Huh? My first fitting ...

[TooSteep]

Hello. I am a lifetime super casual hacker, who has spent the past 3 months obsessively working on improving my swing/game (I've had nothing but time on my hands). I had my trapping/compressing 'aha' moment with a 55* wedge about 6 weeks ago, and have slowly worked my way up to compressing my 7-iron on up. I've been practicing a lot on course during twilight rounds these past few weeks, and I am now very confident in my impact from 150 yards and in. The change in my impact from 3 months ago is dramatic (I dropped 29 strokes off my worst 120 score from early July to my best 91 score this past week). 

So I thought I should get fit for clubs, as my irons are from '91 (shafts from ~2002). I contacted my local fitting chain, and told them that I was confident from 150-in, but really struggled between driver and 7-iron. I went in today, and spent 90 minutes, mostly hitting 7-irons with different shafts.

Here are my fitting results:

 

YOUR CURRENT CLUB Non Pro-Line

Ball Speed 100 MPH

Back Spin 5206 RPM

Launch 20.00 DEGREES

Offline 3.8 YARDS

Descent 42.50 DEGREES

Distance 137.5 YARDS

RECOMMENDED CLUB Taylormade P790 Steel

Ball Speed 109 MPH +9 MPH

Back Spin 3885 RPM -1321 RPM

Launch 20.25 DEGREES +0.3 DEG

Offline 8.8 YARDS +5 YDS

Descent 43.75 DEGREES +1.3 DEG

Distance 161.0 YARDS +23.5 YDS

 

And here's my question - are these really an improvement? The new 7-iron has 5 1/2* more loft (30.5* vs 36 *) and was 1/4" longer, so it's obviously going to go longer. But the drop in spin and increase in dispersion was marked. I'm pretty excited about my newfound ability to stick greens from 150 in, so the loss of spin was setting off red flags.

And ... I played last night, using a rangefinder, and hit my 7-iron 3 times, sticking greens all 3 times from between 144 and 154, so I am a little skeptical of the launch monitor numbers saying my current distance is 137.5. I can perhaps accept that my brain had me swinging way easier into the net, but it still feels off. I'd have to hit one quite thin to go carry just 137, although thin is my common miss now.

When I asked to hit a 4 or 5 iron in the P790, it wasn't an option, as I was told that they only test with 7 irons. Quite disappointing to me, as my problems are from outside of 150.

I am aware that I need to replace my existing 4-6 irons, but I have no idea if this fitting session has actually helped me on that quest?? Thoughts?

 I did order a TaylorMade Sim Max Rescue 4 at the end of the session, as I appeared to hit it a consistent 180+, which is something I don't currently have. I didn't spend much time trying different hybrid options, but the Ventus 6 shaft and the TM 4 felt really good to me.

(Now I'm wondering about ordering a couple of modern Maltby 5-6 iron heads with the shaft they recommended (KBS Tour 110, coming from a Project X Rifle 5.5), to see how things work/feel, but I'm not sure what the Maltby equivalent of the P790 is.)

 

[cnosil]

I would suggest you read this article:  https://pluggedingolf.com/there-is-no-perfect-fit/

In my opinion,  the drop in spin is probably a little much.   The loft you see is the loft for most modern clubs.  You did get a bit more descent angle which helps with the loss of spin  Many fitters only have the fitting clubs available and not the whole set.  Launch monitors are not equivalent and may not reflect what you see on a course;  so you have to compare your clubs on that launch montitor.    Hitting the ball farther will result in wider distribution with same face angles;  you haven't hit enough shots to really determing dispersion;  PGA players have about a 30 yard wide dispersion with 7 irons.  

[azstu324]

So I believe (don't quote me) that the P790 equivalent from Maltby is going to be the TS-2 as far as tech, profile, and lofts. Initially I thought the TS-1's would be in the same ballpark as the 790's but after actually getting the TS1-s made, I took them to PGATSS for comparison and found that they're much smaller in profile and top line. The TS1's kind of seem to fall in between the 760's and 770's. 

