Titleist T100s

[Golfin83]

Titleist achieved perfection in 1993 and have yet to reproduce it.  I have 4 sets of "modern day" irons sitting in my closet and gathering dust.  The CB series came close and WHEN I fail to find anymore 962's on ebay they may get their day in the sun.  I get made fun of regularly for my "antiques" until we settle out at the 19th hole.  I'm not sure why this "testers wanted" post got me so hard to sign up and make a post but here I am.  I doubt to get a tester pick so I'll leave my plea here...Not everyone chases distance, with what we can do with drivers now irons do not need to be delofted for distance (and yes the 2 degrees you can change in a fitting doesn't cover it).  Kind of ironic that I am Titleist biggest fan and hardest critic...I might be a small percentage but a little nod to distance control with your upper tier blades would be appreciated.  I know it sounds counter intuitive but I'd like to think their are more people like me who would give up yardage on irons to be able to cover numbers.  I don't care about the look/feel of the latest generation, with enough swings we can get used to anything....I'm just begging for loft control.  Being able to dial in a set of irons to what numbers you need is essential.  I started this post with intentions of making a case for a trial selection, I know longer would want one.  I'm sure the "newest line" is beautiful and eye pleasing...but is it functional? While it's impressive to hit a PW 160 yards it helps nothing.   I hope next years release has an option for loft control.  #DistanceIsn'tEverything 

[Shankster]

Hmm. 

[Golfin83]

Sorry about the rant, the final round of the Olympics is a bit late for me and I'm a couple drinks in...Just needed to get this off my chest for a couple years now, It's not all distance.  I'd rather have an option to control the distance.

 

 

[RickyBobby_PR]

8 hours ago, Golfin83 said:

I'm sure the "newest line" is beautiful and eye pleasing...but is it functional? While it's impressive to hit a PW 160 yards it helps nothing.   I hope next years release has an option for loft control.  #DistanceIsn'tEverything 

Well the new line isn’t really about distance. The 100 isn’t a distance iron and the 100-s aren’t either. I hit the 100-s today and they don’t go further than the previous version and are about the same distance I’ve seen from the Ap2 and both the ap2 and t100 are the most played on tour so not really pure distance clubs.

the t200 and 300 are like every other club on the market from other manufacturers. They are designed to help those who need help to get the ball in the air or reduce spin. I have a friend who doesn’t need distance help and is a low single digit that plays the ap3. 
 

What you didn’t talk about in your rant js titleist chose not to release a new cb or mb this release because there was nothing to improve on and still have those in their lineup. 
 

Edit: posts pleading for a test opportunity isn’t how testers get chosen. If you want to be a tester contribute to the forum and the opportunities will come. 

[Hook DeLoft]

The T100 and T100s have 4 degree gaps and, to me, that is what counts. The number stamped on the club doesn’t matter as long as the gapping is right. 

[GolfSpy AFG]

At the risk of launching another loft-jacking debate, it drives me crazy when a stronger lofted iron set is instantly written off and derided without paying ANY attention to the other engineering that goes into the club.  The fact is, optimal launch and spin conditions for a given club can still be achieved at those lofts, for some.  Sure, maybe some OEMs in the GI or SGI category don't pay attention to that, but you can't tell me Titleist is guilty of that in the Player's Distance Space. 

Get fit and maybe it's you who can achieve those conditions.  If not, drive on...not sure what there is to get upset about.

[TR1PTIK]

On 8/1/2021 at 7:47 AM, Hook DeLoft said:

The T100 and T100s have 4 degree gaps and, to me, that is what counts. The number stamped on the club doesn’t matter as long as the gapping is right. 

While you are correct about gapping, what's far more important than loft is yardage. Gapping by loft is merely a starting point and ideal yardage gaps can be achieved with more or less loft between clubs depending on how the club is designed which is why long irons often shift to 3 degree gaps.

It is always worth doing a gap analysis when purchasing new clubs to make sure you can actually hit the intended target.

[RickyBobby_PR]

9 minutes ago, Getoffmylawn said:

At the risk of launching another loft-jacking debate, it drives me crazy when a stronger lofted iron set is instantly written off and derided without paying ANY attention to the other engineering that goes into the club.  The fact is, optimal launch and spin conditions for a given club can still be achieved at those lofts, for some.  Sure, maybe some OEMs in the GI or SGI category don't pay attention to that, but you can't tell me Titleist is guilty of that in the Player's Distance Space. 

