SteelFiber i95cw Vs fc 90: What I'm experiencing

[El Rayo X]

I've played the SF i95cw (constant weight) in regular for the past 3 years or so and recently got a set of Apex 21 with the SF fc 90 (not CW) in regular flex.
Aerotech says the fc version is supposed to have the same characteristics as the "i" series, but a little higher launch in the long irons.
While I am seeing the higher launch in the 6 and 7 irons, I'm getting a lot worse dispersion overall with these clubs, mainly to the left, with a exaggerated draw.
I took my old irons ( Cobra Forged Tec Black ) with the i95cw shaft with me to the range yesterday and the difference a little shocking, slightly lower, more penetrating flight, and way better dispersion.
I thing the "fc" shafts are much less stable , and a bit softer to flex.
The other thing I'm finding is that I like constant weight or ascending weight shafts.
I was fit to the i95cw at HotStix, and the fc 90 at PGASS.
Anyone else have experience with both these shafts? If so, what are your thoughts?

 

[Summit]

I've played the SF i95cw (constant weight) in regular for the past 3 years or so and recently got a set of Apex 21 with the SF fc 90 (not CW) in regular flex.
Aerotech says the fc version is supposed to have the same characteristics as the "i" series, but a little higher launch in the long irons.
While I am seeing the higher launch in the 6 and 7 irons, I'm getting a lot worse dispersion overall with these clubs, mainly to the left, with a exaggerated draw.
I took my old irons ( Cobra Forged Tec Black ) with the i95cw shaft with me to the range yesterday and the difference a little shocking, slightly lower, more penetrating flight, and way better dispersion.
I thing the "fc" shafts are much less stable , and a bit softer to flex.
The other thing I'm finding is that I like constant weight or ascending weight shafts.
I was fit to the i95cw at HotStix, and the fc 90 at PGASS.
Anyone else have experience with both these shafts? If so, what are your thoughts?

The walls are thinner in the FC vs the CW. The FC are designed for the player who has a fairly smooth swing and just needs some help getting the longer irons up in the air. Chances are your swing characteristics are a bit aggressive for the FC or you needed them tipped a bit more.

 

[El Rayo X]

The walls are thinner in the FC vs the CW. The FC are designed for the player who has a fairly smooth swing and just needs some help getting the longer irons up in the air. Chances are your swing characteristics are a bit aggressive for the FC or you needed them tipped a bit more.

Good info.
I've noticed that if I really slow my tempo, they work well. Very hard for me to maintain that "slow"
Unfortunately, my natural tempo, while not fast, is quicker than the fc's like.

 

[Chef23]

I never played them in a set of irons but I did find the fc90s much looser in fittings for me than the i95s. While I liked the added trajectory the trade off was never there for me given the dispersion issues.

 

[McLovin]

i spent a little time with the after-market sf and the stock sf this past week. the after-market felt very stable to me and i found that i liked it more than i expected. the stock was pretty loose, and while i wasn't as fresh when i was hitting it, i didn't care for it nearly as much.

so you may just prefer the tighter and more controlled performance of the after-market.

 

[Summit]

Good info.
I've noticed that if I really slow my tempo, they work well. Very hard for me to maintain that "slow"
Unfortunately, my natural tempo, while not fast, is quicker than the fc's like.

Yeah. That's understandable. The FCs are part of Callaway's "Custom" fitting cart, so that's probably why the PGASS fit you into them.

 

[El Rayo X]

Yeah. That's understandable. The FCs are part of Callaway's "Custom" fitting cart, so that's probably why the PGASS fit you into them.

The fc's are not all that popular apparently, since Cally is now offering them at no uncharge....lol