@Popeye64 can probably lend some better expertise as he's used both Maltby TS models. 

 

[Popeye64]

So I believe (don't quote me) that the P790 equivalent from Maltby is going to be the TS-2 as far as tech, profile, and lofts. Initially I thought the TS-1's would be in the same ballpark as the 790's but after actually getting the TS1-s made, I took them to PGATSS for comparison and found that they're much smaller in profile and top line. The TS1's kind of seem to fall in between the 760's and 770's. 
[mention=75887]Popeye64[/mention] can probably lend some better expertise as he's used both Maltby TS models. 
 

The P790 and the TS-2 is a far better comparison. Lofts are actually very close as well. The TS-1 is more blade like in every way possible.

Sent from my SM-G981U using Tapatalk

[Popeye64]

I also want to add that the P790s spun far less than the comparable TS-2 with identical shafts. Thus making the P790s difficult to stop on the green.

Sent from my SM-G981U using Tapatalk

[TooSteep]

18 hours ago, Popeye64 said:

I also want to add that the P790s spun far less than the comparable TS-2 with identical shafts. Thus making the P790s difficult to stop on the green.

Sent from my SM-G981U using Tapatalk
 

That was a red flag for me - I don't see any advantage in losing spin in scoring irons.

I'm also still unsettled about the distances. Warming up at the range yesterday, with no wind on a clear day, I hit 4 consecutive 7-irons between 151 and 157 yards in the air. I had a clear view of the landing (range marker was right at 151) and used a range finder. The discrepancy between my real-world results and what they were showing me on their monitor is significant in my mind.

I feel like I am no further ahead, as I went in looking to improve my long-irons, not wanting to sacrifice spin in my short irons.

Question for you Popeye, as you seem to be a Maltby expert: at a given loft in the scoring irons (7 up), which of the TE/DBM, TS-2, PTM, KE4 Tour+, Hogan PTX Pro heads would give the most spin? Which would be most forgiving on thin shots? (All my misses are thin and/or heel).

I feel like I need to build up a few different irons and give them thorough real-world tests. I also think of the lower irons (6 down) as a completely different tool, and would have no problem playing a radically different head/design. For whatever swing flaw reason I have, there is a quantum drop in performance for me between 7 iron and 6 iron.

Sub 70, New Level, Maltby, Hogan all appeal to me. And those Excalibur rapid taper iron shafts sound really intriguing! If you have suggestions for a scoring iron/ low iron combo, please let me know.

 

[Popeye64]

That was a red flag for me - I don't see any advantage in losing spin in scoring irons.
I'm also still unsettled about the distances. Warming up at the range yesterday, with no wind on a clear day, I hit 4 consecutive 7-irons between 151 and 157 yards in the air. I had a clear view of the landing (range marker was right at 151) and used a range finder. The discrepancy between my real-world results and what they were showing me on their monitor is significant in my mind.
I feel like I am no further ahead, as I went in looking to improve my long-irons, not wanting to sacrifice spin in my short irons.
Question for you Popeye, as you seem to be a Maltby expert: at a given loft in the scoring irons (7 up), which of the TE/DBM, TS-2, PTM, KE4 Tour+, Hogan PTX Pro heads would give the most spin? Which would be most forgiving on thin shots? (All my misses are thin and/or heel).
I feel like I need to build up a few different irons and give them thorough real-world tests. I also think of the lower irons (6 down) as a completely different tool, and would have no problem playing a radically different head/design. For whatever swing flaw reason I have, there is a quantum drop in performance for me between 7 iron and 6 iron.
Sub 70, New Level, Maltby, Hogan all appeal to me. And those Excalibur rapid taper iron shafts sound really intriguing! If you have suggestions for a scoring iron/ low iron combo, please let me know.
 

