Players irons...distance vs. control?

[Indygolfer18]

I had an iron fitting today and am having a hard time deciding which should take priority. I was fitted into the ZX7s, and while they were awesome, the lofts are pretty low and they go a mile. I'm not sure that hitting a 186 yard 7 iron is a good thing? I loved the T100 too. While it didn't go as far (178) and lacked a tad bit of forgiveness, the look at address + offset + turf interaction is money.

 

Shot dispersion was pretty good with both, a little bit better with the T100 but the ZX7s were within a 2 yard radius. At what point does distance become a bad thing? And at what point do I just need to close my laptop and trust my fitter?

[TallGuy90]

Depends on your game. I hit my 7 160 carry with 10-12 yard Increments. I don’t find my self need a 190 plus club very often . 

[gibbiesmalls]

Distance is never a bad thing.  Ever. Don't let anyone convince you otherwise.

 

I wish I hit my LW 150 yards with the same control I have with it now that I only hit it 80. Strokes gained has clearly established that distance matters and probably the biggest contributor to the differences at all levels of golf. 

 

I don't know about you, but I have a much easier time hitting my 9 iron than a 4 iron.... and if I could hit 9 iron the distance I currently hit my 4 iron, there is ZERO doubt in my mind that I would be shooting far better scores than I do today.

 

 

 

[Straphael]

Distance matters off the tee shot. Irons are for accuracy on aproach shots. If you hit 7 iron 150 you need 150ish every time you pull it. Not a 10-20 yard dispersion front to back. So picking something off max distance isn’t what I’d go with. 
i do agree distance isn’t a bad thing but gapping is more important than anything unless you are massively distance challenged but I don’t picture that being an issue if those models are what you got fitted for. 

[Bye]

Is there really much difference between the 2? The ZX7 7 iron is 2 degrees stronger and went 8 yards further. 4 yards per degree of loft is about what you should expect. 
 

What would help your game more, a bit more forgiveness or a club that offers a touch more in shot making. Distance wise you are only talking about how the gapping is managed IMO.
 

Both companies make great irons. 

[beaney]

I’d agree with all above. The distance is a nice thing and if the gapping works, then brilliant. 
 

I have the z765 and find that the consistency of distance is brilliant, which I think is really important with this type of iron. 
 

both are great irons, so I guess it’s a case of which you prefer the look and feel of, and which for in to the gaps between the rest of your bag. 

[Jc0]

It should be about how the ball is reacting when it lands. If the ball goes 5 yards father that doesn't matter if it releases 20ft vs a club that goes 5 yards shorter and stops where it lands. With the irons you want the ball to stop where you are expecting, then play the longest thing that stops where you are expecting.

[Golf64]

Depending on the other numbers with the ZX7s, maybe a change of shafts, ball? If you were not launching the ball too high, maybe weaken the lofts 2* to add spin/launch to shorten your distances? 

[anth]

Let me ask you this question. If you swapped the performance of the clubs around, would that make your choice easier?

[phizzy30]

I would go with distance control over distance with irons.  Pointless to hit a 7 iron 190 when your dispersion sucks or when you don't know if it's going to fly over the green or stop 10 yards short and roll back. 

[Hawkeye77]

Only 2 degrees difference and 8 yards? That’s a lot, IMO. 

 

Nothing about the post seems to suggest zx7s in terms of why you would select an iron. 

Edited August 14, 2021 by Hawkeye77

[Fairway14]

7 hours ago, Indygolfer18 said:

At what point does distance become a bad thing? 

Distance should not be a factor for developing swing technique and, or, choosing which model iron to play.

The player who consistently carries his 7-iron 160 yards is  well set to score better than the player who randomly carries 7-iron shots anywhere from 165 to 180. If your goal is to score lower then develop a swing and choose an iron model which produces consistently accurate carry distances.

The problem with irons designed for distance is that they inherently make consistent carry distance control too challenging.

 

[Indygolfer18]

1 hour ago, Golf64 said:

Depending on the other numbers with the ZX7s, maybe a change of shafts, ball? If you were not launching the ball too high, maybe weaken the lofts 2* to add spin/launch to shorten your distances? 

The ball actually launched well, I had a 50* descent angle and was averaging 5700 RPM on 130ish mph ball speed. I tend to have a higher ball flight though!

[Indygolfer18]

1 hour ago, anth said:

Let me ask you this question. If you swapped the performance of the clubs around, would that make your choice easier?

No, that’s why I’m confused on which direction to go. ZX7 was really consistent distance-wise, forgiving, and had great ball flight. I just don’t know if the extra distance that comes with them is something that would disrupt my game. The worst part of my game is 30-90 yards right now and having to hit more half shots because I’m carrying a PW 145 doesn’t sit well with me!

