Why are Lofts getting JACKED

[fixyurdivot]

3 minutes ago, Golfspy_CG2 said:

Just like Cast v Forged

Blades vs GI

walk vs ride

Topics like these will keep golf forums alive  

Don't forget human vs. robot .

[Golfspy_CG2]

1 minute ago, fixyurdivot said:

Don't forget human vs. robot .

Yep,

Or 

IOS vs Android

[pozzit]

48 minutes ago, Golfspy_CG2 said:

I kind of hate to keep rehashing this point, but I asked the people--Fitter and R&D--at Titleist this week about the stronger lofts of today versus 5-10-15 years ago.    He said it's just a matter of evolution of materials and designs, clubs 10 years ago were built with better technology than 30 years ago and lofts were adjusted at that time, it's just more of a "hot topic" these days.

He said he can't speak for their competitors as to their marketing, he can only speak to Titleist design and the lofts are adjusted to keep within certain launch and spin characteristics to maintain optimal decent angles.   That is a portion of the of the fitting process that has gone overlooked by many and it's as important probably more important than the spin of an iron when it comes to stopping an iron on the green. 

 

Glad you asked the Titleist fitters I'm sure they get asked that all the time or at least hear peoples whispers about it. Glad to get actual OEM feedback. I like the fact that they mentioned OPTIMAL decent angle because I would assume more loft would create steeper decent which my not be optimal. 

Launch and decent angle is very important factors in iron fitting. I am not a fitter or expert in the matter by any mean but I feel that the launch angle and spin in flight determine the decent angle. More backspin would cause more drag and loss of forward momentum causing steeper decent angle. 

[Golfspy_CG2]

2 minutes ago, pozzit said:

Glad you asked the Titleist fitters I'm sure they get asked that all the time or at least hear peoples whispers about it. Glad to get actual OEM feedback. I like the fact that they mentioned OPTIMAL decent angle because I would assume more loft would create steeper decent which my not be optimal. 

Launch and decent angle is very important factors in iron fitting. I am not a fitter or expert in the matter by any mean but I feel that the launch angle and spin in flight determine the decent angle. More backspin would cause more drag and loss of forward momentum causing steeper decent angle. 

Yes, a lot of that is true.  They also mentioned the increased speed from the newer faces and lower lofts are able to maintan the same launch windows as higher lofts.    So it's all basically a puzzle and balancing act that they--the engineers spend countless hours working on---It's not just crank this down 2 degrees and lets sell it ...(not saying you were sayng that, just an observation that there is a lot more to designing clubs than just lowering the loft for more distance. 

[RickyBobby_PR]

2 hours ago, fixyurdivot said:

Curious who among the forum are using a mixed bag of "standard" and "power" lofts, in which clubs, why, and how they are performing?  I'm currently wanting something between my 4i and my G400 3w.  I'm thinking the G410 2 or 3 crossover or possibly a G400 5w... but wonder how a G410 4i power loft might work. 

I doubt anyone is using that. Most using power specs are looking for the help all the way thru the bag and those not playing power specs would use a hybrid or crossover in the longer clubs. 
 

it would probably depend on loft and what the gapping is or maybe require 2 different 4is(I haven’t looked at specs) 

[fixyurdivot]

40 minutes ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

I doubt anyone is using that. Most using power specs are looking for the help all the way thru the bag and those not playing power specs would use a hybrid or crossover in the longer clubs. 
 

it would probably depend on loft and what the gapping is or maybe require 2 different 4is(I haven’t looked at specs) 

I was thinking along the lines of what @Kenny Bbrought up; that for the slower swing speed players, distances in the low iron often start to merge.  The idea here would be to spread that a bit.

[Golfspy_CG2]

2 hours ago, fixyurdivot said:

I was thinking along the lines of what @Kenny Bbrought up; that for the slower swing speed players, distances in the low iron often start to merge.  The idea here would be to spread that a bit.

My thought on that. if you are struggling with swing speed.  Your best option on the top end of the bag is go with Hybrids vs stronger lofted irons.   

I know it's the case for me.  I stop at the 6 iron.  There would be no benefit to me to hit a 23 or even 22 degree 5 iron.  

I'm better off with a 24 degree hybrid in that spot.  

