Wilson blades

[blades_are_life]

5 hours ago, pdxhak said:

Another vote for the FG17s! I have a couple sets of heads and built set in the garage so I'm a bit biased 😄

5 hours ago, boggyman said:

I play the set in my bag very, very regularly! Several in our playing group tell me they’re all I need, one of them was a long time golf shop owner! I only own one other playable set of irons after the 17s. 

Do either of you know a) lofts b) where I could get more of them? I picked up a lone 6 iron on a lark in a used club bin and quickly came to the same conclusion both of you did about the quality of the clubhead so I'm somewhat desperately trying to obtain a full set.

 

[bcstones]

11 hours ago, cold_war_era_golfer said:

I dunno...those Goosenecks look like they might have a cavity on the back! 😁

somewhere I have a set, perhaps even a set of heads....anyway, nope not cavity - there is a ridge across the back. I've not played them, nor shafted/griped the heads yet...all in storage...but I might be interested in finding a new home for them

[pdxhak]

58 minutes ago, blades_are_life said:

Do either of you know a) lofts b) where I could get more of them? I picked up a lone 6 iron on a lark in a used club bin and quickly came to the same conclusion both of you did about the quality of the clubhead so I'm somewhat desperately trying to obtain a full set.

 

 

There are a couple of sets now on ebay. The lofts below are from another thread here.

 

2i 20* 

3i 23*

4i 26*

5i 30*

6i 34*

7i 38*

8i 42*

9i 46*

PW 49*

 

 

[boggyman]

1 hour ago, blades_are_life said:

Do either of you know a) lofts b) where I could get more of them? I picked up a lone 6 iron on a lark in a used club bin and quickly came to the same conclusion both of you did about the quality of the clubhead so I'm somewhat desperately trying to obtain a full set.

 

20,23,26,30,34,38,42,46,50 is what I’ve always seen. The lofts above are for 2-PW. I hit these, loft for loft, same lunch as a modern day 4-GW set. Guys over in the Classic Firum will be a big help. 

[Stephen8802]

That FG-17 thread was before my time, so I just read it for the first time. The OP states those lofts as an estimate, and I think he is off. I can't imaging a tour blade in 1980 being that, companies didn't start messing with the lofts until later. I've always assumed FG-17s have a 51* PW, which was the Staff standard for years, but I really don't know. I have two sets, perhaps I'll throw them on the loft machine this weekend and see how they measure out.

 

I'm a bit of a heretic when it comes to FG-17s, I still have a bad taste in my mouth from 1982 when I bought a set and the chrome flaked off. Wilson had some chrome problems starting with the Button Backs, but the FG-17s were really the height of the issue. I worked in a pro shop, so it wasn't hard to get a replacement set, but I never could get past that. I got the Line Overs as soon as they were available and couldn't sell my 17s fast enough.  I haven't hit either of my sets yet, but I really need to let them out of the dog house and give them a round; I'll do that this summer. 

 

 

[NRJyzr]

13 hours ago, blades_are_life said:

Do either of you know a) lofts b) where I could get more of them? I picked up a lone 6 iron on a lark in a used club bin and quickly came to the same conclusion both of you did about the quality of the clubhead so I'm somewhat desperately trying to obtain a full set.

 

 

12 hours ago, pdxhak said:

 

There are a couple of sets now on ebay. The lofts below are from another thread here.

 

2i 20* 

3i 23*

4i 26*

5i 30*

6i 34*

7i 38*

8i 42*

9i 46*

PW 49*

 

 

 

The PW is 50* in the FG-17 set.  This "20-30-50 progression are the "classic lofts" so many of us know, those of us who started or played in either the 80s or 90s. 

 

A few years ago, Brother Shallowface posted an image of the catalog page that had the lofts, which confirmed the 20-30-50 progression.

 

I'm not sure if it started with the Line Under Staffs of 84-86 or the Fluid Feels of 87-90, but somewhere in there, the 20-30-50 became 19-29-49.  

 

Personally, I'd still go 20-30-50, but I'm funny that way.  I might even do 19-31-51 (4* gaps between all irons)...

 

[pdxhak]

I have seen both 49* and 50* listed so it is confusing. Doubtful the 1* makes a difference for my game :D

[blades_are_life]

On 5/24/2023 at 8:36 PM, Stephen8802 said:

That FG-17 thread was before my time, so I just read it for the first time. The OP states those lofts as an estimate, and I think he is off. I can't imaging a tour blade in 1980 being that, companies didn't start messing with the lofts until later. I've always assumed FG-17s have a 51* PW, which was the Staff standard for years, but I really don't know. I have two sets, perhaps I'll throw them on the loft machine this weekend and see how they measure out.

