Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
GolfSpy WD

Matching Golf Clubs by MOI

Recommended Posts

Our Sponsors

From Tom Wishon's blog (http://wishongolf.com/clubmakers/matching-golf-clubs-by-moi/):

 

Matching Golf Clubs by Moment of Inertia – a Replacement for Swingweight

Now that TWGT has made it possible for clubmakers to offer matching of clubs to their Moment of Inertia (MOI) as an alternative to swingweight matching, we have received a lot of questions about what MOI matching is and how it can offer clubmakers a better way to build clubs that truly are matched to each other and identical in swing feel. As of 2011, more than 500 custom clubmakers now offer their golfers the shot consistency improvement benefits of MOI matching.

 

What is MOI Matching?

 

The MOI of any object is a measurement of its resistance to being put in motion around a defined axis of rotation. Related to golf clubs, if each club in a set requires a different amount of force to swing the club (swinging the club to rotate around our body), the golfer cannot be as consistent swinging each different club in the set. In most simple form, MOI matching scientifically makes each club require the same amount of effort to swing. This is what makes MOI matched clubs offer better shotmaking consistency than swingweight matched clubs. Swingweight matching does not make each club the same in terms of the amount of force required by the golfer to swing each club and hit the shot. MOI matching does. However, because golfers can be quite different in their strength, tempo and swing mechanics, the right MOI must be identified and custom fit for each golfer to allow the concept to properly work.

 

Is MOI Matching a new high-tech clubmaking concept?

 

Not at all. Back in the 1920s when swingweight was developed, its originators were aware of the principles of MOI matching and tried to make swingweight matching of clubs simulate MOI Matching. They failed because the principle of the swingweight scale they developed could not truly accomplish the task of measuring the MOI of a golf club. Over the decades since the development of swingweight, engineers familiar with the principles of MOI have been in agreement that MOI matching would truly make all clubs within a set swing with exactly the same feel, while swingweight matching could not.

 

Has MOI Matching ever been done previously in golf clubs?

 

Yes, there were two previous times in golf equipment history in which companies attempted to offer MOI matched golf clubs. In the 1970s, a company named Sounder Golf offered sets of woods and irons which claimed to be matched by weighting the clubs at specific points within the shaft. The Sounder clubs never caught on for two reasons: 1) Sounder was under-capitalized and unable to generate enough demand through their marketing programs. 2) Every set of Sounder clubs was built to only one specific MOI. Because golfers are different in strength, tempo and swing mechanics, one MOI measurement could never fit the MOI requirements of each golfer.

 

In the late 1990s, Tommy Armour Golf Company introduced their EQL model clubs to the market. By making all of the woods the same length and same total weight as the 5-wood, and all of the irons the same length/total weight as the 6-iron, the company did achieve a true MOI match for all the clubs within each segment of the set. This concept failed for two reasons; first, because the one MOI measurement to which all the EQL woods and irons were built did not fit all golfers, and second, because the concept of all woods and all irons being the same length was much too radical for golfers to accept.

 

“About 10 days ago, I received my new Wishon Golf irons with Series 5, R-flex shafts. My clubmaker, Frank Grasso of Golf Tec, in New Jersey, made up three demo 5-irons and I selected the one with the R-flex shaft. He then made up the set MOI matching the irons. I am happy to report that I am hitting my irons more accurate and consistent than I ever have. I am still experimenting with ball position and yardages, but the MOI matched Wishon irons are a great improvement.

 

“So far 90% of my misses are 2-3 yards short, where I can get up and down and save pars, as opposed to my old misses which were in bunkers or across cartpaths and almost never getting up and down. These irons are also sneaky long… sometimes it feels like I missed the shot and it ends up perfect. As for the MOI matching, every club in the set plays and feels the same and are effortless to swing. 4 weeks ago, I was ready to take a break from golf, and now, thanks to my new Wishon MOI matched irons, I can't wait to get to the course to play or practice.”

 

– Thanks and keep up the good work, Mike Hayes

 

How is the right MOI determined for each golfer?

 

Virtually all golfers who play frequently may have noticed they have a “favorite club” or clubs within their current set, or within a previous set of clubs. A “favorite club” may be defined as a club with which the golfer is most consistent over all others, and which the golfer has the utmost confidence in their ability to hit the ball solid and on-center more often than the other clubs in the set. After research and testing, TWGT believes that a one reason golfers have “favorite clubs” is that the MOI of those clubs happens to match the strength, tempo and swing mechanics of the golfer noticeably better than the MOI of other clubs.

There are two ways clubmakers can find the right MOI for any golfer. One is to ask the golfer to bring forth a “favorite club” from any set they may own or have used. The “favorite club” is measured for its MOI using the TWGT MOI Matching System, after which the other clubs are then built to match the MOI of that “favorite club(s)”.

 

The most common method used by clubmakers is to build a test club(s) based on the fitting recommendations made for the golfer after going through the entire fitting process. By manipulating the headweight of the test club with lead tape, it is possible to find a headweight to “rest of the club” ratio that will result in more comfort for the golfer and a higher percentage of on center hits. Once done, the test club is measured for its MOI, and the TWGT MOI Matching System is used to guide the clubmaker in building all the other clubs in the set to have the same MOI.

 

Does MOI Matching change the fitting process for the golfer?

 

No. MOI Matching is simply a replacement for swingweight matching in the fitting process. Clubmakers will fit golfers for every one of the other key fitting specifications based on the same fitting procedures that they have developed and with which they are experienced. Once all of the fitting specifications are determined by the clubmaker, then MOI Matching is brought in to guide the clubmaker in how the clubs will be assembled with regard to final headweight, and in some cases, the final length adjustments.

 

Is there any aspect of the fitting or performance of the shafts that is changed by MOI Matching?

