5 Years From Now, Will Cavity Back Irons Only Be For Better Players?

[Yzmerf]

10 hours ago, Red4282 said:

Wishon said lofts above 35 degrees, iron design (blade, cavity, etc) doesnt matter because the loft is the overwhelming variable in what your ball does.

Wasn’t there a story last week about a Callaway staffer with a one off $5k Apex wedge to match his irons? Better distance control was what i remember. Yes backspin over rides side spin but it doesnt solve for ball speed.

Edited February 10, 2022 by Yzmerf

[MattC555]

You can't buy a game.  Simple as that.  I haven't found an iron set that has a profound effect on my score.  For me it's all about fit and getting my flight characteristics right.  I've landed on what I enjoy hitting most and gets me itching to get back out there.  Beyond that I find it to be all a bunch of baloney 5 iron and down.  People will evolve into whatever the adverts tell them will improve their game.  My reality is that practice improves my game, not some fancy hollow bodied, tungsten, thin face, hot launch 7 iron. 

[tcb121]

19 hours ago, bladehunter said:

Eh.  For good players. I’d argue that the opposite result would  happen in that test . You can’t believe how many times I’ve handed an Mb to another guy who asked to hit it. They hit a couple and hand it back going “ dang , that’s really not hard to hit and feels so good “.     If you could talk to half the college players away from coaches , you could convert 50 % with just 9 holes.  

 

I'm just playing percentages.  Good players can play anything or should be able to, but even good players during 36 holes will miss the center of the face of an iron.  I would say the negative tradeoff for the elite would be workability and feel inside of 160.  However I would say they would gain in most instances.  Even tour pro's have mixed bags that start at 6 iron, so they have already done the math.  My guess is any 0 - 10 hdcp at a club would shoot better with the GI's and yes, there are some extreme edge cases where it may not work, but I'm also willing to bet it would be less than 5%.  Take the challenge.  If I told you it would lower your scores and be easier to hit, but you would not be able to make huge shot shapes outside of your wedges would you still make the switch?  Are you telling me a 5 hdcp would shoot better with blades then he could with GI's?  Here's an interesting question, at what hdcp would the tradeoff be worse?  So I think we could all agree a 20 hdcp would play better with GI's, and a 15 would play better with GI's, and for me I'm a 5 hdcp and I've done the challenge and I know I play better with GI's.. It's not drastic, because to be a mid single digit hdcp you have developed a decent amount of skill, so I can drive the ball well, and I can chip and putt well, so putting pure blades in my bag would maybe only increase my score by a couple shots a round, or maybe not at all on a good ball striking day, but I'll take the forgiveness of the GI's all day every day.  So what hdcp is the tradeoff negative?  I'm going to say 2 hdcp and better players would see only a marginal negative impact playing GI's through an entire bag, but many tour players are already playing GI's in the longer irons, so were really only looking at a few clubs difference here anyway.  

[Mashume]

23 hours ago, lefthack said:

You can have my MB's when you pry them from my cold, dead hands. 

No need to pry... that one-iron will make a good enough knife to do the job. 😉

 

And, just to show I'm not against blades at all... my next purchase may very well be a set of hickory shafted sticks. I love the idea of playing with persimmon again.

[lefthack]

1 minute ago, Mashume said:

No need to pry... that one-iron will make a good enough knife to do the job. 😉

 

And, just to show I'm not against blades at all... my next purchase may very well be a set of hickory shafted sticks. I love the idea of playing with persimmon again.

 

I keep looking at Honma wooden woods and would love to try one. My original set was wooden driver and 3 wood ('88). I couldn't ever hit the driver, but that 3 wood was money. Now that I can hit a driver, I would love another shot at it. 

