Jump to content
Firebird

Stronger Lofts - is this a Good or Bad Thing

Recommended Posts

Our Sponsors

1 hour ago, Dr Strangelove said:

I don't follow the argument that OEM's have to strengthen the lofts to adjust for spring faces.  Why would they not keep the length the same then?  They haven't.  The length has also been extended.  It really is putting a 7 iron label on a 6 or 5 iron.

I like your bag setup.  👍 

i had a hard time choosing between what I bought, and what you chose for driver, irons and wedges. They were all my runners up, lol. We have the same 3 wood and putter.

You have excellent taste in clubs... lol.

  • Like 1

:ping-small: G400 Max 9*

:callaway-small: Rogue 15*  

:callaway-small: Rogue X 3 & 4 hybrids 

:callaway-small: Rogue X 5-AW 

:cleveland-small: CBX 52* & 58*

:odyssey-small: Stroke Lab Double Wide 34"

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Retrogolfer36 said:

That's the guideline. You cant regroove them though, unless you are going to refill the face. Those groove sharpener tools dont do anything but dig the grooves deeper, which will do nothing to restore the sharpness of the grooves.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk
 

Rick Shiels did video on them he said it worked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Manufacturers do it because it sells clubs.  Are they selling to knowledgeable customers or people who don't know better?  Probably a mix of both.  There's definitely a level of deception at play in my opinion.  Consumers need to be knowledgeable when they buy something, trusting salesman is rarely a wise move whether it concerns golf clubs, cars, or anything else IMO.

Dave

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, viking said:

Rick Shiels did video on them he said it worked.

My issue with the groove sharpeners is fear if them starting to cut my balls. 
 

also, cgs arent lower in todays club, that is a total myth. Some of the the irons in the early 2000s still have some of the lowest cgs today.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Moose4282 said:

My issue with the groove sharpeners is fear if them starting to cut my balls. 
 

also, cgs arent lower in todays club, that is a total myth. Some of the the irons in the early 2000s still have some of the lowest cgs today.

Yes Rick noticed the same thing but he admitted he went overboard in his video.

On your second point I noticed that posting as well. But you can visibly see the different weights now internally and externally and they did not have that before, so why advertise these different metals and fillings make up if it does not change the center of gravity and ability to improve launch of the ball?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I read it here somewhere where the Spaulding Executive clubs still have more or better weight placement cg than today's clubs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I now carry 4 wedges, 44, 48, 50, and 54. I was using my new 44 degree pitching wedge to chip but started carrying my really old Cleveland 588 Rusty Steel Shaft. Grooves are obviously not what they were when new but still it is amazing the spin I can get even on short chips.


Callaway Epic Flash 9 Degree

Callaway Big Bertha Fusion 3 wood 15 Degree

Callaway Epic Hybrid 18 Degree

Callaway Steelhead Pro 4-AW Irons

Cleveland 48 and 54 Degree Wedges Steel Shaft

Recoil Graphite Shafts in all Callaway Clubs

Callaway Big Bertha Putter - for when it is wet

La Jolla Putter with Flat Car Grip.

Preferred ball - Currently Costco Kirkland Performance 3 Piece but Seed 001 is preferred.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, viking said:

Yes Rick noticed the same thing but he admitted he went overboard in his video.

On your second point I noticed that posting as well. But you can visibly see the different weights now internally and externally and they did not have that before, so why advertise these different metals and fillings make up if it does not change the center of gravity and ability to improve launch of the ball?

Because its marketing... they need a story to tell so people buy them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What other evidence do you have that the weight placement and club head centre of gravity has not changed in many years? You list one club but are there others?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, dthrog00 said:

Manufacturers do it because it sells clubs.  Are they selling to knowledgeable customers or people who don't know better?  Probably a mix of both.  There's definitely a level of deception at play in my opinion.  Consumers need to be knowledgeable when they buy something, trusting salesman is rarely a wise move whether it concerns golf clubs, cars, or anything else IMO.

Dave

What’s deceptive? 

