Technology is amazing, but...

[NiftyNiblick]

...if a recreational player who has fourteen or fifteen clubs

with which he or she is very familiar, comfortable, and satisfied,

should that player chase technology to be current?

 

If, after a reasonable adapting period,

that recreational player actually slices a stroke off his/her average score,

he or she would obviously be the one to  decide if the expense and time adjusting was worth it.  

 

Do you think, however,  that most of the folks who play pretty much for fun more than competition

would  find it worth it?

 

 

[PMookie]

I could still be quite familiar with my Dunlop irons, and steel head/steel shafted Golfsmith driver head from 1986. I’ve tried that driver 10 years ago and it was already 20 yards behind what was “modern” at the time. The irons, I could probably get away with. I’m positive my Ping Zing 2 irons would still be worthwhile for me to play.

I think that the technology is to a point in drivers, fairway metals, and hybrids that one SHOULD play “modern” versions, but irons are still built based on loft, so beyond some “forgiveness”, maybe launch heights, weighting of the heads, and feel/sound, there wouldn’t be much difference. A 30* iron from two different makes could have some distance difference, but I wouldn’t think it would be as drastic as the driver/fwy/hybrid.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using MyGolfSpy

 

[NiftyNiblick]

Good point about drivers, but one still has to get used to hitting the modern 460cc driver with the toe pointed skyward at address.

"Graphite shaft droop" over a longer shaft is the reason given for the extreme upright lies, but there was nothing about my personal experience that confirmed that.

 

I ask the question, though, because I know my own answer needn't necessarily be typical.

I always had too many questions about  the metrics and cosmetics of modern clubs, technology features notwithstanding.

 

 

 

[Wedgie]

I could still be quite familiar with my Dunlop irons, and steel head/steel shafted Golfsmith driver head from 1986. I’ve tried that driver 10 years ago and it was already 20 yards behind what was “modern” at the time. The irons, I could probably get away with. I’m positive my Ping Zing 2 irons would still be worthwhile for me to play.
I think that the technology is to a point in drivers, fairway metals, and hybrids that one SHOULD play “modern” versions, but irons are still built based on loft, so beyond some “forgiveness”, maybe launch heights, weighting of the heads, and feel/sound, there wouldn’t be much difference. A 30* iron from two different makes could have some distance difference, but I wouldn’t think it would be as drastic as the driver/fwy/hybrid.
 
 
Sent from my iPhone using MyGolfSpy
 

I think this is really spot on. I play with new guys basically every week and my observation has been the best players I play with have old irons and putters and new hybrids and drivers. The guys that aren’t as good seem to have new gear throughout the bag. Just an observatIon however. With my Launcher HB irons I’m hoping to become the guy with old irons since they work so well for me.


Sent from my iPad using MyGolfSpy

[PlaidJacket]

Not sure if this reply fits; but...

There's a young fellow at my office who's recently been bitten by the golf bug. He's purely a recreational player. He also likes to hunt. Probably more than playing golf. Fine with me. His equipment is mostly a collection of older hand-me-down clubs. Recently he's upgraded some by purchasing a new putter and two Cleveland wedges. This guy is really short, 5'5"; and none of his clubs fit his stature. I've advised that he at least get a basic retail fitting before buying anymore new irons or woods. He's told me he'd taken his old exiting irons (steel shafts) to a shop and they cut them down! Probably 2"-3"!! Hmmm.... I'm not so sure about this as I think that significantly alters the shaft characteristics . (I'm no shaft expert for sure but this bothers me) 

He has several old woods - driver, fwy's etc. like those TM's in the above photos. He would certainly benefit by getting some newer ones. IMO.

[NiftyNiblick]

16 minutes ago, Wedgie said:

I think this is really spot on. I play with new guys basically every week and my observation has been the best players I play with have old irons and putters and new hybrids and drivers. The guys that aren’t as good seem to have new gear throughout the bag. Just an observatIon however. With my Launcher HB irons I’m hoping to become the guy with old irons since they work so well for me.