Ok this might get long.
The TE/DBM for me launched too high a few years back when I bagged them and I struggled losing it right when they would balloon up to the right. Some of that was my own swing fault. But the design nature ot those irons give them possibly the lowest center or gravity of any players iron head. Which will get them up in the air very quickly. Plus they look tiny at address with the very thin top line. Can intimidate some players
The KE4 and the TS-2 can sort of be talked about in the same group. Both are a very solid choice where forgiveness is a bigger priority over shot making. Ill give the nod to the KE4 in terms of being able to work the ball. The TS-2 irons are distance monsters that really go along way yet still give you excellent spin numbers. But they tend to just wanna go straight. Wider sole and thick topline give it an UGI feel. Not a bad thing mind you but don't expect to be able to move it around as you like. I could hit a draw with the long irons as they have a pretty good offset but beside that they just go stright.
As for the PTM. These have been the biggest surprise in the Maltby lineup. Longer blade length look that can turn off some players but are so dam easy to hit. Thinner topline that appeals to better players. Forgiveness that is way up there with any other forged head. No nonsense design, very consistent. Spin wise I put them as right where they need to be. Only way to describe them. Won't spin off the green on you but still hold a firm green.
Now for the Hogans. I really wanted the combo set as I like to play a blade in my short irons and a forgiving club in the longer. As you said im fine with a radically different set of long irons. It wasn't offered in black. So I grabbed the great, head only deal Hogan offered me in the all PTx Pro. I'm obsessed with the long irons in feel and performance. Its exactly how I like an iron to feel and perform in every category. They spin on the verge of too much if you don't play for it. The stopping ability of the long irons is amazing. Once the irons get to the 8 the design changes to a sort of solid yet its three pieces, and here is what I really dislike about the PTMs. They... for me... lack feel. Even when I hit a great shot I feel indifferent about how it felt. Most times I have no idea on where it hit the ball on the face. I've really worked at the range to get better contact, and I ahve, but its still a struggle. Had I gotten the icon 8-Pw I think it would have been pure love.
When I get home i will still have some time to play but my 8-PW might be the PTM blacks with the 4-7 being the Hogans.
Hope that helps feel free to ask anything else.


Sent from my SM-G981U using Tapatalk

[azstu324]

@Popeye64 is definitely the man when it comes to comparing Maltby stuff and getting really good advice. Great input on your previous post!

 

My field sample of Maltby is not nearly as robust as Popeye64's but I have some good experience with what I have used and being a Maltby fanboy, I've followed a lot of what other guy are saying about various clubs and things they've built. I would venture to say that most of the single-piece forged CB style clubs would be great for anybody who is serious about transitioning from SGI clubs into something a little more player "looking" but still needing something to be very friendly. I would say that looks, forgiveness, and playability seem to be pretty uniform throughout the Maltby lineup and Ralph Maltby's primary thought process when designing clubs.  

I played the DBM's for about 3 seasons and really enjoyed them. Like Popeye mentioned, I found these to be high fliers and spinners. Of course the shaft I played didn't really do much to keep them out of orbit either (Nippon NS Pro 950GH). I had used them to move from a bout a 15 hdcp to a 10 and they carried me beautifully through the transition. Honestly I could easily continue to use them in the single digits. 

Moving to what I currently play and how they compare: I'm playing a whole set of TS-1's (3-PW) and love the absolute hell out of them! What I've found is that they're actually less intimidating than the DBM's at address with just a fractionally thicker but perfect width top-line, are more forgiving, feel a little better, sound phenomenal.. but get this.. look much more like player's MB's. It's really something incredible that Maltby has done with these, to bundle everything that players from mid teens to scratch look for and need in a club and having completely pulled off catering perfectly to about 3 different levels of player in a single club. IMO these are the holy grail of mix between looks, forgiveness, playability, sound, and feel. Additionally, while my yardage has increased with with the TS-1's due to stronger lofts, we're only talking about 5-10 yds which is not so absurd. What I'm getting at is that if you're considering the DBM/TE's or the TS2's, don't forget to give the TS-1's a look. (of course this is 100% my opinion and very subjective but thought it wouldn't hurt to chime with these points)

@Popeye64 do you know of anybody who has tried to combo the TS-1 and 2 but also had the lofts adjusted on the TS-2's? To me, if you could get the lofts to match up, that would really be a stellar combo. I realize the flight might be different on the 2.. but still if you could find a way to blend without any major differences, that seems like a good way to go. 

