Lofts on modern clubs

It is human nature to take the path of least resistance, make safe decisions, cover your a** etc...
Mostly golf equipment designs are warmed over versions of previous designs. Sure there are some exceptions, but the the designers typically try to "stay within the box of current conventional thinking", because if they don't, and their original idea did not sell well, they may be out of a job.
Putting out stuff similar to what everybody else is doing is safer , so that is what hired employees tend to do.
I think the two most recent significant changes to the golf equipment industry were Karsten Solheim's perimeter weighting concept, for which he had the conviction to apply to putters and irons. The other recent materially significant improvement change to golf equipment was Ely Callaway's release of the over sized metal wood. Both of these men were not employees thinking about job security, they were business owners willing to take the financial risk of supporting their unconventional products.

You VASTLY underestimate the amount of work these R&D crews do. VASTLY.
 
You VASTLY underestimate the amount of work these R&D crews do. VASTLY.

Especially when they’re fighting tooth and nail to reduce grams here and there.
 
Modern GI irons do go farther with lower loft. They also launch higher. However, for everyone getting fit and choosing a club that works for their swing (and not having the fitter do anything too crazy) is the best bet.

The course doesn't care how you get around it. Just play what is either best for your game or what is best for you.
 
You VASTLY underestimate the amount of work these R&D crews do. VASTLY.

I definitely do not equate large R&D budgets, including all the staff and resources used, to necessarily mean that the end result is good sense products. In fact, too many cooks usually spoils the stew.
Throughout history most of the world's iconic products were born from the vision and determination of one person.
 
I definitely do not equate large R&D budgets, including all the staff and resources used, to necessarily mean that the end result is good sense products. In fact, too many cooks usually spoils the stew.
Throughout history most of the world's iconic products were born from the vision and determination of one person.

Amen, all R&D should be a team of one, with no budget at all and that person should be locked into a sensory deprivation chamber with no contact to the outside world or the consumers they’re creating for.




Sheesh.
 
Amen, all R&D should be a team of one, with no budget at all and that person should be locked into a sensory deprivation chamber with no contact to the outside world or the consumers they’re creating for.




Sheesh.

I think they did that to Yagley before he was moved to emerging tech. What does he know though...
 
I think they did that to Yagley before he was moved to emerging tech. What does he know though...

And if we know anything about Yags, he clearly panders to marketing all the time (massive sarcasm there, haha).
 
And if we know anything about Yags, he clearly panders to marketing all the time (massive sarcasm there, haha).

I’m not going to head down the path of much of this thread. I will say that if someone doesn’t believe tech has changed or majorly impacted golf clubs outside of perimeter weighting or oversized metal woods, I would tell them to enjoy their niblick and feathery, while driving to the drive in with their model t. Haha.

Those had impact. Just as countless others. Easy to disregard what isn’t understood though, so we will continue to try and bring knowledge and help golfers learn.
 
I’m not going to head down the path of much of this thread. I will say that if someone doesn’t believe tech has changed or majorly impacted golf clubs outside of perimeter weighting or oversized metal woods, I would tell them to enjoy their niblick and feathery, while driving to the drive in with their model t. Haha.

Those had impact. Just as countless others. Easy to disregard what isn’t understood though, so we will continue to try and bring knowledge and help golfers learn.

The amount new materials or the ability to apply materials alone has revolutionized designs is jaw dropping when one takes the time to look at it. Heck, just look at how Callaway is now applying and suspending tungsten in their designs, its insane.

For me, I hope we keep seeing lofts change, because I know if they do, then the launch and spin parameters are simply getting better and better with the designs. Is it the case with every club? Heck no, some in the past have simply tried to loft down, but look at the releases we have seen this year, and are just now starting to see as well, and there is no denying the R&D that has gone into these clubs.
 
Here are just a few of the variables that affect dynamic loft and distance.

Static Loft - That's what the OP is referencing. This is only one factor affecting dynamic loft (the angle the ball comes off the club in reference to the ground).

Center of Gravity - Fundamentally, if the mass is lower on the face the ball launches higher and vice-a-versa.

Spring Effect - How efficiently energy is transferred from the club to the ball. Just like there are baseball bats that are better or worse at getting a ball to jump off a bat and a softball doesn't go as far as a baseball or a Superball. The smash factor measured by modern launch monitors is in part measuring this.

Shaft Characteristics - If the shaft is loaded (bent back at impact) the club is de-lofted. If the shaft has released (kicked forward) at impact the loft is increased. The speed of the clubhead at impact and amount of energy transferred is also affected.

There is a very long list like this and in some cases the interaction of the various characteristics matters. But hopefully, this is enough to give you the idea.
 
It isn’t that high launch and more distance is a bad thing. It’s the fact the lofts HAVE been jacked in recent times as a result. If my Hogan Black 7 Iron was jacked to 27 as the new Callaway is, it would be a 5 iron (26°) and not nearly as easy to hit. Hogan lofts are more traditional because of the design of the club. The PTX’s might be different because of their “GI” design.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Et Tu Brute?;n8637225 said:
As I say, the results are better. I'm never going back to playing 20th-century technology.

Are they better? I went from 16 year old blade/combo set to a SGI set. But I am playing worse than when I was using the old technology. Also my new SGI irons do not hold the green like the old ones, yes they are a club and half longer but that's no good if I roll off the back of the green.

By that anecdotal evidence, the new technology has not improved the game of golf and the lofts did nothing but change the number stamped on the sole.

That's the great thing about internet musings, so many variables (missing) or cherry picked. Of my above anecdote, I left out that I have been playing bad throughout the bag, driver down to putter. My swing is all off for all clubs and most of my iron contact has been thin, so yes its going to roll out more.

Does it really matter the loft or technology or is it the person swinging the club?
 
Well, I took the leap. I was going to buy the T200/300 irons, but my boss told me about Callaway preowned. I was astounded to find a set of Apex irons that matched my dcis for a great price. So I dusted off my old fitting sheet and bought some like new Apex cf 16 irons. The specs for these irons have a little less offset than my 981s, but not much. I talked to a Callaway rep and was told I could have them bent later if I needed too. So now I have a new set of 6 through PW complemented by a 52,58, and 62 Vokey wedge. I dropped the 4 and 5 iron out of my bag. I have my 7 wood and 5 wood instead. I will probably replace those with more modern hybrid clubs soon.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Back
Top