Sub70 golf

[Sluggo42 6,559]

So here’s a few picks of the raw wedges after 4 rounds now. 

and the udder side...

good spin from these...

 

two rounds have have been in the rain, and I’m an early bird, so it’s always wet -so that might be an accelerating factor...

[GolfSub70 452]

9 hours ago, Sluggo42 said:

So here’s a few picks of the raw wedges after 4 rounds now. 

 

Thanks for sharing!  I tell everyone that asks about the raw finish that it's not for everyone...but it's a great option and I've really warmed up to the look.  It's fun to see them develop that patina.  We had a guy that sprayed them on purpose to accelerate the rusting process.  Hopefully they are performing well for you too!

[Kwoodfield 84]

It’s weird. Rust on some clubs drives me mad, yet on wedges I lovvvve it. These look great!


Sent from my iPhone using MyGolfSpy

[Sluggo42 6,559]

11 hours ago, GolfSub70 said:

Thanks for sharing!  I tell everyone that asks about the raw finish that it's not for everyone...but it's a great option and I've really warmed up to the look.  It's fun to see them develop that patina.  We had a guy that sprayed them on purpose to accelerate the rusting process.  Hopefully they are performing well for you too!

So far so good- only 4 rounds in, but, spin is awesome!

[PMookie 14,910]

I received my Sub 70 seven iron to try. Looks great! We just had another two days of rain, so who knows when I’ll be able to try it. Looking forward to seeing what it can do, and how it feels!



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Kwoodfield 84]

Can’t wait to get these on order


Sent from my iPhone using MyGolfSpy

[Sluggo42 6,559]

Every time I see those 639’s, I want some

[robertson153 2,415]

Every time I almost forget about Sub70 someone bumps this thread You guys are killing me [emoji51]


Sent from my iPhone using MyGolfSpy

[edingc 10,076]

That club is gorgeous. Love to no medallion/badge look. So clean.

[cnosil 19,651]

Got to try the 739 irons today as part of the Game Improvement Iron Most Wanted category.  Was in my group of 7 irons today and I still have the 5 and PW to go.   Overall performance was equivalent to anything I have tested in this group so far. I didn't get any specific numbers but ball speed and launch were good.  My only problem was that I had a tendency to hit a high fade with the test clubs.  This wasn't the case with other clubs I was testing.   Anyone looking for a game improvement iron should take a look at the 739 series.  

[GolfSub70 452]

13 hours ago, cnosil said:

Got to try the 739 irons today as part of the Game Improvement Iron Most Wanted category.  Was in my group of 7 irons today and I still have the 5 and PW to go.   Overall performance was equivalent to anything I have tested in this group so far. I didn't get any specific numbers but ball speed and launch were good.  My only problem was that I had a tendency to hit a high fade with the test clubs.  This wasn't the case with other clubs I was testing.   Anyone looking for a game improvement iron should take a look at the 739 series.  

Thanks for the info!  Glad to hear the iron testing has started already.  I know the guys at MGS are hoping to get more of their testing and results out earlier this year.  I bet a different shaft would lower the flight and straighten out that fade with the 739s 

[newballcoach 867]

For you guys that have demoed/played/seen these irons, what is the offset like? According to the spec numbers on their website (which don't provide units, so I have to assume are measured in milimetres), the offsets are the same or higher than my current set of Callaway Steelhead's, (which are a GI iron with strong offset). The 599 have the least offset but the 639 have even more offset than the Callaways. 

Has this affected the flight of the ball for anyone? I was kind of under the impression these are supposed to be more of a playerish type of iron, but with that amount of offset I am going to have a hard time keeping them out of the left rough (yes obviously I need to test them). Just wondering if a) these numbers/units are correct and b) if anybody else has noticed/has an issue with the extreme offset in these clubs. Thanks guys.

[Waazzupppp 108]

I'm just dying to see THESE in real life... They just LOOK like a buttery-soft, penetrating-flight, monster that I can't wait to hit. Pretty sure Sub70 said these would be hitting the market late spring, early summer...

So perfect... Clean, yet techie... No excess badging... Just nailed it in the looks department. Now, will they be available in black? [emoji16]

Sent from my SM-N960U1 using Tapatalk

[GolfSub70 452]

1 hour ago, newballcoach said:

For you guys that have demoed/played/seen these irons, what is the offset like? According to the spec numbers on their website (which don't provide units, so I have to assume are measured in milimetres), the offsets are the same or higher than my current set of Callaway Steelhead's, (which are a GI iron with strong offset). The 599 have the least offset but the 639 have even more offset than the Callaways. 