[bladehunter]

38 minutes ago, tcb121 said:

 

I'm just playing percentages.  Good players can play anything or should be able to, but even good players during 36 holes will miss the center of the face of an iron.  I would say the negative tradeoff for the elite would be workability and feel inside of 160.  However I would say they would gain in most instances.  Even tour pro's have mixed bags that start at 6 iron, so they have already done the math.  My guess is any 0 - 10 hdcp at a club would shoot better with the GI's and yes, there are some extreme edge cases where it may not work, but I'm also willing to bet it would be less than 5%.  Take the challenge.  If I told you it would lower your scores and be easier to hit, but you would not be able to make huge shot shapes outside of your wedges would you still make the switch?  Are you telling me a 5 hdcp would shoot better with blades then he could with GI's?  Here's an interesting question, at what hdcp would the tradeoff be worse?  So I think we could all agree a 20 hdcp would play better with GI's, and a 15 would play better with GI's, and for me I'm a 5 hdcp and I've done the challenge and I know I play better with GI's.. It's not drastic, because to be a mid single digit hdcp you have developed a decent amount of skill, so I can drive the ball well, and I can chip and putt well, so putting pure blades in my bag would maybe only increase my score by a couple shots a round, or maybe not at all on a good ball striking day, but I'll take the forgiveness of the GI's all day every day.  So what hdcp is the tradeoff negative?  I'm going to say 2 hdcp and better players would see only a marginal negative impact playing GI's through an entire bag, but many tour players are already playing GI's in the longer irons, so were really only looking at a few clubs difference here anyway.  

I have taken the challenge. I played t100 all last season.  That’s as GI as it gets. Multi material , tungsten all over etc. my scoring  average didn’t drop.  And I have stats galore recorded thanks to the decade app.  What I did see was GIR go down by one green a round.  And proximity on greens hit to get a few feet (3) on average wider.  But I stuck with it because of my elbow injury and the fact that the t100 set is graphite.    I still have the old setup (modus 130 in an MB).  And very likely will swap back soon.  Or today.  Lol.  I don’t personally think irons help anyone unless we’re taking proper fit.  And to me an MB iron is a better fit for some. 
 

For me I’m a shallow aoa guy with speed (118-122  with driver )  . I prefer an iron with a low Vertical center of gravity.  It’s a matter of fitment. They simply fit me better by providing enough spin , and height to be usable. Most GI irons now have a very high Vcog in order to help those hitting it steep and fat.  I don’t do either.  
 

truth is.  One size will never fit all.    I do agree to a point.  From 200 yards and up for long hitters , dispersion or accuracy isn’t the real concern. Which is why as you said 3-4 irons or pros maybe hollow etc nowadays. They’re most tee clubs and long par 3s or approaches on par5s from 240 ish. But many you won’t see play anything but an mb from 5 iron down.  Why ? Accuracy from 200 down.  

[Red4282]

12 hours ago, Yzmerf said:

Wasn’t there a story last week about a Callaway staffer with a one off $5k Apex wedge to match his irons? Better distance control was what i remember. Yes backspin over rides side spin but it doesnt solve for ball speed.

 When lofts become over 35, the ball doesnt compress as much, therefore the thin fast spring face becomes mute at that point. Thats why most of these players distance irons, are like combo sets in once you get to the 8/9 iron they become a solid forging with no tungsten

Edited February 10, 2022 by Red4282

[Notashank]

On 2/8/2022 at 12:22 PM, tcb121 said:

If you read the forms here enough you see a lot of talk about blades vs CB vs MB..   Or to put it another way GI vs non GI and then the loft jacking Karens come out for ya..  There's a good scene in "Days of Thunder" where the crew chief challenges Cole to a test.  Drive 50 laps your way and drive 50 laps the way I tell you to.  I kinda feel like doing that test with some of my golf buddies.  Sure go get those P770's or those Apex Pro's and go play 36 holes your way with those custom fit blades.  Then let me custom fit you into some GI's and go play 36.  My bet is most golfers would perform better with the GI's.  The very best players I know play GI's or CB irons.  There are some guys at the club who have blades that play daily and can handle them, but I'd still bet they would play better with GI's over the course of 36 holes with the GI's.  

