-handicap players. Your swing flaws are subject to being grossly exaggerated by improper club fitting. 

 

I'd also say that because typical one length sets are ordered custom, you might as well get fit. Even if you buy online and then buy to your specs.

 

Looking at Club Champion, an iron fitting is $150. That will tell you what grips work for you, what shaft weight and flex fits your swing, what swing weight suits your tempo, what lie angle you need. Sure, they're also fitting for clubheads, but IMHO the clubhead is the least important part of the fitting. And you're under no obligation to buy. 

 

A typical fitting is based on a 7i, then they usually just extrapolate out +/- for the rest of the clubs in the set. Well, it's pretty darn easy to translate that to a SL set based on a 7i length, right? It's not really hard to adjust it slightly for a set based around 8i or 6i length either. It's basically +/- 0.5" and +/- 0.5* lie angle as I understand it...

 

And then if you order the SL set and determine they're not right for you, you have all the fitting specs you need for whatever replaces them. But if you love the SL set, they're fit exactly to what you need for $150 (or whatever your local fitter charges). 

[lefthack]

1 hour ago, extrastiff said:

I love my single length shovels as a plus cap, 120+ driver swingspeed

 

I hope to be close to scratch by the end of the year, but I don't swing nearly that hard. I'm not willing to give up the ability to hose myself for the sake of single length. 

[clinkinfo]

2 hours ago, Rich Douglas said:

I agree with the trajectory issue, but recent advances by Wishon's line have negated that a bit. I can't speak for Edel and Cobra on that matter, and I couldn't care less about the off-brands.

 

Not sure I agree with the spins, since that is largely a function of loft. Again, newer designs have gotten better in this area--but it remains a concern. 

I’m not saying they are “‘low spin” relative to other irons, I’m saying they are too low a spin rate for the trajectory they are traveling on.  You can’t have shallow approach angles AND low (or average) spin numbers and hold greens.  
 

I was talking about spin relative to the trajectory they create, not saying they are “‘low spin” heads compared to other brands..  

 

BUT spin is also affected by head speed, which is why the longer wedges spin more, and logically, the longer irons probably spin a tiny bit less then their longer standard length versions.  But again, that’s not really the problem, it’s the 25 yards Of height with a decent angle way too shallow and 3700 rpms that’s the problem.

OL is a weird iron set. At first, when I was using them, I thought I’d fallen in love.  The longer wedges just gave more spin, but were not really harder to control, and the longer irons felt just like the 7,  BUT, that honeymoon ends pretty quickly when you begin to have trouble holding anything with an iron under 6.  It just didn’t seem to translate to a better score for me, actually the opposite.  

 

[TKS]

4 hours ago, clinkinfo said:

I’m not saying they are “‘low spin” relative to other irons, I’m saying they are too low a spin rate for the trajectory they are traveling on.  You can’t have shallow approach angles AND low (or average) spin numbers and hold greens.  
 

I was talking about spin relative to the trajectory they create, not saying they are “‘low spin” heads compared to other brands..  

 

BUT spin is also affected by head speed, which is why the longer wedges spin more, and logically, the longer irons probably spin a tiny bit less then their longer standard length versions.  But again, that’s not really the problem, it’s the 25 yards Of height with a decent angle way too shallow and 3700 rpms that’s the problem.

OL is a weird iron set. At first, when I was using them, I thought I’d fallen in love.  The longer wedges just gave more spin, but were not really harder to control, and the longer irons felt just like the 7,  BUT, that honeymoon ends pretty quickly when you begin to have trouble holding anything with an iron under 6.  It just didn’t seem to translate to a better score for me, actually the opposite.  

 

Easily solved. You need a women's 9 wood instead of a SL 6iron 😉. But seriously, an man's got to know his limits, and Tom Wishon knows most of ours and nixed a 4 iron in the EQ1-NX'S iron set. But! Today I just hit his 5 & 6 EQ1 hybrids in the set - they tower!

Been playing the 4hy since release, after some shaft shenanigans,  I cannot explain how a 20* head can get so high - pretty cool shallow face and low weight position design works.

[abenjami]

9 hours ago, Rich Douglas said:

Sure! It's a mistake on two different levels.

 

First, it completely negates the advantage of single-length clubs. Sure, it would be nice to be able to hit low-lofted irons with shorter shafts....to the extent that you can. But you miss out on the real advantage of single-length irons (which is discussed all over this thread, so I won't repeat it here). 

 

But let's take your concept as-is. It still fails because of clubhead design. And it fails on two significant counts--one blatant, and one more subtle. The blatant: simply cutting down the shaft of your 4-iron and 5-iron will throw off the gross weights and swing weights of those two clubs dramatically. They'll feel really weird because they'll feel so much lighter than the rest of your set. Iron clubheads get progressively lighter as the shafts get progressively longer to compensate for the additional weight of longer shafts. Cutting down the shafts takes that weight away. You'll need to add it to the clubhead to return the club's static weight and swing weight to normal levels--and to get those clubs to feel like the rest of the set. But adding that weight can change the playing characteristics of the heads of those clubs, especially now that manufacturers are already using multiple designs throughout the set. Introducing some extra weight--whether you do it with lead tape or inserting it into the weight port--might give you some unanticipated troubles. This is the subtle problem.

