Foam filled irons vs traditional forged, is there any real advantage?

[mister2cool]

Tried searching but couldn't find any topics that's not more specific to one brand.. like PXG.. so I am hoping to get a more general discussion on this.

So recently I had an PXG experiment with their Gen 2 0311T taking advantage of some pretty decent price. I didn't do fitting and picked the 80g MMT knowing that it is most likely the wrong shaft for me. It's an experiment and I really didn't need new irons. I also know someone who would definitely take them so had no concerns of losing out $. 

 

I had them for exactly one week.. did 2 range sessions and played 9 holes. Shafts are too light as expected but the heads were what kind of surprised me a bit so I wanted to hear some opinions from others who have had more experience with these foam filled irons.  Having played mostly MB forged irons for the past 20 years, I expected the heads to look clunky and fat, the impact to have very little feel but balls would rocket off the face. Turned out none of the 3 things happened. Surely the top line isn't quite Miura TB skinny but it is very much similar to the Srixon 9's that I am already accustomed to. The impact feel isn't quite as crisp as some of the best MB irons but I'd have to be a total snub to say they feel awful. I had played Adams XTD forged before and it had polymer insert and these PXG had a very similar feel with a duller sound. The gen 2 0311T has the exact same loft as my Srixon 945\965, and I a lost a little in carry distance and slightly lower flight because I had to go easier with the swing. 

 

This leads to wonder what exactly is the advantage of these foam filled irons? I mean when PXG first came about they were almost 2 times more expensive than a traditional set.. then P790 came about and undercut their pricing which led to lawsuit and all. Many other OEM have jumped on the bandwagon since then if I am not mistaken. If there isn't real advantage, why are OEMs jumping into this space?  Now PXG has the ST line which is not foam filled and it's even more expensive than their foam filled offerings. So is traditional forged still a more superior club? 

[FlyingRev]

You lost me at PXG.

[jvincent]

14 minutes ago, mister2cool said:

So is traditional forged still a more superior club? 

 

It depends on your definition of superior.

 

Foam filled irons are by necessity hollow body designs. The size and shape of the internal cavity and associated weight distribution will be different between manufacturers and that will affect feel, sound, and performance.

 

As a general rule though assuming lofts are equal a hollow body iron will have higher ball speeds across the face than a traditional forged iron. The hot debate topic is whether or not a hollow body will have greater dispersion than a traditional iron.

[bogeypro]

It's snake oil.  

[NoCalHack]

The basis behind hollow irons is that the thin faces have higher ball speeds compared to solid faces.  Also, compared to a solid forged club, they enable more options with weighting.  You can move the weight to the perimeter, and also further back away from the face.  These factors can make the club more forgiving and also launch it higher.  

 

I'm less convinced of the advantage over a thin faced perimeter weighted club, but you can say the advantage is look and feel.

 

The technology is here to stay.  

[mister2cool]

12 minutes ago, FlyingRev said:

You lost me at PXG.

Thanks for your contribution.

[driveandputtmachine]

25 minutes ago, mister2cool said:

Tried searching but couldn't find any topics that's not more specific to one brand.. like PXG.. so I am hoping to get a more general discussion on this.

So recently I had an PXG experiment with their Gen 2 0311T taking advantage of some pretty decent price. I didn't do fitting and picked the 80g MMT knowing that it is most likely the wrong shaft for me. It's an experiment and I really didn't need new irons. I also know someone who would definitely take them so had no concerns of losing out $. 

 

I had them for exactly one week.. did 2 range sessions and played 9 holes. Shafts are too light as expected but the heads were what kind of surprised me a bit so I wanted to hear some opinions from others who have had more experience with these foam filled irons.  Having played mostly MB forged irons for the past 20 years, I expected the heads to look clunky and fat, the impact to have very little feel but balls would rocket off the face. Turned out none of the 3 things happened. Surely the top line isn't quite Miura TB skinny but it is very much similar to the Srixon 9's that I am already accustomed to. The impact feel isn't quite as crisp as some of the best MB irons but I'd have to be a total snub to say they feel awful. I had played Adams XTD forged before and it had polymer insert and these PXG had a very similar feel with a duller sound. The gen 2 0311T has the exact same loft as my Srixon 945\965, and I a lost a little in carry distance and slightly lower flight because I had to go easier with the swing. 

 

This leads to wonder what exactly is the advantage of these foam filled irons? I mean when PXG first came about they were almost 2 times more expensive than a traditional set.. then P790 came about and undercut their pricing which led to lawsuit and all. Many other OEM have jumped on the bandwagon since then if I am not mistaken. If there isn't real advantage, why are OEMs jumping into this space?  Now PXG has the ST line which is not foam filled and it's even more expensive than their foam filled offerings. So is traditional forged still a more superior club? 

