What Iron Tech Works For You?

360 face cup for me, to have an off-center shot, which is often for me, still go the expected distance has done wonders for my game. Other areas of my game are lacking, but iron striking has improved a lot this year so far.
 
If I'm being 100% honest, I'm not nearly as in touch with the tech in irons as I am in woods or even putters. I'm a fan of anything that helps with misses on the toe or low on the face, without being too bulky. Luckily for me the new Apex irons are perfect for that.
 
What do you think makes it more effective? Genuine question, not pertaining so much to the group here, but golfers in general. Do you think people understand what makes the V Sole different?

I can’t say for sure but the Hogan sole seems a little narrower with a little more bounce. I’ve almost eliminated all fat shots and my divots are smaller and not as deep but I also don’t have as many thin shots as I would with the Srixon’s
 
I'd have to say the cup face tech has been a game changer for me. With my mishits, it's good to be able to miss toe side and and still have a great result.
 
Cup face and the tech built into the 2019 Apex irons has been great for me.

Prior to that the VSole on the Srixon line was a game changer for me.
My VSoles were on the Hogan irons, otherwise my answer is the same.

The 2019 Apex iron's cup tech with the MIM weighting is phenomenal.
 
Forged iron. 360 Face Cup. Urethane Microspheres. Tungsten weighting specifically placed for each iron to achieve ideal results.
 
I've liked the increased forgiveness, especially toward the toe, and speed retention on mishits with the M6s. I don't know that any of the tech in the irons is new other than the speed bridge. The inverted cone tech has been around for years.

I do miss the nice crisp feeling when a shot is struck well that I got from my old AP1s.
 
There is forgiveness related tech and there is distance related tech.

IMO, if you can hit your longest iron 200 yards down to maybe 180, you probably don't need distance tech (those numbers vary wildly based on personal preference but there is a cap on how far you need to hit your irons and its set by your woods and hybrids). The thin faces, hollow bodies, jacked lofts with low CoG to give you high launch and low spin, etc. are great for people that need it but may actually hurt the people that don't. Personally, I found that cup face hurt my iron accuracy more than the extra distance helped it.

The forgiveness related tech should help just about everyone except for the elite few who always hit the ball dead center and clean on the downstroke. For the rest of us, having a higher MOI and soles that do a good job in the turf really help.
 
Another vote for Cup Face.
 
Personally, I found that cup face hurt my iron accuracy more than the extra distance helped it.

Can you explain this further? Assuming multiple pieces in irons (not forged or cast from a single block), why do you believe removing welds and extending beyond the face cause accuracy issues?
 
There is forgiveness related tech and there is distance related tech.

IMO, if you can hit your longest iron 200 yards down to maybe 180, you probably don't need distance tech (those numbers vary wildly based on personal preference but there is a cap on how far you need to hit your irons and its set by your woods and hybrids). The thin faces, hollow bodies, jacked lofts with low CoG to give you high launch and low spin, etc. are great for people that need it but may actually hurt the people that don't. Personally, I found that cup face hurt my iron accuracy more than the extra distance helped it.

The forgiveness related tech should help just about everyone except for the elite few who always hit the ball dead center and clean on the downstroke. For the rest of us, having a higher MOI and soles that do a good job in the turf really help.

Comparing loft for loft, the shots I hit from 150 yards with my current irons (JPX 900 Hot Metal) fly higher and a more consistent distance than the shots I was hitting in 2013 with my then-current irons (Ping G20). I have to conclude that I'm one of the people for whom higher elevation and less spin is a very much needed combination.

The irons I was playing way back in the day (say 20 years ago) from 150 were hitting low bullets that couldn't stop on the green even though in reality they were spinning like a son of a gun. Just no elevation on any shot longer than a PW.

As for forgiveness, I actually haven't noticed it improving much if at all over the past decade. Those G20's hit straight shots with any sort of straight swing, even if I caught it way out on the toe or high or low on the face. So do the current irons. Once you go big sole and high MOI the forgiveness thing (directional) is what it is.
 
Last edited:
Comparing loft for loft, the shots I hit from 150 yards with my current irons (JPX 900 Hot Metal) fly higher and a more consistent distance than the shots I was hitting in 2013 with my then-current irons (Ping G20). I have to conclude that I'm one of the people for whom higher loft and less spin is a very much needed combination.

The irons I was playing way back in the day (say 20 years ago) from 150 were hitting low bullets that couldn't stop on the green even though in reality they were spinning like a son of a gun. Just no elevation on any shot longer than a PW.

As for forgiveness, I actually haven't noticed it improving much if at all over the past decade. Those G20's hit straight shots with any sort of straight swing, even if I caught it way out on the toe or high or low on the face. So do the current irons. Once you go big sole and high MOI the forgiveness thing (directional) is what it is.

I agree. I'll add something though. At first, manufacturers came out with the thin faces to get more distance. It worked but it increased dispersion. Shots right off the center went further than ones off the edges. The improvements in forgiveness over the past few years have likely gone towards the thin face clubs where the variable face thickness and other small tuning has made it so that the COR is more consistent across the face. Unless you had one of the original thin face clubs and went to a more current forgiving thin face, you may not have noticed.

Basically, the 3rd generation of cup faces is more forgiving than the 1st generation.
 
Can you explain this further? Assuming multiple pieces in irons (not forged or cast from a single block), why do you believe removing welds and extending beyond the face cause accuracy issues?

