Store line vs. Pro line

[The Aspidistra in the Hall]

I'm loving this topic. Can you see any obvious difference in the shaft quality?

[The Aspidistra in the Hall]

These Spaldings play as well as much from the era. Also, from a soggy UK point of view being stainless has distinct advantages.

 

[mocokid]

1 hour ago, The Aspidistra in the Hall said:

I'm loving this topic. Can you see any obvious difference in the shaft quality?

That's probably the biggest difference!

[SnowbirdTom]

As a new-ish guy to this collecting thing, I’m getting stuff that appeals to my eye and can be played without concern for hurting a true collectible or historic item.  There’s stuff in my purchases that I wanted well back in the day, clubs with history for me and just for fun ones.  Hardly ever spend more than $50 for a set of irons or woods, sometime get both for that!  It’s fun to show up and get the reaction when a persimmon hits a ball.  Even more fun smoking the high tech guys in a round.
 

That said, I tend to fascinate on blade style irons and flange or mid-mallet putters.  I’ve learned how to re-grip clubs and will probably end up trying shafts someday because of this group.  Great info from all y’all that have been doing this for far longer than I.

 

Bravo and thanks to all who contribute!  

Edited January 19, 2023 by SnowbirdTom
Phone glitch typing

[Shallowface]

7 hours ago, cold_war_era_golfer said:

The one with the spades outlining the face was the pro line for 1963-64.  I believe the other to be storeline. Aside from the club icons outlining the face and a different shaft.  I can’t tell much difference.  
 

 

I had one of those Personal Model PWs as a kid.  Bought it new for $4.99 in 1974.  Mine had the Spalding "Alumishaft" and a leather grip.  It was a fine club!  

 

Looking back at store line clubs from the 60s many of them had a similar look to the pro line models from a year or two prior, particularly from Spalding and Wilson.  I figured they were using leftover or slightly out of spec heads that hadn't been stamped and just stamped the store line branding on them.

 

I played 6 years before I had my first pro line set, so I have a soft spot for the store line clubs of the 60s and 70s.  I don't collect them but i do enjoy seeing them in the thrifts and on Ebay.  There is one I do have though.  It's a Wilson Black Heather 5 iron that is like the one I used at the high school golf team tryout in 1976.  They announced the tryout and had us choose a club out of a barrel of used clubs the school happened to have. They took us to a large field next to the school and had us hit there.  That club was sweet and solid and I had no trouble making the team with it.  I still enjoy hitting the one I have in my collection.

 

As far as the differences between store line and pro line back then, I always felt as though the chrome plating didn't look quite as good on the store line clubs.  I don't know if it didn't have the underplating layer or exactly what it was, it just didn't look the same.  As far as the steel shafts I honestly don't think there was that much difference between the store line and pro line shafts.  After all, an aftermarket TT Dynamic was only about 4 bucks in the late 70s, and that was retail to the consumer.  I did bend the steel shaft of the PW I had prior to the Spalding just from hitting balls with it, but it was a model called "Presidential" by a company called M&R and was "Made in Japan" from the days when that term was synonymous with junk.         

[cold_war_era_golfer]

Here’s the shafts between those two wedges I posted yesterday.  
 

The pro line obviously says it’s pro.  The other has a more generic looking label. 
 

 

[cold_war_era_golfer]

Here’s a bit from the 1964 Spalding Professional Catalog

 

Theres the pro line irons $154

Jay Hebert $82

Johnny Palmer $62

 

Even though it’s marked as a pro catalog.  They must have included the entire line.  
 

[The Aspidistra in the Hall]

2 hours ago, cold_war_era_golfer said:

Here’s the shafts between those two wedges I posted yesterday.  
 

The pro line obviously says it’s pro.  The other has a more generic looking label. 
 

 

The Power-Action generic shaft you show is the same, label at least, as on the Kroflites I have.

Do the steps on the two shafts compare?