 

I'm a bit of a heretic when it comes to FG-17s, I still have a bad taste in my mouth from 1982 when I bought a set and the chrome flaked off. Wilson had some chrome problems starting with the Button Backs, but the FG-17s were really the height of the issue. I worked in a pro shop, so it wasn't hard to get a replacement set, but I never could get past that. I got the Line Overs as soon as they were available and couldn't sell my 17s fast enough.  I haven't hit either of my sets yet, but I really need to let them out of the dog house and give them a round; I'll do that this summer. 

 

 

Yeah I saw it mentioned somewhere that pretty much the Wilson quality control process had slipped a bit by that time which led to problems when they were released but that this was of less concern for people now because the heads circulating today are mostly the ones that did not have those issues.

 

On 5/24/2023 at 8:09 PM, boggyman said:

20,23,26,30,34,38,42,46,50 is what I’ve always seen. The lofts above are for 2-PW. I hit these, loft for loft, same lunch as a modern day 4-GW set. Guys over in the Classic Firum will be a big help. 

Is this not the classic forum?!

On 5/24/2023 at 7:46 PM, pdxhak said:

 

There are a couple of sets now on ebay. The lofts below are from another thread here.

 

2i 20* 

3i 23*

4i 26*

5i 30*

6i 34*

7i 38*

8i 42*

9i 46*

PW 49*

 

 

Will have to look at ebay but was kinda hoping to find someone or something local.

14 hours ago, NRJyzr said:

The PW is 50* in the FG-17 set.  This "20-30-50 progression are the "classic lofts" so many of us know, those of us who started or played in either the 80s or 90s. 

 

A few years ago, Brother Shallowface posted an image of the catalog page that had the lofts, which confirmed the 20-30-50 progression.

 

I'm not sure if it started with the Line Under Staffs of 84-86 or the Fluid Feels of 87-90, but somewhere in there, the 20-30-50 became 19-29-49.  

 

Personally, I'd still go 20-30-50, but I'm funny that way.  I might even do 19-31-51 (4* gaps between all irons)...

 

Thank you for confirming these lofts. To my eye the FG-17 6I looked pretty much exactly like the 7I in standard modern blades I've demo'd recently like the MP221 so this does check out. I will say I strongly prefer lofts this way. I know it is to some degree just the number stamped on the bottom of the club but there is a cleanliness to it that sits well with me. Were lofts back in that time generally all standardized to this system? I also have a set of Wilson X-31 Plus (the forged muscle cavity from 1976) and would really like to know what those are too. I think the 6I looks the same as the FG-17 but the edgy triangular groove pattern is causing me to doubt my eye.

Edited May 26, 2023 by blades_are_life

[boggyman]

17 hours ago, blades_are_life said:

Yeah I saw it mentioned somewhere that pretty much the Wilson quality control process had slipped a bit by that time which led to problems when they were released but that this was of less concern for people now because the heads circulating today are mostly the ones that did not have those issues.

 

Is this not the classic forum?!

Will have to look at ebay but was kinda hoping to find someone or something local.

Thank you for confirming these lofts. To my eye the FG-17 6I looked pretty much exactly like the 7I in standard modern blades I've demo'd recently like the MP221 so this does check out. I will say I strongly prefer lofts this way. I know it is to some degree just the number stamped on the bottom of the club but there is a cleanliness to it that sits well with me. Were lofts back in that time generally all standardized to this system? I also have a set of Wilson X-31 Plus (the forged muscle cavity from 1976) and would really like to know what those are too. I think the 6I looks the same as the FG-17 but the edgy triangular groove pattern is causing me to doubt my eye.

Yessir, it’s the CLASSIC! Had a brain fart there,my apologies!

[blades_are_life]

10 hours ago, boggyman said:

Yessir, it’s the CLASSIC! Had a brain fart there,my apologies!

It's okay thinking of the FG-17s sometimes makes me daydream too.

[The Aspidistra in the Hall]

On 5/27/2023 at 11:01 AM, blades_are_life said:

It's okay thinking of the FG-17s sometimes makes me daydream too.

Following on the FG17 daydreaming theme, what modern shafts would put in to get the best out of them in today's world?