Sent from my iPad using MyGolfSpy

My only gripe with the new metalwoods is not their design and technology but their rather their fit metrics.

Getting the loft angle / face angle / lie angle correlations that work for me is really hard with new equipment, even if it's adjustable.

The very early metalwoods by TaylorMade and Titleist set up at address exactly like the wooden clubs that preceded them.

The later ones did not and still, of course,  do not. 

If one's not old enough to have played with wooden woods, of course, that obviously wouldn't be a factor.

What really confuses me is that many of the players who are old enough don't immediately notice the difference.

 

[Har in the Hat]

great question.
I was exercising in the basement with my swing fan and I saw my Callaway Big Bertha 3 wood. when I started golfing I used this club in lieu of driver. I hit it 230 and was consistently in the fairway. I'm thinking of taking it back out into use and see how it works.
use what works.

Sent from my SM-G900W8 using MyGolfSpy mobile app

[revkev]

Use what you have fun using


Sent from my iPhone using MyGolfSpy

[fixyurdivot]

4 hours ago, NiftyNiblick said:

Do you think, however,  that most of the folks who play pretty much for fun more than competition

would  find it worth it?

Nope.  Just like in fly fishing, I see folks with $1000 rods who can't cast the length of the boat and folks casting $150 rods who should be making instructional videos.  Most all of us have been bit by the marketing types and their hype over our lives.  Some of it factual but most of it not so much.  The decision to chase technology is purely personal.  Some absolutely love it and pursue it as fast as it hits the streets; others (myself in this lot) tend to be a bit more weary and less prone to chase it.  (I'm still not a former PE2 player ).  

 

 

[chisag]

... Equipment changes for a reason. Yes, one of those reasons is to make money and bring out new product that is not much of, if any improvement on the previous version. But courses have changed and most importantly the ball has changed. And that means equipment had to change to keep up. Then there are break thru's like slot technology, carbon crowns, tungsten in multi material players irons and of course hollow, foam filled irons. All of these can be a game changer if you were playing previous equipment. Of course the better the player, the more the improvement. 
 

... But just remember, there are many that look at golf equipment like a hobby. It is fun to try new heads, shafts and balls. For me at least, it has been quite rare for a new club to make a difference in my score. It is usually a different look, feel, sound or maybe combo of shaft and head that provides enjoyment but not better scores. Off the top of my head the RBZ slot in fairway woods, low spin high launch of the SLDR, foam filled P790's and carbon crowned/railed soles of my F8 fairway woods have made an actual, albeit small difference in my play. 

... I think roughly about 5 years is as long as you want to play clubs before upgrading to newer technology. If you play one piece solid forged MB's or CB's there really is no need to change and the same can be said for wedges. If a shaft fits you very well, you can also play it longer than 5 years. That said, I am talking a bout a small increase in performance that could mean a slightly lower score or better shots, but certainly not a night and day difference. I could easily play a J33 Driver with an NV shaft, original launcher fw wood and a set of 762B's and probably score within a stroke or two as I do playing my F8 Even Flow Black, F8 fw and P790's. 

[null]

My only gripe with the new metalwoods is not their design and technology but their rather their fit metrics.

Getting the loft angle / face angle / lie angle correlations that work for me is really hard with new equipment, even if it's adjustable.

The very early metalwoods by TaylorMade and Titleist set up at address exactly like the wooden clubs that preceded them.

The later ones did not and still, of course,  do not. 

If one's not old enough to have played with wooden woods, of course, that obviously wouldn't be a factor.

What really confuses me is that many of the players who are old enough don't immediately notice the difference.

 

But how do you know that modern metalwoods won't work for you?  Have you gone for a fitting with modern equipment at all over the last few years?