 

Very rarely, if ever. As we said, the selection of the shaft is made on the basis of the same fitting procedures the clubmaker is comfortable with using to identify the best shaft for the golfer's swing speed and swing characteristics of the downswing transition, downswing tempo/acceleration and wrist-cock release.

 

Because of the final head weighting requirements of the MOI Match for each club, the frequency progression of the shafts will be slightly different than if the clubs were swingweight matched. In all of our testing, and in the reports of actual MOI fittings that clubmakers have done, we have yet to hear of one case in which the golfer required an adjustment in the tip trimming to offset the different progression of frequency from shaft to shaft within the set that came from the MOI matching headweight requirements. In short, 99% of the time we believe the MOI matching will not affect the golfer's perception of the shaft fitting.

 

What will a golfer notice when switching from swingweighted to MOI matched clubs?

 

We have yet to hear from a clubmaker using the MOI matching system that a golfer for whom MOI matching was performed did not notice a difference in the swing feel of all of the clubs in the set, and a minor to significant increase in the percentage of solid, on-center hits with their clubs. If the golfer “waggles” each MOI matched club, providing they are sensitive to the weight feel of each club, they will detect a progressively increasing headweight feel as the clubs get shorter in the set. But as soon as the clubs are swung full, the golfers all report that they can close their eyes, switch clubs in the set, and not really detect any difference in the total swing feel of the clubs from each other.

 

If I take a set of MOI matched clubs and measure each club on a swingweight scale, what will I see?

 

Depending on the MOI each club is made to possess, the swingweight of the clubs in an MOI matched set will very slightly increase from the longest club in the set to the shortest. Most typical is to see the swingweight increase by 0.5 swingweight points per club down through the set. This is very definitely one of the main reasons golfers like the swing feel of their MOI Matched clubs and do experience an improvement in shot consistency.

 

Will the woods and irons all be built to have the same single MOI?

 

No. TWGT testing and feedback from many of the clubmakers using MOI matching in their work has proven that because woods and irons are so different in their length ranges, better results are obtained by matching all the woods to one MOI, and then matching all of the irons to another MOI, with both chosen specifically for each golfer either on the basis of the “favorite club” or the “test club” approach. The difference in MOI measurement between the woods and irons typically is for the woods to be 50 g/cm2 higher in MOI than the irons.

 

What about the wedges – should they be built to have the same MOI as all of the rest of the irons?

 

Again, this was another aspect of MOI fitting and matching that TWGT has spent some time investigating. What we found was that any of the wedges that are chiefly used by the golfer for less than a full swing, it should not be matched to the same MOI as the rest of the irons, each which are predominantly used with a full swing. In general, because many golfers do use the PW and AW (gap wedge) for full swings more than they do the SW and LW, it is OK to make the MOI of the PW and AW the same as the rest of the numbered irons. But for the SW and LW, they are better off being built individually to an MOI or swingweight based on the principles taught in the book, Common Sense Clubfitting: The Wishon Method.

 

How does the TWGT MOI Matching System work?

 

In 2006, TWGT introduced an upgrade to the original MOI Matching system with the MOI Speed Match System. This system consists of an electronic device that directly measures the MOI of any golf club in one operation. The older MOI Matching system required clubmakers to manually measure 4 different specifications of each club and then use the accompanying software to calculate the MOI of each club. Thus, the MOI Speed Match hardware is much faster to use to quickly measure the MOI of any club.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is a Golfsmith article about matching MOI yourself (http://www.golfsmith.com/cm/display_page.php?page_num=cm_lp_moi_matching)

 

MOI matching is a snap when you use eight-gram increments.

By Jeff Sheets, Vice President of R & D at Golfsmith

 

Every year we see golf technology changing at an increasing rate that general consumers are unable to keep up with. The evolution from persimmon-shaped woods to the new variety of square, bullet-shaped and triangular heads is one of the most obvious examples. I have often touted that golf equipment design is no different from fashion design. A keen eye can easily tell the model year of a club because of its design cues, simple elements like sole widths, the lines on a toe or the shape of a topline. However, alongside changes in the physical appearance of equipment, often there are invisible factors changing, too. For example, one non-visual element we're changing in most of our 2008 iron models is the weight of our iron heads.

 

For more than 75 years, iron heads have been separated by a 7-gram weight increment between each loft and the next. This progression allows identical swingweights among clubs with half-inch length increments. The swingweighting system has worked well for many decades, so why fool with it? You must understand that there is a method to the madness: Because we have recognized the advantages of moment of inertia (MOI) matching, a process that head weights have a direct influence on, we are changing the weight increments on most of our 2008 iron models accordingly.

 

MOI matching actually predates swingweighting, but it involves some tricky mathematics to arrive at the appropriate head weights, shaft lengths and overall club specifications. With the development of the swingweight scale in the 1920s, swingweighting became the club fitter's shortcut to MOI matching. Clubmakers seeking a rapid assembly procedure have stuck with it ever since.

 

In the past few years, MOI matching has become popular again because of high-tech electronics that enable a club fitter to perfectly fine tune a set without dealing with the arithmetic. In fact, for the past year the Auditor MOI Scale (No. 245246) has been one of the hottest-selling tools we offer. In using the MOI scale, one piece of information has become very apparent — MOI matching a set is more easily accomplished by using 8-gram increments between the heads than by using the traditional 7-gram increments.

 

Using half-inch length increments and 8-gram weight increments between irons leads to an MOI matched set. So how does this compare to a swingweighted set? None of the elements of the MOI matched set will differ except for the swingweights. Instead of the swingweight being constant, there will be a progression: Each club will swingweight a half-point heavier than the next-longer club. For example, if you assemble an MOI matched set with the 3-iron as your longest club at D0, the swingweights will increase successively to D0.5, D1, D1.5, etc., until you reach the pitching wedge, which will be D3.5.