 

I'm an engineer and can't figure out why any player would want to play a less forgiving iron.  With CB technology and shafts the way the are today dispersion and distance control is on par with blades anyway.  Sure, a strong case could be made for blades in 8, 9, wedges, but why play anything above that in a blade?  It's why more and more pro's are playing mixed bag sets.  

 

My guess is we will see more graphite irons on tour in the next few years.  We will see a trend going to lighter weight graphite shafts in irons that will be just as stiff as X130's but weigh 90 grams.  The same trends happened in graphite driver shafts.  Used to be 80 - 90 gram graphite driver shafts and then slowly but surely it went to 75 then to 65 and now sub 60 is super popular.  So you have 60 gram shafts in driver that can handle 120mph club head speed and still keep spin and dispersion down..  It's coming in irons as well.  DG S300's will be replaced by MMT 125's or lighter and just like the loft jacking that we see with 28 degree 7 irons, they drop and stop with 49 degree decent angles..   Golf is a tech game these days.  Some up and coming tour guys will play it like Bryson and just tinker in the lab with shafts and lofts and GI heads and will sort out gapping and spin rates and then it will be game on.  

Exactly what I think when I play with a guy who shoots 81 and has mizuno blades in the bag. 

[Red4282]

2 hours ago, bladehunter said:

I have taken the challenge. I played t100 all last season.  That’s as GI as it gets. Multi material , tungsten all over etc. my scoring  average didn’t drop.  And I have stats galore recorded thanks to the decade app.  What I did see was GIR go down by one green a round.  And proximity on greens hit to get a few feet (3) on average wider.  But I stuck with it because of my elbow injury and the fact that the t100 set is graphite.    I still have the old setup (modus 130 in an MB).  And very likely will swap back soon.  Or today.  Lol.  I don’t personally think irons help anyone unless we’re taking proper fit.  And to me an MB iron is a better fit for some. 
 

For me I’m a shallow aoa guy with speed (118-122  with driver )  . I prefer an iron with a low Vertical center of gravity.  It’s a matter of fitment. They simply fit me better by providing enough spin , and height to be usable. Most GI irons now have a very high Vcog in order to help those hitting it steep and fat.  I don’t do either.  
 

truth is.  One size will never fit all.    I do agree to a point.  From 200 yards and up for long hitters , dispersion or accuracy isn’t the real concern. Which is why as you said 3-4 irons or pros maybe hollow etc nowadays. They’re most tee clubs and long par 3s or approaches on par5s from 240 ish. But many you won’t see play anything but an mb from 5 iron down.  Why ? Accuracy from 200 down.  

You are spot on. People get lost in all this bit reality is there are 3 types of “forgiveness” 

 

1. low cg. Helps get ball airborne for slower speeds and low strikes. 
 

2. Blade SIZE. More surface area for contact.

 

3. Moi type forgiveness. This is the one that is debatable. As I mentioned above it makes not difference above 35 degrees. It can give a marginal increase below that, but not near as much as the moi has an effect in a driver. You could argue that this type of “forgiveness” is worse. A mishit almost always has a drop in backspin. Im sure you have experience this miss with high moi and blade… you catch it slightly toe side, with the blade you will lose it right a bit, like a weak looking push, but the lower spin gets it near or within reason of the distance control you were going for. With the high moi, the ball starts more online but is much hotter thanks to ball speed retention but spin has still dropped…depending on how much, it drops out, or flies. There is something to better dispersion with blades if you have decent speed. I personally go to a cavity at 6 iron but just mainly because it is slightly bigger blade size, and just feels more forgiving even though i know its not really.

[Luds]

I think the only reason why cavity backs were geared towards mid to high handicaps were because we didn't yet have the technology... Everything is relative to what was available at the time.  I'm no history of club tech genius, so somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but if one of the first evolutions from the traditional blade iron was the cavity back, then a cavity back AT THAT TIME would seem pretty damn forgiving!! With time being in our favor, we've learned that those irons deemed more forgiving and for higher handicaps aren't exactly forgiving by today's standards of the hollow body "techy" construction.  

