Wedges

[Fourputt]

This discussion is proving that there is no best wedge, just as there is no BEST putter. There is only what is best for YOU, and you can only find that out by trying everything you can get your hands on. I've gone through a great many wedges through the years, and right now I'm using Vokey spin milled. I just happen to like them, but that doesn't mean that anyone else should buy them just because they work for me.

Just like putters, you should use what feels good in your hands, looks good to your eye, and plays the way you want it to play. Picking purely by brand, or by someone's biased recommendation is a good way to spend a lot of money without getting any satisfaction for it.

 

[texasaggie]

I guess jpstuff is happy with his wedges.Myself I like the polls ,shoot outs and opinions of others. Helps me choose or at least try the club.
Then comes the hard part (how to hit them).:nailbiting:

 

[SunsetBeachGolf]

This discussion is proving that there is no best wedge, just as there is no BEST putter. There is only what is best for YOU, and you can only find that out by trying everything you can get your hands on. I've gone through a great many wedges through the years, and right now I'm using Vokey spin milled. I just happen to like them, but that doesn't mean that anyone else should buy them just because they work for me.

Just like putters, you should use what feels good in your hands, looks good to your eye, and plays the way you want it to play. Picking purely by brand, or by someone's biased recommendation is a good way to spend a lot of money without getting any satisfaction for it.

Well buying anything by name is just silly, we agree completely there. However with putters with some companies you have options.

For instance every golfer has an optimal putter shape they like to look at and and optimal weight and toe hang they need. With custom companies that can make their own handmade hosels and have many putter head shapes to work with can make anything a customer needs.

 

[Fourputt]

Well buying anything by name is just silly, we agree completely there. However with putters with some companies you have options.

For instance every golfer has an optimal putter shape they like to look at and and optimal weight and toe hang they need. With custom companies that can make their own handmade hosels and have many putter head shapes to work with can make anything a customer needs.

My point is that most people haven't a clue what they need until they have a lot of experience using different wedges. With a variety of bounce, face and weight combinations, you need to be able to test before you buy, and that isn't usually possible. Unfortunately, you can rarely find an opportunity to take a set of wedges out on the course and hit them from all situations, and then try another bounce/loft combo and keep doing so until you find what you like. You usually have to buy before you can take them into the sand and other dicey wedge situations, so the process of finding the right wedge can be an expensive process.

 

[JB]

My point is that most people haven't a clue what they need until they have a lot of experience using different wedges. With a variety of bounce, face and weight combinations, you need to be able to test before you buy, and that isn't usually possible. Unfortunately, you can rarely find an opportunity to take a set of wedges out on the course and hit them from all situations, and then try another bounce/loft combo and keep doing so until you find what you like. You usually have to buy before you can take them into the sand and other dicey wedge situations, so the process of finding the right wedge can be an expensive process.

I agree with you to an extent. Better yet, I agree with you almost 100%. However during our Wedge Shoot Out, we saw the same 2-3 wedges outperform basically every single other wedge out there. Looks and feel category aside (those are picked by the testers) in terms of performance and where the ball ended up in relation to the hole with each club it was the same 2-3 wedges for just about everybody. Trending like this we see over and over again.

 

[SunsetBeachGolf]

I agree with you to an extent. Better yet, I agree with you almost 100%. However during our Wedge Shoot Out, we saw the same 2-3 wedges outperform basically every single other wedge out there. Looks and feel category aside (those are picked by the testers) in terms of performance and where the ball ended up in relation to the hole with each club it was the same 2-3 wedges for just about everybody. Trending like this we see over and over again.

I am pretty sure I know two of your top performers, but neither are worth anything for me. I tried the Eidilon and Cleveland. The only Cleveland I have ever really liked were the 588's, and I tried a sand and lob wedge in the Eidilon and could never get what everyone else got out of them. I tried three different shafts in them with no luck.

 

[JPsuff]

I agree with you to an extent. Better yet, I agree with you almost 100%. However during our Wedge Shoot Out, we saw the same 2-3 wedges outperform basically every single other wedge out there. Looks and feel category aside (those are picked by the testers) in terms of performance and where the ball ended up in relation to the hole with each club it was the same 2-3 wedges for just about everybody. Trending like this we see over and over again.

I'm curious.