I would not say there is and advantage either way, it is just different.  Whether they are good for you or not is also completely personal and is dependent upon your spin and launch profile.

 

I launch the ball a bit low some times, and with a pile of spin.  So the foam filled irons that tend to launch a tad higher loft for loft can fit me well.  I am also a very high spin player with my irons and never was able to find a ball that retained what I wanted around the green in high spin, but was lower with the irons.    

 

If you are a low spin player, THEY WILL NOT LOWER YOUR SCORES.  I have seen piles and piles of people complaining about hot spots or the like with these irons.  For the most part now, these "hot spots" are because the irons from the fairway was just enough spin to be ok, but as soon as a little grass or a little water is introduced that spin drops even more and you get the super long balls.   The front to back dispersion is just too varied.

[boggyman]

Unless you’re looking for added distance, then no. But that’s just my  .02 worth. Foam filled irons will most likely have the super thin faces for “addled” distance, with less spin. To me, nothing replaces traditional forged, and there’s not much iron wise I haven’t tried. I’ve recently put my old blades from the early ‘80s back in play fir the umpteenth time! Good luck in your search!

[Nixhex524]

IDK... I have never played hollow body irons besides the Gen 1 0311T (if they were HB??)...  I thought they felt ok, but I did get crazy inconsistent distances.  Irons like the Srixon 7x5 have been extremely consistent for me so I have stayed there.  That said, I do have a set of P770 on the way.  During a fitting they were very consistent distance wise and dispersion, I was shocked.  Maybe as time has gone on, OEM have figured out a way to dial this design in, but I am a believer that the less variables there are, they more reliable something will be.  Based on no science, but the mind is a powerful thing in golf.

[puttingmatt]

Its the  design  feature, with most of the tech inside a hollow blade looking iron.

Most if not all the foam filling fills the void for noise I suspect. Allows for different thickness  metal faces  to be welded onto a body. Not necessarily new idea, just a different design. Benefits????    I don't think so, lots of hype though.

[phizzy30]

31 minutes ago, puttingmatt said:

Its the  design  feature, with most of the tech inside a hollow blade looking iron.

Most if not all the foam filling fills the void for noise I suspect. Allows for different thickness  metal faces  to be welded onto a body. Not necessarily new idea, just a different design. Benefits????    I don't think so, lots of hype though.

If thinner faces work for increased distance for drivers due to rebound effect, then why wouldn't the same apply for irons? 

[puttingmatt]

1 hour ago, phizzy30 said:

If thinner faces work for increased distance for drivers due to rebound effect, then why wouldn't the same apply for irons? 

It very well may, but distance is the GI iron

mantra, and there are lots of choices.

I prefer a solid forged club, be it muscle back or cavity back .  Distance is not the only consideration I  Iook at when choosing an iron. Just because foam filled irons resembles a blade design, doesn't make it a traditional players iron. That said, they have their place, and would get my consideration maybe when I am older and needing distance.

Edited September 7, 2021 by puttingmatt

[BirdieBob]

Jvincent said it well.

The premium PXG irons are hollow so as a result it is very perimeter weighted and performs accordingly with improved off center results.

The internal material is there to reduce sound vibration and produce a feel/sound that certainly is not clicky like many hollow irons without an internal filling.

As to distance increase due to the thin face, I would say probably minimal but it may be a marketing point.  Most distance increases that have been seen in the past 5 years are due to stronger lofts/lower spin.

Edited September 7, 2021 by BirdieBob

[RainShadow]

3 hours ago, FlyingRev said:

You lost me at PXG.

 Good, that means we won't hear from you again on the subject.

 

[phizzy30]

2 hours ago, puttingmatt said:

It very well may, but distance is the GI iron

mantra, and there are lots of choices.

I prefer a solid forged club, be it muscle back or cavity back .  Distance is not the only consideration I  Iook at when choosing an iron. Just because foam filled irons resembles a blade design, doesn't make it a traditional players iron. That said, they have their place, and would get my consideration maybe when I am older and needing distance.

I'm with you, I have always played a solid forged club for irons minus the 2 sets I had when I was a kid growing up.  The hollow body design irons do intrigue me though.  I don't need more distance from my irons, but I'm getting older and I know my time will come when I will reap the benefits of player's distance irons.   