Saying that you need your driver 5* flat without even knowing how you'd hit a recent club isn't really a good argument

 

 

[bens197]

I played six years from HS through college and my first year as an apprentice with this bag...

975D UST ProForce 75x
A Golfsmith raylor style 3 wood with a DG x-100
Titleist 962B 2-9
Wilson Johnny Miller forged PW
Vokey 200-54 and 58
PING Anser 2

I’d love to say these were technology but they remind me more of a true craftsman’s tools. I loved that bag. Still do.


Sent from my iPhone using MyGolfSpy

[GB13]

Year over year there is very little difference in technology. Cumulatively though, there is a large difference. If you look at and Epic VS Rogue, there is very little difference. 

But the difference between the Rogue and the Hyper X is quite large. 

It all comes down to what gain you need to spend $500. Is it 3 yards? Then you should upgrade every 2 years. 15 yards? Then maybe once every 10 years is good for you. 

While I could very easily play the Hyper X, I would rather play something newer, longer, and more forgiving. I could also play 1950's blades but they don't make the game as enjoyable for me. I would rather play with something modern that I didn't feel was holding me back. The blades very well may not be holding me back, but I would like to give myself the best chance to score well.

Some people enjoy playing with persimmon woods and blades for the nostalgia. I don't, but if you do, play em and enjoy em. 

[bens197]

Year over year there is very little difference in technology. Cumulatively though, there is a large difference. If you look at and Epic VS Rogue, there is very little difference. 
But the difference between the Rogue and the Hyper X is quite large. 
It all comes down to what gain you need to spend $500. Is it 3 yards? Then you should upgrade every 2 years. 15 yards? Then maybe once every 10 years is good for you. 
While I could very easily play the Hyper X, I would rather play something newer, longer, and more forgiving. I could also play 1950's blades but they don't make the game as enjoyable for me. I would rather play with something modern that I didn't feel was holding me back. The blades very well may not be holding me back, but I would like to give myself the best chance to score well.
Some people enjoy playing with persimmon woods and blades for the nostalgia. I don't, but if you do, play em and enjoy em. 

Spot on.

It’s amusing how technology in the ball has worked with the driver to keep us hitting it the same.



Sent from my iPhone using MyGolfSpy

[NiftyNiblick]

6 hours ago, jlukes said:

But how do you know that modern metalwoods won't work for you?  Have you gone for a fitting with modern equipment at all over the last few years?

Saying that you need your driver 5* flat without even knowing how you'd hit a recent club isn't really a good argument

 

 

I understand what you're saying, jlukes, but it's not like I've never been on a monitor.

Consider this.

 

For decades, the 43" driver had a standard lie angle of 55º.

 

That would suggest that a 45" driver should have a 53º lie angle to compensate for the extra length.  Longer clubs get flatter.

 

Instead, the 45" driver goes more UPRIGHT to 58º.

It takes an awful lot of "graphite shaft droop" to compensate for 5º of lie angle.

 

My swing doesn't produce nearly that much.

And with the ground involved, upright fairway woods are much worse.

 

Also, older players use more lofted drivers due to reduced club head speed.

The OEMs put closed faces on the higher loft drivers.

I guess that all seniors slice...except that I and my flat swing NEVER sliced.

 

I'm guessing that younger players simply swing differently than we did.

[tony@CIC]

For me club technology year over year is an incremental improvement at best. So I don't try to upgrade my clubs annually. Are RTX 4.0 wedges really that different from 3.0?

My preference and implementation of golf technology is from a different perspective; those tools that will help me either better understand my game or assist in becoming more consistent. So my technology purchases have been limited to a LRF - NX7 Pro and a LM (SC 200). Next technology purchase will probably be ARCCOS 360.


Sent from my iPad using MyGolfSpy

[HardcoreLooper]

1 hour ago, tony@CIC said:

For me club technology year over year is an incremental improvement at best. So I don't try to upgrade my clubs annually. Are RTX 4.0 wedges really that different from 3.0?

