Stock PW vs. Aftermarket PW

[All4's]

As I said, it's part marketing. I'm certainly not so blind as to think that isn't an element.

I find this part very interesting. Almost every golfer I have ever met in every capacity has more confidence in their irons as they get shorter. Having a 7 iron in ones hand normally carries more confidence that having a 6 iron (again for almost every golfer I have met). This is why you see combo sets are popular, because many golfers feel as though forgiveness is needed less in scoring irons.

But you seem to still be looking at this from the whole a 7 iron is still a 6 iron with a different number stamped on it and that really is not correct out side of loft. Because my 7 iron and your 6 iron will have different ball flights despite going the same distance. With the change in weighting, and different levels of club design, you can now have an iron fly the distance of a 6 iron and have the same ball flight as a 7 iron. That is where the change was made (and why it was made).

So I go back to the question I asked above. If new technology came about that made irons go 10 yards further per iron due to whatever the reason, but the lofts were still the same, would you still have issues with it?

I can tell you that I have been playing this game for a long time. At some points quite well, and I assure you I have ALWAYS had more confidence in my irons as they go up. I feel better picking up a 7 iron than I do a 6 iron and as you yourself have mentioned in many threads about the looks of clubs, this game apparently is quite mental.

I guess we just see it differently. I don't relate my comfort level as much to the club I am hitting as I relate it to the distance I have to cover. I definitely agree that hitting a higher club is more comfortable, but to me that is only because that equates to being closer. I feel better about covering 150 than 170 no matter what club is in hand. Having a higher number stamped on the bottom isn't as much of a factor. I'll concede that this is more of factor for some than others.

To answer your question I equate every iron to yardage, not lofts, or flights. So I don't care what loft my 8 has so long as it still goes 150-155 AND produces the ballflight I want. I don't want an 8 iron that goes 165 with an 8 iron flight. Label that club a 7 iron since that is how far a standard 7 iron should go for me, regardless of flight. As I said earlier, if they had to deloft a club to make it go a standard 8 iron distance due to design/shaft/whatever, then so be it. But I don't think that is what is happening since every delofted club I see goes farther than standard instead.

So far, the only merit I can gather from the argument for delofted clubs is the mental illusion aspect. I just don't find that compelling, or compelling enough to cause someone to have to realign their entire bag (in the most critical area for coring no less) to cover gaps created for no reason other than a possible mental trick, or my contention, a marketing angle for the OEM's to tout distance.

EDIT: I should add that I have no issue with someone choosing to play non stronger lofted clubs, but I do take some issue with someone saying my PW is not a PW and so on. It is a PW, flies the same flight as a PW, I use it as my PW and it is stamped that way.

I said it wasn't a PW to me because again, I am tied to the yardage, not loft or flight or anything else. A PW to me is defined by the yardage it travels, not the flight it takes to get there. Every set of irons can have different flights based on their design, so flight should be the variable and yardage should be the constant, not vice versa.] I can get the flight I want through the proper combination of head design/shaft/ball. So because your PW goes a 9 iron distance, it isn't a PW to me based on the above logic of a PW having the sole mission of covering a specific distance. To me it is a 9 iron because it is covering a 9 irons distance. I am not trying to be glib or insulting, so I hope by explaining it as I have above it clarifies why I say your PW is not a PW to me unless it goes 130-135 with a standard swing.

 

[coolbreeze]

THis is confusing to me, so if you took some lessons and started working out, and you could hit your PW 150 then it would no longer be a PW?

 

[All4's]

That is abstracting the argument quite a bit. Instead, let me ask this of the delofted crowd. When do you say when?

Let's say next year Taylor Made makes a set that the iron stamped an 8 iron goes 260 yards with "an 8 iron flight". Has that bastardized the set to the pint that you cry uncle? At that point do you concede it isn't a positive to have skewed the yardages so much?

 

[JB]

That is abstracting the argument quite a bit. Instead, let me ask this of the delofted crowd. When do you say when?

Let's say next year Taylor Made makes a set that the iron stamped an 8 iron goes 260 yards with "an 8 iron flight". Has that bastardized the set to the pint that you cry uncle? At that point do you concede it isn't a positive to have skewed the yardages so much?

That is a ridiculous comparison though.

Im very curious your thoughts to Coolbreezes question. You said that if you base everything off yardage and that if you hit your 8 iron 165 it would then be a 7 iron. So if you got better or stronger or grooved your swing and all of the sudden hit your same clubs further, what does that do to your thought on the subject? Do you take a sharpie and change all the numbers? Get irons bent to match the older specs?

EDIT:

Once again you are relating it only to marketing and taking out everything that has been said on the subject about why the lofts were changed for many of these companies. If you look at the lineup, stronger lofts are almost always only seen in clubs where weighting is different than what was seen a decade ago. If it was all about marketing, why would a company not just change the lofts on their entire lineup?