I'll be specific. I came off some very old cleveland irons that I would get 150 yards off my 8 pretty consistently. I switched to cf16's and got roughly 155 to 160 with greater height off my 8 but if I hit it high off the face it could get up to 165 and shots off the toe would lose more distance than my old club. Effectively, the technology increased my average distance without losing height (probably a gain, actually) at the cost of greater front to back dispersion.

Note: I don't think it was the cup face engineering you noted but the thin, flexible face that is common in many distance irons nowadays.

I switched to an i200, lost some average distance but am now back to having very repeatable and predictable carry distances and I score better. Lesson learned on my part.
 
I'll be specific. I came off some very old cleveland irons that I would get 150 yards off my 8 pretty consistently. I switched to cf16's and got roughly 155 to 160 with greater height off my 8 but if I hit it high off the face it could get up to 165 and shots off the toe would lose more distance than my old club. Effectively, the technology increased my average distance without losing height (probably a gain, actually) at the cost of greater front to back dispersion.

I switched to an i210, lost some average distance but am now back to having very repeatable and predictable carry distances and I score better. Lesson learned on my part.

So less about cup face, and more about lower spin, that makes sense. While lower spin CAN occur from a Cup Face design, it is not guaranteed to do so. What you got differently in depth yardage, COULD have been similar to what you may have lost laterally or still even depth yardage, when missing without it.
 
We were speaking with someone yesterday and their latest iron was filled with a lot of technology. It is not easy to tell a tech forward story with irons, especially online, so my question to THPers was what tech do you believe works for you? Do you even pay attention to it?

I don't know if this is considered tech , appearance design, or a combination of both, but the G700 iron was the first SGI over sized head with an appearance I liked. Specifically, Ping created a large head without a wide diameter top line. I think they achieved this by making the head relatively long from heel-to-toe, and also having a pronounced (high-to-low) slope from the toe to the heel. The end result is a very large head which (to me ) appears graceful rather than bulky/boxy.
 
V sole and weight towards the toe. Tungsten plugs and those types of things.
 
The tungsten weighting has been a factor in a lot of clubmaking recently. Especially in the Titleist line of irons. I like the fact that they can play with the weight distribution around the head & to help spread ball speed across the face. Also, the sole width and profiles have evolved into better camber & radius. How the iron reacts thru the turf is a big deal to me in terms of feel.

This is why I am very intrigued with the new line of "T" irons. I can't wait to hit them :act-up:
 
Getting in late on this but to me to me at least I think that manufacturers have gone in too much on the distance thing instead of getting a consistent playing iron. It's great to have an 8 irons that goes 160 yards but it's dependent on where it is hit on the face without getting drastic. With every new iteration of clubs, the higher, longer, easier to hit takes center stage over consistency. My problem is that I'm not consistent in my striking abilities so to me it's more of a guessing game at times. If I knew I could hit my irons "X" yards with a good strike and "X" yards with an inconsistent strike for me at least it would be better because then I wouldn't be too concerned with a hot strike which has happened. I guess that I'm more of a old school loft type of guy where distance to me is secondary maybe even lower than that. Those type of irons are getting harder and harder to find unless you go to a players iron, which I'm no where close to that.
 
I could hit my irons "X" yards with a good strike and "X" yards with an inconsistent strike

I think this would be cured with a lot more practice.
 
I think this would be cured with a lot more practice.

I'll totally agree on that, but I guess unless we're not playing Thursday through Sunday, most of us would agree with that. I was trying to say that hot strikes also happen depending on where you hit the ball off the face.
 
So less about cup face, and more about lower spin, that makes sense. While lower spin CAN occur from a Cup Face design, it is not guaranteed to do so. What you got differently in depth yardage, COULD have been similar to what you may have lost laterally or still even depth yardage, when missing without it.

And I think that can be mitigated with a fitting. I'm not a super high spin player, so the fitter put me in a shaft that adds a bit more, and I've had zero issues with accuracy outside of my skill level. I hit multiple balls right at the pin I was going at yesterday, including with the cup faced long irons. Being an internet golfer, I had the whole "maybe I should get the short irons from the combo set" in the back of my mind, but I honestly see no need.
 
Either my swing is so weak or maybe I never hit the "hot spot" but that sort of thing is super infrequent for me. I know what my distances are with a solidly struck iron shot using a 9, 8 or 7 (6-iron is a big less consistent for me). I will sometimes flush one that goes maybe 3-4 yards past my "good shot" average. But never anything wildly long unless I catch a flyer out of Bermuda rough. And the bad swings I pretty much know instantly are going to be 5, 10, 15 yards short depending on just how bad.

So maybe that unplanned 4-yard boost isn't ideal but my aiming margins aren't that fine. Maybe if I were hitting 7-iron 160 instead of 140 I'd be seeing hotter hot shots on center hits.
 
Low CG and heel/toe weighting seem to help hide a lot of flaws in my game. There is probably a ton more to it, but those two do a darn good job.
 
Low CG and heel/toe weighting seem to help hide a lot of flaws in my game. There is probably a ton more to it, but those two do a darn good job.

There's other stuff that can help too but those two right there get you to the point where, if you can't play with that club, you just can't play.
 
Srixon’s V sole was a game changer for me, Hogan took it to the next level.

How so? I've been contemplating Srixons for my next irons. Should I look toward Hogan instead?
 
Back
Top