 

 

[TooSteep]

Great information. Thank you both.

My first thought after reading Popeyes comments about the TS-2 being 'distance monsters' had me wondering if they could be bent 20,24,28,32? So 1* stronger in the 4, 2* weaker in the 7, and 1* weaker in the 6. I could see these being paired with a high-launch softer shaft. Does anyone have experience bending these?

Then the PTMs in their standard 36, 40, 44, 48 lofts (8-G) would match well, and I could pair them with low-launch stiffer shafts.

Or the TS-1 in 36, 40.5, 45, 49.5 and end up needing 1 fewer wedge.

Have people experimented with combo irons where you change the shaft as well as the heads? I guess its what something like the KBS Tour FLT is trying to do. What would the equivalent be in actual different shafts?

[Popeye64]

Great information. Thank you both.
My first thought after reading Popeyes comments about the TS-2 being 'distance monsters' had me wondering if they could be bent 20,24,28,32? So 1* stronger in the 4, 2* weaker in the 7, and 1* weaker in the 6. I could see these being paired with a high-launch softer shaft. Does anyone have experience bending these?
Then the PTMs in their standard 36, 40, 44, 48 lofts (8-G) would match well, and I could pair them with low-launch stiffer shafts.
Or the TS-1 in 36, 40.5, 45, 49.5 and end up needing 1 fewer wedge.
Have people experimented with combo irons where you change the shaft as well as the heads? I guess its what something like the KBS Tour FLT is trying to do. What would the equivalent be in actual different shafts?

This is exactly what the Rapid Taper shafts have been doing. High launching long irons with the 75g and then the heavier 95g that keep them lowered and more control.
I really like the 4° gaps with the PTMs. Wish more clubs would stay with that gapping.
The TS-2s bend pretty easily. No issues what so ever. Only Maltnys that are tough to bend are the DBM finished clubs.

Sent from my SM-G981U using Tapatalk

[ejgaudette]

There are a number of factors that could explain the launch monitor numbers and your real world experience including hitting off a mat, being indoors, another big thing to consider is the ball your playing. If you were fit on a different ball this can really matter. A ball change could give you another 500 rpm which could make the TMs more playable. Also 5.5 degrees less of loft will decrease spin. It looks like comparing spin of your current 6 would make more sense. Of course you need to go with what is most comfortable. Good luck on your search.

[dlow206]

Did the P790 test club have plastic or tape on it to protect it? That can really mess with spin on the launch monitors.

[TooSteep]

No tape or plastic on the P790. It is a high-volume fitting place, they have a huge selection of 7-iron heads.

I'm still trying to sort my head around the idea of 2 sets of irons: 24, 28, 32 for easy distance, and 40, 44, 48, 52 for scoring (not sure about 36). Question - if my fitted steel iron shafts are +1/4" and 2* upright, what would I do about graphite iron shafts, which run 1/2" longer. Would those clubs still be 2* upright, and 1/4" longer?

I ask because I am curious about the idea of a graphite shaft in the long irons, and steel in the scoring irons.

Edited October 8, 2020 by TooSteep

[cnosil]

No tape or plastic on the P790. It is a high-volume fitting place, they have a huge selection of 7-iron heads.
I'm still trying to sort my head around the idea of 2 sets of irons: 24, 28, 32 for easy distance, and 40, 44, 48, 52 for scoring (not sure about 36). Question - if my fitted steel iron shafts are +1/4" and 2* upright, what would I do about graphite iron shafts, which run 1/2" longer. Would those clubs still be 2* upright, and 1/4" longer?
I ask because I am curious about the idea of a graphite shaft in the long irons, and steel in the scoring irons.

There is no rule on how long a graphite shaft should be. Many are now designed to be the same length as steel to provide the same swingweight.

Generally adding length increases lie angle so you would need to go flatter.