 

I do think SOME cavity backs are becoming redundant, while others are essential!  For example, I think Titleist MB/CBs and Taylormade P7MB/CBs are pretty close from a forgiveness standpoint.  Obviously the CB versions are easier to hit, but slightly so.  On the other hand, I think a Srixon ZX7 is a forged cavity that is a much more forgiving iron than a blade.  

 

In terms of the 5 years hypothesis, I think cavity-back irons will still be extremely prevalent, but just might not what we were used to 10+ years back

 

 

[Red4282]

55 minutes ago, Luds said:

I think the only reason why cavity backs were geared towards mid to high handicaps were because we didn't yet have the technology... Everything is relative to what was available at the time.  I'm no history of club tech genius, so somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but if one of the first evolutions from the traditional blade iron was the cavity back, then a cavity back AT THAT TIME would seem pretty damn forgiving!! With time being in our favor, we've learned that those irons deemed more forgiving and for higher handicaps aren't exactly forgiving by today's standards of the hollow body "techy" construction.  

 

I do think SOME cavity backs are becoming redundant, while others are essential!  For example, I think Titleist MB/CBs and Taylormade P7MB/CBs are pretty close from a forgiveness standpoint.  Obviously the CB versions are easier to hit, but slightly so.  On the other hand, I think a Srixon ZX7 is a forged cavity that is a much more forgiving iron than a blade.  

 

In terms of the 5 years hypothesis, I think cavity-back irons will still be extremely prevalent, but just might not what we were used to 10+ years back

 

 

Zx7 is a perfect example of the forgiveness im talking about, the reason they are deemed so forgiving is blade size. They are rather large compared to most blades and cbs.  But thats about it, in terms of moi and cog, there isnt anything about them that stands out vs others.

Edited February 10, 2022 by Red4282

[obsessed_golfer]

I am just happy I have taken care of my Titleist 704.cb, Ping i10 and Ping s59 sets because the current lot of irons do not look like anything I want in my bag.  They play just fine for me and I have no interest in anything that's out there today.  I can't look down at a club like the T400 and want to play it.  And that's probably what's going to be pushed by the manufacturers in the future! 

[bladehunter]

6 hours ago, Notashank said:

Exactly what I think when I play with a guy who shoots 81 and has mizuno blades in the bag. 

I’d pay more attention to if he can putt or not. Since it’s usually almost half the shots.  

[TiScape]

2 hours ago, Red4282 said:

Zx7 is a perfect example of the forgiveness im talking about, the reason they are deemed so forgiving is blade size. They are rather large compared to most blades and cbs.  But thats about it, in terms of moi and cog, there isnt anything about them that stands out vs others.

I’m sorry. Am I correct in thinking that you are saying ZX7s are large compared to most CBs???

[R5Two]

No. Blades 4 life. 

[gator022]

Some of the original concepts here remind me of @Obee’s bag. Last I saw it was driver, 3w, 3-7 hybrids, 8 & 9 AP2 irons and then 4 specialty wedges. Obviously the middle hybrids are going to be mixed around some by folks but essentially his bag is the larger concept here. Interesting and seems plausible for sure.

[Red4282]

4 hours ago, TiScape said:

I’m sorry. Am I correct in thinking that you are saying ZX7s are large compared to most CBs???

Um, well i guess i should walk that back a bit. Most modern cbs and blades have gotten bigger over time. Id say compared to modern offerings they are middle of the pack in blade-lengths. Interestingly i dont care for their progression, smaller long irons and bigger short irons (as opposed to titleist who uses the opposite progression).

[Canyonaro]

On 2/9/2022 at 1:06 PM, bladehunter said:

Underrated comment.  ^.  The current ball also doesn’t spin enough for long irons . Not really.  Find a ball that spins , and suddenly , 3/4 iron is no issue to hit at a good gap from each other.  But it’s all about low spin driver.  