 

As you can see from the chart, the longer irons in an MOI matched set are lighter, and therefore easier for most golfers to swing, than those in a traditionally swingweighted set. At the same time, the shorter irons are heavier in the MOI matched set. As the shaft becomes shorter and lighter, the heavier mass in the head provides better feel while placing more mass behind the ball at impact.

 

Change is good when it helps achieve the objective at hand — in this case, controlling distance and consistency. In a recent focus group, test shots were compared between a swingweighted set and an MOI matched set of otherwise identical irons. Using a TrackMan™ radar system to measure shots, we found that short iron distances were identical between the two sets, while the long iron shots showed a much greater distance disparity between the two. All participants hit the MOI matched long irons at least a half-club farther than their swingweighted counterparts. More importantly, the yardage dispersion between the MOI matched clubs was much more consistent than the yardages among the swingweighted set. Overall shot-making quality was measurably better with the MOI matched set than with the swingweighted set.

 

The 5-irons in our sets will continue to weigh 254 grams, just as they have in years past. Longer irons will be lighter than previous versions by a gram or two, and shorter irons will be heavier than the old models. A change like this may appear radical to some club fitters. However, we view it as another technology improvement that all golfers will benefit from. A number of the major OEMs have also recognized the merits of the 8-gram increment, but they are not talking about MOI matching. Instead, they focus on the merits of progressive swingweighting. Regardless of what you name it, this set configuration leads to a better performing product for all levels of golfers.

 

Previously existing models will continue to be offered in 7-gram weight increments. Using these older designs makes traditional swingweighting available to those club fitters who prefer that technique. However, we anticipate that 8-gram increments will be the iron spec of the future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I stumbled upon this concept today while reading TWGT's blog. Has anyone tried this or known anyone who's done it? I'm not sure of the Golfsmith way is far too simplified or not, but it was an interesting solution.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's a response to Golfsmith's article from Wishon:

 

You don't need heads with 8g increments. As long as the heads have some way to add weight to the head to establish the final parameters of the MOI match, that's all you need. And no way can you just "trust" everything without at least a good swingweight scale to do the MOI approximation.

 

Finding the right MOI for your swing does require a little trial and error with at least one of the clubs, preferably longer than a 7 iron. The "favorite" club method was something we proposed way back in 2003 when we first created the equipment and methodology for being able to match clubs to MOI. This was a very initial theory we started with.

 

Since then, based on feedback from several hundred clubmakers who dove into the MOI Pool and started fitting golfers and recording the results, the very best way to find a golfer's best MOI is with the test club method. Build the test club so everything on it is fit to the golfer but not yet the final headweight. Slowly adding weight to the head, having the golfer hit 3-4 shots and then watching for where you see the highest % of on center hits AND ASKING THE GOLFER for his/her feedback as to what is feeling very controllable and good.

 

Once you find that, if you had the modern MOI Speed Match unit, you would just measure this test club's MOI and then use the unit + headweight additions to bring every other club up to that same test club's MOI.

 

With a swingweight scale only, you measure the length and swt of the preferred test club - then you do the progressive 0.5 swingweight point increase/decrease along with the 3/8" length increments up and down from there for the other clubs.

 

Technically Tim is right in saying the swt progression if more like 0.65 swt points per half inch, but trying to use a slide weight swingweight scale to get to 0.65 point increments. . . goooood luck on that! So 0.5 is ok for the progressive swing weight change through the set.

 

This'll get you pretty darn close. For perfection, that's what the MOI Speed Match unit is for.

 

Hope this helps and have fun. MOI matching is truly a better deal for a wider range of golfers to be able to achieve a little better consistency for on center hits and the timing of your release than is swt matching.

 

Sometime I would like to get UK clubmaker Richard Kempton to post his findings from 8 yrs of MOI match fitting over 500 different golfers. He's kept all the data and post fitting interview feedback from every one of the 500+ he has MOI fit. Priceless data there which absolutely positively supports the superiority of MOI matching to swingweight matching, WHEN THE MOI MATCH IS DONE RIGHT TO FIND THE RIGHT MOI FOR THE GOLFER'S SWING TENDENCIES. He had ONE golfer ask to have the clubs moved back to a swingweight match out of the 500+. One.

 

TOM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I stumbled upon this concept today while reading TWGT's blog. Has anyone tried this or known anyone who's done it? I'm not sure of the Golfsmith way is far too simplified or not, but it was an interesting solution.

 

Twice. Two years ago I went with inches for length measurements while making the headweights 8g apart instead of 7. That can be a pain in the a$$. I swingweighted them last year, now this year I'm keeping the 7g increments and using centimeters as my length measurement. That I found out about near the end of last year, when I picked up Jeff Summitt's new book.

 

Everyone is going to have their opinions on this. Maltby isn't that big of a fan, especially when he considers that swingweighting's worked for about 100 years. Some people are fanatics. I don't know where I stand anymore. I definitely felt like my short irons worked better for me with MOI matching two years ago (because it's still cold/snowy, I can't really get out and test the new build)... but there's so many "golf placebo's" out there that I could definitely see people putting MOI matching in that category. One upside is you can use any grip you want with MOI matching; the idea behind it is the grip is the focal point of the swing, so the grip doesn't factor into the reading. With swing weight matching you have to- or at least, it behooves you to- find grips that are relatively close in weight to your current model, to maintain the swing weight you were fit to. It's about consistency.

 

Jeff Sheets suggests MOI matching each category of clubs on their own. Woods, irons, wedges... you get the idea. His thought is, since they're all different implements, they shouldn't be lumped together. He does have a point, in my eyes: if you MOI matched everything together, you could easily end up with a driver in the low C's (like C3) while the LW could be in the high E's. That could make the driver head too light, which means you can't tell where it's at in the swing, which means bad things for your driving. The LW would then be too heavy. Makes sense to me... it may or may not be good for you, but something to consider, at least.