[Soccerrick10]

As a person on the more senior side of senior citizen, I am thrilled that manufactures have developed and refined “players distance irons”.  It has kept me in the game for a longer period of time.  The benefit to me goes beyond just distance.  With the weight taken out of the back, the hollow design allows that weight to be placed lower making it easier to get the ball up in the air.  The thin face gets me ball speeds back into a reasonable level.  The lower spin helps solve my high spin tendencies.  The weight distribution makes off center hits “less bad”.  These are all helpful for slower swing speed golfers.

 

With the three year development of the category, we are seeing new cup face and variable face thickness help with the hot spots shots seen in the past.  In spite of the vitriol spewed at PXG, their (Ping) engineers helped drive this technology.  I think the Gen 3, possibly Gen 4 and new P790’s are the best balanced of the variables of club performance.

 

Having said all that, I too am in the group that loves the feel of a good, solid strike on a solid bodied, forged iron.  I’ve played a few (MP4, MP5, MP18 and 0211 ST).  It’s that feel that keeps me coming back.  So, when I play and it counts, it’s hollow body for me.  I just can’t keep up from the longer tees without them.  When it’s for fun - the solid body irons are in my bag.

[mister2cool]

3 hours ago, Soccerrick10 said:

As a person on the more senior side of senior citizen, I am thrilled that manufactures have developed and refined “players distance irons”.  It has kept me in the game for a longer period of time.  The benefit to me goes beyond just distance.  With the weight taken out of the back, the hollow design allows that weight to be placed lower making it easier to get the ball up in the air.  The thin face gets me ball speeds back into a reasonable level.  The lower spin helps solve my high spin tendencies.  The weight distribution makes off center hits “less bad”.  These are all helpful for slower swing speed golfers.

 

With the three year development of the category, we are seeing new cup face and variable face thickness help with the hot spots shots seen in the past.  In spite of the vitriol spewed at PXG, their (Ping) engineers helped drive this technology.  I think the Gen 3, possibly Gen 4 and new P790’s are the best balanced of the variables of club performance.

 

Having said all that, I too am in the group that loves the feel of a good, solid strike on a solid bodied, forged iron.  I’ve played a few (MP4, MP5, MP18 and 0211 ST).  It’s that feel that keeps me coming back.  So, when I play and it counts, it’s hollow body for me.  I just can’t keep up from the longer tees without them.  When it’s for fun - the solid body irons are in my bag.

Totally agree with what you are saying. I thought the  PXG's could have been good for me perhaps in 10 years (in late 40's) but now is not the right time yet. 

After a week of experiment, I passed them on to a friend who's  in mid 60's at cost and he absolutely loves them, especially the lighter shafts. 

[Valtiel]

10 hours ago, mister2cool said:

This leads to wonder what exactly is the advantage of these foam filled irons?

The foam part ala PXG/Taylormade/whatever is not really the thing to focus on, it's just something they add ostensibly for sound and feel purposes while trying to market it as something more (SpeedFoam Air, lol). The real question is about hollow construction as that is the real tech going on. As @NoCalHack said, it allows for thin, unsupported faces which = higher COR and higher potential ball speed, both on solid hits and more critically, mishits. Companies have been making these irons feel better and better in recent years, similar to shaft tech allowing the creation of stiffer and stiffer shafts at both lower weight classes and without feeling like crap. 

The ability to push weight around is a plus as well, but within a "standard" iron shape there is not a whole lot you can do with that. Irons have to fit within a certain size/shape for both aesthetic and performance reasons, so you can't really take advantage of hollow construction like companies did with metal woods. It would be similar to the earliest small metal woods and their performance "benefits", which weren't really realized until the head sizes got bigger and weight could be moved further from the face. 

[Stuart_G]

6 hours ago, Valtiel said:

The foam part ala PXG/Taylormade/whatever is not really the thing to focus on, it's just something they add ostensibly for sound and feel purposes while trying to market it as something more (SpeedFoam Air, lol).

 

It was also added to help keep the thinner faces from caving in over time (if you want to believe some of the early PXG designer interviews).   So there supposedly is a structural/support component to that aspect of the design.   Whether that's also true for TM or Ping hollow body designs, I can't say.

 

 

 

 

[bvanlieu]

17 hours ago, bogeypro said:

It's snake oil.  

 

Sweet, delicious oil it is.

 

Depends on your ability and strike. Very consistent you may not notice. If you vary a bit it can be turn bogeys to pars sometimes.