[fixyurdivot]

1 hour ago, Golfspy_CG2 said:

My thought on that. if you are struggling with swing speed.  Your best option on the top end of the bag is go with Hybrids vs stronger lofted irons.   

I know it's the case for me.  I stop at the 6 iron.  There would be no benefit to me to hit a 23 or even 22 degree 5 iron.  

I'm better off with a 24 degree hybrid in that spot.  

Thanks for the advice.  Finding this missing link is my winter mission while in AZ.

[RickyBobby_PR]

 

4 hours ago, fixyurdivot said:

I was thinking along the lines of what @Kenny Bbrought up; that for the slower swing speed players, distances in the low iron often start to merge.  The idea here would be to spread that a bit.

 

1 hour ago, Golfspy_CG2 said:

My thought on that. if you are struggling with swing speed.  Your best option on the top end of the bag is go with Hybrids vs stronger lofted irons.   

I know it's the case for me.  I stop at the 6 iron.  There would be no benefit to me to hit a 23 or even 22 degree 5 iron.  

I'm better off with a 24 degree hybrid in that spot.  

I’m with rob. Regardless of the lofts the slower the swing speed the harder to get the iron in the air. Hybrids and woods offer more launch and the ability to get the ball flying.

amateurs tend to hit 5w better than 3w because of the loft giving better flight characteristics.

[Golfspy_CG2]

2 hours ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

 

 

I’m with rob. Regardless of the lofts the slower the swing speed the harder to get the iron in the air. Hybrids and woods offer more launch and the ability to get the ball flying.

amateurs tend to hit 5w better than 3w because of the loft giving better flight characteristics.

And sometimes a shorter shaft IS a good thing.

[RickyBobby_PR]

3 minutes ago, Golfspy_CG2 said:

And sometimes a shorter shaft IS a good thing.

So many ways to go with that

[HardcoreLooper]

On 10/21/2019 at 9:20 AM, fixyurdivot said:

 

Perhaps the next big breakthrough will be "transformer" clubs... a single club that can do it all. 

Steve Divnick has taken care of this for you...

https://www.divnickgolf.com/adjustable/

[Kenny B]

5 hours ago, Golfspy_CG2 said:

My thought on that. if you are struggling with swing speed.  Your best option on the top end of the bag is go with Hybrids vs stronger lofted irons.   

I know it's the case for me.  I stop at the 6 iron.  There would be no benefit to me to hit a 23 or even 22 degree 5 iron.  

I'm better off with a 24 degree hybrid in that spot.  

I've thought about getting the 5i in my set of Bridgestones.  However, I also stop at the 6i; it's 24º.  Even with my slow swing speed, I get it reasonably up in the air; the nice feature of SGI clubs.  My first hybrid is 4H at 22º... little higher ball flight than the 6i though, but it doesn't go much higher than my 17º 2H.

[FrogginBullfish]

I did something of this sort for my capstone design project in my last year of mechanical engineering, though it was basically just using moveable weights to alter launch characteristics in an iron. Never got to manufacture it though.

Steve Divnick has taken care of this for you...
https://www.divnickgolf.com/adjustable/

Sent from my Pixel 2 using MyGolfSpy mobile app

[Hook DeLoft]

Last year I was playing with a couple of guys, one a good ball striker playing Titleist AP2's and another with a lower swing speed playing SGI irons with strong lofts.  On a par 3, they both hit 8 iron and the guy with the SGI irons made a big deal about hitting the same club as the guy playing the AP2's.  I said, "you know the loft on his 8 iron is nearly 2 clubs weaker than the loft on your 8 iron."  The shorter guy said "I don't care, we hit the same club."  LOL!  I do believe stronger lofts are mostly about marketing.  It used to be that the lowest lofted iron I could hit well was about 25 degrees.  Now it's about 27 degrees and I expect in the next couple of years that will become around 29 degrees.  It won't matter if the club is labeled as an 8 iron or a 5 iron, that's the limit of my old fart ability.  It really doesn't matter what's stamped on the bottom of the club as long as my gaps are good.