 

If anything, it could at least be a fun experiment. Or drive you crazy :P .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Twice. Two years ago I went with inches for length measurements while making the headweights 8g apart instead of 7. That can be a pain in the a$$. I swingweighted them last year, now this year I'm keeping the 7g increments and using centimeters as my length measurement. That I found out about near the end of last year, when I picked up Jeff Summitt's new book.

 

Everyone is going to have their opinions on this. Maltby isn't that big of a fan, especially when he considers that swingweighting's worked for about 100 years. Some people are fanatics. I don't know where I stand anymore. I definitely felt like my short irons worked better for me with MOI matching two years ago (because it's still cold/snowy, I can't really get out and test the new build)... but there's so many "golf placebo's" out there that I could definitely see people putting MOI matching in that category. One upside is you can use any grip you want with MOI matching; the idea behind it is the grip is the focal point of the swing, so the grip doesn't factor into the reading. With swing weight matching you have to- or at least, it behooves you to- find grips that are relatively close in weight to your current model, to maintain the swing weight you were fit to. It's about consistency.

 

Jeff Sheets suggests MOI matching each category of clubs on their own. Woods, irons, wedges... you get the idea. His thought is, since they're all different implements, they shouldn't be lumped together. He does have a point, in my eyes: if you MOI matched everything together, you could easily end up with a driver in the low C's (like C3) while the LW could be in the high E's. That could make the driver head too light, which means you can't tell where it's at in the swing, which means bad things for your driving. The LW would then be too heavy. Makes sense to me... it may or may not be good for you, but something to consider, at least.

 

If anything, it could at least be a fun experiment. Or drive you crazy :P .

 

Thanks. Very good point about the placebo effect. I haven't actually seen data such as, "MOI matching usually drops player score by X shots", the results are always based on player perception, which is very subjective.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wd,

I know professional clubmakers that swear by the MOI matching.

From them, in the beginning is it a tough start getting the "feel" correct and then duplicating the MOI number on themachine.

But like everything else once you are used to doing something it is second nature.

 

Overall the effect is better ball striking as a result. Better scores should result.

 

Another way to do it with standard equipment it to cut the clubs in 3/8 increments instead of 1/2" using the 7 gram components.

If a golfer is very tall or very short I do this already. I suppose if the swing speed was low it would work on golfers in the middle.

This is of course building without an MOI machine.

 

I think MOI has merit, I just need the time to quantify the "feel" as parameter when fitting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wd,

I know professional clubmakers that swear by the MOI matching.

From them, in the beginning is it a tough start getting the "feel" correct and then duplicating the MOI number on themachine.

But like everything else once you are used to doing something it is second nature.

 

Overall the effect is better ball striking as a result. Better scores should result.

 

Another way to do it with standard equipment it to cut the clubs in 3/8 increments instead of 1/2" using the 7 gram components.

If a golfer is very tall or very short I do this already. I suppose if the swing speed was low it would work on golfers in the middle.

This is of course building without an MOI machine.

 

I think MOI has merit, I just need the time to quantify the "feel" as parameter when fitting.

 

The 3/8 increment sounds like the easiest solution. If I decide to reshaft my irons I'll probably do it this way for kicks. The main problem is finding the ideal MOI with a new shaft. I know Wishon says to build a test club and add weight until it feels right and shots look good. Once the "ideal" is found, is the right answer to then cut another shaft an extra X inches to get the final desired SW or do you add tip weights?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 3/8 increment sounds like the easiest solution. If I decide to reshaft my irons I'll probably do it this way for kicks. The main problem is finding the ideal MOI with a new shaft. I know Wishon says to build a test club and add weight until it feels right and shots look good. Once the "ideal" is found, is the right answer to then cut another shaft an extra X inches to get the final desired SW or do you add tip weights?

 

MOI matching is a the talent to finding the correct "moment" for the clubs. Once the first club is determined correct then the MOMENT machine comes into play for the builder. MOI is really a length based equation, so,,,, when that is found and lets say we dont have machine and 7 gram intervals is the club head weight. we then using the 3/8 length of the club is all we can do. You can swing weight to feel if you like as the weight does play into the clubs feel but it does not impact the club moment greatly. I say greatly, it does impact it for sure but not as much as length. Without adding tip weights the swing weight of the club will increase as you move down the set. If you added weight to the first club then I would suggest adding the same weight to all the clubs through the set. Trim to flex.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I started MOI matching back last November. I am extremely glad I've done so.

 

I believe MOI fitting and matching works great. You just need to have the fitting done properly.

 

When I started to do it, I matched each club's MOI to my best iron in the bag…which at the time was the 4-iron which was at 2,700 kg/cm^2. I saw a big-time improvement, particularly in the worst club in the bag at that time…my 3-iron, which only measured at 2,625 kg/cm^2. When I brought the weight up to 2,700, I hit it noticeably better.

 

However, I started to see the flaws in using the ‘best club' method. So I started to fit based on impact dispersion and ball flight. I started off with my 6-iron, which had a MOI of 2,675. I would add a 1-gram strip of lead tape to the back, put some impact tape on, then hit 3-5 balls and look at the dispersion. I kept repeating the process and found that my optimal MOI was actually 2,725.

 

In the end, I could see why I hit the 4-iron so well. It not only had the highest MOI of all of my irons in the bag, but it's MOI was closest to my true MOI of 2,725.

 

Many MOI fitters stick with the best club in the bag method and I don't think it truly work as well as it should. Furthermore, if your iron heads are really heavy, you may find that no club in your bag is below your optimal MOI. So when you try to fit for MOI, you really can't because all of clubs have too heavy of an MOI.

 

I would recommend either Wishon or GolfSmith 6-iron when you are trying to fit for MOI. They have the lightest clubheads for irons I've seen and one can employ the same method I used to find the MOI.