Get fit and maybe it's you who can achieve those conditions.  If not, drive on...not sure what there is to get upset about.

Yup and @Golfspy_CG2 posted a video from titleist not to long ago showing the launch numbers from a golds doing a fitting and how the numbers compared for each of the lines and what benefited the golfer and why. 

[TR1PTIK]

7 minutes ago, Getoffmylawn said:

At the risk of launching another loft-jacking debate, it drives me crazy when a stronger lofted iron set is instantly written off and derided without paying ANY attention to the other engineering that goes into the club.  The fact is, optimal launch and spin conditions for a given club can still be achieved at those lofts, for some.  Sure, maybe some OEMs in the GI or SGI category don't pay attention to that, but you can't tell me Titleist is guilty of that in the Player's Distance Space. 

Get fit and maybe it's you who can achieve those conditions.  If not, drive on...not sure what there is to get upset about.

Correct. There are so many considerations taken and the T100 vs T100 S demonstrate this perfectly. It wasn't simply enough for Titleist to adjust the loft and call it a day, they re-engineered the club so that grind and bounce would match and even created a small pocket behind the face (the "muscle channel") to further enhance performance. 

 

 

 

[Shankster]

I was in the anti loft jacking club, not too long ago actually.

I now play the T100S irons.  They are magical… I can’t imagine NOT  playing with stronger lofts.  Yes, the PW goes far, I just hit one 166 yards last round out, but I am averaging around 153 with it according to Arccos and my “smart distance”.  My 48° wedge is averaging 145 yards, same Arccos is telling me that.  Looking at those, I could actually, based on my “PW” (the 48°) go a degree or two lower on the PW, or perhaps bend the 48° a smidge weak.
 

The way I look at it is, they are just a Strong of each club.  If said club goes 153, the next one goes 165, the next 177, and so on. That is reliable distance, and controlable.  Probably more consistent too, since the tech helps keep the ball speed up on miss hits.

 

Dont get me wrong, blades, or a nice looking CB get a good look from me.  They will always hold a special spot in my heart,  but the numbers don’t lie man.  A little help, some strong lofts, and some tungsten helped my game more than I could have ever imagined.

 

So, if I switch back to say the 620MB, with the PW being 47°, I would see a similar number to what I am hitting my Vokey 48°.  The 9 iron would go just a bit shorter than my set T100S PW.

 

Like I said, I was anti loft jacking until these things made me a believer.  As a high ball hitter, they are a blessing.  No one wants to hit the ball shorter… I don’t think.?

 

Analyways, a good conversational thread.  And in by no means am I trying to say I’m 100% right.  I respect your opinion on the loft issue.  I just think we get too hung up on it quite often. 
 

 

[GolfSpy AFG]

12 minutes ago, Shankster said:

I was in the anti loft jacking club, not too long ago actually.

I now play the T100S irons.  They are magical… I can’t imagine NOT  playing with stronger lofts.  Yes, the PW goes far, I just hit one 166 yards last round out, but I am averaging around 153 with it according to Arccos and my “smart distance”.  My 48° wedge is averaging 145 yards, same Arccos is telling me that.  Looking at those, I could actually, based on my “PW” (the 48°) go a degree or two lower on the PW, or perhaps bend the 48° a smidge weak.
 

The way I look at it is, they are just a Strong of each club.  If said club goes 153, the next one goes 165, the next 177, and so on. That is reliable distance, and controlable.  Probably more consistent too, since the tech helps keep the ball speed up on miss hits.

 

Dont get me wrong, blades, or a nice looking CB get a good look from me.  They will always hold a special spot in my heart,  but the numbers don’t lie man.  A little help, some strong lofts, and some tungsten helped my game more than I could have ever imagined.

 

So, if I switch back to say the 620MB, with the PW being 47°, I would see a similar number to what I am hitting my Vokey 48°.  The 9 iron would go just a bit shorter than my set T100S PW.

 

Like I said, I was anti loft jacking until these things made me a believer.  As a high ball hitter, they are a blessing.  No one wants to hit the ball shorter… I don’t think.?

 

Analyways, a good conversational thread.  And in by no means am I trying to say I’m 100% right.  I respect your opinion on the loft issue.  I just think we get too hung up on it quite often. 
 

 

And I take it you've got no problem generating enough spin?

[heavygolffeels]

Hard to pick on titleist for loft jacking a players iron. They literally have the same club 2 degrees weaker if thats what you prefer, or fit into better. And its not like its just bent that way. Both are engineered for the designed loft. Doesnt get much better.

