HOGAN IRON LOVERS

[birly-shirly]

I don't take MPF as gospel, but there are some solid, empirical measurements in here regarding different hogan heads for anyone curious to look at differences between models. [url="http://www.golfworks.com/images/art/MPF_BEN%20HOGAN.pdf"]http://www.golfworks.com/images/art/MPF_BEN%20HOGAN.pdf[/url]

I haven't looked very closely at this, but my initial impressions are that if you look only at the various blade designs, then any variation between models is pretty slight. The CoG looks to move maybe 3/8" toe to heel, and less than a 1/4 inch vertically across all models - with a cluster of designs within a tighter yet distribution.

Sadly, there are no measurements for the models that I'd be most interested in, the Apex IIs, Apex PCs and '88 Redlines - but I'm inclined to think that for most of us, variation in our ballstriking from day to day and shot to shot is liable to be greater than the variation between club designs. If I found myself playing a set of 60s blades and hitting a mix of decent shots and hosel rockets, I'd be more concerned.

[stevemcgee99]

I hit a DX, Haig, MaxFli, and PC today. I thought the PC felt best. Of course, didn't get a lot of shots in with each, but my first impression felt best with the PC.

[pdgolferman]

[quote name='birly-shirly' timestamp='1415021662' post='10390357']
I don't take MPF as gospel, but there are some solid, empirical measurements in here regarding different hogan heads for anyone curious to look at differences between models. [url="http://www.golfworks.com/images/art/MPF_BEN%20HOGAN.pdf"]http://www.golfworks.com/images/art/MPF_BEN%20HOGAN.pdf[/url]

I haven't looked very closely at this, but my initial impressions are that if you look only at the various blade designs, then any variation between models is pretty slight. The CoG looks to move maybe 3/8" toe to heel, and less than a 1/4 inch vertically across all models - with a cluster of designs within a tighter yet distribution.

Sadly, there are no measurements for the models that I'd be most interested in, the Apex IIs, Apex PCs and '88 Redlines - but I'm inclined to think that for most of us, variation in our ballstriking from day to day and shot to shot is liable to be greater than the variation between club designs. If I found myself playing a set of 60s blades and hitting a mix of decent shots and hosel rockets, I'd be more concerned.
[/quote]

Wow!
The Maltby man states that, according to his stats, the '06 Hogan's playability compare to game improvement irons....got to be a great advert for the blades v cavity back debaters.
...I got dragged from a shop, kicking and screaming last weekend all because they had a set of these with rifle stiff shafts.

[HoldenCornfield]

[quote name='birly-shirly' timestamp='1415021662' post='10390357']
I don't take MPF as gospel, but there are some solid, empirical measurements in here regarding different hogan heads for anyone curious to look at differences between models. [url="http://www.golfworks.com/images/art/MPF_BEN%20HOGAN.pdf"]http://www.golfworks...F_BEN HOGAN.pdf[/url]

I haven't looked very closely at this, but my initial impressions are that if you look only at the various blade designs, then any variation between models is pretty slight. The CoG looks to move maybe 3/8" toe to heel, and less than a 1/4 inch vertically across all models - with a cluster of designs within a tighter yet distribution.

Sadly, there are no measurements for the models that I'd be most interested in, the Apex IIs, Apex PCs and '88 Redlines - but I'm inclined to think that for most of us, variation in our ballstriking from day to day and shot to shot is liable to be greater than the variation between club designs. If I found myself playing a set of 60s blades and hitting a mix of decent shots and hosel rockets, I'd be more concerned.
[/quote]

Interesting to me that the Precisions (represented by the '58 Sabers) actually score relatively high for a classic blade at 334. Although not necessarily surprising as I find them to be somewhat oversized for the time period and more forgiving than they feel.

On the other hand, the '99 Apex Plus cavity backs come in at only 163.

I wish they had some of the early Wilsons rated. I've hit the '56 Dyna's and '63 Turfriders and find them to be very playable with their short, bored out hosel and increased toe weight and length. But they also have a very shallow blade height. Would that hurt or help their rating? The COG seems to be very low, especially on the long irons. But the short blade height could be intimidating for some players.

[Kathy Marie]

Well, the Maltby Playability Factor Wilson PDF shows a "Dyna-Powered" (ie, late 50's) iron head with a date of 1968, so maybe this has what you need?

[url="http://www.golfworks.com/images/art/MPF_WILSON.pdf"]http://www.golfworks.com/images/art/MPF_WILSON.pdf[/url]

No Turfrider was tested, but I'm thinking it was skipped because it was a one year only model.