 

It becomes a little trickier with the woods and hybrids. You will not typically shrink the impact dispersion like you would with the irons because they are longer clubs swung at higher speeds. What I found is that the impact dispersion will get smaller, but you have to rely a bit on the trajectory.

 

Recently, I ordered a new set of irons and put different shafts in them. I assembled the 6-iron and since then I had made a few swing changes, so I wanted to see if I would notice a difference when I fitted for MOI. I had no ideal what the 6-iron's MOI was when I started to experiment. So I added 1-gram strips of lead tape and found the best amount of added weight for me. I then went home on the MOI machine and it came out to 2,730, only 5 kg/cm^2 from my previously MOI fitted irons.

 

IMO, the benefits are too important to pass up.

 

 

 

 

 

 

3JACK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Given that I could be considered a "better player" that happens to have a high swing speed I'll provide my opinion based on that perspective.

 

1) I don't have a favorite club in the bag I hit them all equally well, but they also have been 7 gram gaped and shafts positioned using FLO and Spine theory on shaft orientation. Did I have a favorite club when I knew nothing about shaft alignment and club building as a 1.1, nope I hit them all really well.

 

2) I feel that there is a point of negative returns for going lighter to get more distance, meaning if I can't feel the head in the swing I won't have control over my timing into impact which can cause poor shots and just poor contact in general. Let me provide an example I recently cut down my driver from 45.00" to 44.50" I tried to play the club with the same weighting and sprayed it all over the place couldn't feel the head at all. My builder suggested two lead squares that weight 2g each on the bottom of the driver to increase the swing weight 2 points, started hitting the driver great again better then before at 45.00" even.

 

3) Again "longer irons are 1/2 club longer then swing weight" sounds like some BS that an OEM would market to sell their product. That brings me to the next point is that additional 1/2 club longer going to help you get closer to the pin for more birdie opportunities? Who really cares to hit a club 1/2 club longer if you have no control over the distance into a green. Look up the thread about PGA Tour putting averages if you think distance is more important then accuracy and a shorter putt to lower your scores. I would like to read more about a MOI set that has shaft aligned the same as a swing weighted set for the high swing speed and / or better player if the MOI comes out more accurate and consistent then the swing weight for majority of tests then I feel you have a solid alternative replacement for swing weighting.

 

I am not against MOI but I haven't 100% bought into it being better then swing weighting for my game personally, it is like single frequency shafts honestly which i have stronger opinions against. single frequency shaft looks good on paper and works for some but in practice it is a terrible concept for most people. I feel that MOI might be the same thing great on paper but in practice works for a hand full of players only rather then the masses.

 

That is my personal opinion you don't have to agree with me about it but I think some builders will swear by stuff that really doesn't work for a player just because it is the "in" thing currently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I am not against MOI but I haven't 100% bought into it being better then swing weighting for my game personally, it is like single frequency shafts honestly which i have stronger opinions against. single frequency shaft looks good on paper and works for some but in practice it is a terrible concept for most people. I feel that MOI might be the same thing great on paper but in practice works for a hand full of players only rather then the masses.

 

That is my personal opinion you don't have to agree with me about it but I think some builders will swear by stuff that really doesn't work for a player just because it is the "in" thing currently

 

The simplest way I can explain MOI matching is that it actually DOES find the swingweight for the golfer. It's just that when you MOI match, it will find the optimal swingweight for EACH club for that golfer's swing. So if you test out a 6-iron and find that swingweight that fits you perfectly, the swingweight for your 5-iron that fits you best will not be the same as the 6-iron. Same with the rest of the clubs in your bag.

 

I can sort of see GolfSmith's point on the ½-club longer with the longer irons as being true. Where MOI matching is most beneficial is that it greatly improves impact dispersion. So if you have the correct lie angles and you are continually having smaller impact dispersion, over time you will probably hit it a little further based on the centeredness of contact. With the shorter irons, they are easier to hit on the sweetspot because they are shorter and swung at a slower speed, so the difference in distance is probably not going to be noticed.

 

I would like to see what the MOI of your irons are. I know that when I measured a set of Mizuno Pro TN-87's…the 3 thru 7-iron were all in a tight MOI range of 2,725 to 2,740. And I never did anything to them. The 8-PW were in the 2,660 to 2,680…which from a MOI matching perspective is still pretty good.

 

Now…my optimal MOI for irons is at 2,725. So there's a reason why I hit the 3 thru 7-irons so well…their MOI was close to my optimal MOI. And there's a reason why I didn't like the 8-PW, the MOI was tightly dispersed between those clubs…but way too light for my swing.

 

I wouldn't be surprised to see something similar with your irons.

 

I think while your irons may work great for you, you would agree that not all clubs that have the same swingweight feel the same. For example, each year I go to the PGA Merchandise Show's ‘Demo Day.' And each year the tents have clubs with a sticker attached to the club to show the swingweight. And I'll see a graphite shafted 6-iron that is labeled at D-2 and it will feel very differently from the same model 6-iron that has a heavier steel shaft and is also labeled at D-2. So you know something is going on that isn't adding up.

 

 

 

 

3JACK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The simplest way I can explain MOI matching is that it actually DOES find the swingweight for the golfer. It's just that when you MOI match, it will find the optimal swingweight for EACH club for that golfer's swing. So if you test out a 6-iron and find that swingweight that fits you perfectly, the swingweight for your 5-iron that fits you best will not be the same as the 6-iron. Same with the rest of the clubs in your bag.

 

I can sort of see GolfSmith's point on the ½-club longer with the longer irons as being true. Where MOI matching is most beneficial is that it greatly improves impact dispersion. So if you have the correct lie angles and you are continually having smaller impact dispersion, over time you will probably hit it a little further based on the centeredness of contact. With the shorter irons, they are easier to hit on the sweetspot because they are shorter and swung at a slower speed, so the difference in distance is probably not going to be noticed.