 

I have for example a CB, CB with tungsten, and hollow 6 iron. I have hit balls with a LM and powder with all three (along with playing rounds with them). They all are the same loft, same shafts. The hollow retains a bit more speed on thin/toe strikes in my case. Its not 20y more, but 5 easily can be 7-10 depending on stinker of a strike relative to other clubs.

 

That can be the difference between 30' putt and bunker shot. 

 

- b

[BIG STU]

Hollow bodied foam filled is not anything new. I can remember in the late 80s early 90s TM had like the 6 iron up on the ICI line hollow and filled with foam. A friend of mine passed his PAT with them and still plays them. Back in the day I tried one of his clubs same shaft as mine and all. It felt like crap to me of course I was hitting Blade Citations at the time.

I do have a set of TM TP cavities (2014 model) and the 5 6 and 7 irons have the polymer stuff in them. Something feel wise for me is lacking. I will admit part of it is the Steelfiber 95 R shafts for some reason they hit harsh to me. But I play a lot of 5 irons bump and run around my course and I absolutely love that 5 iron for the feel around the greens.  Part of my shaft disagreement may be because I am still not swinging great having came off a broken back the last 17 months. May play a practice round with them today because even though I am a blade man I like the way those sit at address. May change out the shafts and put a extra set of Apex shafts I have laying around because I want to love those heads. I need to frequency out those shafts because I did not know who built them and how they are tipped. I did a trade deal for them

Edited September 8, 2021 by BIG STU

[mister2cool]

10 hours ago, Valtiel said:

The foam part ala PXG/Taylormade/whatever is not really the thing to focus on, it's just something they add ostensibly for sound and feel purposes while trying to market it as something more (SpeedFoam Air, lol). The real question is about hollow construction as that is the real tech going on. As @NoCalHack said, it allows for thin, unsupported faces which = higher COR and higher potential ball speed, both on solid hits and more critically, mishits. Companies have been making these irons feel better and better in recent years, similar to shaft tech allowing the creation of stiffer and stiffer shafts at both lower weight classes and without feeling like crap. 

The ability to push weight around is a plus as well, but within a "standard" iron shape there is not a whole lot you can do with that. Irons have to fit within a certain size/shape for both aesthetic and performance reasons, so you can't really take advantage of hollow construction like companies did with metal woods. It would be similar to the earliest small metal woods and their performance "benefits", which weren't really realized until the head sizes got bigger and weight could be moved further from the face. 

 

4 hours ago, Stuart_G said:

 

It was also added to help keep the thinner faces from caving in over time (if you want to believe some of the early PXG designer interviews).   So there supposedly is a structural/support component to that aspect of the design.   Whether that's also true for TM or Ping hollow body designs, I can't say.

 

Very interesting.. I guess I really misunderstood the whole design points of these.. hollow body and foam fill was really a way to make a cavity back iron look like muscle back and to have a larger sweet spot and thin face, and to improve sound\feel\durability over a simple hollow body. Now that I really looked into these but I always thought the design was to drastically improve COR and increase ball speed. 

[Stuart_G]

5 minutes ago, mister2cool said:

 but I always thought the design was to drastically improve COR and increase ball speed. 

 

It is.  The fact that the fill material might act as a structural reinforcement doesn't necessarily negate that.  The material properties are still going to be very different from a solid steel design.

Edited September 8, 2021 by Stuart_G

[NRJyzr]

The talk of moving weight around to increase forgiveness sounds lovely, but it doesn't seem to actually be occurring.  

 

GolfWorks doesn't have many PXG clubs tested, but here's the data for the most forgiving one they have in the list, the 0311 XP.  I've pulled the Zing2, but the Zing would've also been a decent choice for comparison.  The MOI between the two is very close, and the CG is actually a good bit farther back on the Zing2.

 

Point being, they're not actually achieving anything that hasn't already been done with a more "standard" CB, in terms of CG manipulation and Moment of Inertia.

 

As for COR, personally, I'm ok with it in my driver and fairway wood, but less enthusiastic about the variability inherent in a flexible face when it comes to irons.  IMHO obviously, and seasoned to taste  😉 

 

 

Edited September 8, 2021 by NRJyzr

[Drivingrangehero]

Having played blades for years, now playing a set of HMB’s, I haven’t seen an increase in ball speed loft for loft when flushed, but I’m sure they have better ball speed retention when you are fractionally off, and what I do notice is that they are more forgiving on my misses (low on the face)

 

 

[BIG STU]

8 hours ago, Stuart_G said:

 

It is.  The fact that the fill material might act as a structural reinforcement doesn't necessarily negate that.  The material properties are still going to be very different from a solid steel design.