[fozcycle]

The dissenters will  say that with the stronger lofts you often end up with a 43* PW as a result and the next club up is likely a GW at 50 or 52.  So they say the 7 to 8 degree difference will leave them a distance gap between those two clubs instead of the 4 to 5 degrees that everyone seems  to think is gospel.
The problem with that thinking...IMO only, is we have established we are talking about the average weekend casual golfer who doesn't really get into fitting and all  the specs   That player will  not notice or care about a 2 degree gap difference between his older clubs and his newer ones.    It's all a bunch of commotion about something that will at most affect 1% to 2% of the players, and those players are already educated enough to know they can do things to offset that difference if it's noticeable to them. 

Hey Rob, you are talking about me....LOL

My new Wilson D7’s have a 43* PW and my Cobra King Wedges ares 50*/54*/58*. I have been able to adjust for the gap by lightening up on my PW swing or choking up 1/2 inch or so. My PW is now 105-110, GW is 85-95. If I am in between I usually go with the shorter iron and just have a longer putt. So far it’s been working out pretty good. I have considered ordering the D7 GW but it’s not urgent.


Sent from my iPad using MyGolfSpy
Cobra King F8(10.5*) w/ Mitdubishi Tense ck Blue Regular; 3W & 5W Cobra King F8 w/ Mitsubishi Tense ck Blue Regular shafts; Tour Edge CBX119 22* Hybrid w/Project X Evenflo Regular shaft; Wilson Staff D-7 5-PW w/UST Mamiya Recoil 460 Regular graphite shafts; Cobra King F8 Gw(50*)SW(54*)LW(58*)all w/UST Mamiya Recoil 460 ES regular shafts.Putter: Tommy Armour Impact No. 3; Bag: Cobra Ultralight Cart bag, Peaccoat Blue.

[perseveringgolfer]

if they didnt make them stronger but did make the ball go higher we would all be losing a lot of distance- it makes sense based on the science. Just takes a bit of getting used to when you would normally play a 6 iron to your fav par 3 and now its a 7 or 8.

[RickyBobby_PR]

12 minutes ago, perseveringgolfer said:

if they didnt make them stronger but did make the ball go higher we would all be losing a lot of distance- it makes sense based on the science. Just takes a bit of getting used to when you would normally play a 6 iron to your fav par 3 and now its a 7 or 8.

Everyone ignores the size of the heads compared to decades ago and everything else in the design and are focused on some number in the bottom. Nobody is talking about club lengths being longer to go with the lofts, etc.

 

[RetiredBoomer]

3 hours ago, perseveringgolfer said:

if they didnt make them stronger but did make the ball go higher we would all be losing a lot of distance- it makes sense based on the science. Just takes a bit of getting used to when you would normally play a 6 iron to your fav par 3 and now its a 7 or 8.

This simply  isn't true from my experience. There was never a more sole weighted club than the late seventies Spalding Executive.  It was extremely sole weighted to have synergy with the rock hard Top Flite which was a line drive missile with regular blades. 

The lofts were almost still 1950s lofts but just a little bit jacked:

20º 2-iron

23º 3-iron

26º 4-iron

30º 5-iron

34º 6-iron

38º 7-iron

42º 8-iron

46º 9-iron

50º pitching wedge

and a big gap to the 58º sand wedge.

They were as low CG as any club made today, and there was no loss of distance whatsoever. They were howitzers.

Players under social security age simply don't have the perspective to see what's happened with loft jacking because they began playing in the middle of it.

Its here. There's nothing we can do about it.

But don't believe the phony tech reasons, because it's all marketing, not tech.  The tech is there for sure, but the sole stampings are cosmetic and marketing inspired.  Clubs still play according to their lofts, not their sole numbers.

[chisag]

On 11/4/2019 at 9:56 AM, Golfspy_CG2 said:

Yes, a lot of that is true.  They also mentioned the increased speed from the newer faces and lower lofts are able to maintan the same launch windows as higher lofts.    So it's all basically a puzzle and balancing act that they--the engineers spend countless hours working on---It's not just crank this down 2 degrees and lets sell it ...(not saying you were sayng that, just an observation that there is a lot more to designing clubs than just lowering the loft for more distance. 

 

... Other than over 20 years ago when I went from one set of MB's to another set of MB's with the same specs, I have always had to adjust to new irons. Different spin, trajectory and distance. I will never understand the push back against technology improvements and that includes stronger lofts. It is what it is and you either adjust or just don't buy new clubs. 

