Why not 'Most Wanted Blended Iron Sets'?

[TooSteep]

... or some such thing. Looking through the data on all of the MGS 'Most Wanted' iron tests, it seems blindingly obvious that what we want out of scoring irons 8,9,P,A is different than what we want out of mid irons and long irons. I feel that if manufacturers would get their lofts and lengths somewhat in sync, than they could offer sets of 4 scoring irons in 38*, 42*, 46*, 50* lofts that would target distance consistency, dispersion, spin and drop-and-stop flight characteristics. A wide range of golfers could benefit from this. 

Mid irons would target different characteristics - perhaps a blend of forgiveness, spin control and distance consistency at 30* and 34*.  Long irons would be all about distance and forgiveness below 30* loft.

You see SGI long/mid irons on tour, and almost everybody carries some sort of hybrid/driving iron. So players are already doing it - and are often jettisoning irons purchased as part of larger sets.

By looking into blended sets, perhaps MGS can drive manufacturers to bundle their irons in ways that more players would benefit from.

Looking at this years reviews for example, Ping i210 short irons, Titleist T300 mid irons and XXIO X long irons might make a great blended set. 

[jddaigneault]

I think the challenge would be looking across different manufacturers. However, PING looks like they could have a winning blended set in house!

[fixyurdivot]

9 hours ago, jddaigneault said:

I think the challenge would be looking across different manufacturers. However, PING looks like they could have a winning blended set in house!

Agree - for sure if talking mixed OEM sets.  But it seems like a good many mfg's. are offering mixed iron sets now (PCB + PD, PD + GI, etc.). Which PING mixed iron set are you referring to?

[jddaigneault]

3 hours ago, fixyurdivot said:

Agree - for sure if talking mixed OEM sets.  But it seems like a good many mfg's. are offering mixed iron sets now (PCB + PD, PD + GI, etc.). Which PING mixed iron set are you referring to?

i500 in the long irons, i210 in the short/mid. Weakness according to the data would be mid irons, so it’d all be about what classifies as mid. Maybe 7-PW i210, 3-6 i500?

[fixyurdivot]

That is certainly a nice pairing.  I was thinking more along the lines of the Hogan PTX Pro Combo

https://benhogangolf.com/pages/players-combo-set-with-ptx-pro-4-iron

[ChitownM2]

Part of the problem is that nobody would buy them except for the very knowledgeable who probably already do consider hybrid sets. Due to tradition or whatever, most people want to look down and see the same club at address.

I also think it would be very hard to get good gapping between clubs from different OEMs. Everybody has different lengths and lofts not to mention different shafts available, yet most fitters still only have a 7 iron to hit. As the latest NPG mentioned it's hard enough to get fitted using just one club but throw in the variable that your trying to determine what 4&5 iron are going to gap well with some other set based on hitting the 7 iron and it's not realistic for most golfers. Hell, most golfers still don't even get fitted at all much less a super detailed fitting like would be required to put together a multi oem hybrid set.

 

Edited November 2, 2020 by ChitownM2

[Chip Strokes]

7 minutes ago, ChitownM2 said:

Part of the problem is that nobody would buy them except for the very knowledgeable who probably already do consider hybrid sets. Due to tradition or whatever, most people want to look down and see the same club at address.

 

bingo!

its completely cost ineffective for manufacturers, fitters, and golf shops to do this and cater to the tiniest segment of the market. 

like you said, the 1% of golfers looking for this level of detail likely already have the knowledge to put a set like that together anyway 

call it tradition, convenience, laziness, or whatever you want...99% of golfers are going to be best served and happiest getting a set of irons from a single OEM and a single model line. 

[null]

Most wanted is really geared toward the average consumer - ones that go into a big box store or shop online and make stock purchases with very limited intention to be properly fit.

You have to remember that us internet forum golfers are a very very small minority of golfers, and even most of us don't get a true fitting. 

 

15 minutes ago, ChitownM2 said:

Part of the problem is that nobody would buy them except for the very knowledgeable who probably already do consider hybrid sets. Due to tradition or whatever, most people want to look down and see the same club at address.

I also think it would be very hard to get good gapping between clubs from different OEMs. Everybody has different lengths and lofts not to mention different shafts available, yet most fitters still only have a 7 iron to hit. As the latest NPG mentioned it's hard enough to get fitted using just one club but throw in the variable that your trying to determine what 4&5 iron are going to gap well with some other set based on hitting the 7 iron and it's not realistic for most golfers. Hell, most golfers still don't even get fitted at all much less a super detailed fitting like would be required to put together a multi oem hybrid set.