The knowledgeable consumer on any product is going to do some research, make an informed decision, some will do more than others but some form of research will be done. 
 

The ones who don’t know better are probably also the ones who don’t care about lofts, materials used, don’t care about cg location. They want a club that goes farther than the one they have. They don’t care how it does it or why. 
 

none of this is unique to golf. 

  • Like 1

Driver: Titleist 917D3 9.5 with Graphite Design MAD Pro 65g S

Wood: Titleist 917F2 with UST Mamiya Helium 5F4

Hybrid: Titleist 816H1 21 with Atmos Blue 85 S

Irons: Titleist 718 AP3 4i, 718 CB 5-6, MB 7-9 with KBS $ Taper 125

Wedges: Vokey SM7 46/50/54/60 with DG s200

Putter: Scotty Caemeron Super Rat1

Ball: Titleist Prov1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

What’s deceptive? 

The knowledgeable consumer on any product is going to do some research, make an informed decision, some will do more than others but some form of research will be done. 
 

The ones who don’t know better are probably also the ones who don’t care about lofts, materials used, don’t care about cg location. They want a club that goes farther than the one they have. They don’t care how it does it or why. 
 

none of this is unique to golf. 

Which is fine except thats not really whats happening. A clubfitter is supposed to put you in whats best for your game. They are professionals. Most consumers get sucked into the distance numbers and its up to the clubfitters to explain to them WHY its happening and WHY it may not be best for them. Some clubfitters do, and some will not, which is a shame. 
 

You say its on the consumers to be educated.. ok yea maybe but its still ethically not right. When we go to the doc we expect him to give us medicines to actually feel better and have no motive to make extra money and possibly make us feel worse by pushing the wrong meds. Is thats the consumers fault for not being educated there?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, viking said:

What other evidence do you have that the weight placement and club head centre of gravity has not changed in many years? You list one club but are there others?


Moose provided you with a link, but I'll take it a step farther and paste some MPF data.  This is why some of us keep saying it's all marketing BS.

Here we have the Titleist T400
image.png.4916f47160d2c93f33e1776c02b71708.png

And following that, the GI iron from Titleist when I started playing golf, the DCI 981
image.png.2e317963e048bf7c2686509b7206fda0.png

Or, a whole pile of Callaway irons from late 90s and early 2000s, most of which had 26* 5 irons and 46* PW, I believe, said without checking their std specs.
image.png.a4391078dfb70ae40fb9bba411abf7ea.png

 

And finally, a look at a couple Pings.  The G710 compared to the Godfather of cavity backs, the Eye2:
image.png.bdd4c2fdcd7bd9deea2059e2fcd67e97.png

 

 

 

image.png

Edited by NRJyzr
edited because the Eye2 replicated itself!! Hack!

Cobra King LTD @ 10.5*, ProtoPype 80 X, 43.5"
2h:  TaylorMade Stage 2 Tour, Aldila NV105 S
3-PW:  Mizuno MP37, DGS300
GW: Mizuno Pro 52*, DGS300
SW:  Ram TG-898 56* -or- Wilson Staff PMP 58*
Putter:  Snake Eyes Viper Tour Sv1, Cleveland Designed By, or Mizuno TPM-2, all at 34", or Cleveland Huntington Beach 1, 35"
Ball:  Wilson Staff Duo Pro or FG Tour, or Kirkland Signature 3 pc

Sometimes play 2-PW Golden Ram TW282 or 2-PW 1980 Golden Rams

Occasionally swap in Orlimar or Ram persimmons at the top end of bag

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, NRJyzr said:


Moose provided you with a link, but I'll take it a step farther and paste some MPF data.  This is why some of us keep saying it's all marketing BS.

