"Jacked" Lofts in 2020

[Golf Ghost]

I don't go way back, but as far back as I remember, 48* was always pw loft.

Like what has been stated before, there is no standard. Just a preconceived standard based off past clubs. And like I said before, everyone can play whatever they want. For slower swingers or people with higher spin, stronger lofted clubs are awesome. But for me, they're not ideal. And as far as hitting a 29-30* 7i the same launch conditions as a 34-36* lofted 7i... I don't buy it, and the iron testing I've done doesn't support it. That's just me though.

Never said you said PW was 50. The post about the Tommy clubs stated that according to some here.

Even from past clubs before though, we've seen such a variation between companies.

 

[JB]

Uhm... pw says 48*, and 4* down from there. That's pretty much standard isn't it? Unless you were referring to the ladies clubs.

Must have missed others discussing 50 and even higher in multiple threads...

 

[kevin81002]

Must have missed others discussing 50 and even higher in multiple threads...

That's a gap wedge. ?

 

[ddstanford]

I wonder if they gave me a 4 iron with a 3 iron loft if I could hit with it . My 3 iron psyches me out.

 

[GoldenBuff]

Staying away from the debate, one of these days I am going to get back into my iron experimentation and give a meaningful go to some jacked lofts! I have only played more "standard" lofts. Outside of flight preferences (I hit the ball high already) only issue I might find is what to do after PW. I play a 46* PW now. Stronger gap wedge, fine. Stick with a 58 or 60 lob wedge, fine. In between that however, might take some thinking and getting used to. Kind of fun to think about different iron options. I love to explore.

 

[buckeyewalt]

This is where Hogans idea of putting loft instead of numbers on irons would solve this problem. You could opt for power spec, std, or weaker l ok lofts.

 

[KingSinghUNLTD]

I very clearly recall the Cleveland ad campaign from a few years ago where they promoted 4* loft gaps between wedges for consistent gapping. For me a sand wedge is 54*-56* and the rest should be gapped consistently from there. On the longer end of the bag we’re now seeing 1.5*-2* difference in lofts between 3-4 irons and 4-5 irons. How does this even give proper gapping?

Was the Cleveland ad false? Has the new tech changed gapping on the long end of the bag? Or do the OEMs simply want to make it difficult for the average golfer to buy without spending on a professional fitting just so they can claim to be the longest, highest launching irons for the “high handicapper”.

 

[KingSinghUNLTD]

This is where Hogans idea of putting loft instead of numbers on irons would solve this problem. You could opt for power spec, std, or weaker l ok lofts.

The idea of having power or standard specs is really nice. Now some OEMs can follow the lead of Ping and Titleist.

 

[Golf Ghost]

I very clearly recall the Cleveland ad campaign from a few years ago where they promoted 4* loft gaps between wedges for consistent gapping. For me a sand wedge is 54*-56* and the rest should be gapped consistently from there. On the longer end of the bag we’re now seeing 1.5*-2* difference in lofts between 3-4 irons and 4-5 irons. How does this even give proper gapping?

Was the Cleveland ad false? Has the new tech changed gapping on the long end of the bag? Or do the OEMs simply want to make it difficult for the average golfer to buy without spending on a professional fitting just so they can claim to be the longest, highest launching irons for the “high handicapper”.

Gapping higher in the bag is a bit more difficult. The longer the shaft and lower the loft, the harder to launch for a lot of amateurs. So a lot of time weighting and stuff is involved to change the gaping instead of simply loft differences.

 

[Snickerdog]

On the longer end of the bag we’re now seeing 1.5*-2* difference in lofts between 3-4 irons and 4-5 irons. How does this even give proper gapping?

What irons have that little gap? My Hot Metal irons had 3° gaps from 4-6 irons. I have Epic Forged irons now and they are all 3° from 4-7 iron.
Even in the wood you will usually always see a minimum of 3 degrees also.

 

[arydolphin]

This thread will take off again after embargo drops on a new release next week.

 

[Snickerdog]

This thread will take off again after embargo drops on a new release next week.

It is definitely the thread that will keep on giving.

 

[Jman]

A lot of post in here talked about PW at 50.

Also, what's "standard"?

THIS THIS THIS!

Dafuq is this “standard” we hear about all the time anyway?

 

[RetiredBoomer]

I just wish that there was real customization available.
Giving you a choice of shafts and grips isn't customization.
That's elemental.
So is bending for lie angles (which with most manufacturers is only available on irons and wedges; I don't count those absurd movable hosel things).
Companies like National Custom Works can offer a measure of customization, but only with simple one piece irons, not with modern tech.