 

I would like to see what the MOI of your irons are. I know that when I measured a set of Mizuno Pro TN-87's…the 3 thru 7-iron were all in a tight MOI range of 2,725 to 2,740. And I never did anything to them. The 8-PW were in the 2,660 to 2,680…which from a MOI matching perspective is still pretty good.

 

I think while your irons may work great for you, you would agree that not all clubs that have the same swingweight feel the same. For example, each year I go to the PGA Merchandise Show's ‘Demo Day.' And each year the tents have clubs with a sticker attached to the club to show the swingweight. And I'll see a graphite shafted 6-iron that is labeled at D-2 and it will feel very differently from the same model 6-iron that has a heavier steel shaft and is also labeled at D-2. So you know something is going on that isn't adding up.

 

My set was built to have perfect 7 gram gaps in it, the shafts were spine aligned into the hosels and I play a 38.75" 3 iron with 1/2 gaps down to a 35.25" PW... My wedges all play the same length at 35.25" as well and were weighted to accommodate that build profile. They are at a 60.5* 6iron lie angle which you can call flat a touch (Miura it is actually standard at that lie for blades i think). I can pick up my 9iron and it feels exactly the same as my 3iron just has a longer shaft, I hit both equally well.

 

I just want to see some proof that a perfectly swing weighted shaft is inferior to MOI, all MOI research has been done on off the rack models no s*** you'll get better results with OEM tolerances on equipment. Just a little FYI about me and my swing speed / distances. I personally not looking for more distance I look for control period.

 

carry distances for full shots

60* (LW @ 35.25") ~ 99 yards

56* (SW @ 35.25") ~ 113 yards

52* (GW @ 35.25") ~ 127 yards

47* (PW @ 35.25") ~ 141 yards

43* (9i @ 35.75") ~ 155 yards

39* (8i @ 36.25") ~ 169 yards

35* (7i @ 36.75") ~ 183 yards

31* (6i @ 37.25") ~ 197 yards

27* (5i @ 37.75") ~ 209 yards

24* (4i @ 38.25") ~ 218 yards

21* (3i @ 38.75") ~ 227 yards

19* (hybrid club @ 41.00") ~ 240 yards roughly

16.5* (4metal @ 43.00") ~ 265 yards

9.3* (Driver @ 44.50") ~ 285 yards (edited sorry 295 was probably average total)

 

Like I said I'm a high swing speed player and a single handicap golfer, I have previously seen negative returns with longer and lighter swing weights in the lighter clubs, I went the opposite way with the Driver for a reason better control and contact as I can feel the heads better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I play to a +1 handicap currently. My driver speed is currently at 110-113 mph measured on Trackman back in March. I hit my 9-iron about 148 yards and my 7-iron about 172 yards.

 

Here's a swing of mine that I took back in January, just so you don't think I'm making stuff up.

 

 

I can only tell you that I have personally tested at least 25 sets of swingweight matched irons and see massive differences in MOI. Since I do clubfitting and clubmaking as a hobby and just started to get into MOI matching since last November, I don't have an overwhelming amount of customers. But, I have yet to find a customer who wants to go back to swingweight matching. That's about 12 customers I've done it for. Not exactly a huge sample size, but so far, so good.

 

I have a set of Titleist 690MB's that were ‘custom fit' and swingweight matched. I hit the 7-iron on the money, but the 3 and 4-irons felt like I was trying to swing a sledgehammer. When I measured the MOI, it told the story…the MOI of the 3 and 4-iron were at 2,775 while the 7-iron was at 2,725 (the rest of the clubs had MOI's all over the place). And that's for clubs that were not off the rack. In fact, most of my customers do not purchase clubs off the rack.

 

I had one customer who had his Nike blades fit to the Nth degree and felt the long irons were too heavy and the 9 and PW were too light. We later found out that his best MOI was at 2,640 kg/cm^2 and his 3 thru 5-irons were in the 2,700 to 2,710 range and the 9-iron and PW were at 2,590 and 2,595.

 

And like I said, at the PGA Merchandise show the companies have their expert clubfitters/clubmakers set their clubs to a swingweight and mark them down on a sticker. But, there's no way a person can tell me that those clubs will feel the same if they have different shafts in them. Oban had a new iron shaft on display set at D-2 and it felt completely different than the KBS shaft also set at D-2 with the same Titleist AP2 head model.

 

Lastly, while I can believe GolfSmith's claim of an extra ½ club gained on the long irons, MOI matching is all about accuracy, consistency and yardage control with the irons. It greatly reduces the face contact dispersion, provided the person is fitted correctly.

 

The only issue I've ran into it is if the head weights are abnormally heavy. Miura's K-Grind SW clubhead weighs in at 301 grams. But my Edel SW clubhead weighs at 307 grams. That's a big difference. When I MOI-matched the K-Grind it came out well because the head was of a fairly normal weight. But, the Edel SW was just too heavy.

 

I wound up checking the static weight of each club and found that my Wishon PW was 451 grams, but the Edel SW weighed in at 478 (it should weigh more like 461 to 465 grams).

 

I wound up putting a lighter shaft (True Temper DG SL) that was 12-grams lighter than my C-Taper and getting a lighter grip (Iomic Sticky 2.3). That got the MOI on the money and static weight at 462 grams which is what I wanted.

 

I will say that I hit the SW much, much better, but it still feels a little funny because there headweight kinda throws things a little out of proportion.

 

I think if you know the static weight of the club, the head weight, the MOI and the Shaft Bend Profile, you can really start to get ahead of the game as far as finding the best clubs for your golf swing.

