We've launched the new forums! Read more here

judging a golf clubs performance on appearance

SuperStroke
ball striker

ball striker

Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2014
Messages
532
Reaction score
0
How much do the looks or appearance of an iron head, driver or putter play when purchasing equipment?? I know for me it's a big factor. I know they say don't judge a book by its cover or in this case a golf club but appearance inspires confidence at address IMO. Now I know it doesn't theoretically make sense on how a club will perform as you still have to swing it but personally I've always liked a nice, thick top line, progressive offset and a wide sole with some sort of camber or bevel in a wide soled iron.....Also a nice, deep cavity or pocket cavity has always appealed to me. On the flip side is I can take a forged blade with thin soles and hit some nice golf shots with them, I just don't like how they look. Am I alone or do some of you buy equipment based on appearance over performance?
 
Last edited:
Doesn't matter too much for me, my first set of irons i bought for myself were cleveland 792 vas's. As long as the driver isn't a square or triangle I'm ok with it. A well struck ball, or drained put is prettier than any club.

Sent from my LG-MS770 using Tapatalk
 
For me, aesthetics are important. I don't want to be looking down at address seeing a club that I find "ugly." Performance is certainly our #1 goal, but with so many different OEM's and club choices there's no reason not to find a club both appealing in appearance and performance. And of course, beauty is in the eye of the golfer.
 
Looks matter.

We like to say that we will play anything of it works, but that is just not the case for many
 
If it does not look right to my eye no matter how good it is i will have a hard time playing it
 
I have to say that, performance aside, I really love the look of a classic blade. Mizzuno, Titleist, whatever. It's almost like the harder to hit well the more I will like it.

Now, if you can convince me that a certain club REALLY works for me, I'm in. Unfortunately I can mis-hit any club ever made.
 
blugold said:
Looks matter.

We like to say that we will play anything of it works, but that is just not the case for many
Click to expand...
Gotta agree, I'd be lying if I said looks don't matter. I'm not as picky about my irons but definitely have a preference with my driver and especially my putter. I've gotten use to a white driver head now and the #9 style putter head just fits my eye.
 
It matters a lot to me. If I don't like what I'm looking down at I'm not going to be confident in hitting a shot. Don't get me wrong, if a club is borderline of me liking it's looks at address then performance will sway that. Some clubs are just too far off from that though.
 
beeDoubleU said:
Doesn't matter too much for me, my first set of irons i bought for myself were cleveland 792 vas's. As long as the driver isn't a square or triangle I'm ok with it. A well struck ball, or drained put is prettier than any club.

Sent from my LG-MS770 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Those were the ugliest clubs ever, but they hit he ball well. Course I played at when they came out had a full demo set and I would take them out from time to time. I liked them, but they were hard to look at.
 
The looks of an iron matter a lot to me. If the top line is too thick or the head is too offset then I'll put the club back in the rack and move on to the next one.
 
When I look down at address, I have to like what I am looking at or the confidence just won't be where it needs to be.
 
StLCardsFan said:
Those were the ugliest clubs ever, but they hit he ball well. Course I played at when they came out had a full demo set and I would take them out from time to time. I liked them, but they were hard to look at.
Click to expand...

My pro who taught me used to tease me and ask me if i was going to weed his garden with my irons.

Sent from my LG-MS770 using Tapatalk
 
blugold said:
Looks matter.

We like to say that we will play anything of it works, but that is just not the case for many
Click to expand...

My first thought is, that doesn't apply to me, but i think looks matter to me as well. I think i like weird looking clubs.

Sent from my LG-MS770 using Tapatalk
 
On the one hand, absolutely the look of clubs matter. Cobra being successful with the Amp Cell and BiO Cell lines is proof that people like good, uniquely colored clubs. That they perform is also nice, but people are putting them in hand in part because they're aesthetically pleasing.

That being said, a term I hear and read a lot of from club designers is "under the hood." They're all about packing as much of what makes a club do what it does, especially in the forgiveness department, away from the aesthetics. Callaway Apex/Pro and TaylorMade Tour Preferred Cavity Back irons are both great examples of creating a certain aesthetic while keeping performance and forgiveness hidden from view.
 
I love the looks of a classic blade iron, but looks don't mean as much to me as they used to. I used to go by looks first and then performance, now I go by performance first, and if they look good, great, if they don't, I'm still going to use them if the performance is there.
 
I always like to put a club down to see how I like it at address. There have been some clubs that I was just dying to hit well but it didn't work out. I don't care how pretty a club is at this point, if I can't play it well there is no chance I'm going to buy it.
 
Last edited:
I'll admit looks matter to me. I try to be open minded but am drawn to a good looking club. That said, I do have to actually be able to hit them. Doesn't help the score if the clubs look good but you can't hit worth spit.
 
While I would prefer to like the way my clubs look.
It has no bearing on if I will game it.
Here are just some of the clubs that I gamed and loved that many thought were ugly.

Backstryke Putter
Dart putter
Spider putter
Cleveland Niblicks
Several different belly putters
Nike Sq driver and FW woods
And I have Bio Cell irons on the way which many wouldn't game because of their looks.
 
Orange Hog said:
While I do like a sharp looking club I'm not one to shy away from playing an ugly duckling as long as it gets the job done. Heck, I played the 588 Altitudes all last year so I clearly have no shame when it comes to aesthetics.
Click to expand...
Them altitudes are an eye sore but they seem to be the most popular set of irons in THP for whatever reason.
 
I don't think it matters either way.
If you have to like the way your clubs look and that's what works for you, great.
It's all about playing what works for you and not for everyone else.
 
Looks are critical to performance for me because if they don't look good they will not be performing in my hands. I am picky picky picky.
 
Looks in the bag does not mean much over performance (I will go with performance)--look at address is different as it affects performance for me.
 
I play what I think are ugly fairway woods (RBZ stage 2) and irons (Speedblades), so I guess I'd say looks aren't too important. But I was embarrassed by them so I painted their crowns and backs.
 
I'm guilty of it as well. I love the look for players' woods and irons, but can't really hit them consistently anymore. Luckily clubmakers have come a long way in combining tech and looks.
 
Its still pretty big in my book. However, there have been a few lately that I would have never purchased that just flat out perform. So im getting to a point where new equipment doesnt have to be the best eye candy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top