 

I guess there is a third one as well: the fact that single-length clubs are harder to hit at the low-lofted end of the set. In other words, if the longest iron you can hit comfortably--good ball flight and good gapping--is a 4-iron, you will likely be limited to the 5-iron in a single-length set. This is because about 85% of a ball's carry distance is generated from the loft, with the other 15% coming from the length of the club. But you lose this second element, making it much more likely the 4 iron won't carry far enough. (Good manufacturers of single-length clubs make up for this with changes in the club heads, moving the center of gravity, etc.) So what you'll have is a 5-iron that flies shorter than it did before you cut down the shaft, and a 4-iron that flies the same distance as the 5, but rolls out a bit farther. 

 

Some good points here.  Just FYI, I wasn't talking about literally cutting down an existing shaft on a 4i and 5i.  I was talking about having them custom built at a shorter length than stock.  But I think your point mostly still holds.

 

Maybe then what I should do is just get 4/5/6 in one-length, and then 7+ just keep what I have, even though they're completely different clubs.  LOL

[Rich Douglas]

1 hour ago, abenjami said:

Maybe then what I should do is just get 4/5/6 in one-length, and then 7+ just keep what I have, even though they're completely different clubs.  LOL

To each his/her own, of course. And I don't know how much of that is real and how much is "LOL." But I'll risk a response anyway.

 

I've said this before, the main draw of this method is NOT to be able to hit shorter low-lofted irons. The main benefit is to be able to put the same swing on every iron in the set. But, naturally, YMMV.

 

(Wanting a single-length for lower lofts and variable for the high lofts and wedges is a common feeling among those who've not yet tried this. But I'm serious, the lengths aren't the issue; the issue is that they are all the SAME length.)

[Rich Douglas]

9 hours ago, lefthack said:

 

I hope to be close to scratch by the end of the year, but I don't swing nearly that hard. I'm not willing to give up the ability to hose myself for the sake of single length. 

Play what makes you happy, what you have confidence in. That's all that really matters anyway.

[Rich Douglas]

8 hours ago, clinkinfo said:

I’m not saying they are “‘low spin” relative to other irons, I’m saying they are too low a spin rate for the trajectory they are traveling on.  You can’t have shallow approach angles AND low (or average) spin numbers and hold greens.  
 

I was talking about spin relative to the trajectory they create, not saying they are “‘low spin” heads compared to other brands..  

 

BUT spin is also affected by head speed, which is why the longer wedges spin more, and logically, the longer irons probably spin a tiny bit less then their longer standard length versions.  But again, that’s not really the problem, it’s the 25 yards Of height with a decent angle way too shallow and 3700 rpms that’s the problem.

OL is a weird iron set. At first, when I was using them, I thought I’d fallen in love.  The longer wedges just gave more spin, but were not really harder to control, and the longer irons felt just like the 7,  BUT, that honeymoon ends pretty quickly when you begin to have trouble holding anything with an iron under 6.  It just didn’t seem to translate to a better score for me, actually the opposite.  

 

Each of us enjoys (or does not) a different experience. Thanks for the clarification on spin. But I'm not sure length actually adds spin.

 

As for holding the low-lofted irons, I haven't had any trouble with the set through the 5-iron. But the 4-iron (in the Sterling; the EQ1-NX doesn't have one and won't) was tougher to hold. Wishon dumped the 4-iron when he moved to the new design. Then again, I'm seldom faced with hitting anything more than a 7-iron to a green, except the occasional longer par-3.

 

But what's most important is your experience--which weighs much more heavily than the speculations of those who've not yet hit them.

[Rich Douglas]

4 hours ago, TKS said:

Easily solved. You need a women's 9 wood instead of a SL 6iron 😉. But seriously, an man's got to know his limits, and Tom Wishon knows most of ours and nixed a 4 iron in the EQ1-NX'S iron set. But! Today I just hit his 5 & 6 EQ1 hybrids in the set - they tower!

Been playing the 4hy since release, after some shaft shenanigans,  I cannot explain how a 20* head can get so high - pretty cool shallow face and low weight position design works.

Haven't gone to the 4H yet. I love my traditional 3H and 4H. Since I'm already hitting the 3H, I think I'll stick with both. I don't really need the 5H or 6H; the EQ1-NX irons are fine for those.

 

Speaking of which, the EQ1-NX lower-lofted irons fly higher than did the Sterlings, in my experience. Tom weakened the lofts by 1 degree and moved the centers of gravity around to change the launch angles.