 

 

 

 

3JACK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't say you were full of s*** I am a analytical person, if you are going to make a claim like "MOI has tighter dispersion then a perfectly swing weighted set" please provide the raw data that can back up that claim in trials over 1000s of golfers or at least on a robot. Blame the OEMs for having marketing slight of hand and complete bulls*** claims to performance increases, but i want the fine print and be able to make my own call.

 

Currently I have only read a hand full of success stories and some claims that it's better then rack models, well hell a perfectly swing weighted set is better then a rack model also. It is nothing personal to anyone in the MOI camp, you are going to have to work harder to convince ALL club builders and golf activists MOI is the better model to make custom builds with.

 

I suggested that someone posts a stat of the percentage of tour pros playing MOI matched clubs, I have a guess it is less then 1%, no that it matters for the average player at all, I just see MOI more beneficial to slow swing speed weekend golfers then tour players personally. Speaking from experience I lose feel of the head in the down swing I lose complete control of the shot, you get to a point where in some players like me too light is negative returns for consistency in contact and shot control that was my only point / concern about MOI.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do clubfitting as a hobby and barely make any money off of it. The money I do make goes right back into the hobby, either with purchasing new tools or doing experiments or trying new components, etc. My web site has a lot of posts based on personal experiences in golf, so when I got into learning about MOI matching, readers of mine wanted to know more about it.

 

So I have no ambition to do scientific research with a sample size over 1,000 people (last I knew, a sample of size of 100 was considered scientifically adequate) and have all of the research backed up scientifically. I don't have the time or will to do it.

 

I just think that your statements are fairly misinformed. I HAVE worked with 'perfectly swingweight matched' sets and not only seen a difference in MY impact dispersion once the clubs were MOI-matched, but in several customers as well. It's really the biggest draw to customers who work with me...they want to know why irons in their set don't feel and perform the same despite being perfectly swingweight matched by other clubfitters.

 

And has anybody given you 'raw data that can back up that claim in trials over 1000s of golfers that can show swingweight matching is superior?'

 

At least GolfSmith attempted to do that and utilized Trackman for it.

 

As far as Tour pros go, how many of them utlize some sort of progressive swingweight in their irons?

 

I would probably say about 20%. And when you look at the Tour pros who mysteriously make their PW, GW and SW much heavier swingweight, you're probably looking at closer to 90%+.

 

And there's a reason for it, they can feel the difference in the heft of their irons throughout the set when they swingweight match them. So they have the right idea, I just think proper MOI fitting and matching would provide them with a more accurate way of using progressive swingweight.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

3JACK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do clubfitting as a hobby and barely make any money off of it. The money I do make goes right back into the hobby, either with purchasing new tools or doing experiments or trying new components, etc. My web site has a lot of posts based on personal experiences in golf, so when I got into learning about MOI matching, readers of mine wanted to know more about it.

 

So I have no ambition to do scientific research with a sample size over 1,000 people (last I knew, a sample of size of 100 was considered scientifically adequate) and have all of the research backed up scientifically. I don't have the time or will to do it.

 

I just think that your statements are fairly misinformed. I HAVE worked with 'perfectly swingweight matched' sets and not only seen a difference in MY impact dispersion once the clubs were MOI-matched, but in several customers as well. It's really the biggest draw to customers who work with me...they want to know why irons in their set don't feel and perform the same despite being perfectly swingweight matched by other clubfitters.

 

I could care less about your credentials, you are nothing but a hobbyist just like myself. I can take your opinion as factual or completely call a bulls*** flag on you and ask for more proof to back up your claims, it is that simple and that is what this boils down to. I find it really funny that when my opinion is different then other peoples on a subject or a review, it starts to sound very defensive in the posts like I mean anything personal against that person. You only happened to be the most avid poster FOR MOI, I happen to be the most avid poster in wanting you to proove it other then your small trials of the claims that you made in your very first post that MOi impact dispersion for all golfers.

 

And has anybody given you 'raw data that can back up that claim in trials over 1000s of golfers that can show swingweight matching is superior?'

At least GolfSmith attempted to do that and utilized Trackman for it.

I assume that someone has proved to you with data the claims of dispersion in the first post you made? All I said was wanting proof that MOi was better then swing weight I didn't make any claim that it was not sure where you got that from. GolfSmith had tighter dispersion when testing off a rack model versus MOI. My point was no s*** you'll get those results as the OEM tolerances for swing weighting suck balls.

 

As far as Tour pros go, how many of them utlize some sort of progressive swingweight in their irons? I would probably say about 20%. And when you look at the Tour pros who mysteriously make their PW, GW and SW much heavier swingweight, you're probably looking at closer to 90%+.

 

And there's a reason for it, they can feel the difference in the heft of their irons throughout the set when they swingweight match them. So they have the right idea, I just think proper MOI fitting and matching would provide them with a more accurate way of using progressive swingweight.

 

Now I am confused, I thought that for years before MOi started gaining ground again with a handful of hobbyists and builders that the PW normally came in at D3 in OEM specs, I know that Vokey and a ton of other wedges have come stock at D4 rating for several years now. There is nothing mysterious about this, a heavier head gives you more control over the face because you can feel and control the head in the downswing.

 

MOI set example --> 3 ~ D0, 4 D ~ 0.5, 5 ~ D1, 6 ~ D1.5, 7 ~ D2.0, 8 ~ D2.5, 9 D3.0, PW D4.0, GW D4.5, SW D5.0, LW D5.5

Swing weight example --> 3 - 9 D2, PW ~ D3, Wedges ~ D4

 

People most of the time can't even feel the difference in one swing weight point. They might be able to tell to at 2 points which one is heaver. so for 5 - PW don't change the feel in majority of golfers hands, you get heavier in the wedges and lighter in the short clubs something I have seen some OEMs going to anyways

 

D1 3 and 4, D2 5 - 9, D3 PW, D4 wedges, this neither supports MOI or says that Swing weight is the best way. All that says to me is that GOLD IS NOT ONE FIT ALL and that the OEMs are selling to the high handicap golfer "distance" we come back full circle to "longer and lighter" in the longer clubs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When we are posting here or on any forum…we have other people reading the forum. I would think that one thing that would cross their mind is ‘what type of credentials does this person have?' Or ‘what's this poster's agenda?'