 

 

5 minutes ago, Chip Strokes said:

bingo!

its completely cost ineffective for manufacturers, fitters, and golf shops to do this and cater to the tiniest segment of the market. 

like you said, the 1% of golfers looking for this level of detail likely already have the knowledge to put a set like that together anyway 

call it tradition, convenience, laziness, or whatever you want...99% of golfers are going to be best served and happiest getting a set of irons from a single OEM and a single model line. 

 

 

Spot on here.  

[heavygolffeels]

Unfortunately, most of the iron sets are made with a specific target player in mind. Very few manufactures create their whole lineup to with the intent of creating blending sets. It's more lets create these MBs for great ball strikers, these distance irons for mid caps looking for gains, and these SGI irons to sell right off the rack. And in doing so, its impossible loft wise to blend the sets. Alot of manufacturers like Cobra dont even produce similar looking irons that you would even want to blend. 

I love the Titleist iron lineup this year. The sets are great looking and the T100 irons have such great reviews. Personally, I'd love a T100 8-PW, T200 5-7, and a T300 4 iron. Visually, they even look like a nice flowing set, but the lofts make those impossible to blend. The T100S gives you a fighting chance, but for some takes away what was so great about the T100 in the first place. Mizuno is kinda the same. Sets visually go well, but sometimes lofts are way stronger in the more GI irons. PING is decent, but you have to reto spec the I500s to blend with the i210s (or power spec the i210s). 

My Srixon 585/785 blended set has really changed my game. I love it. But it's not perfect. I really like how Hogan has 4 degree loft gaps in all sets. You can build Icons, Pro, UiHis however you want and the irons flow well, and loft gap properly. I wish more manufacturers did this. But I get it.  Its hard to sell distance irons with strong lofts. And hard to sell SGI clubs off the rack if the 7 iron isnt below 30* and hitting bombs.   

 

 

[fixyurdivot]

1 hour ago, scooterhd2 said:

I wish more manufacturers did this. But I get it.  Its hard to sell distance irons with strong lofts. And hard to sell SGI clubs off the rack if the 7 iron isnt below 30* and hitting bombs.   

I think they will.  Golfers, on average, are much more "golf educated" than decades ago - certainly pre computer/interweb world.  As word gets out about the advantages of mixed/combo sets, OEM's will make these more of a standard as opposed to some esoteric option.  It's getting increasingly difficult for mfg's to find significant shifts in performance (design limits) and simply offering a combo approach can, for a good many players, get those last droplets of blood out of the turnip.  

[TexasFullSend]

A blended set would vary on the golfer. 

 

For example with Titleist irons you could have blended set with T100/T200 or T200/T300 or T300/T400. Granted this is an exaggeration of combos but that's how IMO a test would be.

 

I play Taylormade p760s which is a natural blended set designed by the company. 

Edited November 3, 2020 by TexasFullSend

[heavygolffeels]

14 hours ago, TexasFullSend said:

A blended set would vary on the golfer. 

 

For example with Titleist irons you could have blended set with T100/T200 or T200/T300 or T300/T400. Granted this is an exaggeration of combos but that's how IMO a test would be.

 

I play Taylormade p760s which is a natural blended set designed by the company. 

The problem is the stock lofts are not very compatible. 

5-7 T200, and 8-PW T100 leaves a 8 degree loft gap between the 7 and 8 iron. 

5-7 T400, and 8-PW T300 leaves a 7 degree loft gap between the 7 and 8 iron.

 

 

[TexasFullSend]

2 hours ago, scooterhd2 said:

The problem is the stock lofts are not very compatible. 

5-7 T200, and 8-PW T100 leaves a 8 degree loft gap between the 7 and 8 iron. 

5-7 T400, and 8-PW T300 leaves a 7 degree loft gap between the 7 and 8 iron.

 

 

Yup I agree. It’s very rare that a you can blend a set without changing the lofts. Even the new Taylormade irons they give you a guide with how to blend the clubs and adjust the lofts. 

[TooSteep]

On 11/2/2020 at 7:33 AM, Chip Strokes said:

99% of golfers are going to be best served and happiest getting a set of irons from a single OEM and a single model line. 

That is completely wrong. 0% of golfers are going to be 'best served' by getting a single set set from a single model. There is so much room for improvement here that it kind of boggles the mind.