When these tests are conducted, does everyone know what brand of clubs they're hitting, or are all of the clubs blank?


-JP

 

[JB]

The clubs are taped in the back, but most can figure it out. However it is not up to them to determine which they like best. It is done by measurements. They can say up and down that they like "X" brand the best, but it all comes down to performance.

 

[JPsuff]

The clubs are taped in the back, but most can figure it out. However it is not up to them to determine which they like best. It is done by measurements. They can say up and down that they like "X" brand the best, but it all comes down to performance.

OK.

I guess that's as close as you can get to "blind".


-JP

 

[JB]

I always believed looks played a huge role as well, but all the ones that people said "I love the looks of these" they ended up hitting worse than the ones that did not make their top 5 in looks, the same thing with driver, putters, and hybrids.

 

[JPsuff]

I always believed looks played a huge role as well, but all the ones that people said "I love the looks of these" they ended up hitting worse than the ones that did not make their top 5 in looks.

Which is exactly my point when it comes to such things.

People often "love" a certain club (especially putters) because they've been "told" to love it. It was in someone's bag when they won a major, their favorite player uses one, or simply because of the price (they can afford to pay for such things) or the "buzz" that's been created for it in the golf rags and through other marketing.

I see this a lot with Scotty's.

It still and always will boil down to what feels best and works best for the individual player and I don't think that changes much. Certain designs will tend to win out over others because they possess certain characteristics which have proven, over time, to be superior because they just work.

In my opinion, I believe that equipment manufacturers basically hit the wall in terms of "new and improved" about ten years ago (with the possible exception of drivers) and today it's mostly about shapes and colors (and marketing "ad-speak").

"Fast Swing Technology", anyone?
(of course that got old and was then changed to: "Flight Control Technology ")

Please.

Let's face it, you can't re-invent the wheel forever. Once something works, it works and all that's left after that is to just build around that original concept.


-JP

 

[JB]

In my opinion, I believe that equipment manufacturers basically hit the wall in terms of "new and improved" about ten years ago (with the possible exception of drivers) and today it's mostly about shapes and colors (and marketing "ad-speak").


-JP

I could not disagree more. So much innovations have come in the last 10 years. Shape of drivers, hybrids, grooves in wedges. Foam insert. Hybrid irons. Players Irons that are not blades, the list goes on and on.

Shape and weighting make more of a distance in the feel of a club than anything else out there. This according to John Hoeflich, Tom Stites, Dave Billings, Don White, and about 9 others that make up the top clubmakers in the world.

R&D brings tons of new things to the table each year.

 

[JPsuff]

I could not disagree more. So much innovations have come in the last 10 years. Shape of drivers, hybrids, grooves in wedges. Foam insert. Hybrid irons. Players Irons that are not blades, the list goes on and on.

Shape and weighting make more of a distance in the feel of a club than anything else out there. This according to John Hoeflich, Tom Stites, Dave Billings, Don White, and about 9 others that make up the top clubmakers in the world.

R&D brings tons of new things to the table each year.

Yes but much of that was brainstormed years ago and today it's basically just variations of the same things. Take composite irons, for example. Once the concept of fitting a dissimilar face material to a club body was conceived, everything that has followed is just a variation of that original concept; different materials, different weighting, but still the same premise.

A golf club head is only so big and is only so malleable. How many truly different ways are there to package the same basic idea? It's like the automobile industry, decades ago, manufacturers could design cars that each had their own distinctive look. But as the years passed, virtually every car on the road looks like every other car. That's not anyone's fault nor is it a lack of creativity. It's just that after years of R&D, they've simply run out of ways to make cars different.

Same thing with golf clubs.


-JP

 

[PRO V1 KENOBE]

I currently use Cleveland CG12 wedges with zip grooves,can fault them in any way at all,well worth a look.

 

[JB]

Yes but much of that was brainstormed years ago and today it's basically just variations of the same things. Take composite irons, for example. Once the concept of fitting a dissimilar face material to a club body was conceived, everything that has followed is just a variation of that original concept; different materials, different weighting, but still the same premise.

A golf club head is only so big and is only so malleable. How many truly different ways are there to package the same basic idea? It's like the automobile industry, decades ago, manufacturers could design cars that each had their own distinctive look. But as the years passed, virtually every car on the road looks like every other car. That's not anyone's fault nor is it a lack of creativity. It's just that after years of R&D, they've simply run out of ways to make cars different.

