Jump to content

Kansas King

Member
  • Posts

    380
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Kansas
  • Interests
    Golf
  • Handicap:
    6

Recent Profile Visitors

1,301 profile views

Kansas King's Achievements

 

  (1/14)

543

Reputation

  1. Golfworks has released an interesting new counterbalance putter shaft under the Maltby line. The shaft is appears to be a heavy aluminum shaft on the butt end that transitions into steel for the final few inches. The stock shaft is 38" and the heavy aluminum portion represents 32" from the butt. According to Britt Lindsey's comments on the Maltby Forum, it appears the shaft is designed for putter heads ranging from approximately 360 - 390 grams but must be at least 350 grams to have any feel. The shaft itself weighs 265 grams which is considerably heavier than the roughly 130 gram standard putter shafts. I find this shaft to be intriguing and wonder if anyone has ordered one yet. I can't seem to find much else like it on the market but I'm sure it's not alone. Maybe it's a ripoff of something else out there but I can't seem to find much. There are the BGT Stability shafts but they don't seem to have the same weight to them and they cost around $300. I'm curious if anyone has any insights on these shafts. The idea of counterbalancing a putter using a shaft that distributes the weight more evenly through the length of the club than just shaft butt weights and heavy grips seems interesting.
  2. I would recommend just picking up any of the plethora of cheap golf oriented rangefinders that have flooded the market. As far as I can tell, most people are satisfied with them. I know a lot of people really like the TGW slope laser at around $200 which comes with interchangeable side plates that make it useable for competition. This generic rangefinder appears to also come in different flavors for other brands. I have a cheaper Nikon Coolshot and like it but I would probably seek out a rangefinder with better pin seeking technology in the future. However, the cheaper cool shots are still better to have than a rangefinder with no pin seeking at all. Based on what I see, the 1000i appears to be a different version of the cheaper coolshot. On the whole, I would recommend a golf range finder. I guess if you wanted to use it for hunting my question would be, what is more important to you? Would a golf rangefinder work for hunting?
  3. The combo of higher spinning balls and more loft should help. There are a lot of variables at play but all things being equal, you're launch and spin should go up higher loft and higher spinning ball. The Titleist T100 7-iron clocks in at 34*, so your set is definitely on the stronger side. I would be careful going hog wild on raising lofts and is can really mess with the bounce and the turf interaction, so if possible I would recommend changing the loft on one iron before changing the whole set. Beyond changing you're swing, the only other things you change would be the shaft, grip, and head weight and that is tricky. Depending on the swing weight of you're irons, you may want to try a small amount of tape on the bottom back edge of the clubhead. You may be able to get a little more dynamic loft with a little lower and more rearward weight. This won't change much and may will likely be unnoticeable unless you really go heavy. Then you could use a different grip to dial in swing weights but you would still end up with a dramatically heavier total club weight which is unlikely to solve anything. Ultimately, you likely need different shafts or a different club head which you already know. I don't know what you're hitting but you probably are going to want to avoid the generally lower spinning "tour distance" category like the P790s, i500s, etc.). The way the grooves are cut in some of those irons along with the hot faces can really lead to low spinning distance monsters that are hard to control. Assuming you play a middle of the road steel shaft, I don't know that there is a significant amount to be gained from changing shafts alone. Irons swings are generally a little to slow and steel shafts generally don't deflect that much during the swing. That's why the whole lead tape thing I mention above would likely have little impact. Overall, increasing the lofts and playing a higher spin ball is probably about the best you're going to do with you're existing irons. Being an 8.7 hdcp, you may find you're next set of irons being a little more player oriented with more traditional lofts. I generally don't recommend actively changing a swing just based on equipment but you gotta do what you gotta do. If you want an affordable set of irons that offer some forgiveness and higher launch, I would recommend looking at some of the older Ping i-series irons from the i10s to i25s. Best of luck!
  4. Lots of good recommendations on here. I like Eccos but really any proper sealed leather shoe will suit your needs. I know that a lot of people really like mesh-like materials for shoes but it's almost impossible to make them waterproof and still offer the benefits of airflow. I've had Footjoys in the past that did not have any water issues. Eccos are probably the highest quality shoe made for golf today. Their polyurethane being molded directly on the shoe (not glued) remains largely unparalleled to other manufacturing techniques. I currently play the Adidas Tour 360s because I wanted a little more padding. They are holding up well but the materials aren't as nice as my Eccos. The yak leather used in Eccos is softer and nicer feeling than any other leather used in golf footwear today. There are some good Adidas Adipure shoes out there with better leathers but they are few and far between. I will say that even though the leather on my Adidas isn't the nicest, it's held up well. After about 2 years of use, the sealant and white paint is still not cracking.
  5. No doubt. I'm going to admit that I'm feeling a little keyboard warrior-esque today but I would also say that I would still support my thoughts if I were discussing it in person with someone from the MGS staff. I'm also guilty of being overly harsh from behind the keyboard from time to time. I kind of like what that one organization 60 Minutes was showing where they would have two people with very different political leanings sit down and have to have a conversation about the issues for an hour. The outcomes while talking in person and words being typed behind a keyboard are dramatically different. I would say though, that if we don't like something we're seeing, it's important to share that feedback.
  6. Did you accidentally somehow quote and post this on the grips thread instead of the Rick Shiels Beef thread?