[cold_war_era_golfer]

17 minutes ago, The Aspidistra in the Hall said:

The Power-Action generic shaft you show is the same, label at least, as on the Kroflites I have.

Do the steps on the two shafts compare?

No they do not compare.

[raggal62]

Generally store line clubs had lesser quality control standards than pro line. Specs could be all over the map. And as posted earlier, shafts were the biggest contributing factor.

[Shallowface]

It's my belief that factors such as head weight (and the resulting issues with swingweight), lie angle, loft angle and face angle deficiencies in quality control were much bigger factors in the playability of store line clubs of the 60s and 70s than any relatively minute spec issues with steel shafts.  It wasn't like it is today where the prominence of graphite and the complete lack of standards as to what is, for example, a stiff versus a regular which has caused shafts to be such an issue. 

 

I remember the first so-called matched set I had of bottom of the line Northwestern irons back when I was first starting.  I can honestly say in all the years since I have never owned a sand wedge that was as heavy as the five iron was in that set.  Also, they forgot to blast the face of the 8 iron so it had grooves but otherwise was smooth.  

[Swingingk]

8 hours ago, Shallowface said:

It's my belief that factors such as head weight (and the resulting issues with swingweight), lie angle, loft angle and face angle deficiencies in quality control were much bigger factors in the playability of store line clubs of the 60s and 70s than any relatively minute spec issues with steel shafts.  It wasn't like it is today where the prominence of graphite and the complete lack of standards as to what is, for example, a stiff versus a regular which has caused shafts to be such an issue. 

 

I remember the first so-called matched set I had of bottom of the line Northwestern irons back when I was first starting.  I can honestly say in all the years since I have never owned a sand wedge that was as heavy as the five iron was in that set.  Also, they forgot to blast the face of the 8 iron so it had grooves but otherwise was smooth.  

I would have to agree with all of this and the shaft thing too.  Just less exacting on specifications, quality, and finish overall for a less expensive to build product aimed at the masses rather than the more avid and discerning golfer.  This combined with a bit more "bling" and you've got "store line".  Nothing wrong with it per se' just less expensive and more available to the everyday Joe - and Jane.

[mocokid]

On 1/19/2023 at 12:50 PM, raggal62 said:

Generally store line clubs had lesser quality control standards than pro line. Specs could be all over the map. And as posted earlier, shafts were the biggest contributing factor.

Check the distance between shaft steps, better clubs generally speaking more steps.

[bcstones]

I seeing/reading ya'll talking about the '60s & '70s "store/general/retail/etc" clubs....what about the so-called "general or retail" lines in the decades prior to that...Spalding Kro-Flite line was their main line, then it disappeared to be followed by the Top-Flite. So was the Kro-Flite sold in both places or was there just one (my Uncle gifted my Dad his old set of Robert T Jones Jr set of clubs, all w/the Kro-Flite logo, they were beautiful, pyratone wood like sheathing shafts, persimmon heads...I can tell you for sure, my Uncle did not buy from retail stores, also he played at the original Tam O'Shanter outside of Chicago)...so I'm really wondering about the quality of heads & shafts in those early years of steel shafts. Another thing, I noticed in the Kaplan catalogs, that MacGregor when they first signed on Sam Snead, Ben Hogan & others - those clubs were listed as "general" line, a year later the same clubs were in the "professional" pages...It was easy to tell the difference in the H&B clubs, the "general" line had names like "Mars 70", "Atlas", "Louisville Slugger", etc. vs the PowerBilt professional line (seems to me that they dropped their "general" line in the mid-60s). 

So I'm wondering what really is the difference between those early "general" lines & the "pro" lines?

[Hickory4ever]

Golf equipment has changed a lot in the last 100-120 years and the reasons for those changes have varied. The growth of the game in the early 1900’s meant mass manufacturing was required to meet demand where as early clubs were hand made by experienced club makers.

 

The steel shaft era resulted from multiple factors, one of them being the depletion of old growth Hickory. They also did not warp. The early steel shafts had their challenges, one being rust which spawned the pyratone coating, as was weight and consistency. 
 