My preference and implementation of golf technology is from a different perspective; those tools that will help me either better understand my game or assist in becoming more consistent. So my technology purchases have been limited to a LRF - NX7 Pro and a LM (SC 200). Next technology purchase will probably be ARCCOS 360.


Sent from my iPad using MyGolfSpy

You will not be disappointed in Arccos.

No one should buy anything they don't want to buy.  No one should feel like the need to buy anything to enjoy the game.  I enjoyed my hand-me-down Wilson Staffs, my Hogan Apex redlines, my Hogan Apex Pluses, and my Mizuno MX-200s.  I loved all of those clubs.  I'm sure I could have gotten a few more seasons out of my Mizunos if I hadn't been selected for the CCC.  They were extremely well designed and forward thinking... for 2009.  But the F8s have made a huge difference in my game.  Technology moves quite a long way in nine years.

 

 

[deejaid]

Familiarity and confidence beats technology every time. If you are standing in the middle of the fairway with a club you’ve hit 5,000 times you have a better chance of sticking it close than you do with the newest, latest technological wonder you bought last week. Doesn’t matter how much “better”, “longer” or “more forgiving” it is.

Now, on the flip side, many people feel much more confident knowing they have the newest, most forgiving, longest club money can buy in their hand. If that is what gives them the confidence to make that same shot, that’s great too.


I put my Hogan’s in the bag in spring and have been playing and practicing more since joining my club. Because I’ve been able to work on my game more my confidence has grown and I am becoming intimately familiar with how my clubs perform. I am not interested in the latest and greatest, I am interested in making these clubs do exactly what I want on demand.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[SteddyGolf]

The biggest technological advancement effecting golf is the golf ball. All other advancements run a distant second. I can grab my old persimmon wood and bang it out close to my G Driver but if I hit a Titleist Pro 90 with either of those clubs it goes no where in comparison to the modern Golf ball.


Sent from my iPad using MyGolfSpy

[Badams69]

On 10/14/2018 at 10:50 AM, PlaidJacket said:

Not sure if this reply fits; but...

There's a young fellow at my office who's recently been bitten by the golf bug. He's purely a recreational player. He also likes to hunt. Probably more than playing golf. Fine with me. His equipment is mostly a collection of older hand-me-down clubs. Recently he's upgraded some by purchasing a new putter and two Cleveland wedges. This guy is really short, 5'5"; and none of his clubs fit his stature. I've advised that he at least get a basic retail fitting before buying anymore new irons or woods. He's told me he'd taken his old exiting irons (steel shafts) to a shop and they cut them down! Probably 2"-3"!! Hmmm.... I'm not so sure about this as I think that significantly alters the shaft characteristics . (I'm no shaft expert for sure but this bothers me) 

He has several old woods - driver, fwy's etc. like those TM's in the above photos. He would certainly benefit by getting some newer ones. IMO.

I'm around this guys size - horrible amount to cut.  You've been kind enough to reply to a prior post of mine about new clubs being cut an inch and it ruined them.

At that height 1/2" or 1" is about all that is needed.  anything more is too much.  PING is likely the easiest way to buy used for such a person because they can just get the right dot and instead of cutting or paying boatload for fitting that doesn't equate to where golf is in their life ..... they can just buy to a reasonably close fit.

You are more than correct about being skeptical of how much was cut and what this does to the club (mostly in swing weight which equates to effectively stiffening the clubs).

I've quit golf twice in the last fifteen years and retooled for well under $200 including bag.  All clubs that were relevant within the prior 4-6 year period of tech boom also.

[Badams69]

Now to the original post.

I think I have some insight into this as I coach high school golf.  While we have a handful of kids that are highly competitive and major players in the hunt for a state individual and team championship, we also have some who sign up and don't even own clubs and others who are playing for fun and learning a game for life.