 

So it's not about being defensive, it's just qualifying my comments. I like the fact that you stated your position as a hobbyist who has a 1 handicap. It makes me understand better where you are coming from rather than the 15 handicap who does clubs for a living, but comes off as the low handicapper who just has an interest in clubfitting and clubmaking.

 

So even if you don't like me explaining my position, I'm sure others prefer it because I know how it is to be reading a thread only to find out that the poster is different than the persona they portray on a message board.

 

As far as results go, I'm sure you could go to Tom Wishon and ask for more scientific research. Or perhaps Richard Kempton out of the UK (www.theclubdoctors.co.uk). Of course, one could say that they have a bias as well because they are clubmakers in favor of MOI fitting and matching.

 

I just find it irrational to be in favor of swingweight matching because MOI matching has no proof that it work…when swingweight matching has no proof that it works either. And you keep talking about clubs off the rack and I keep saying that I have turned customers to MOI fitting from swingweight matching that were not clubs off the rack and were exact swingweight matching and personally have seen their impact dispersion improve. No, I didn't keep scientific record for it, but I'm not going to act like it hasn't happened.

 

D1 3 and 4, D2 5 - 9, D3 PW, D4 wedges, this neither supports MOI or says that Swing weight is the best way

 

I disagree. It's saying that many Tour pros can feel a difference in irons and that if they make every iron the same swingweight, the long irons feel too heavy to them and the short irons feel too light to them. That's why they use some sort of progressive swingweight.

 

When you match the clubs MOI and THEN measure their swingweight, the swingweight will progress as the club gets shorter. Tour pros doing a crude version of swingweight progression certainly is not supporting swingweight matching. What these Tour pros are doing is much more in-line with what MOI matching accomplishes.

 

Obviously, OEM's are promoting a lighter weight club to a degree. But, almost all of the OEM's have options to make the club as heavy as they want because there are custom fitting options for almost every OEM that outside of having to pay for higher priced shafts or grips, are either very inexpensive or do not cost any extra money.

 

Where the OEM's are really trying to improve distance is by moving the CoG on the clubhead lower and de-lofting the iron heads. The ball launches lower while maintaining the same max height and thus unknowing customers think they are hitting it 2-clubs further when they are actually hitting a club built 2 clubs stronger. That will be a much bigger factor in increasing distance than making the swingweight lighter.

 

 

 

 

 

 

3JACK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3Jack,

 

I know you have a MOI scale, but how do you feel about the 3/8" separation rule between clubs in terms of length for "standard" weight club heads? I'm curious how much length gap you have between your clubs?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3Jack,

 

I know you have a MOI scale, but how do you feel about the 3/8" separation rule between clubs in terms of length for "standard" weight club heads? I'm curious how much length gap you have between your clubs?

 

You can do MOI matching with either 1/2" or 3/8". The reason for the 3/8" is that it makes MOI matching a little easier.

 

Let's say you have a set of clubs and you fit yourself for MOI with a 6-iron (standard procedure). And the MOI comes out to 2,700 kg/cm^2. If you utilize the 1/2" increments and your 6-iron is at 37.5" long (standard), then your 3-iron would be 39 inches long.

 

The *potential* problem is that at 39 inches, when you assemble the club with no extra weight added, you *might* have a MOI that is too much higher than 2,700. We generally want a tolerance of +/- 5 kg/cm^2. So at 39 inches, you may wind up having a MOI of 2,730 which would be way too high for this golfer.

 

However, if you utilize 3/8" increments that 3-iron will be 38-5/8" long. So that 3/8" difference in shaft (from the 1/2" increment 3-iront that is 39" long), could be the difference between having a club that has too high of an MOI versus one that may have an MOI under the optimal one and all you have to do is just add a little weight.

 

This really has to do with the OEM's making their heads very heavy. Wishon and GolfSmith have the lightest iron heads I've seen. The reason being is that if you do MOI matching (or even swingweight matching), all you really have to do is add some weight to the head. It's always easier to add weight versus lose weight on a club.

 

I think with Wishon and GolfSmith equipment (or any clubhead that is close to be as light as their heads), you can use 1/2" increments without an issue. Where it gets dicey is when the heads are noticeably heavier. I have a set of Titleist 690MB's that were perfectly swingweight matched and the 3-iron and 4-iron felt like sledgehammers. The 6 and 7-iron felt great. But, when I finally got to measure them, the 3 and 4-irons were at 2770 kg/cm^2 and the 6 and 7 irons were at 2,730 and 2,720 kg/cm^2. My optimal MOI is at 2,725. So that's why I couldn't hit the 3-iron and 4-irons well, but hit the 6 and 7-irons well.

 

Where I think golfers need to be more conscious with their head weights and MOI is taller golfers like myself. I play with +1/2" longer shafts. Making my 6-iron at 38 inches long. Adding that 1/2" of shaft increases the MOI quite a bit. And that's why those Titleist 690MB's were too heavy with the long irons...their iron heads are just too heavy. I would either have to grind the head, trim the shaft down or find a lighter shaft with a thinner inner wall.

 

Recently I purchased a new set of Wishon heads with their Stepless steel shafts and I made those to 3/8" increments. On average, I actually hit them a little further than my 1/2" increment KBS Tour shafts because the stepless steel have a stiffer tip section which keeps the spin down into the wind. However, the tricky part has been figuring out the lie angles because of the difference in shaft length and shaft droop. I hope to get the lie angles bent later this week (I have the lie angles bent last) and hopefully everything works out fine.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

3JACK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...