[lefthack]

22 minutes ago, Rich Douglas said:

Play what makes you happy, what you have confidence in. That's all that really matters anyway.

 

And I totally do. But I don't know if I'd like SLI or not until I've hit them. Issue being lefty is I will likely have to buy some to hit them.

 

I feel pretty lucky in that my last few sets have gotten progressively better and haven't regret switching. Problem is it makes me wonder if these are this good, then how good would those others possibly be? 

 

I feel like I will end up with a player set, a fancy set, and a floater set of irons. The floater set being whatever floats my boat at the time.

[TKS]

23 minutes ago, Rich Douglas said:

Haven't gone to the 4H yet. I love my traditional 3H and 4H. Since I'm already hitting the 3H, I think I'll stick with both. I don't really need the 5H or 6H; the EQ1-NX irons are fine for those.

 

Speaking of which, the EQ1-NX lower-lofted irons fly higher than did the Sterlings, in my experience. Tom weakened the lofts by 1 degree and moved the centers of gravity around to change the launch angles.

Been doing fittings since release of Sterlings, played for 3yrs, and an EQ1-NX early adopter here. Both great performing designs. When fitted, best in concept. I've put every EQ1 iron, hyb, fwy head through their paces. A hidden gem in the current wishon line is the 590 driving irons

Edited April 18, 2021 by TKS
Another thought to add

[clinkinfo]

10 hours ago, Rich Douglas said:

Each of us enjoys (or does not) a different experience. Thanks for the clarification on spin. But I'm not sure length actually adds spin.

 

As for holding the low-lofted irons, I haven't had any trouble with the set through the 5-iron. But the 4-iron (in the Sterling; the EQ1-NX doesn't have one and won't) was tougher to hold. Wishon dumped the 4-iron when he moved to the new design. Then again, I'm seldom faced with hitting anything more than a 7-iron to a green, except the occasional longer par-3.

 

But what's most important is your experience--which weighs much more heavily than the speculations of those who've not yet hit them.

 

length adds club head speed.  Club head speed adds spin.  You can easily see it on the Launch monitor with the PW on a one length set, for the same loft it goes higher and spins more because of the added length (and resulting speed).   But again, we aren’t talking about huge changes because of this, just small ones.  

Edited April 18, 2021 by clinkinfo

[clinkinfo]

10 hours ago, Rich Douglas said:

To each his/her own, of course. And I don't know how much of that is real and how much is "LOL." But I'll risk a response anyway.

 

I've said this before, the main draw of this method is NOT to be able to hit shorter low-lofted irons. The main benefit is to be able to put the same swing on every iron in the set. But, naturally, YMMV.

 

(Wanting a single-length for lower lofts and variable for the high lofts and wedges is a common feeling among those who've not yet tried this. But I'm serious, the lengths aren't the issue; the issue is that they are all the SAME length.)

 

I think many people who try SL see it slightly differently.  They think:

 

I love that the long irons are shorter, that makes them easier to hit.  
 

I can live with the longer short irons because they are still as easy to hit as my 7 iron, which isn’t hard.

 

It’s not super important that they are all the same length, because for many of us who tried SL we still had standard length woods.  

 

 

 

[extrastiff]

On 4/16/2021 at 3:39 PM, abenjami said:

I have never played a SL set of irons but I'm definitely curious as it pertains to the longer irons.  I think the issue for me is that I have spent a decent amount of time hitting the Cobra's in a store on a simulator and quite frankly I don't like the heads being a long time Mizuno guy.

 

Unless you are really trying to become a single plane swinger like Bryson and thus want all your irons to be the same length for that reason, the SL logic doesn't make a lot of sense to me.  Well at least for my game anyway.

 

I'm completely comfortable hitting my 6-PW at their traditional decreasing lengths.  But where my consistency struggles is with my 4i and 5i.  I like the idea of a shorter shaft on those clubs and I'm considering just ordering a custom 4i and 5i cut at the same length as my 6i.  Any opinions on that? 

 

 

13 hours ago, abenjami said:

 

Some good points here.  Just FYI, I wasn't talking about literally cutting down an existing shaft on a 4i and 5i.  I was talking about having them custom built at a shorter length than stock.  But I think your point mostly still holds.

 

Maybe then what I should do is just get 4/5/6 in one-length, and then 7+ just keep what I have, even though they're completely different clubs.  LOL

Myself and @Rich Douglashave disagreed on this multiple times, goes to show it takes all types. 
 

but I have had plenty of sucess only cutting down 4 iron and 5 iron. In fact, now I play 4, 5, and 6 at 7 iron length, 7-pw at 9 iron length. And wedges at standard wedge length. 
 

I have no issues swinging the multiple different lengths. Sure, all clubs at same length may be slightly more “point and shoot.” But at the same time, I’m much better with a wedge/9 iron in my hand than a 6 iron, so the inconsistency I would get with a six iron was spilling over into my scoring clubs when I was testing all that length.