[Shankster]

52 minutes ago, Getoffmylawn said:

And I take it you've got no problem generating enough spin?

Nope.  My 6 iron stops on a dime.  

[null]

Lofts are simply a tool used to generate launch window, spin, angle of descent.

Due to my delivery (I don't lean the shaft forward), I need stronger lofts to prevent me from hitting balloon balls.

 

1 hour ago, Shankster said:

I was in the anti loft jacking club, not too long ago actually.

I now play the T100S irons.  They are magical… I can’t imagine NOT  playing with stronger lofts.  Yes, the PW goes far, I just hit one 166 yards last round out, but I am averaging around 153 with it according to Arccos and my “smart distance”.  My 48° wedge is averaging 145 yards, same Arccos is telling me that.  Looking at those, I could actually, based on my “PW” (the 48°) go a degree or two lower on the PW, or perhaps bend the 48° a smidge weak.
 

The way I look at it is, they are just a Strong of each club.  If said club goes 153, the next one goes 165, the next 177, and so on. That is reliable distance, and controlable.  Probably more consistent too, since the tech helps keep the ball speed up on miss hits.

 

Dont get me wrong, blades, or a nice looking CB get a good look from me.  They will always hold a special spot in my heart,  but the numbers don’t lie man.  A little help, some strong lofts, and some tungsten helped my game more than I could have ever imagined.

 

So, if I switch back to say the 620MB, with the PW being 47°, I would see a similar number to what I am hitting my Vokey 48°.  The 9 iron would go just a bit shorter than my set T100S PW.

 

Like I said, I was anti loft jacking until these things made me a believer.  As a high ball hitter, they are a blessing.  No one wants to hit the ball shorter… I don’t think.?

 

Analyways, a good conversational thread.  And in by no means am I trying to say I’m 100% right.  I respect your opinion on the loft issue.  I just think we get too hung up on it quite often. 
 

 

Bingo.

[Shankster]

20 minutes ago, scooterhd2 said:

Hard to pick on titleist for loft jacking a players iron. They literally have the same club 2 degrees weaker if thats what you prefer, or fit into better. And its not like its just bent that way. Both are engineered for the designed loft. Doesnt get much better.

I am a little curious about the inserts on the new T100•S and what they does for the iron.  The ones I have, truly feel like a fully forged one piece blade.  Probably why I like them so much.  I hope they didn’t mess it up with the insert.

[Vegan_Golfer_PNW]

I always seemed turned off by the loft jacking, although extra distance while retaining spin would be an interesting dicotomy for my game. To me it seems like it would cause issues at the bottom of the bag for your scoring wedges.

[RickyBobby_PR]

6 minutes ago, rbsiedsc said:

I always seemed turned off by the loft jacking, although extra distance while retaining spin would be an interesting dicotomy for my game. To me it seems like it would cause issues at the bottom of the bag for your scoring wedges.

The only issue is those who mentally don’t want to carry an additional wedge because they want it have a wood or hybrid in their bag.

[Vegan_Golfer_PNW]

12 minutes ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

The only issue is those who mentally don’t want to carry an additional wedge because they want it have a wood or hybrid in their bag.

makes sense. I guess if people only go 5i-W1 should be fine, but those of us that go 4i might pose a challenge at the top of the bag like you suggest. I am a high spin player (at least with my driver, irons might not be) so these stronger lofts could potentially benefit me

[RickyBobby_PR]

1 hour ago, rbsiedsc said:

makes sense. I guess if people only go 5i-W1 should be fine, but those of us that go 4i might pose a challenge at the top of the bag like you suggest. I am a high spin player (at least with my driver, irons might not be) so these stronger lofts could potentially benefit me

Well when you start looking at actual gaps the 4i may be an unnecessary club. While one can’t get a full bag fitting with every iron due to no brands having that type of fitting cart at their partners golfers need to be looking at that during their fitting and asking the fitter to determine what their set makeup should be. I know a few reps and fitters that do that but most will just fit for shaft and head in the iron and move on.

