1991 WS Goose Neck Irons

[Sid Vicious]

I just came across a set of mint 1991 WS Goose Necks, 4-9I. Had them re-gripped and have played two rounds with them and they play quite well. I have two questions about them:

 

1) What is the difference between the WS GN model and the FG-53 model? I have the ones w/o the FG-53 designation.

 

2) Anyone seen any loose clubs for the top or the bottom of the set? Haven't had much luck on the web.

 

These things are amazing. They must have sat in a closet for 15+ years. They look like they have maybe 5 rounds on them. No clack marks, nicks, ball wear or anything. Al the numbers match too. And I found them by accident in a Goodwill for 2 bucks a piece. I like them so much I'm really thinking about building around them and using them all the time.

[alucard655]

Post some pics of the sole and back of the iron to so we could get an idea of what they look like.

[mat562]

I remember the Gooseneck irons. If I remember rightly, the Mk I model was fairly conventional looking (apart from the hosel) and sat alongside the Fluid Feel irons in the late '80s.

The latter version were a channelback design weren't they? With a sort of wide sandblasted groove in the back?

[Sid Vicious]

Mine are Channel Backs. When I did the original research on them, I was told that according to the Maltby guide, they were 1991 year model. I assume they were able to look up the serial #s for that but I have no way of knowing, so I'm not even sure about the year.

Let me go get them out of the car and take some phone pics and upload them.

Edit: here are the photos of the 5 and 7. They are representative of the set, as far as condition. First two are the 5 and the second two the 7.

[bma725]

[quote name='glenntwo' post='2140432' date='Dec 23 2009, 10:33 AM']1) What is the difference between the WS GN model and the FG-53 model? I have the ones w/o the FG-53 designation.[/quote]

If they don't have the FG-53 designation, then they weren't the 1991 model. The 1988-90 model was the version that was just called the Staff Gooseneck and did not have the model designation. 1991 was the first year of the FG-53 name. They changed it that year because that was the year they introduced the FG-51 and they wanted both blades to appear as if they were part of the same line.

In terms of differences, they are minimal and cosmetic. Logo placement, type and size, and the hosel knurling. That's it. The heads themselves are identical.

[forgedforever]

I remember the Goose Necks well! I almost bought a set, probably in the late 1980's. I had previously used Wilson Staff irons, but hadn't been playing as much and thought these would be a bit more forgiving. They featured a bit larger blade and the channel back. Never pulled the trigger on them though.

I always wonder what happens to the pitching wedges of these sets when you see 3-9 or 4-9. I'm amazed how often you will see sets of sets on the Bay that don't have the pitching wedge.

I have searched on the Bay a few times over the years for these. I recall seeing some, but not a lot of them.

Overall, looks like a nice find!

[Sid Vicious]

Thanks. I got real lucky finding these where and when I did. I have had them out for two rounds and they play very nicely too. The high toe and the razor-sharp leading edges make them very easy to line up where you want to, and since the offset is minimal, they seem to have a nice boring flight to them. But I am still wondering about the fonts on these things. They are different from every other photo of GNs I've seen so far. There has to be a reason for that.

I have seen a non 53 wedge on Ebay in the last few days, but it looks like it's about ready to disintegrate. And, obviously it's not the same model year because it has the normal font for WS.

Oh yeah, one more thing...Apparently on the 53s, the channel back is satin finished while the upper and lower muscle is chromed, but the non 53s like mine are exactly the opposite (channel chromed).

I sent an email off to Wilson complete with photos and serials the other day. Haven't heard back from them yet, but I figure after the holidays they will catch up. Hopefully they can fill me in on everything.

[belmullet]

I started playing retro blades a few months ago and the first set I bought off Ebay was the Wilson Gooseneck irons- the ones (as in your pictures) from the late 80s with the logo but no number designation. I think they are great irons- I could hit the two iron a long way off the tee. I have purchased a variety of vintage steel irons since then, but will certainly return to the Wilson's at some point during 2010 as I cycle through a variety of these great vinatge clubs. Enjoy them!

[Sid Vicious]

[quote name='belmullet' post='2151434' date='Dec 30 2009, 06:35 PM']I started playing retro blades a few months ago and the first set I bought off Ebay was the Wilson Gooseneck irons- the ones (as in your pictures) from the late 80s with the logo but no number designation. I think they are great irons- I could hit the two iron a long way off the tee. I have purchased a variety of vintage steel irons since then, but will certainly return to the Wilson's at some point during 2010 as I cycle through a variety of these great vinatge clubs. Enjoy them![/quote]

What does the font for the iron number look like on yours? Is it anything like the ones in the previous pics I put up?

[belmullet]

My irons look identical to yours, BUT.... the numbers are a bit different- more stylized than yours- definitely different. Also, there is a dot on the sole next to the W in Wilson. i can't tell if yours have that dor or not. Ironfinder has mine listes as 88-90. I would guess yours are also in that range and just a slight variation. Mine is one year and yours is another- don't know which year for which iron. The FG-53 model is listed as 91-92. Yours is definitely earlier than that.