Same thing with golf clubs.


-JP

Then that can be said about anything in the world. However changing the shape even slightly and the weight even slightly makes a huge distance. To say that in 10 years nothing has come along is a complete mess. That means all of these club makers have done nothing. We should all be playing Titleist DCI irons and that nothing has come along to change them.

Club makers spend hours and years researching ideas and I assure you there is a difference. Have you ever thought maybe you cannot tell the difference and that is why it doesnt matter to you? Or that maybe you are a tad stuck in your ways to except that things might have changed? It is a slap in the face to these people to say that they are no more important than a makeup artist because things dont matter.

Small differences is what makes the world go around. But to think that they are all cosmetic is absurd.

 

[JPsuff]

Then that can be said about anything in the world. However changing the shape even slightly and the weight even slightly makes a huge distance. To say that in 10 years nothing has come along is a complete mess. That means all of these club makers have done nothing. We should all be playing Titleist DCI irons and that nothing has come along to change them.

Club makers spend hours and years researching ideas and I assure you there is a difference. Have you ever thought maybe you cannot tell the difference and that is why it doesnt matter to you? Or that maybe you are a tad stuck in your ways to except that things might have changed? It is a slap in the face to these people to say that they are no more important than a makeup artist because things dont matter.

Small differences is what makes the world go around. But to think that they are all cosmetic is absurd.

Maybe.

Have you ever wondered how every year there are a crop of "new" toothbrushes on the market? The toothbrush has existed for at least 4,000 years yet to this day there are ads all over the media proclaiming the latest "new and improved" toothbrush. Does anyone really believe that there could be anything done to a toothbrush that hasn't already been done?

Yet the ads tell us it's so and the consumer goes out and buys them.


It's not the technology that sells new toothbrushes, it's the marketing, baby!

The marketing!


-JP

 

[JB]

Or perhaps its that people wear out their toothbrush. But comparing a plastic item that is used to clean teeth to something that uses metals and weighting and shapes is not apples to apples.

But believe what you want. Its clear that you want to argue just to argue, so have at it. You can continue to play 10 year old equipment if it works for you. If no advances have come out then half the clubs in your bag should not be used and you can get much cheaper clubs that are from 1999.

 

[Hanks]

:starwars:

 

[JPsuff]

I never said that there have never been ANY improvements in golf technology. All I'm saying is that the improvements that have been made are not nearly as profound as the industry would have us believe.

Let's face it, the golf industry is one giant marketing machine. And unlike many other industries, everything the golf industry says, does or allows is all "in house". They have the manufacturers who make the equipment, the pro tours that market the equipment and the USGA that makes the rules and oversees the technology.

Sort of a "Golf Mafia", if you ask me.

Each of them depends upon the other so whatever one says, the others agree with. Sometimes that requires some debate or even litigation (like the "square grooves" controversy years ago), but in the end, the viability and survival of the industry as a whole is the Prime Directive and whatever needs to be done to ensure the industry's survival will be done.

It stands to reason then (in my opinion), that any improvements originating from one portion of the industry are going to be supported and praised by the rest of the industry because they're all part of the same body and they all "need" each other. So it's no surprise that every new bit of technology is going to be promoted as groundbreaking or in some other superlative fashion and all of those within the industry are going to jump on that bandwagon.

In such a case, a marginal improvement becomes "cutting edge" and a new color or style becomes "bold and innovative". I don't blame anyone for doing that - that's just good business. But I also don't believe that every year there's something so different or so innovative that last year's model must be tossed onto E-bay to make room for the "new and improved" version.

The "new and improved" game has been played by every other manufacturer in the world for decades - a product is slightly modified so that FTC laws are not violated but for all intents and purposes this "new" product is just a repackaged version of the old one.

So what makes the golf industry any different?


-JP

 

[JB]

That is not what you said at all previously. Your Quote:

In my opinion, I believe that equipment manufacturers basically hit the wall in terms of "new and improved" about ten years ago (with the possible exception of drivers) and today it's mostly about shapes and colors (and marketing "ad-speak").

Not some innovation. Not some differences. You said hit a wall which to most people means no innovations. Then you went on to say in this thread and in others that you believe the only thing that has changed is cosmetic. That is FLAT OUT NOT TRUE.