[Ping Player]

Yes, the loft progression 20° - 50°. I have 76s and Fg-17s that have these specs. My 69s I play the PW weaker at 53° then:

9: 47

8: 43

7: 39

6: 35

5: 31

4: 27

3: 23

2: 20

 

I play one of the three sets at least once a week. I love the Wilson stuff. Including the 60s putters. 8802 & 8813.

 

See attached sheet for Classic Specs. 

[blades_are_life]

43 minutes ago, The Aspidistra in the Hall said:

Following on the FG17 daydreaming theme, what modern shafts would put in to get the best out of them in today's world?

Whatever is closest to the default shaft in there, which I imagine is essentially a DG S300.

[No_Catchy_Nickname]

On 5/21/2023 at 4:10 AM, Foozle said:

I didn't appreciate the significance of the "49". Did that carry through and form the basis of the Fg51, Fg55 etc?

I have a full set (1-Sw) of the Fg49's that I played for a couple of seasons and really liked. Possibly the narrowest blade I have encountered? 

I recently picked up a set of Fg55's which have a similar muscle profile but more generous and forgiving sole.

All time Wilson favourites remain the '76 mini bullet back Staff's.

 

Possibly. I do recall that the FG62s, which came out after the new groove rule, were named for the number of Majors that had been won up until then with Wilson irons.

 

With Gary Woodland winning the US Open in 2019, I think that number would be 63 now. Don't think there have been any other Major winners using Wilson since then.

[Hickory4ever]

5 hours ago, blades_are_life said:

Whatever is closest to the default shaft in there, which I imagine is essentially a DG S300.

I have TT R300 in my Wilson Staffs and they work well and are original.

[Garydean]

Well added another set to the collection lol, eyeing up a set of x31s now

[RolandofGilead]

On 5/24/2023 at 3:43 PM, braincramp52 said:

What can you guys tell me about these? I'd like to play them on a regular basis.

 

I play these FFs as my winter set and the subsequent FG-51s as my primary set. The FFs have a sharper leading edge that will make some real craters if you aren’t careful, otherwise they are pretty similar overall. Both sets have more offset than is standard for blades nowadays and I’ve come to like it. Easier to hit straight than the modern marketing geniuses would have you think. Yours appear to have original ferrules and the stock Dynamic shafts should have a thin red (stiff) or black (regular) band of paint near the lowest step in the shaft to indicate flex. They are identical to Dynamic Gold S/R300 and the original build quality is excellent. I put fresh grips on mine and they practically swing themselves on most days. I can always count on these Fluid Feels, a birth year set for me, to get my swing back in check.

Edited June 4, 2023 by RolandofGilead

[pdxhak]

My FG17 heads that will eventually be sent off to be refinished. 

 

[braincramp52]

On 6/4/2023 at 12:29 AM, RolandofGilead said:

I play these FFs as my winter set and the subsequent FG-51s as my primary set. The FFs have a sharper leading edge that will make some real craters if you aren’t careful, otherwise they are pretty similar overall. Both sets have more offset than is standard for blades nowadays and I’ve come to like it. Easier to hit straight than the modern marketing geniuses would have you think. Yours appear to have original ferrules and the stock Dynamic shafts should have a thin red (stiff) or black (regular) band of paint near the lowest step in the shaft to indicate flex. They are identical to Dynamic Gold S/R300 and the original build quality is excellent. I put fresh grips on mine and they practically swing themselves on most days. I can always count on these Fluid Feels, a birth year set for me, to get my swing back in check.

My miss is hitting it fat so they might not be for me. 

Edited June 7, 2023 by braincramp52

[No_Catchy_Nickname]

13 hours ago, pdxhak said:

My FG17 heads that will eventually be sent off to be refinished. 

 

 

Let us see the pictures when you get them back!

[Ping Player]

Some of the Staffs in the Sunday rotation. It's a "sickness". 🤣🤙🏻

[Swingingk]

4 hours ago, Ping Player said:

Some of the Staffs in the Sunday rotation. It's a "sickness". 🤣🤙🏻

Cool picture.  It's interesting to see how similar they all are over so many years.  

The FG-49's certainly are pretty.  One doesn't see many of those.

[scruffynick]

Just bought some fg55s, can't wait to hit them. Had fg17 and fg49 in the past, why I parted with them I'll never know.