 

[MikeF]

At the end of the day a PW is a PW regardless of how far someone hits it. Just because person y hits it x yards doesn't make it anything other than a PW


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk because I am away from my Mac

 

[Esox]

How many years do we have to wait before the lower lofted PW can be called a PW. I had a set of Mizuno TP 9 blades. The PW loft was 50*. The only iron 2-PW with any bounce was the PW and that was 2*.

I guess then I could say just about any PW with less than 50* of loft isn't a pitching wedge.

But I wouldn't because it would be ridiculous. Clubs have changed. Hell, golf course have changed. If golf courses used to mostly be 6,000-6,400 yards, and now they're all built to 7,000 plus, are they not golf courses?

Kevin

 

[WMac19]

Im very curious your thoughts to Coolbreezes question. You said that if you base everything off yardage and that if you hit your 8 iron 165 it would then be a 7 iron. So if you got better or stronger or grooved your swing and all of the sudden hit your same clubs further, what does that do to your thought on the subject? Do you take a sharpie and change all the numbers? Get irons bent to match the older specs?

Good point. Last season, a smooth 8-iron with my MX-200's was 155 yards. This year, after working really hard in the gym since October, my 8-iron distance with an MP-52 8-iron (2* weaker loft, same length/shaft) is 165-170.

Incidentally, I have a 6* gap between my MX-200 7-iron and MP-52 8-iron. I figured to player-test the clubs first before deciding upon any adjustments. Whether it be the mass behind the ball with the MP's or what, I'm really not having any difficulty with a gap. Time will tell...

I've truly never cared what one company chooses to call a particular club relevant to loft. If somebody hits their 42* PW past my 43* 9-iron and feels good about it... more power to 'em. I play the course and have never nor will I ever compare my clubs to another's. I'm kinda' surprised it's an issue.

 

[wburdett]

I'm a stock wedge guy myself as I really think it is a short iron more similiar than specialty wedges. Not playing half pw that much as 3/4 56 or or full 60's would be easier shot given loft and bounce of the pw. My pw is 47 as well

 

[daveetrice]

I have always used the Stock PW. My current PW is 42.5* which is pretty strong. I think of my GW/46* as my Pitching Wedge.

 

[anotherday]

I've been testing out different irons because I've been looking into getting a new set. With the stronger lofts and new technology, the balls are going farther than with my current set. I don't think it would make sense to look for a set of irons that go as far as my current set just for the convenience of not having to re-learn my distances. If my 8 iron goes 160 with a new club, well then that is my new 8 iron distance.

I like the enthusiasm throughout this post but at the end of the day it doesn't look like anyone's minds will be changed on the topic. Also, does it really matter what someone considers their PW or any other club?

The other day I popped up a 90 yarder with my driver... so I'm going to call that my Lob wedge now.

 

[All4's]

That is a ridiculous comparison though.

Im very curious your thoughts to Coolbreezes question. You said that if you base everything off yardage and that if you hit your 8 iron 165 it would then be a 7 iron. So if you got better or stronger or grooved your swing and all of the sudden hit your same clubs further, what does that do to your thought on the subject? Do you take a sharpie and change all the numbers? Get irons bent to match the older specs?

EDIT:

Once again you are relating it only to marketing and taking out everything that has been said on the subject about why the lofts were changed for many of these companies. If you look at the lineup, stronger lofts are almost always only seen in clubs where weighting is different than what was seen a decade ago. If it was all about marketing, why would a company not just change the lofts on their entire lineup?

I was using an exaggerated comparison to make the point more explicit, as you did with a driver to PW comparison. When is an 8 iron no longer really what is stamped on the bottom of the club? That was the philosophical point I was bringing up. Change the question to 8 irons going 180, same principle.

To answer Coolbreezes' question; no that wouldn't bother me at all, as your premise introduces another variable, me. Your premise just changes what my standard 8 iron swing distance is. So I'd be fine with hitting my 8 iron further, but would be back to where we started if I tried a different, stronger lofted set and the 8 iron from that set goes 165. It is all relative. Same way I don't care that Bubba Watson hits his 47* PW 160 yards with his standard swing.

Let me make the point a totally different way since it seems my previous descriptions might have been taken in the context of how clubs relate to me. Historically, an 8 iron is seen as a 150 yard club taken on average. Let's say this year's golf census determines that the average 0-10 handicapper has an 8 iron swing speed of 94mph. My contention is that manufacturers targeting that market should stamp an 8 on the bottom of the club that goes 150 yard with a 94 mph swing with their design offering. That makes 8 irons consistent. Then the only variable is individual swings, so I may hit mine 140 and Bubba hits his 180. But we both hit all of the irons we try that far, but their individual design characteristics offer differing flights, forgiveness, workability, etc. to match a golfer's desired performance set The point being that there is no reason to add the variable of clubs going farther than the number on the bottom indicates they should go. While every person's standard swing distances are unique, the clubs are static.