On the other hand many of the people these clubs are made for don’t do fittings and they play the same loft set up in their non set wedges and at the top of the bag regardless of what irons they have because that’s what they always played. I see it all the time in the group I used to play with and the ones I get randomly paired with

[Shankster]

1 hour ago, rbsiedsc said:

makes sense. I guess if people only go 5i-W1 should be fine, but those of us that go 4i might pose a challenge at the top of the bag like you suggest. I am a high spin player (at least with my driver, irons might not be) so these stronger lofts could potentially benefit me

I fully intend to have my iron set up like this soon.  Getting the 5 iron bent strong 1°

here is my 14 club set up… now, take the numbers next to the iron and insert 1970 numbers next to them.  It doesn’t matter what the number is, not one bit.  16° is 16° as 28° is 28°… and 48° is 48°.  

Here me out… 

There is no such thing as loft jacking!!!  

It’s our perception.  We think a 1 iron should be 16° and a 7 iron 34-36° because that is what was normal.  The numbers are just to tell you the order of the dang clubs…. And I’m a traditionalist, look at it from my point of view.  Make sense now?  You’re welcome.

 

this is a pretty loft gap too I might add…

 

Driver - 8-10° depending on fitting.

3W - 14.5°

2 - 16°

3 - 20°

5 - 24°

6 - 28°

7 - 32°

8 - 36°

9° - 40°

P - 44°

W - 49°

S - 54°

L - 59°

Putter

 

[GolfSpy AFG]

2 minutes ago, Shankster said:

 

W - 49°

 

 

Is that a set gap wedge or something else?  I thought I remembered the stock set wedge loft of the T-100S as 48...did you bend it or get a specialty wedge?

[Shankster]

@rbsiedsc none of that was directed toward you, or meant in a jerking way at all.  You just brought up a good point that I wanted to address.  

[Shankster]

Just now, Getoffmylawn said:

Is that a set gap wedge or something else?  I thought I remembered the stock set wedge loft of the T-100S as 48...did you bend it or get a specialty wedge?

No. Just a vokey 48 bent weak 1.  Just for me personally, I could probably get away with a 50 honestly.  The P and the 48° I have now are really close in distance.

[JonMUSC08]

I like the opinion but not everything is loft jacking. Sometimes we can think of it as "assisting the high handicap" to all them to hit the ball further with more aggressively lofted clubs. I reviewed the Ping G710's and they are an aggressive loft for a Super Game improvement player. As an 11 hdcp, i could easily hit them straight and far. I barely had to ever hit a 7iron into a long par 4, if that. Wasnt my cup of tea BUT for high hdcp players, it helps get the ball further down the fairway for them with more controlled clubs.

 

In term of the T100s, those seem to be more of abridge between game improvement and players distance irons maybe? I wpould LOVE to test them out and see if they allow for better shot shaping capability as opposed to a Game improvement iron WHILE also allowing for a bit more distance capability. 

 

My $0.02

[DiscipleofPenick]

On 8/1/2021 at 7:55 AM, RickyBobby_PR said:

Well the new line isn’t really about distance. The 100 isn’t a distance iron and the 100-s aren’t either. I hit the 100-s today and they don’t go further than the previous version and are about the same distance I’ve seen from the Ap2 and both the ap2 and t100 are the most played on tour so not really pure distance clubs.

the t200 and 300 are like every other club on the market from other manufacturers. They are designed to help those who need help to get the ball in the air or reduce spin. I have a friend who doesn’t need distance help and is a low single digit that plays the ap3. 
 

What you didn’t talk about in your rant js titleist chose not to release a new cb or mb this release because there was nothing to improve on and still have those in their lineup. 
 

Edit: posts pleading for a test opportunity isn’t how testers get chosen. If you want to be a tester contribute to the forum and the opportunities will come. 

That's good to know.I haven't hit the T series yet, but I was checking out the AP2 when I bought my CBs. It was close and I chose to move back to a smaller head, classic iron.

[DiscipleofPenick]

2 hours ago, Shankster said:

Nope.  My 6 iron stops on a dime.  

I like hearing this. I wasn't sure but I want to test the T100S. I have 714CB in the bag now.

[null]

Lets remember why the T100-S line was created in the first place.  PGA Tour players were wanting their T100 irons bent strong, but didn't like the offset or decrease in bounce that came from bending an iron strong

Tony's writeup on the original T100-S irons was spot on

https://mygolfspy.com/titleist-t100s-iron-review/

Quote

We’ve covered this many times before but, what the hell, I’ll bang my head into the wall again. Yes, everybody is jacking their lofts, but it’s time to start coming to terms with the idea that static loft (the number listed in the catalog) doesn’t tell you much of anything about performance. Even on a relative basis, it won’t tell you launch angle, spin rate, peak height, descent angle or whether you’ll be able to stop a ball on the green. All of that stuff is heavily dependent on additional factors like geometry and CG location.