By the time we get to the 60’s, steel shaft production had become much more mature. I believe the fundamental difference between the pro and store line clubs was the attention to quality control.

 

As to the Kroflite story, for many years it was Spalding’s flagship. With MacGregor and Wilson seeming to dominate, Topflite was developed as their leading edge product and Kroflite became store line as it had name recognition, much the way that H&B introduced Powerbilt, marketing 101.

 

On another note, the laminate woods evolved out of the depleting of Persimmon stocks. The growth of the game made changes like these inevitable.

 

I believe that the pro line clubs were usually better or at least more consistent to serve the premium market. 

Edited January 21, 2023 by Hickory4ever

[bcstones]

6 hours ago, Hickory4ever said:

Golf equipment has changed a lot in the last 100-120 years and the reasons for those changes have varied. The growth of the game in the early 1900’s meant mass manufacturing was required to meet demand where as early clubs were hand made by experienced club makers.

 

The steel shaft era resulted from multiple factors, one of them being the depletion of old growth Hickory. They also did not warp. The early steel shafts had their challenges, one being rust which spawned the pyratone coating, as was weight and consistency. 
 

By the time we get to the 60’s, steel shaft production had become much more mature. I believe the fundamental difference between the pro and store line clubs was the attention to quality control.

 

As to the Kroflite story, for many years it was Spalding’s flagship. With MacGregor and Wilson seeming to dominate, Topflite was developed as their leading edge product and Kroflite became store line as it had name recognition, much the way that H&B introduced Powerbilt, marketing 101.

 

On another note, the laminate woods evolved out of the depleting of Persimmon stocks. The growth of the game made changes like these inevitable.

 

I believe that the pro line clubs were usually better or at least more consistent to serve the premium market. 

I guess I've been wondering if the major manufactures were cynical enough to take the club heads that did not match their specs & sell them to the general public, rather than take any kind of loss?

 

Or perhaps, it was more in the line of the heads were similar but shafts might not meet those specs, yet again - give them to the general public cuz they could?

 

So might the Kro-Flite pre-1950 be considered a pro line?
 

[Swingingk]

2 hours ago, bcstones said:

I guess I've been wondering if the major manufactures were cynical enough to take the club heads that did not match their specs & sell them to the general public, rather than take any kind of loss?

 

Or perhaps, it was more in the line of the heads were similar but shafts might not meet those specs, yet again - give them to the general public cuz they could?

 

So might the Kro-Flite pre-1950 be considered a pro line?
 

I don't think it was that they were selling non-conforming items at a cheaper price or we'd be seeing Mac VFQ's and Wilson Dynapowers with flaws, which we aren't.  I tend to think that they were putting less work into a lower priced product to sell at a less expensive price point for casual players that can't feel the difference or don't care.  It costs money to grind heads to specific weights, sort shafts, and assemble for certain swingweights - all characteristics an accomplished player would be wanting and willing to pay extra for.  For the most part store line equipment looks great but may or may not have those characteristics.  

[Hickory4ever]

1 hour ago, Swingingk said:

I don't think it was that they were selling non-conforming items at a cheaper price or we'd be seeing Mac VFQ's and Wilson Dynapowers with flaws, which we aren't.  I tend to think that they were putting less work into a lower priced product to sell at a less expensive price point for casual players that can't feel the difference or don't care.  It costs money to grind heads to specific weights, sort shafts, and assemble for certain swingweights - all characteristics an accomplished player would be wanting and willing to pay extra for.  For the most part store line equipment looks great but may or may not have those characteristics.  

I agree. The store line clubs were simply a cheaper line and did not have as much care given to match everything. 
 

The Kroflite line flipped from Spalding’s top offering when it was considered old. Marketing dictated a change to Topflite in an effort to recover ground lost to competitors for their pro line equipment. The growth in golf following WW2 was huge and competition was fierce.