We have some old clubs to give them, like you show and worse ...... then we also have some more recent vintages (ten years or so old), and it makes a real difference for the user to say the least when they are bumped up in model of iron or wood.

However what I see these beginner or pure recreational guys/girls having most success with is the 80's 90s variety perimeter weighted cast clubs.  

If we had the $$$ means to do so, I'd outfit our program with 10 sets of eye2 or zing clubs or anything similar whether ping or not.

Drivers?  So many can be had for peanuts that have been produced since the CC and other limits were put in place on modern drivers.

Since you could buy a driver (905R) irons(eye2) and putter (anser) for at or less than $125 total, that when hit well do most anything a new model can do, why not ?

Spend $1500 for the latest/greatest - NO WAY!

 

[GB13]

9 hours ago, Badams69 said:

I'm around this guys size - horrible amount to cut.  You've been kind enough to reply to a prior post of mine about new clubs being cut an inch and it ruined them.

At that height 1/2" or 1" is about all that is needed.  anything more is too much.  PING is likely the easiest way to buy used for such a person because they can just get the right dot and instead of cutting or paying boatload for fitting that doesn't equate to where golf is in their life ..... they can just buy to a reasonably close fit.

You are more than correct about being skeptical of how much was cut and what this does to the club (mostly in swing weight which equates to effectively stiffening the clubs).

I've quit golf twice in the last fifteen years and retooled for well under $200 including bag.  All clubs that were relevant within the prior 4-6 year period of tech boom also.

I agree with you here. I am on the flip side though, (6'2") and need clubs 1" long and 3° upright. If I order from anyone but Ping (and maybe a few others), the SW and lies are all over the place. I have seen SW D1 to D7 and lies from 2° upright to 5° upright, on one set, keep in mind these were to be built to D5 SW. 

When I order from Ping, the lies are reasonably close and the swing weights are within a point or two. For me it's either a $2400 set that was built by Club Champion or a $900 Ping set that is pretty darn close. $1500 just isn't worth it to me. 

[NiftyNiblick]

There is a generous selection of lofts,

and lengths are a rather simple adjustment.

 

Lie angles and face angles are the main problem with drivers and fairway woods.

If you can't be accommodated in those areas, seven or eight generations of technology become less important than a good fit.

Upright lies killed me.  Closed faces killed me.   Flatter, more open faced clubs resulted in greater distance, accuracy, and consistent clean hits 

than I could achieve with more modern technology and poor fit.

 

You could give me the most sophisticated driver in the world,

but if it's stupid moving parts can't come up with the loft/face/lie combination that fits,

it's just a fireplace stoker to me.

 

 

 

[Badams69]

8 hours ago, NiftyNiblick said:

There is a generous selection of lofts,

and lengths are a rather simple adjustment.

 

Lie angles and face angles are the main problem with drivers and fairway woods.

If you can't be accommodated in those areas, seven or eight generations of technology become less important than a good fit.

Upright lies killed me.  Closed faces killed me.   Flatter, more open faced clubs resulted in greater distance, accuracy, and consistent clean hits 

than I could achieve with more modern technology and poor fit.

 

You could give me the most sophisticated driver in the world,

but if it's stupid moving parts can't come up with the loft/face/lie combination that fits,

it's just a fireplace stoker to me.

 

 

 

Agree with all this!

Now - to that original question - how much is that all worth to a part-time/recreational golfer? (although aren't we all - when it is said and done)

Ha - you posed the original question - so ...... to that end. ...... all things equal fit trumps tech unless the gap is outlandish.  Hickory shafts fit well might still pose an issue.

 

[NiftyNiblick]

10 hours ago, Badams69 said:

.  Hickory shafts fit well might still pose an issue.

 

I think the unforgiving plain blade club heads would be a bigger problem than the shafts--with me, anyway.