One thing I brought up before--- Wonder how well the foam or polymer will hold up after repeated hits and age? You know I have clubs 50 years old or older ( blades) and they hold up and hit well. Wonder if any of these foam filled beauties will be playable in say in 50 years or so?

[naj959]

10 hours ago, mister2cool said:

 

 

Very interesting.. I guess I really misunderstood the whole design points of these.. hollow body and foam fill was really a way to make a cavity back iron look like muscle back and to have a larger sweet spot and thin face, and to improve sound\feel\durability over a simple hollow body. Now that I really looked into these but I always thought the design was to drastically improve COR and increase ball speed. 

It was my understanding (can't remember where I read it) that the faces actually exceed the legal limit for COR and the foam is used to bring them back down to the legal limit.

[Valtiel]

27 minutes ago, naj959 said:

It was my understanding (can't remember where I read it) that the faces actually exceed the legal limit for COR and the foam is used to bring them back down to the legal limit.

That is how the speed injection tech works on the M5/M6/SIM heads, which utilizes a hard resin, but not with the irons I don't believe. They sort of imply that this is what is happening in their marketing language, but I think the low density foam is merely designed to enhance feel and provided a small amount of support for the face. They have been slowly reducing the face thickness with each P790 iteration; 1.75mm -> 1.65mm -> 1.5mm, but whether that actually corresponds to any COR related legalities and "slowing down" the face I have not seen in the irons, only the drivers. 

[ChipNRun]

On 9/7/2021 at 11:37 AM, driveandputtmachine said:

Whether they are good for you or not is also completely personal and is dependent upon your spin and launch profile.

 

Foam-filled irons will tend to launch the ball higher and have a bit more forgiveness. This is helpful, but may have drawbacks around 8i (40* loft of so) by starting to balloon the ball. I had a bit of trouble with my CB Pro Tungstens as my clubs had a slight falloff in distance with 8i and 9i. This partially was a problem due to parallel tip shafts, as the shorter shafts were a bit lighter than the longer shafts. (Parallel tip are not continuous weight.)

 

As per @Stuart_G, I put some lead tape below the grip on the 7i, 8i and 9i and pretty much solved the problem. It helped me stay down and through the shots better.

 

Studies of SGI vs. Players clubheads show that the SGI (and GI) launch has diminishing returns with > ~ 40* Loft. Higher lofts launch the ball better.

 

For example, the 2014 TM SLDR irons (left) had Thru Slot technology and polymer-filled Speed Pocket in 3i-7i, but more traditional cavity back for 8i through wedges. This 7i-8i split was a common feature of many models of GI irons.

 

In some shafts (counterbalanced), the longer shafts are lighter in weight than the shorter ones. The Ping AWT 2.0 steel shafts and Alta CB graphite shafts are like this, as are the TT AMT shafts (Red, White and Black) and the certain Recoil shafts. Note: These counterbalanced shafts are all taper tip.

 

In traditional heads and cavity-back heads, the short irons and wedges will fly better due to higher loft, but somewhere in the longer irons players often find a club where the irons no longer launch very well.

 

Possible longer iron solutions:

 

• Go with a lighter shaft or a softstepped shaft to improve launch.
• Switch to a friendlier head. For players who mix sets themselves, the friendlier head might mean going with 4i and 5i in a Callaway Apex (GI), and 6i on up in Apex Pro (Player's Distance).
• Replace iron with hybrid. For irons this is called gap analysis, basically looking for point in numbered irons at which say 4i and 5i go same distance. If you find this, you might replace the 4i with a hybrid.

And, a final point. Comparing irons as hollow or traditional forged is a flawed comparison.

 

Forging is a manufacturing process.  You can have forged irons that are SGI (old Nike VR-S forged, shown left) all the way through Players/blades (many brands and models).

 

Do not assume that all forged irons are blades. Simply not the case.

 

Edited September 9, 2021 by ChipNRun

[bogeypro]

18 hours ago, bvanlieu said:

 

Sweet, delicious oil it is.

 

Depends on your ability and strike. Very consistent you may not notice. If you vary a bit it can be turn bogeys to pars sometimes.

 

I have for example a CB, CB with tungsten, and hollow 6 iron. I have hit balls with a LM and powder with all three (along with playing rounds with them). They all are the same loft, same shafts. The hollow retains a bit more speed on thin/toe strikes in my case. Its not 20y more, but 5 easily can be 7-10 depending on stinker of a strike relative to other clubs.

 

That can be the difference between 30' putt and bunker shot. 

 

- b

Couldn't it also mean the difference between the center of the green and flying it?