Lack of customization possibilities is the downside of tech. When you bought a set of persimmon woods from your club pro, if you wanted custom loft, lie, and face angles, you could get them no questions asked. Upon receiving the order, the manufactured simply lathed the clubheads that way. Not so with clubheads made with multiple materials and processes.

A real high end clubmaker should send you a form in which you fill out the metrics and cosmetics that you want for each club and then have the capability of delivering. Even if you spend six or seven grand on a set of clubs, you'll probably play them for at least a decade or more.

 

[radiman]

I just wish that there was real customization available.
Giving you a choice of shafts and grips isn't customization.
That's elemental.
So is bending for lie angles (which with most manufacturers is only available on irons and wedges; I don't count those absurd movable hosel things).
Companies like National Custom Works can offer a measure of customization, but only with simple one piece irons, not with modern tech.

Lack of customization possibilities is the downside of tech. When you bought a set of persimmon woods from your club pro, if you wanted custom loft, lie, and face angles, you could get them no questions asked. Upon receiving the order, the manufactured simply lathed the clubheads that way. Not so with clubheads made with multiple materials and processes.

A real high end clubmaker should send you a form in which you fill out the metrics and cosmetics that you want for each club and then have the capability of delivering. Even if you spend six or seven grand on a set of clubs, you'll probably play them for at least a decade or more.

Can you imagine how much it would cost to custom make a complete set of clubs without bending. I think $6k-$7k is low. We got to spend some time with Callaway's R&D department. They have this capability to create one off clubs for their tour staff. From what they told us, the cost is staggering. And, it's not like their entire staff is outfit like this. They're still getting their clubs adjusted the good old fashioned way of bending and grinding.

And, even the best golfers in the world use those absurd hosels you referenced. But, I guess I can understand how that's not good enough for yourself.

 

[Pepetito]

Where do you stand on this in 2020?

Necessary for tech that we are seeing?
Excuse to make people think they hit the ball far?
A fad that will go away?

Give some strong reasoning on how you feel, and what matters to you.

I don’t see the issue

 

[GraniteRoost]

I wonder if they gave me a 4 iron with a 3 iron loft if I could hit with it . My 3 iron psyches me out.

I know, right?

I just wish that there was real customization available.
Giving you a choice of shafts and grips isn't customization.
That's elemental.
So is bending for lie angles (which with most manufacturers is only available on irons and wedges; I don't count those absurd movable hosel things).
Companies like National Custom Works can offer a measure of customization, but only with simple one piece irons, not with modern tech.

Lack of customization possibilities is the downside of tech. When you bought a set of persimmon woods from your club pro, if you wanted custom loft, lie, and face angles, you could get them no questions asked. Upon receiving the order, the manufactured simply lathed the clubheads that way. Not so with clubheads made with multiple materials and processes.

A real high end clubmaker should send you a form in which you fill out the metrics and cosmetics that you want for each club and then have the capability of delivering. Even if you spend six or seven grand on a set of clubs, you'll probably play them for at least a decade or more.

I think where we are headed is that if you are grinding, you are likely affecting with detriment, the properties engineered into the golf club. Think about hollow bodies and how they are designed to flex and are highly engineered structures.

Now, with Callaway AI in 2020, they have optimized each clubface across an entire set of clubs. I would pose that shaft makers and club makers are on the path to fitting tools that will economically truly allow custom shafts or heads to be a thing of the future.

Consider MIM manufacturing, 3D printing, combined with custom fitting, and AI. Lots of possibilities here

 

[RetiredBoomer]

Can you imagine how much it would cost to custom make a complete set of clubs without bending. I think $6k-$7k is low. We got to spend some time with Callaway's R&D department. They have this capability to create one off clubs for their tour staff. From what they told us, the cost is staggering. And, it's not like their entire staff is outfit like this. They're still getting their clubs adjusted the good old fashioned way of bending and grinding.

And, even the best golfers in the world use those absurd hosels you referenced. But, I guess I can understand how that's not good enough for yourself.

I understand the obstacles. I'm merely saying what I WISH was available.

This is the reality. All the many benefits that do come with the new tech have also made it HARDER to offer customization. It was quite easy to custom lathe a persimmon or laminated maple clubhead. It was easy fror a skilled craftsman to custom grind a one piece carbon steel blade. Now, with more sophisticated club engineering, that level of customization would be quite hard.

I have the personal disadvantage that the modern spec references deployed today are terrible for me personally. I play better with obsolete clubs that fit than with more sopisticated clubs with better technology but which don't come close to fitting. Others may try to tell me that anybody can be comfortably fit with modern clubs, but on this subject, I'm the one who knows.

 

[radiman]

I understand the obstacles. I'm merely saying what I WISH was available.