 

Pro V1x is the closest ball you can buy to the Titleist Professional 100, which was the ball I played in high school & is really the bridge between the Tour Balata and the Pro V1. Most of the guys still playing MBs are using it. Most of them still play X100 or the original Project X shafts, too. That's what the clubs were designed around. 

 

Ball tech is evolving so that driver spin isn't so much of an issue anymore. A spinny ball can be calmed down by lowering driver loft, which also gets you more ball speed, so that's become a trend recently. 

[bladehunter]

7 hours ago, Red4282 said:

Um, well i guess i should walk that back a bit. Most modern cbs and blades have gotten bigger over time. Id say compared to modern offerings they are middle of the pack in blade-lengths. Interestingly i dont care for their progression, smaller long irons and bigger short irons (as opposed to titleist who uses the opposite progression).

Sounds like an iron I should hit.  That’s one of my gripes with t100. I like the short irons. But the long irons size is off putting.  My eye would rather see the larger short irons and smaller long irons.  

[Red4282]

1 hour ago, bladehunter said:

Sounds like an iron I should hit.  That’s one of my gripes with t100. I like the short irons. But the long irons size is off putting.  My eye would rather see the larger short irons and smaller long irons.  

Sure but are more likely to have higher variance in strike the longer the club gets. So it makes sense in that regard. I found the first gen t100s progression to be pretty large. The 620cb was much more subtle.

[bladehunter]

35 minutes ago, Red4282 said:

Sure but are more likely to have higher variance in strike the longer the club gets. So it makes sense in that regard. I found the first gen t100s progression to be pretty large. The 620cb was much more subtle.

I just tend to not like wider soles.  My miss is always going to be a mm thin.  These irons don’t do well on the thin miss. The weight on the larger long irons head is spread about toward the top and toe.  Does me no good.  I want it all down low. 

[MtlJeff]

I don't see wood-like irons becoming the norm. They've been around for a while, remember like the old hibore irons? Every MFR has rolled out something like this, i don't think they ever sold well. And i don't just hang out with serious ballas like myself, i know a lot of real jabronis and even these guys rarely go full hybrid-iron

 

So, i don't really see it changing too much more. I think irons like Ping G are about the biggest you can get regular acceptance of before diminishing returns kick in

 

[Pepperturbo]

On 2/8/2022 at 9:37 AM, deejaid said:

It seems the days of the cavity back iron being geared towards mid to high handicap players have come to an end.  With all the club manufacturers pushing hollow/filled head irons with construction similar to metal woods as the most common iron type for performance across the range of handicaps, it seems cavity back irons are becoming as dated as blade irons in their design.

 

This had me wondering, in 5 years will playing cavity back irons be viewed the same as playing blades today?  Will we have threads asking “I’m I good enough to play cavity backs?” because spring face hollow head irons will be the new standard for performance and playing anything else will be only for low handicaps?

 

I love my forged KZG cavity backs but must admit I see a few different clubs that catch my eye that are a little more technologically advanced.

I hate to say this but products cycles quasi repeat themselves if you're been around long enough, like me.  When I took up golf 30yrs back I started with Ping CBs off the shelf, switched to MB blades, switched back to player CB's, then MBs, then CBs and now back to blades.  I've NEVER bought into marketing jargon.

 

What you've proposed is OEM jargon marketing that naive or club-ho's looking for a stroke or two, buy into.  Since CAD, that marketing technique seems to be OEM's expertise; feed the naive.  Tell him he'll hit the ball further using modern clubs, that secretly have stronger lofts and greater gaps.  I am sure more misinformation will hit its mark with naive and Club-hos hoping for game.  

 

Yep, lots of CAD designed clubs have technologically designed insides that imply superiority compared to my simple 620 MBs.  Yet, I still hit traditional irons better than most mid-hi caps hit their cosmetically advanced strong lofted irons, and indexes haven't come down, which says it all.  One low indexes thoughts.