That isn't what is happening. JB I have addressed your assertion that tech has changed and thus you can now hit a 6 iron that goes a 6 iron distance but has a 7 iron's flight. That was the majority of my last post, so I think there is a disconnect. Possibly my issue so let me give it another, hopefully better, try. I am saying if a club goes a 6 iron distance, with a 7 iron flight, it should be stamped a 6 because the yardage trumps the flight in relation to how golf has been and is played. Why stamp it a 7 because of a secondary characteristic like flight? Yardage is the primary concern of an iron and most other clubs.

 

[All4's]

At the end of the day a PW is a PW regardless of how far someone hits it. Just because person y hits it x yards doesn't make it anything other than a PW


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk because I am away from my Mac

I disagree. What if stamp PW on my driver. Does that not make it a driver? Same concpet as relabeling a 6 a 7, etc. Remove the person from the equation. Say it is Iron Byron. I assert that all 8 irons should go between 150-160 when that machine swings them. Why woudl you ever label them a 9? Unless you want to market them as longer.

 

[JB]

How many years do we have to wait before the lower lofted PW can be called a PW. I had a set of Mizuno TP 9 blades. The PW loft was 50*. The only iron 2-PW with any bounce was the PW and that was 2*.

I guess then I could say just about any PW with less than 50* of loft isn't a pitching wedge.

But I wouldn't because it would be ridiculous. Clubs have changed. Hell, golf course have changed. If golf courses used to mostly be 6,000-6,400 yards, and now they're all built to 7,000 plus, are they not golf courses?

Kevin

Great point Esox. My 1st set had a 50* PW and I always played it as a PW. When I moved to a 48* PW in my opinion it was still a PW.

Historically, an 8 iron is seen as a 150 yard club taken on average. Let's say this year's golf census determines that the average 0-10 handicapper has an 8 iron swing speed of 94mph. My contention is that manufacturers targeting that market should stamp an 8 on the bottom of the club that goes 150 yard with a 94 mph swing with their design offering. That makes 8 irons consistent. Then the only variable is individual swings, so I may hit mine 140 and Bubba hits his 180. But we both hit all of the irons we try that far, but their individual design characteristics offer differing flights, forgiveness, workability, etc. to match a golfer's desired performance set The point being that there is no reason to add the variable of clubs going farther than the number on the bottom indicates they should go. While every person's standard swing distances are unique, the clubs are static.

That isn't what is happening. JB I have addressed your assertion that tech has changed and thus you can now hit a 6 iron that goes a 6 iron distance but has a 7 iron's flight. That was the majority of my last post, so I think there is a disconnect. Possibly my issue so let me give it another, hopefully better, try. I am saying if a club goes a 6 iron distance, with a 7 iron flight, it should be stamped a 6 because the yardage trumps the flight in relation to how golf has been and is played. Why stamp it a 7 because of a secondary characteristic like flight? Yardage is the primary concern of an iron and most other clubs.

Couple of things. Im not sure where the data comes from (pertaining to history saying an 8 iron is 150 yards), do you have a source?

As to the 2nd part, I completely disagree. How in the world can you base the numbers on the bottom of a club by distance if everybody hits it differently. The numbers have always been based on ball flight internally in the industry (modern era) because that is the one factor that is for the most part similar across the board. Just as when a PW was 50* and most in the industry used that as the measure, we heard the same thing when wedges went to 48*. Then a few years later, that went away. It all changed because weight was moved and a higher ball flight was more common.

Im still just completely confused with your reasoning. You dont like stronger lofted clubs because you say an 8 iron is supposed to go X distance. If you get stronger and hit it further, that is accepted. Yet if the irons get stronger, that is not accepted. But yet you still say that an 8 iron is only supposed to go X distance.

 

[JB]

I disagree. What if stamp PW on my driver. Does that not make it a driver? Same concpet as relabeling a 6 a 7, etc. Remove the person from the equation. Say it is Iron Byron. I assert that all 8 irons should go between 150-160 when that machine swings them. Why woudl you ever label them a 9? Unless you want to market them as longer.

No its not the same concept. The ball flight is different. Again you are labeling this as their reasoning being because of distance. However it is based on ball flight, not distance.

 

[All4's]

No its not the same concept. The ball flight is different. Again you are labeling this as their reasoning being because of distance. However it is based on ball flight, not distance.