This is the reality. All the many benefits that do come with the new tech have also made it HARDER to offer customization. It was quite easy to custom lathe a persimmon or laminated maple clubhead. It was easy fror a skilled craftsman to custom grind a one piece carbon steel blade. Now, with more sophisticated club engineering, that level of customization would be quite hard.

I have the personal disadvantage that the modern spec references deployed today are terrible for me personally. I play better with obsolete clubs that fit than with more sopisticated clubs with better technology but which don't come close to fitting. Others may try to tell me that anybody can be comfortably fit with modern clubs, but on this subject, I'm the one who knows.

I don't mean any ill will with this statement, so please don't take it as an attack. But, it seems to me that your issue may lie in a refusal to accept modern clubs in general. As in you may not be coming in with an open mind. I've seen you reference your hesitation in multiple threads.

So, if it's not a mental thing and your game is truly not able to accept modern club tech, I think you're in a very small minority. And as much as I'd like to see something come out that was able to please everyone, I don't think things are going to regress to a point that matches club specs from multiple generations ago.

Play what you play best with. Whatever makes you enjoy the game the most.

My own experience in stronger lofts seems to be a smooth transition. The lofts on my new irons are 2.5 degrees stronger than my old set. With the new face and the stronger loft, I'm almost exactly a club longer. So, I'm adjusting my set makeup. I'm not focusing on the number on the bottom of my clubs or even the stated lofts for that matter. But on how far I hit each club. I'll still have consistent gapping through the bag. The clubs I hit into the greens will just have a different number on them.

 

[Thrillbilly Jim]

This is where Hogans idea of putting loft instead of numbers on irons would solve this problem. You could opt for power spec, std, or weaker l ok lofts.

People basically lost their $#!t because Hogan did that! They had to go back and etch a number on the hozel to appease people! Apparently, golfers cannot swing a club with a 7 on the bottom of it!

 

[Snickerdog]

People basically lost their $#!t because Hogan did that! They had to go back and etch a number on the hozel to appease people! Apparently, golfers cannot swing a club with a 7 on the bottom of it!

That 7 throws everything off.

 

[JB]

People basically lost their $#!t because Hogan did that! They had to go back and etch a number on the hozel to appease people! Apparently, golfers cannot swing a club with a 7 on the bottom of it!

Here is the perfect example summing up how little most golfers care about this subject. Ben Hogan irons have increased sales by well over 100% since abandoning just having lofts on them.

 

[RetiredBoomer]

Here is the perfect example summing up how little most golfers care about this subject. Ben Hogan irons have increased sales by well over 100% since abandoning just having lofts on them.

Needless to say, I liked and applauded that failed experiment.

Edel, by the way, offers a choice of lofts, club numbers, or both (just on the conventional variable length model, not on the one-length model) . It proves that custom stamping isn't that hard.

 

[Johan185]

First of all. of course play what you want. Of Course play the best clubs to suit your game.

A random review of 5 irons specs from most major OEM'S lofts. 21, 21.5, 22, 22.5, 23, 23.5. 24, 24.5. 25. 27, 28 degrees. All with the purpose of hitting the 5 irons 210 yards.

I hit a 21 degree 3 iron 210 to 220 yards.

I hit a 5 iron 21 to 23 degrees 200 yards.

My 27 degree 5 iron goes 180 to 190 yards.

4 iron at 24 degrees goes 190 to 200.

My gaps get overlapped with a 17 degree 3 iron to a 21 degree 5 iron. No easier to hit than any other 21 degree club. No technological advantage .

But to each his own

 

[JB]

First of all. of course play what you want. Of Course play the best clubs to suit your game.

A random review of 5 irons specs from most major OEM'S lofts. 21, 21.5, 22, 22.5, 23, 23.5. 24, 24.5. 25. 27, 28 degrees. All with the purpose of hitting the 5 irons 210 yards.

I hit a 21 degree 3 iron 210 to 220 yards.

I hit a 5 iron 21 to 23 degrees 200 yards.

My 27 degree 5 iron goes 180 to 190 yards.

4 iron at 24 degrees goes 190 to 200.

My gaps get overlapped with a 17 degree 3 iron to a 21 degree 5 iron. No easier to hit than any other 21 degree club. No technological advantage .

But to each his own

Quesation for you. Why do you play your driver at 7.5*?
Becuase it fits your game best, right? If you put a 5.5* driver it wouldn’t carry further, right? Just like if you took 5 drivers that were all 10.5* they wouldn’t automatically go the same distance, because spin and launch varies, correct?

So why is their an immediate assumption that loft is the only determining factor in distance if every golfer already knows it isnt.