[ChitownM2]

23 hours ago, TooSteep said:

That is completely wrong. 0% of golfers are going to be 'best served' by getting a single set set from a single model. There is so much room for improvement here that it kind of boggles the mind.

I think his statement needs to be taken in context. The level of fitting that would be required to put together a blended multi-oem set just isn't available or an option for almost all golfers out there. So if the choice is between a single set from a single model or trying to hodge podge together a blended set based on the results of how someone else or a group of other people hit particular clubs, then the choice is clear that most people would be better off with a single set (preferably that they are fit into). 

 

Sometimes I wish MGS would release more of the raw data that goes into how they score/rank the clubs. The winner might only be the "best" for 30% of testers, meaning that for 70% of the golfers one of the other options was the better. That 70% would be spread out over 10 other sets so they score lower, but do you really want to buy your next irons based solely on the fact that it worked best for 30% of the testers? It's basically a tool to be used if you can't or aren't willing to do an actual fitting to help improve the chances that you get a club that works well for you. 

[DaveP043]

23 hours ago, TooSteep said:

That is completely wrong. 0% of golfers are going to be 'best served' by getting a single set set from a single model. There is so much room for improvement here that it kind of boggles the mind.

How would you suggest accomplishing this?  Should clubfitters stock clubheads from say 4-iron to wedge, in every line, from every manufacturer?  Or maybe 3 different clubheads from each set, broken down as in your original post?  Should clubfitters also stock appropriately-trimmed shafts for each club length?  Would an iron fitting go through each club available, and each shaft available?  The logistics of doing what you suggest are completely beyond the bounds of possibility.  I spent an hour on a range selecting a driver, choosing between 4 manufacturers and appropriate shafts, and was just about exhausted at the end.  An iron fitting could take days!

Clubs aren't magic, the "perfect combination" is unlikely to save any player even a single whole stroke as compared to a reasonably well-fit standard set of irons.

 

[Chip Strokes]

On 11/11/2020 at 1:12 PM, TooSteep said:

That is completely wrong. 0% of golfers are going to be 'best served' by getting a single set set from a single model. There is so much room for improvement here that it kind of boggles the mind.

i was gonna leave it at “happily agree to disagree” because i’m lazy, but then @DaveP043 typed it all out for me

36 minutes ago, DaveP043 said:

How would you suggest accomplishing this?  Should clubfitters stock clubheads from say 4-iron to wedge, in every line, from every manufacturer?  Or maybe 3 different clubheads from each set, broken down as in your original post?  Should clubfitters also stock appropriately-trimmed shafts for each club length?  Would an iron fitting go through each club available, and each shaft available?  The logistics of doing what you suggest are completely beyond the bounds of possibility.  I spent an hour on a range selecting a driver, choosing between 4 manufacturers and appropriate shafts, and was just about exhausted at the end.  An iron fitting could take days!

Clubs aren't magic, the "perfect combination" is unlikely to save any player even a single whole stroke as compared to a reasonably well-fit standard set of irons.

 

this is so spot on. 

[Kansas King]

On ‎11‎/‎2‎/‎2020 at 9:33 AM, Chip Strokes said:

bingo!

its completely cost ineffective for manufacturers, fitters, and golf shops to do this and cater to the tiniest segment of the market. 

like you said, the 1% of golfers looking for this level of detail likely already have the knowledge to put a set like that together anyway 

call it tradition, convenience, laziness, or whatever you want...99% of golfers are going to be best served and happiest getting a set of irons from a single OEM and a single model line. 

I think we may be missing the point that blended sets of kind of existed for a long while but you just have to look closely. The Ping i5, i10, i15, i20, and i25 sets are basically a blended iron set. The short irons have a low-offset and compact head but the set has progressively more forgiving heads with more offset. What these sets don't offer is the extreme levels of progression that many of us, at least those of us using golf forums, want today. I love my i15s because they have a blade-ish profile on the short irons and the 4-iron is practically an SGI club. Progressive sets are nothing new and if you look at almost every set of irons out here today outside of some players clubs, they are very progressive. I expect the trend for more blendable sets to continue but it's really hard to offer that product because there is way more than matching lofts. Differing face thicknesses, materials, COGs, and dimensional properties will affect launch, spin, and length. Loft is still the primary driver of length and spin but hotter faces and more playability can make gapping hard. This is why progressive sets like what many offer are still best for most, because they can design clubs with reliable gapping.