  7. I understand that everyone has some inherent biases but the third core belief for MGS is being "proudly unbiased". I'm actually okay with nice interviews and I love some of the industry research MGS does. I'm not saying MGS has to be a negative nancy every time they publish something. I'm glad MGS covers new products and gives us the information that the company has released. I'm fine with all that. I just think they need to be careful about how things look. It's all about the optics. I don't believe MGS should go to bat for TM, regardless of how great their technology claims to be or how much time they claim to have worked on something. MGS commenting about a Rick Shiels post defending the new stealth drivers puts a little cloudiness as to how MGS can claim they are doing independent testing when they aren't letting a true independent test do the talking for them. While it may be true that the new Stealth driver is a better performer for the staff at MGS, let the actual testing do the talking. The optics of the MGS comment is poor regardless of intent and it potentially tarnishes the trust that so many of us have. This comment alone will not ruin MGS for me and I don't think it will ruin it for anyone else but as someone who values independence, stuff like this starts to make the whole independence claim a little more cloudy.
  8. I think MGS can do what they want, but as someone who has supported MGS in the past based on their mission of being independent and unbiased, growing the company with a bunch of sponsored or affiliated articles doesn't really do it for me. Then you throw in them defending TM and that doesn't really seam to align with the idea of being unbiased and independent. I don't want to overly bash MGS, I think they are well-meaning and do legitimately good work. I want them to succeed as I appreciate their testing and I appreciate them hosting this forum. My fear is that MGS is creeping closer to being the next Golf Digest. I think there are lots of ways for MGS to grow but it is harder if independence is going to remain a genuine part of their mission.
  9. I like Maltby products and find they are a good value. I think their products are largely as good as anyone else's in the in the industry. The hardest part about Maltby products is getting fit. There are some club builders out there that fit for Maltby clubs but there aren't a lot of them and many times, they don't advertise well so it's hard to find the ones that do exist. Plus, many of the fitters actually just fit you on a driving range and build at their homes. IF ANY MALTBY FITTERS ARE READING THIS, PLEASE MAKE SURE YOU HAVE A FACEBOOK ACCOUNT OR SIMPLE WEBSITE EXPLAINING WHAT YOU DO AND HOW TO CONTACT YOU! THANK YOU! I always kind of laugh when it comes to Maltby fitters. You can always tell when you're on a course where a Maltby builder is active. You'll see lots of people with some Maltby clubs in their bag and you ask someone about and they're like "oh yeah, Bill's been building us Maltby clubs for years!". You ask how to contact them and their like "just catch him playing in league on Wednesday night or he's always out here on Saturday morning".
  10. I've honestly lost a little love for MGS over the last couple years. I think they generally do good work and I support them and have donated in the past but I get this sense that they are trying to do more than they set out to do. What started as a small group of hard working people doing independent reviews has turned into a bunch of sponsored articles. I know I'm certainly being overly harsh when I say that because I don't think that is their intent, it's just the optics of their articles have gotten worse, especially since they started the We Tried It series. While I'm happy the MGS staff has obviously developed good relationships with OEM staffs, the optics make it appear that it is spilling over into their work and independence. I think going after Rick Shiels is nonsense for a publication like MGS. He is an independent Youtuber that had an average experience with a new product, who cares? I don't think MGS should. If MGS feels they should defend manufacturers from Youtubers, then I guess I had a misunderstanding of what MGS is about. In the end I currently support MGS and truly appreciate what they do. However, I think they need to take a hard look at how they present information and do what they can to maintain independence. I know that MGS is never going to be 100% independent. I don't know that they could afford to buy all the clubs they test and I'm not saying they should. However, regardless of how independent they are, the optics of what they do is what matters. The optics of MGS going to bat for a large OEM like TM is not a good look IMO. I'm only harsh about independence because my line of work revolves around true independence and risk governance. A lot people don't have a true understanding of what real independence and risk governance actually is.
  11. The TS4 does look sharp but I'll be curious to see how it stacks up to the TS1. I was looking at building a new set in the next 12 months and the TS1 or maybe the new TS3 kind of has my eyes. I currently play the MMB 17s and I enjoy them but I wouldn't be against a little more forgiveness from the sole. I don't think I will be playing quite as much as I used to in the future. I'm sure when available, I'll just build one of each TS1 - TS4 and see what I like best. For all I know, I may really love the extra forgiveness of the TS2.
  12. Someone over at Golfworks has some style. Something that has seemingly been omitted from most of their designs since ever.
  13. I agree with others that you probably need to see a fitter or a pro. I would say that if the R7 was poorly fit to you and you got used to it, that you're swing is maybe a little off now that you are getting more appropriate equipment. Most golfers tend to adjust to the equipment they have over time, regardless of how poorly it fits. If you swing 115 MPH but played with a senior flex driver for a year, you would adjust to get the most out of it. This very well could be some adjustment pains as much as the new clubs may not be a good fit.
  14. Thanks for the info! It sounds like the concept is still the same but with some refinements. I may have to try one out later this year to see how they play.
  15. I'm glad to hear the Edison plays about the same as the Scor wedge. My Scor wedges are still in okay shape as I only used them for about one season but I may be considering putting the 47 and 51 back in the bag this year. If you're ever in desperate need for used but playable 42*, hit me up.
×
×
  • Create New...