I think we are at a deadlock as your assertion is that ball flight is the central indicator of what should be stamped on the bottom and mine is that yardage is the central indicator. I've made my point several ways and we keep coming back to the same point. I keep trying to remove individuality and make the clubs static, and some keep taking the specific (me or another individual's distance hit with an 8 iron) and applying it the general (the perception by the majority of how far an average person should hit an 8 iron).

I started by saying I didn't want to reignite the debate, but I am glad I did. It's been fun and I'd be lying if I said I didn't expand my perception somewhat and see a little more of the argument for why the changes have happened. In my heart of hearts, I still think it is primarily marketing. But now, I think it is 90% marketing and 10% technology causing changes, which is a credit to the dialogue since I began the discussion seeing it as 100% marketing.

I'm settling in to watch The Heritage now gents.

 

[10YardDraw]

No its not the same concept. The ball flight is different. Again you are labeling this as their reasoning being because of distance. However it is based on ball flight, not distance.

i agree with this mostly, i go by ball flight more than i do distance, say im behind a tree and need to get over it but im 160 yards from the green, im not gonna grab my 160 yard club, im gonna grab the one that will have the correct ball flight to get over the tree even if it does leave me short of the green, same in the fairway for me anyway, i use the club thats gonna give me the best ball flight for the shot i want to hit, sometimes i will use a 7 or 8 iron from just over 100 yards if i wanna keep it really low

 

[JB]

I think we are at a deadlock as your assertion is that ball flight is the central indicator of what should be stamped on the bottom and mine is that yardage is the central indicator.

Actually that is not what I said. I dont have an opinion, all I am doing is reporting actual facts as to why it was done based on our experience working with some of the top clubmakers in the industry.

 

[All4's]

The numbers have always been based on ball flight internally in the industry (modern era) because that is the one factor that is for the most part similar across the board.

Actually that is not what I said. I dont have an opinion, all I am doing is reporting actual facts as to why it was done based on our experience working with some of the top clubmakers in the industry.

OK, that was pointed enough to bring me back briefly. I was referencing the above quote as your assertion.

 

[JB]

OK, that was pointed enough to bring me back briefly. I was referencing the above quote as your assertion.

Im confused. I think I said the same thing above (in both quotes)

 

[All4's]

Im confused. I think I said the same thing above (in both quotes)

Maybe I misunderstood then. What were you referring to when you stated "Actually that is not what I said."?

 

[CharlieMoy]

He didnt say "Ball flight is the only indicator of whats stamped on the bottom", as he doesnt have an opinion. I dont want to put words in JBs mouth, but I believe he was just stating industry trends and citing reasons for them, from what I can tell.

Maybe I misunderstood then. What were you referring to when you stated "Actually that is not what I said."?

 

[JB]

Maybe I misunderstood then. What were you referring to when you stated "Actually that is not what I said."?

You said it was my assertion. What I am saying is that it is not. I am merely reporting facts that have been presented to us. Not my opinion. We are here to go past marketing at THP and by doing so it involves getting to the bottom of things such as these debates. There is no other way to do that better than going to the people that build clubs and find out the reasoning behind why they have done these things in the past.

 

[Sean]

I'm late to this thread. But I use the PW that came with the set. In fact I use the GW, SW, and LW too. The loft gaps are perfect, the shafts are the same and the distance gaps suit me just fine too.

 

[All4's]

You said it was my assertion. What I am saying is that it is not. I am merely reporting facts that have been presented to us. Not my opinion. We are here to go past marketing at THP and by doing so it involves getting to the bottom of things such as these debates. There is no other way to do that better than going to the people that build clubs and find out the reasoning behind why they have done these things in the past.

Understood. I guess that still leaves us seeing it differently. I agree that it is a fact that some changes in design and technology have caused some clubs to go farther with the same flight, I don't believe that it is a fact that is the reason why they stamp the number on the bottom that they do. I still think that is driven primarily by marketing. That decision is being made by the VP of Sales and not the VP of Engineering I think. So be it.

I've enjoyed the discussion and have to say the ability to have this type of discussion in a reasonable, intelligent fashion is part of what makes THP so awesome. Thanks to all who participated in this historic thread jack. :embarrassed:

 

[10YardDraw]

Understood. I guess that still leaves us seeing it differently. I agree that it is a fact that some changes in design and technology have caused some clubs to go farther with the same flight, I don't believe that it is a fact that is the reason why they stamp the number on the bottom that they do. I still think that is driven primarily by marketing. That decision is being made by the VP of Sales and not the VP of Engineering I think. So be it.

I've enjoyed the discussion and have to say the ability to have this type of discussion in a reasonable, intelligent fashion is part of what makes THP so awesome. Thanks to all who participated in this historic thread jack. :embarrassed:

I agree 1,000%, other forums this would of turned into a huge fight with some very bad comments.