[Sid Vicious]

No dot on mine. Yours must have the serif-type fonts.

I'm pretty sure mine are 88-90, but no one seems to have seen any of this type anywhere, so I really don't know. I seem to remember this squarish font on something other than WS, but I'll be damned if I can remember what they were.

I still haven't heard from Wilson on these yet either. I'm figuring it's because of the holidays, but who knows? Oh yeah, and IF sent me an email asking for pics so I sent them this morning. We'll see what they have to say.

Happy New Year to all!

[Sid Vicious]

Well I finally got some information from Wilson. Apparently mine are 1990 model, according to the serials. They said they couldn't supply any other info because all the old records are archived.

Also, I received a PM out of the blue from a woman who's father apparently was the designer of the WS GN, way back when. Some interesting news there, but I am waiting for her permission to reprint.

Sooo, does anyone know somebody at Wilson who can get into the archives, or am I asking too much of this whole thing? If you do, please PM me. I am now officially obsessed with finding out the history of this set.

[threejack73]

Here is a pic of a set I am selling for $75.00. Excellent condition 1992 Wilson Staff FG-53 Goosenecks. The set is 1-SW, 11 irons in total and all in excellent condition. The shafts are Dynamic Gold S400, frequency matched by wilson and the grips are in great condition. The set has barely been used. Anyway I thaought someone on this thread might be interested. Hers's some pics.

[threejack73]

Check out the for sale forum for more details on the Goosenecks for sale

[Sid Vicious]

They are beauties. I'm tempted...

[smcgee123]

Threejack73

I am definitely sold interested. Please email me at [email protected].

Thanks
Scott

[Extreme Firepower]

If you take a picture of the offset from the toe on the long irons you'll see why they're called goosenecks.
Now it's not massive but made them a little more playable than the other fluid feel FG models. I also think the heads are much bigger for it's time.

I once hit a fluid feel FG-17 1 iron, I swear the ball was bigger that the iron head. Aforementioned razor sharp and thin sole made them impossible to hit. Tiger Woods wouldn't even be able to hit it it was so small and with the longer hosel the sweet spot was towards the heel

[golfbum9]

glenn

Nice find! You have the orig. Goosenecks which iirc are the more sought after set between the two... not that the 53's are 'bad' by any means!

Get yourself a current GW (PW loft) and you're in business

[zoso]

I have the bag, but have FG-17s...

[Sid Vicious]

[quote name='Ciotog99' date='11 January 2010 - 11:55 AM' timestamp='1263232544' post='2174726']
glenn

Nice find! You have the orig. Goosenecks which iirc are the more sought after set between the two... not that the 53's are 'bad' by any means!

Get yourself a current GW (PW loft) and you're in business
[/quote]

Thank You! I have been playing them for a few weeks now and they are great. I have also been in contact with the daughter of the man who designed them and they have told me some pretty interesting things about Goosies.

I tried communicating directly with Wilson, but it seems they either have no one left there that knows about them, or no one who cares. Too bad, since they are a club I definitely think should be revisited in some way. Very playable and you can work them back and forth and up and down like nothing.

[Sid Vicious]

[quote name='zoso' date='18 January 2010 - 02:56 PM' timestamp='1263848186' post='2189376']
I have the bag, but have FG-17s...
[/quote]

Wow, I never even knew that Goosies had their own bag too! I'm going to have to look around for one.

I'm thinking of going completely vintage with my set. I'm starting to look for some woods, but I am more partial to MT Tourneys and PowerBilts. I would definitely like to find an original 8802 putter if someone has one for a good price though.

[drewspin]

[quote name='Sid Vicious' date='01 February 2010 - 04:13 PM' timestamp='1265058782' post='2219913']
[quote name='zoso' date='18 January 2010 - 02:56 PM' timestamp='1263848186' post='2189376']
I have the bag, but have FG-17s...
[/quote]
I would definitely like to find an original 8802 putter if someone has one for a good price though.
[/quote]

I may be able to help you with that.

[Djay]

RE:"[color="#1C2837"]Anyone seen any loose clubs for the top or the bottom of the set? Haven't had much luck on the web."[/color]

[color="#1C2837"]I've got a set I purchased of the original Goosenecks around 1989. They were my first forged irons so I purchased the whole "enchilada" i.e. 1 iron through SW & 58* "lob"![/color]
[color="#1C2837"]I once put them up for sale on consignment but fortunately they didn't sell. The only wear is honest wear on the club face since I was nerdy enough back then to use club head covers when transporting. They hold so many good memories I keep holding onto them and the beauty (to me) is unmatched when compared to many of today's clubs.[/color]

[color="#1C2837"]They are a forerunner to more recent cavity backs in some ways - The slotted cavity channel, the square grooves, and the degree of offset made/make them much more playable than many of the blades of that era. Now that I'm a senior the stiff "Dyna Step" shafts are too much for me. Many fond memories embedded in these sticks![/color]

[color="#1C2837"]Enjoy those Goose Necks![/color]