 

Quote

 

When Titleist offers an 8.5° driver head, nobody shakes their fists and yells at a cloud about how they have a 10.5° driver in their bag and that they are sick of these sons-of-bitches loft-jacking the big dog. “Back in my day, son…”

Back in your day, drivers were made of wood and golf balls were filled with feathers. Things change.

Nobody complains about lower-lofted drivers because everyone understands that loft is an essential fitting variable. Guys, loft is an essential fitting variable for the rest of the bag, too. Loft isn’t the SAT; there’s more than one right answer.

 

 

[chisag]

2 hours ago, jlukes said:

Lets remember why the T100-S line was created in the first place.  PGA Tour players were wanting their T100 irons bent strong, but didn't like the offset or decrease in bounce that came from bending an iron strong

Tony's writeup on the original T100-S irons was spot on

https://mygolfspy.com/titleist-t100s-iron-review/

 

 

 

... The "loft jacking" boat sailed long ago. T100S are some of the best irons I have played and if it weren't for the Cobra MIM irons that are only 1* weaker I would still be playing them. Like all new clubs it took a little while to dial in distances and gapping but once I did it was like playing any other iron set. 

[RickyBobby_PR]

39 minutes ago, JonMUSC08 said:

I like the opinion but not everything is loft jacking. Sometimes we can think of it as "assisting the high handicap" to all them to hit the ball further with more aggressively lofted clubs. I reviewed the Ping G710's and they are an aggressive loft for a Super Game improvement player. As an 11 hdcp, i could easily hit them straight and far. I barely had to ever hit a 7iron into a long par 4, if that. Wasnt my cup of tea BUT for high hdcp players, it helps get the ball further down the fairway for them with more controlled clubs.

 

In term of the T100s, those seem to be more of abridge between game improvement and players distance irons maybe? I wpould LOVE to test them out and see if they allow for better shot shaping capability as opposed to a Game improvement iron WHILE also allowing for a bit more distance capability. 

 

My $0.02

But it’s not just the high handicap. There’s low single digit handicaps that play Apwx cg. p790, t100-s, t200 and t300 along with ap3. Ap2 were loft jacked when compared to the cb and mb and they have been the most played iron on tour.  Golfers need to stop looking at things in terms of handicaps or skill levels and look at launch characteristics and what fits their swing.

 

[Vegan_Golfer_PNW]

47 minutes ago, Shankster said:

I fully intend to have my iron set up like this soon.  Getting the 5 iron bent strong 1°

here is my 14 club set up… now, take the numbers next to the iron and insert 1970 numbers next to them.  It doesn’t matter what the number is, not one bit.  16° is 16° as 28° is 28°… and 48° is 48°.  

Here me out… 

There is no such thing as loft jacking!!!  

It’s our perception.  We think a 1 iron should be 16° and a 7 iron 34-36° because that is what was normal.  The numbers are just to tell you the order of the dang clubs…. And I’m a traditionalist, look at it from my point of view.  Make sense now?  You’re welcome.

 

this is a pretty loft gap too I might add…

 

Driver - 8-10° depending on fitting.

3W - 14.5°

2 - 16°

3 - 20°

5 - 24°

6 - 28°

7 - 32°

8 - 36°

9° - 40°

P - 44°

W - 49°

S - 54°

L - 59°

Putter

 

No offense taken at all. This is a great discussion and actually makes sense with what everyone else is saying. It is an ingenious design with "stronger" lofts but same head shape. My first set was my dad's old Ping Eye2 clones where my 7i i think was 36* and i could barely hit it 150, which is about how far my 8i now goes (hmm, loft for loft the same).

 Your bag setup is actually really well spaced, even compared to mine:

D-8*, 2H (super hybrid) 16*, 3H 19*, 4i 22*, 5i 25*, 6i 28*, 7i 32*, 8* 36*, 9i 40*, PW 45*, GW 50*, SW 54*, LW 58*, putter

With that said my set is a progressive set. I could totally game your set up based on my set up as well. Like everyone here, we are all hoping to be testers for the new Titleist irons. I may have been amiss to select the T100 in my application.  The fact that they made them stronger but they still spin and launch the same is quite a feat in engineering and goes to show that, like you eluded to, its just a number on the club, it doesn't mean anything as long as they are playable.