... One small irony is I played "traditional" lofts for most of my early golf career. 48* pw, 44* 9i, 40* 8i, etc. I am about to start play some new Titleist T100-S (thanks o MGS ) and their lofts are exactly the same as my old traditional lofts, just one club difference on the sole. 48* w, 44* pw, 40* 9i, etc. And this will take an adjustment from what I am playing now, as do all new clubs. I am beginning to believe this topic is a classic example of a glass of water being half full or half empty and in the case of a few curmudgeons Who Took My Damn Water? 

[RetiredBoomer]

2 minutes ago, chisag said:

 

 I will never understand the push back against technology improvements and that includes stronger lofts. 

There is no pushback against the technology.

None at all that I can see.

The pushback is against the  cosmetic stamping.

They could have today's high tech models exactly as they are, but with the numbers stamped correctly.

They choose not to, and you're right,

we either go along with it or we play obsolete gear or we don't play at all.

That doesn't mean we have to buy the phony explanations from the OEMs, though.

I know from personal experience, not mere opinion, that it's all BS.

If you took up the game right in the middle of all this jacking, you probably have no reason to care--I understand that.

The actual fact remains, however, that it's vanity lofts, pure and simple, not science.

The science is there for sure, but independent of it.

 

[chisag]

6 minutes ago, RetiredBoomer said:

There is no pushback against the technology.

None at all that I can see.

The pushback is against the cosmetic stamping.

They could have today's high tech models exactly as they are, but with the numbers stamped correctly.

 

 

... Clearly someone took your water. Your argument, if I can even call it that, is you are fine with the clubs technology and how they perform but you won't buy or play new clubs because of the number or letter stamped on the sole? I am sure you don't see just how silly that is, but others here certainly do. 

[RetiredBoomer]

6 minutes ago, chisag said:

 

... Clearly someone took your water. Your argument, if I can even call it that, is you are fine with the clubs technology and how they perform but you won't buy or play new clubs because of the number or letter stamped on the sole? I am sure you don't see just how silly that is, but others here certainly do. 

Chi, I do buy the clubs.

I have new clubs that haven't seen green grass yet because of the pandemic.

The totally incorrect numbers are stamped on the soles, and I know and understand that I have to live it.

It didn't stop me from buying the clubs,

and there wasn't a single word in my post that would suggest that it would. Maybe you could read it again.

What I did say was that the OEM excuses for it are totally BS, and I only said it because I know for a fact that it's true.

 

You're an actor, Chi.   That's great, and art is important.

My job required understanding what specific language meant,  recognizing BS when I saw it, and I was really, really good at it.

 

 

 

[chisag]

... LOL there are no incorrect numbers, there are just numbers. Yes, acting is my main profession but I was also a PGA member, taught for 5 years and written reviews of golf clubs as well as going to the PGA Show every year injury did not prevent me from doing so. I have interviewed CEO's, Marketing and Engineering VPs and I understand it is a combination of distance sells as well as technology has a cause and effect. But in the end it is really very simple, either accept where the equipment game is and enjoy your half filled glass off water and complain on a golf forum about how OEM's took half your glass and now call it a decanter. Potato, Pahtato. Clearly we see this completely differently so I will leave you to enjoy your new incorrectly numbered irons when Covid finally lets us play again. Hit em well! 

[RetiredBoomer]

3 minutes ago, chisag said:

... LOL there are no incorrect numbers, there are just numbers. Yes, acting is my main profession but I was also a PGA member, taught for 5 years and written reviews of golf clubs as well as going to the PGA Show every year injury did not prevent me from doing so. I have interviewed CEO's, Marketing and Engineering VPs and I understand it is a combination of distance sells as well as technology has a cause and effect. But in the end it is really very simple, either accept where the equipment game is and enjoy your half filled glass off water or whine and complain on a golf forum about how OEM's took half your glass and now call it a decanter. Potato, Pahtato.

pozzit created a post about "jacked lofts," and I offered my opinions on the subject that "pozzit" introduced.

You disagree with my opinions and I disagree with yours.

I made my observations with no mention of you, however.