Has this affected the flight of the ball for anyone? I was kind of under the impression these are supposed to be more of a playerish type of iron, but with that amount of offset I am going to have a hard time keeping them out of the left rough (yes obviously I need to test them). Just wondering if a) these numbers/units are correct and b) if anybody else has noticed/has an issue with the extreme offset in these clubs. Thanks guys.

Hey thanks for the post.  That is correct that they are listed in millimeters on our website...the 639 and 739 pages have it listed as "Offset (mm)" but for some reason it's not in the 699 table.  We'll get that "(mm)" added on the 699 page.  It looks like Callaway uses inches but it should be a pretty easy conversion.  Regarding the offsets themselves, it looks like some sort of typo/clerical mistake may have been made when they were added to the pages.  I'm working on getting the correct figures and will make sure it gets fixed on the site.  Not exactly sure how that happened as I know it was correct previously...

[GolfSub70 452]

57 minutes ago, Waazzupppp said:

I'm just dying to see THESE in real life... They just LOOK like a buttery-soft, penetrating-flight, monster that I can't wait to hit. Pretty sure Sub70 said these would be hitting the market late spring, early summer...

So perfect... Clean, yet techie... No excess badging... Just nailed it in the looks department. Now, will they be available in black?

Sent from my SM-N960U1 using Tapatalk
 

That is correct that they should be available by early Summer at the latest. No black finish for the irons yet, but it's definitely something we hope to offer in the future.

[Waazzupppp 108]

That is correct that they should be available by early Summer at the latest. No black finish for the irons yet, but it's definitely something we hope to offer in the future.

Can't wait! Make sure to keep us posted!!! These Instagram teases are brutal!

[emoji16][emoji16][emoji16][emoji16]

Sent from my SM-N960U1 using Tapatalk

[newballcoach 867]

27 minutes ago, GolfSub70 said:

Hey thanks for the post.  That is correct that they are listed in millimeters on our website...the 639 and 739 pages have it listed as "Offset (mm)" but for some reason it's not in the 699 table.  We'll get that "(mm)" added on the 699 page.  It looks like Callaway uses inches but it should be a pretty easy conversion.  Regarding the offsets themselves, it looks like some sort of typo/clerical mistake may have been made when they were added to the pages.  I'm working on getting the correct figures and will make sure it gets fixed on the site.  Not exactly sure how that happened as I know it was correct previously...

I kind of assumed this was a mistake, from the photos I have seen the offset does not seem that extreme. However, I do believe that you noted earlier in this thread that it is difficult to take a good photo of the offset in an iron. Thanks for looking into this. I am hoping to be able to demo the 699's this summer.

[GolfSub70 452]

14 minutes ago, newballcoach said:

I kind of assumed this was a mistake, from the photos I have seen the offset does not seem that extreme. However, I do believe that you noted earlier in this thread that it is difficult to take a good photo of the offset in an iron. Thanks for looking into this. I am hoping to be able to demo the 699's this summer.

Yeah it's really bizarre...especially since I cross checked those tables to make sure they were correct about 6 weeks ago. We'll get them squared away. Thanks again for pointing that out. I can get "above view" pictures of the 639 CBs at address if you are interested but unfortunately I don't have the 699s or 739s with me at the moment.  

[cnosil 19,651]

Thanks for the info!  Glad to hear the iron testing has started already.  I know the guys at MGS are hoping to get more of their testing and results out earlier this year.  I bet a different shaft would lower the flight and straighten out that fade with the 739s [emoji6]

I agree, pretty sure it is a shaft issue or swing weighting. Fitting is important! During testing I don’t pay attention to the shafts or setups so I can’t even tell you what shaft they have. My goal is to try and provide a consistent swing across all the clubs without any bias. It probably wasn’t that bad of a ball flight, just looks like it on a launch monitor. It was just noticeably different than the other clubs I was testing but the flight was consistent from shot to shot.

Ultimately it is my belief that it is a quality club, a good value, and holds its own against the name brand clubs.

[newballcoach 867]

1 hour ago, cnosil said:

 

I agree, pretty sure it is a shaft issue or swing weighting. Fitting is important! During testing I don’t pay attention to the shafts or setups so I can’t even tell you what shaft they have. My goal is to try and provide a consistent swing across all the clubs without any bias. It probably wasn’t that bad of a ball flight, just looks like it on a launch monitor. It was just noticeably different than the other clubs I was testing but the flight was consistent from shot to shot.

Ultimately it is my belief that it is a quality club, a good value, and holds its own against the name brand clubs.

 

I would assume the 639 and 699 irons are also in the testing? Players irons and players distance maybe? 

MGS listed the clubs they need to buy from the manufacturers that did not participate, but they don't list the clubs they got from the companies that do. It would be nice to see which set of irons/putters,etc. were sent in, since most OEM's don't send in the entire line.