Got £80 in pro shop so I'm going to put new golf pride grips on and really make them sweet

[Foozle]

1 hour ago, scruffynick said:

Just bought some fg55s, can't wait to hit them. Had fg17 and fg49 in the past, why I parted with them I'll never know.

Got £80 in pro shop so I'm going to put new golf pride grips on and really make them sweet

Similar story, my Wilson back catalogue also includes Fg17, Fg49 and I recently acquired a set of Fg55's which I used for the last few rounds of the season.

The Fg55's are noticeably larger in terms of head size which i initially found off putting (i know! I'm odd!) but i grew to like. Definitely more forgiving but not as soft and pure as the Fg17's, '76 Staff's and various other Tour Blades. Possibly similar in feel to the Fg49's which are almost impossibly butter knife in design.

Not sure what it is about blade evolution into larger more forgiving heads? I do find the more "modern" end of my collection have more forgiveness but less feel. Same is true of say Mizuno Mp32 compared to TP9, MS11 or MP14? Did they use different grades of steel to keep weight down?

On balance I would still err towards the earlier more compact heads. In Wilson terms, for me, that would be '76 Staff or Fg17.

[Shallowface]

[scruffynick]

On 12/11/2023 at 10:19 PM, Foozle said:

Similar story, my Wilson back catalogue also includes Fg17, Fg49 and I recently acquired a set of Fg55's which I used for the last few rounds of the season.

The Fg55's are noticeably larger in terms of head size which i initially found off putting (i know! I'm odd!) but i grew to like. Definitely more forgiving but not as soft and pure as the Fg17's, '76 Staff's and various other Tour Blades. Possibly similar in feel to the Fg49's which are almost impossibly butter knife in design.

Not sure what it is about blade evolution into larger more forgiving heads? I do find the more "modern" end of my collection have more forgiveness but less feel. Same is true of say Mizuno Mp32 compared to TP9, MS11 or MP14? Did they use different grades of steel to keep weight down?

On balance I would still err towards the earlier more compact heads. In Wilson terms, for me, that would be '76 Staff or Fg17.

Had a set of tp9s too, used them through my junior years as we all had tps for a while...all faldo, ole, sandy fans. But the fg17s were my favourite for some reason, used them for a good time. Had some fluid feels and titleist tour model too, just don't understand why I got rid of them all....oh yeah, I got married 🤣

[Swingingk]

On 12/12/2023 at 6:42 AM, Shallowface said:

Thanks once again for posting from your vast array of saved catalog scans.  Much appreciated! 🙂

[boggyman]

Here’s mine minus the lead tape I’ve added since putting new grips on the couple months ago. 1st grips they’d had in 6 years. I’ve had them in/out of the bag notoriously throwing money out the window lol thinks something MIGHT beat them out! Golf is my getaway from it all and hobby! Whether I go out and play solo or in join our weekly scat game. I’ve realized the 17s just can’t be best for me for unexplainable reasons, they just work. A good swing rewards me with a good result, plain and simple. I must’ve been born in the wrong era, turn 55 end of the month! 

[EvanH]

On 5/21/2023 at 6:31 AM, Andy D said:

I’m playing with a set of Wilson Staff FG49 irons. They were designed by Nick Faldo with Wilson circa 88 - 91, and were only released in England for GB and European release….the 49 stands for all the major victory’s with Wilson irons…..The iron are terrific, Faldos idea was to have a pure blade with no frills….as you can see with the photo of my 7 iron, there’s not much room for error. Beautiful to play with, lovely feel….sting your hands if you miss hit..magic.

Stunning looking blade.

 

I'm wondering if the "49" being reference to the number of major victories is either an urban myth or someone lost count.

 

There's a few places where 62 is quoted as the accepted number of majors won by Wilson irons.

 

See:

https://golf.com/gear/irons/us-open-gary-woodland-wilson-irons-major-championship/

https://www.golfmonthly.com/features/the-game/things-you-didnt-know-about-wilson-golf-190982

 

And on wikipedia a (claimed) list of the 62 winners in chronological order.

 

 

Counting back from 62, the 49th win was Ben Crenshaw in 1984.  

Langer was # 50 in 1985, with Andy North # 51 the same year.

 

Anyway, it doesn't quite match the 49.  

Maybe the above list is wrong?

Maybe they lost count?

 

 

[bcstones]

On 1/6/2024 at 4:05 PM, EvanH said:

Maybe the above list is wrong?

Maybe they lost count?

Why not contact Wilson & see if they can tell you what all the figures mean?