You wanted to make a personal thing out of it, and you also attribute whining to me where no whining took place.

Perhaps you might subject yourself to more specificity in your remarks rather than saying Potato, Pahtato after insulting me without cause.

 

 

[chisag]

... Point taken, I did not mean it personally, just addressing the issue. I apologize and removed a few words. 

[GaDawg]

5 hours ago, chisag said:

 

... Other than over 20 years ago when I went from one set of MB's to another set of MB's with the same specs, I have always had to adjust to new irons. Different spin, trajectory and distance. I will never understand the push back against technology improvements and that includes stronger lofts. It is what it is and you either adjust or just don't buy new clubs. 

... One small irony is I played "traditional" lofts for most of my early golf career. 48* pw, 44* 9i, 40* 8i, etc. I am about to start play some new Titleist T100-S (thanks o MGS ) and their lofts are exactly the same as my old traditional lofts, just one club difference on the sole. 48* w, 44* pw, 40* 9i, etc. And this will take an adjustment from what I am playing now, as do all new clubs. I am beginning to believe this topic is a classic example of a glass of water being half full or half empty and in the case of a few curmudgeons Who Took My Damn Water? 

Very well said!

[viking]

On 10/17/2019 at 5:49 PM, cnosil said:

Why is there no length standards, flex standards, headweight standards, shoe size standard, etc.  You can say they lofts are jacked and no one can really provide a good reason why.  Like you said, clubs launch higher and travel farther.  Marketing is all about distance;  most players won't buy clubs that go 10 yards less than their current clubs.    Ultimately the number on the bottom of the club is and has always been meaningless;  find the clubs that allow you to hit the ball a specific distance.  If that is labelled 7, 33*, A, 150 yrd, or something else,  does it really matter?

 

 

Actually the number always meant somethiing eg. my set from 1985 that I still play each club is exactly 10 yards more always was always will be. Now they make these crazy 7 irons that go like a driver almost.

I understand by moving weight back and bottom you get more height so they cut back loft to compensate for that, but there has to be a end someting?

Real issue is the gapping between clubs seems to be inconsistent and too large eg 15+ years an often 20-30 yards for same type of clubs eg. irons.

[viking]

On 4/13/2020 at 11:18 AM, RetiredBoomer said:

This simply  isn't true from my experience. There was never a more sole weighted club than the late seventies Spalding Executive.  It was extremely sole weighted to have synergy with the rock hard Top Flite which was a line drive missile with regular blades. 

The lofts were almost still 1950s lofts but just a little bit jacked:

20º 2-iron

23º 3-iron

26º 4-iron

30º 5-iron

34º 6-iron

38º 7-iron

42º 8-iron

46º 9-iron

50º pitching wedge

and a big gap to the 58º sand wedge.

They were as low CG as any club made today, and there was no loss of distance whatsoever. They were howitzers.

Players under social security age simply don't have the perspective to see what's happened with loft jacking because they began playing in the middle of it.

Its here. There's nothing we can do about it.

But don't believe the phony tech reasons, because it's all marketing, not tech.  The tech is there for sure, but the sole stampings are cosmetic and marketing inspired.  Clubs still play according to their lofts, not their sole numbers.

The Spaulding Executive and TopFlite balls were are legendary. Good point.

[viking]

On 10/19/2019 at 6:47 PM, BaldnBroke said:

We have all watched this happen... I have a set from the 1960s with the loft stamped on each club, the highest numbered iron is an 8-iron and it's 50 degrees and 34" long!!

I think it makes more sense for your Pitching Wedge to be used for pitching.

I like names of clubs rather than numbers, like niblick and mashie.

Always thought that a modern set could be named better... For example, with lofts in brackets:

Driver (9)
Fairway (15)
Hybrid (20)
Long iron (24)... Meets the 38/24 rule
Strong iron (28)
Mid iron (32)
Approach iron (36)
Short iron (40)
Strong Wedge (44)
Pitching Wedge (48)
Gap Wedge (52)
Sand Wedge (56)
Lob Wedge (60)

Still has 5 wedges... But giving the other clubs names seems to soften it somehow to me?



Sent from my SM-G900I using Tapatalk
 

Smart idea Bald.