 

T100 spun more and flew a little bit less, and was slightly less forgiving on low face shots. IMO it was outperformed by the Srixon’s but it fills my gaps better. 

Edited August 14, 2021 by Indygolfer18

[Itsjustagame]

This debate probably varies by handicap. The player who can be very precise with iron carry distances is hitting the center of the club face and is probably a low single digit handicap.

The rest of us would probably be better off with a club that offers better distance/forgiveness.

[betoj]

Irons with better dispersion (for your game) should be chosen every time.  The only shot you are giving up is in that zone just outside your longest iron, where the longer iron could be used, but even there you can cover the distance with a hybrid or fairway wood or even the long iron from the distance set.  Easy decision, if there truly is a dispersion advantage with one set for you.  

[Golf64]

Spin could do with being a bit higher. Decent angle is very good. Might be time for a diff. shaft/ball?!

[Hawkeye77]

21 minutes ago, Indygolfer18 said:

No, that’s why I’m confused on which direction to go. ZX7 was really consistent distance-wise, forgiving, and had great ball flight. I just don’t know if the extra distance that comes with them is something that would disrupt my game. The worst part of my game is 30-90 yards right now and having to hit more half shots because I’m carrying a PW 145 doesn’t sit well with me!

 

T100 spun more and flew a little bit less, and was slightly less forgiving on low face shots. IMO it was outperformed by the Srixon’s but it fills my gaps better. 

Other than the majestic distance, how was it outperformed?  The first post suggested a little more distance for the zx7, the T100s were better in appearance and had better dispersion and distance was apparently fine.  What irons do you hit now and how do the distances compare (in reality)? Whatever the less forgiveness on some low on the face shots part means seems like a nitpick. Are the T100s spinning unreasonably other than the fact the loft is higher? Or is the zx7 spinning too low? Looks like more info coming in vs. the original post, but not really anything to suggest that the zx7s were outperforming and was the distance unreasonable?  Are the distances the averages?  Was the 2 degrees in loft on average and taking out outliers really getting you 8 more yards?  You said the fitter recommended the zx7s - what was his or her reason - had to be more there than you are sharing so far.

 

In the end, it's pretty personal and you should talk yourself into whichever iron you want, but seem to be inconsistent in the info - suggests you are squarely on the fence, been there.  Can you get the Titleists sooner than November?  Srixon is continuing to have issues depending shafts and in general.  Maybe that doesn't matter, maybe it does.

Edited August 14, 2021 by Hawkeye77

[NoTalentLefty]

How about your wedges? I’m not a pro but your 30 to 90 shots are your week spots  by your own admission. wedge upgrade, lessons, or practice might do the trick? With the iron upgrade of course. Wouldn’t want to deprive you of that. If you need a little help go with Srixons. 

Edited August 14, 2021 by NoTalentLefty

[joostin]

7 hours ago, Indygolfer18 said:

While it didn't go as far (178) and lacked a tad bit of forgiveness, the look at address + offset + turf interaction is money.

Looks wins for me.  Sounds like you hit both well, but are more comfortable with the T100 distances right now.  A bit of forgiveness wouldn't sway me, and you might be able to adapt to the ZX7 distances, but sounds like T100 sets up perfect to your eye and does what you expect.  That might be best mentally.  Looks would be my deciding factor, even more than feel... though I'm sure both feel great.

[chinaski]

The 2 yards of dispersion has more to do with the increased loft than the head itself. Hit the x7 side by side with T100s for a better loft comparison. If you were hitting stock, I think Srixon is a degree flatter. 

 

Interesting you said the Zx7 was more forgiving? I haven't seen the new t100 in person yet, but I know the zx7 is a slightly bigger head, but would assume it would be the other way around. 

Edited August 14, 2021 by chinaski

[NJBigFish22]

Maybe you should ask your fitter about the T100S or the T200.  The S would probably close the distance gap and the T200 may do both distance and forgiveness.  

[Hawkeye77]

13 hours ago, Bye said:

Is there really much difference between the 2? The ZX7 7 iron is 2 degrees stronger and went 8 yards further. 4 yards per degree of loft is about what you should expect. 
 

What would help your game more, a bit more forgiveness or a club that offers a touch more in shot making. Distance wise you are only talking about how the gapping is managed IMO.
 

Both companies make great irons. 

Only 2 degrees difference - 34 vs. 32.

Edited August 14, 2021 by Hawkeye77

[dmeeksDC]

Get the T100s. You can always have the lofts bent 1 degree strong so you can feel like you’re getting a little distance boost, which will be a mental edge. You may have been fitted to the Srixons, but you clearly can play either and your comments indicate you really prefer the Titleists. And that’s why you came to us for help. 😊 No big differences. You can fine tune these two irons to play virtually the same. 