Sure tons of it is marketing. Sure tons of it is for sales, as is the case with any industry. But if you think that innovation with irons stopped 10 years ago, then there would be a whole lot of people out of a job. If you believe that the irons and wedges of today are exactly the same performance wise or have not been getting better performance wise over the last 10 years, I think you need to do a little research.

 

[Hanks]

That is not what you said at all previously. Your Quote:

In my opinion, I believe that equipment manufacturers basically hit the wall in terms of "new and improved" about ten years ago (with the possible exception of drivers) and today it's mostly about shapes and colors (and marketing "ad-speak").

Not some innovation. Not some differences. You said hit a wall which to most people means no innovations. Then you went on to say in this thread and in others that you believe the only thing that has changed is cosmetic. That is FLAT OUT NOT TRUE.

Sure tons of it is marketing. Sure tons of it is for sales, as is the case with any industry. But if you think that innovation with irons stopped 10 years ago, then there would be a whole lot of people out of a job. If you believe that the irons and wedges of today are exactly the same performance wise or have not been getting better performance wise over the last 10 years, I think you need to do a little research.

well stated JB!!! :clapp::clapp::clapp:

 

[thedue]

What interests me the most about threads like this is the way different individuals look at the same thing and come away with totaly different conclusions.

A very "Black and White" veiw of things is not a bad thing, but can many times cost a person a lot of enjoyment for new technology, while saving this person a lot of money, lol.

I do have to agree that much of the hype associated with new technology in clubs can get exaggerated greatly, but we forget sometimes how much "feel" and "confidence" can inhance our game, even with outdated or sub-par older technology. Prime example: I have this old wedge I got from my old golf coach. He gave it to me in 1990, at which time the thing looked 20 years old. Starting out this year I hit some great shots with it, but really wanted one of the Cleveland zips. After 2 months I was ready to bring out that old wedge again when I found this site and came across information that changed my swing, swing plane and hands through the shot. Good thing I had my eye's open!

Finally I can hit the Cleveland far better than I ever did my old wedge. I tried the new swing with that old wedge and just can't get the thing to dance like this new one. Frankly, I believe part of it is the indian and part the arrow!

 

[texasaggie]

glad we don't still have the leather golf balls:snicker:

 

[JPsuff]

What interests me the most about threads like this is the way different individuals look at the same thing and come away with totaly different conclusions.

A very "Black and White" veiw of things is not a bad thing, but can many times cost a person a lot of enjoyment for new technology, while saving this person a lot of money, lol.

I do have to agree that much of the hype associated with new technology in clubs can get exaggerated greatly, but we forget sometimes how much "feel" and "confidence" can inhance our game, even with outdated or sub-par older technology. Prime example: I have this old wedge I got from my old golf coach. He gave it to me in 1990, at which time the thing looked 20 years old. Starting out this year I hit some great shots with it, but really wanted one of the Cleveland zips. After 2 months I was ready to bring out that old wedge again when I found this site and came across information that changed my swing, swing plane and hands through the shot. Good thing I had my eye's open!

Finally I can hit the Cleveland far better than I ever did my old wedge. I tried the new swing with that old wedge and just can't get the thing to dance like this new one. Frankly, I believe part of it is the indian and part the arrow!

I believe it's more like 90% Indian and 10% Arrow.

I've seen that proven too many times to think otherwise. I've played with guys who rented clubs at the pro shop and then shot rounds in the low 70's. All of the bells and whistles, the exotic materials, the fittings, the optimizations and all of the other stuff that's touted today as being "essential" may account for a few percentage points worth of game improvement. But the sum and substance of a golfer is his or her ability to put the club on the ball consistently and effectively and the only thing that's going to make that happen is:

Practice...

Practice...

Practice.


-JP

 

[paulthewitt]

I believe it's more like 90% Indian and 10% Arrow.

I believe you are pretty much correct on this point, although I reckon the most forgiving (yes modern) equipment may make this more 80% - 20%.

HOWEVER!

the big thing for this indian is that knowing he has pretty much the best (ie fairly modern) equipment means that the scores are all the indian. I cannot blame the equipment for my bad rounds like i could when i had my first cheap gear.

the other thing it gives me is confidence....all i have to do is swing it right!