Here we have the Titleist T400
image.png.4916f47160d2c93f33e1776c02b71708.png

And following that, the GI iron from Titleist when I started playing golf, the DCI 981
image.png.2e317963e048bf7c2686509b7206fda0.png

Or, a whole pile of Callaway irons from late 90s and early 2000s, most of which had 26* 5 irons and 46* PW, I believe, said without checking their std specs.
image.png.a4391078dfb70ae40fb9bba411abf7ea.png

 

And finally, a look at a couple Pings.  The G710 compared to the Godfather of cavity backs, the Eye2:
image.png.bdd4c2fdcd7bd9deea2059e2fcd67e97.png

 

 

 

image.png

Perfect, thank you! Should be noted if you are trying to interpret that, where it says VCOG- vertical center of gravity, the measurment is from the bottom of the club or sole. So the lower the number the lower the cg.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you you are very knowledgeable. It will take a bit to review and understand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Moose4282 said:

Perfect, thank you! Should be noted if you are trying to interpret that, where it says VCOG- vertical center of gravity, the measurment is from the bottom of the club or sole. So the lower the number the lower the cg.

Thank you you are very knowledgeable. It will take a bit to review and understand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, NRJyzr said:


Moose provided you with a link, but I'll take it a step farther and paste some MPF data.  This is why some of us keep saying it's all marketing BS.

Here we have the Titleist T400
image.png.4916f47160d2c93f33e1776c02b71708.png

And following that, the GI iron from Titleist when I started playing golf, the DCI 981
image.png.2e317963e048bf7c2686509b7206fda0.png

Or, a whole pile of Callaway irons from late 90s and early 2000s, most of which had 26* 5 irons and 46* PW, I believe, said without checking their std specs.
image.png.a4391078dfb70ae40fb9bba411abf7ea.png

 

And finally, a look at a couple Pings.  The G710 compared to the Godfather of cavity backs, the Eye2:
image.png.bdd4c2fdcd7bd9deea2059e2fcd67e97.png

 

 

 

image.png

Thank you you are very knowledgeable. It will take a bit to review and understand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"It's all marketing" completely ignores the vast amounts of R&D that companies put into their designs and tech. 

This is MGS. There might be an article or two (or 57) related to club tech and design on the site that would be far more informative and helpful than posting "it's marketing BS".

Don't like the number stamped on the bottom of new clubs? eBay is littered with old sets up for sale from people who realized new clubs were helping them play better. Go buy some of those and enjoy.  

  • Like 4

In my  :wilson_staff_small:  carry bag:
:wilson_staff_small:  D7 R flex 
:callaway-small:  GBB 3W (lofted to 4W)
:callaway-small: V-Series Heavenwood
:cobra-small: Baffler XL 5i-PW
:cleveland-small: CBX 54*
:cleveland-small:  Smart Sole S
:cleveland-small: #10

Twitter: @russtopherb

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, russtopherb said:

"It's all marketing" completely ignores the vast amounts of R&D that companies put into their designs and tech. 

This is MGS. There might be an article or two (or 57) related to club tech and design on the site that would be far more informative and helpful than posting "it's marketing BS".

Don't like the number stamped on the bottom of new clubs? eBay is littered with old sets up for sale from people who realized new clubs were helping them play better. Go buy some of those and enjoy.  

Please tell me what has all this extensive R&D developed besides new paint schemes?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Moose4282 said:

Please tell me what has all this extensive R&D developed besides new paint schemes?

Sorry, not my job to educate you. I know that sounds like a harsh reply, however there is a wealth of information on this website from the staff and contributors who speak directly with OEMs about why newer materials, different weighting, center of gravity, etc. all dictate what the lofts on the specific clubs are. MGS is far more than a forum that "gives away free stuff". Take a few minutes and go back through the articles discussing newer iron releases and I'm sure you'll find plenty of info there.

Or, you can continue to say things like "it's marketing BS and new paint". Your choice.

  • Like 3

In my  :wilson_staff_small:  carry bag:
:wilson_staff_small:  D7 R flex 
:callaway-small:  GBB 3W (lofted to 4W)
:callaway-small: V-Series Heavenwood
:cobra-small: Baffler XL 5i-PW
:cleveland-small: CBX 54*
:cleveland-small:  Smart Sole S
:cleveland-small: #10

Twitter: @russtopherb

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...