[Nixhex524]

15 hours ago, Indygolfer18 said:

No, that’s why I’m confused on which direction to go. ZX7 was really consistent distance-wise, forgiving, and had great ball flight. I just don’t know if the extra distance that comes with them is something that would disrupt my game. The worst part of my game is 30-90 yards right now and having to hit more half shots because I’m carrying a PW 145 doesn’t sit well with me!

 

T100 spun more and flew a little bit less, and was slightly less forgiving on low face shots. IMO it was outperformed by the Srixon’s but it fills my gaps better. 

 

This is the main problem with distance irons, or irons that produce distance.  I agree with @gibbiesmalls that distance is not a bad thing, it will more often help than hurt if you have decent control but I am with you here.  I do not want a 30 yard gap from my PW to my GW.  I guess you could always go the next step and redo the bottom end of your bag but for me, I like my wedge set-up and do not want to mess with it, so if I find the yardage gap between the PW and GW too close, or too far apart, I don't play those irons.  Probably been mentioned but you could bend the ZX7 weak.  I do think Srixon makes a hell of a players CB so I don't think you'd be upset with them and if they offer more forgiveness than the T100, well, I'd probably go that route honestly and just have them bent to suit my gaps.  

[anth]

I’m a Srixon guy so clearly biased. But if yardage gaps at the bottom of your bag are an issue you need to look holistically at your set up.

 

I used to have a 25 metre gap between AW and SW when I was playing the Z545 - the AW was a Srixon and the SW a Cleveland RTX 2.0.  That big a gap is no good and it was one of the reasons why I moved to the 765/965.

 

Given the ZX7 are as “player” as they come from Srixon if you still have big gapping issues I would suggest there might be other things at play eg. shafts, length etc.

 

If there’s not, and the Titleist don’t give you those gapping issues, then the choice is clear

[Fairway14]

On 8/13/2021 at 10:10 PM, Indygolfer18 said:

I had an iron fitting today and am having a hard time deciding which should take priority. I was fitted into the ZX7s, and while they were awesome, the lofts are pretty low and they go a mile. I'm not sure that hitting a 186 yard 7 iron is a good thing?

Buy a set of Srixon Z Forged !

[MountainKing]

Control 100%.   You want not only left/right dispersion, but you want your irons to fly pretty consistent each time give you good gapping/coverage.  With that 7 iron yardage, you'll end up with probably a 145-150 PW, does that fit into your bag with your other wedges? 

 

While on a totally different universe of playing, watching Tiger go through how his TM irons were developed was fascinating.  He wanted to make sure his new irons matched up with his old irons.  It's a really solid way of thinking, I think. 

[MountainKing]

On 8/14/2021 at 12:21 AM, gibbiesmalls said:

Distance is never a bad thing.  Ever. Don't let anyone convince you otherwise.

 

I wish I hit my LW 150 yards with the same control I have with it now that I only hit it 80. Strokes gained has clearly established that distance matters and probably the biggest contributor to the differences at all levels of golf. 

 

I don't know about you, but I have a much easier time hitting my 9 iron than a 4 iron.... and if I could hit 9 iron the distance I currently hit my 4 iron, there is ZERO doubt in my mind that I would be shooting far better scores than I do today.

 

 

 

 

 

Except in a lot of cases, this distance is achieved by adding length to the iron, decreasing the loft, and utilizing tech to knock the spin off the ball.  Essentially you're not accomplishing what you think you are, because that 9 iron is basically what your old 7 iron was, creating the same problem, but with a different number on the club. 

 

Edited August 16, 2021 by MountainKing

[North Butte]

The problem with this kind of question is "how much distance" and "how much control" are we talking about? The discussion always devolves into generalities that are equal parts experience and prejudice about "types" of clubs or their marketing. 

 

What matters is exactly what a certain set of irons bring to your game. What might create totally unreasonable gaps for one guy might only mean you have to tweak a couple clubs's loft by a degree or maybe switch lofts on your first wedge. And an iron that might give you perfectly good distance control might be a low-spin pseudo-flyer waiting to happen on every shot for someone else's swing. 

 

I remember a young plus-handicap fellow at my club switching to T300 irons and AVX balls a couple years ago even though he's not really lacking in distance. You'd look at that "type" of club and ball and think he's going to lose control and have his distances go all wonky. But he found that he could hit his trajectory windows, get good club gapping and still stop balls on greens with T300/AVX much better than with his old AP2/ProV1 combination. That combo just clicked for him and he'd have never known until he tried them.