[EthanSterlingPrice]

My only gripe with the new metalwoods is not their design and technology but their rather their fit metrics.
Getting the loft angle / face angle / lie angle correlations that work for me is really hard with new equipment, even if it's adjustable.
The very early metalwoods by TaylorMade and Titleist set up at address exactly like the wooden clubs that preceded them.
The later ones did not and still, of course,  do not. 
If one's not old enough to have played with wooden woods, of course, that obviously wouldn't be a factor.
What really confuses me is that many of the players who are old enough don't immediately notice the difference.
 

The wooden equipment just flat out isn’t relevant anymore for anything except reminiscing. My first clubs 10 years ago were a mix of persimmons woods and oversized cavity backs and as much as I liked them they don’t compare to modern equipment. Putters have a longer lifespan but even then the new stuff has better tech. Visuals are just something people have to get over and adapt to or just stay with the old stuff and sacrifice performance...



In the bag
Driver: Callaway Rogue Subzero 9.5 Stiff flex
3 wood: Callaway Rogue Subzero 15 degree
Hybrids: 17 degree titleist 816 h2
Irons: Ben Hogan Ptx 22-46 degree (4-pw)stiff flex standard lie
Wedges: Callaway Mac Daddy 4 50,54,58 degrees
Putter: Odyssey EXO seven

Gig’em Aggies!

[NiftyNiblick]

Just now, EthanSterlingPrice said:

The wooden equipment just flat out isn’t relevant anymore for anything except reminiscing. My first clubs 10 years ago were a mix of persimmons woods and oversized cavity backs and as much as I liked them they don’t compare to modern equipment. Putters have a longer lifespan but even then the new stuff has better tech. Visuals are just something people have to get over and adapt to or just stay with the old stuff and sacrifice performance...
 

I must not be an effective communicator.

I'm talking about loft / face/ lie angles having been changed.

I'm not talking about wood versus metal.

I'm talking about too upright, too closed, and too strong for my tastes.

 

 

[EthanSterlingPrice]

I must not be an effective communicator.

I'm talking about loft / face/ lie angles having been changed.

I'm not talking about wood versus metal.

I'm talking about too upright, too closed, and too strong for my tastes.

 

 

Makes no difference, people are taller on average now so that contributes to the upright lie, many tp models have a neutral or open face at address and can be adjusted on top of that to a point where any more would hurt performance, and you can get 7 woods in many models to eliminate any strong loft issues you may be getting. Unless someone’s idea of the perfect metal wood is a niche club for looks then there’s an option out there.

 

 

 

In the bag

Driver: Callaway Rogue Subzero 9.5 Stiff flex

3 wood: Callaway Rogue Subzero 15 degree

Hybrids: 17 degree titleist 816 h2

Irons: Ben Hogan Ptx 22-46 degree (4-pw)stiff flex standard lie

Wedges: Callaway Mac Daddy 4 50,54,58 degrees

Putter: Odyssey EXO seven

 

Gig’em Aggies!

[NiftyNiblick]

10 hours ago, EthanSterlingPrice said:

Unless someone’s idea of the perfect metal wood is a niche club for looks then there’s an option out there.

 

My idea of perfect metal woods  are the original TaylorMade Pittsburgh Persimmons  or the Titleist PTs  that I already have.

The upright lies are not about the sudden prominence of freakishly tall players.

The upright lies are about "graphite shaft droop" that my flatter, inside hitting swing doesn't produce to any great degree.

Mind you, it was better that I     rather than every other player in the world     disliked the newer metal woods.

I'll give you that.

[deejaid]

The upright lies have nothing to do with taller players. Most amateurs can’t get their swing on the proper plane and come over the top.

Karsten Solheim not only made clubs more forgiving by perimeter weighting, he also accomplished it by fitting players into more upright lies which helped eliminate their slice. If players learned a flatter swing plane OEM’s would make clubs like that. But they realize most people are lazy and are going to put the least amount of work into getting in the proper swing plane and instead expect the clubs to “forgive” their lack of ability.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk