Stock PW vs. Aftermarket PW

[Smallville]

I use the PW that came with my set. I also use the 50* PW that came with another set.

 

[cammyandcarter]

I hit my pitching wedge a bunch during my rounds. I dont get a ton of spin from my stock pw, which is fine. I would like more spin at times, so I thought why not buy a cg16 with the same loft (48) as my pw. So I did it yesterday. Bad move. I am not confident with it at address, and for whatever reason, I hit it half as far as my stock wedge. I noticed my stock is approx 1/2" longer but don't think thats a huge factor. I chipped with it a few times but I didnt spend $130 for a club just to chip with. I'm going to stick with it for a bit and work at it but right now my stock wedge is my gamer.

 

[MikeF]

I disagree. What if stamp PW on my driver. Does that not make it a driver? Same concpet as relabeling a 6 a 7, etc. Remove the person from the equation. Say it is Iron Byron. I assert that all 8 irons should go between 150-160 when that machine swings them. Why woudl you ever label them a 9? Unless you want to market them as longer.

A machine is different to a person though as every swing can be set to the same thus yardage with each club should be roughly the same. With a person it is different but as lon as you are hitting the club that the manufacturers have stamped PW then it is a PW

I personally don't care how far someone hits there wedge. I hit my distance and if that is further than someone else 9 then so be it, it doesn't make my club anything other than a PW


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk because I am away from my Mac

 

[JB]

Understood. I guess that still leaves us seeing it differently. I agree that it is a fact that some changes in design and technology have caused some clubs to go farther with the same flight, I don't believe that it is a fact that is the reason why they stamp the number on the bottom that they do. I still think that is driven primarily by marketing. That decision is being made by the VP of Sales and not the VP of Engineering I think. So be it.

I've enjoyed the discussion and have to say the ability to have this type of discussion in a reasonable, intelligent fashion is part of what makes THP so awesome. Thanks to all who participated in this historic thread jack. :embarrassed:

Wow there are a whole lot of club makers that would strongly disagree with that bolded part. I have passed on the info in this thread that we have been given by numerous people at multiple companies in all facets of the industry. But a few questions have gone unanswered and I would love to hear more on or at least the answers if you dont mind.

You said historically an 8 iron is the 150 yard club. I would love to know where that information came from and if you could point me to the source. All the people I have ever spoken to in the industry describe the 8 iron by ball flight height, not distance (as I have said), but I have looked into that number and it appears way shorter (by historic standards even in the modern era).

Esox had a great point about the PW used to be 50*. Why was it okay to move to 48* after ball flight changed with the lower CG, but not okay to do it now?

Lastly, Im still just completely confused with your reasoning. You dont like stronger lofted clubs because you say an 8 iron is supposed to go X distance. If you get stronger and hit it further, that is accepted and despite the ball going further than X distance, it would still be an 8 iron. Yet if the irons get stronger, that is not accepted.

One more thing, I agree with the above sentiments in that this is what makes this place fun. The members here for the most part are all incredible people and make this such a fun place to debate and talk golf. Hats off to all of you.

 

[dgstern]

Since so many people hit an 8 iron different distances, logic would indicate that distance is NOT the main influencing factor on what is an 8 iron.

 

[Hawk]

Since so many people hit an 8 iron different distances, logic would indicate that distance is NOT the main influencing factor on what is an 8 iron.

You would think. I wish I hit mine 150. Maybe I need even stronger lofts?

 

[Fourputt]

I think that I gave myself a headache trying to follow all of this. What I get from it is - if I hit my 9I on the same trajectory as my buddy hits his SW, then I really have a SW in my hand? Or does he really have a 9I? :confused2:

Or are we both hitting drivers and we're just too stupid to realize it?

All I know is that since the early 90's, iron lofts have been getting stronger in some club lines, and it's been common knowledge that a major factor in that change was so that Club A could be advertised as being longer than Club B. The clubmakers can protest all they want, but I see that as a conflict of interest, so I take it with a grain of salt.

 

[JB]

it's been common knowledge that a major factor in that change was so that Club A could be advertised as being longer than Club B. The clubmakers can protest all they want, but I see that as a conflict of interest, so I take it with a grain of salt.

I think some are classifying clubmakers as the "company" and that is not really the case. Many club makers such as two of the best ever (Long & Hoeffy) do not work for companies anymore and are consultants on projects for many different OEMs and individual projects. Is that still a conflict of interest? Virtually retired club makers that were the reason that many of these lofts changed. If the two of them are not experts in the field, I dont know who would be. One of them was one of the 1st to take a PW from 50* to 48* because of the moved weight and ball flight.

Is a 48* PW a PW? If it is then why? Prior to that they were all 50*. They were moved (according to the guy that moved them) because of a changed CG. So the confusion must be that if a PW was allowed to move to 48* why is it not now allowed to move again?

I should add that no where have I said that marketing did not come as a direct result of what transpired. But that was not the reason the change was made. In the end, who cares? No offense here to anybody, but I could care less if someone wants to live in a pretend world where they dont think that a PW I might using is a PW. Nor do I expect them to care that nobody seems to care that they decide to use a PW that is lofted higher.

 

[BigLeftyinAZ]

I'm putting my 2 cents in without reading all of this.

A PW is a PW regardless of loft.That is how the Manufacture designed this set to be played, so be it.Sure, many iron set lofts have gotten stronger over the years due to technology and designers learning more and more how club design then ever before.It's amazing how new clubs that are stronger in lofts can launch the ball just like older clubs did,meaning today's PW fly's just as high,but farther then yesterdays PW's did.

It's only about bragging rights.It goes on among the Oem's and within our playing partners.If you play older lofts Just laugh it off,when your playing partner claims he hits his PW farther then you do.It doesn't matter,All that matters is who gets the ball into the hole in the fewest strokes.

Just my 2 cents and I'll be in my cave.

 

[thedue]

This has been a pretty good debate, wish I'd have stuck my nose in earlier. I have to say JB's point of it being ok to get yourself stronger and hitting the ball further, but not ok to make the lofts stronger holds some weight. seem's to me that the stronger lofts can be as much a problem as a benefit. I'm testing the CG16 7i right now and have started seeing the gain in distance, mt gaps are goofed up with it, but that can be an easy fix.

They make the balls go further and the greens faster, whats wrong with changing the lofts a bit here and there? You still have to be able to stop that ball as close to the hole as possible in the fewest amount of swings.

 

[Chunkylover77]

Well I seem to have sparked quite the debate. To anyone offended by my set of clubs I offer my non sincerest apologies lol. I didn't get the set so I can brag to all around that I can hit my PW further then theirs. I don't care what anyone hits into the green so I don't see why anyone cares what I hit into the green. I have gotten some chuckles from reading the thread and congrats on keeping it civil. I have some jokes in mind but some could get offended so they won't be posted. Happy Easter everyone.

 

[pjcedog]

This is all just my opinion so take it for what it is worth, coming from someone who has been playing golf for a long time and who plays better than 95% of the people you will meet up with on an average day at the average muni course. The only thing that really matters to me is the gap between clubs in the 120 yards and in range for scoring purposes and consistency. Ideally you want to be able to make full swings between where your tee shots land normally and as many greens as possible. By doing this you reduce the need for 1/2 and 3/4 shots as much as possible, and if you do have to hit these shots you are using as short a club as possible. Shorter club equals easier to hit always for anyone, even a tour pro. Whether you are hitting your PW 140 yards like I do or a 7 iron 140 yards doesn't really matter, neither one is right or correct or more traditional. Whether that PW is a 42 loft or a 47 loft doesn't matter either. What matters is if you are constantly having to hit touch or feel 1/2 and 3/4 shots from the fairway then get a wedge that fills that gap as closely as possible whatever it is. For me if there is more than about a 15 yard full swing difference in distance between my GW and SW or between PW and GW then I fill that gap. Unless you are playing some very tiny greens or on really huge greens a 15 yard difference between clubs is a manageable gap and could be the difference between landing on the front of the green vs being in the center or in the center vs being over, smaller gaps aren't really as helpful and longer gaps are not as easy to manage, you are back to where this conversation started in that case.

 

[All4's]

You said historically an 8 iron is the 150 yard club. I would love to know where that information came from and if you could point me to the source. All the people I have ever spoken to in the industry describe the 8 iron by ball flight height, not distance (as I have said), but I have looked into that number and it appears way shorter (by historic standards even in the modern era).

I think therein lies the conflicting viewpoints. My viewpoint stems from involvement and experience in the golf community, not the industry. I wasn't saying 150 is empirical, I am saying it is consensual. I would hope we can agree that if you took a random sample of 1000 golfers (who have been playing 5+ years) and 1000 instructors and asked how far the AVERAGE 0-10 handicapper hits an 8 iron, that the most typical response would be 150 yards. It is just kind of the rule of thumb since the modern era (cavity backs, solid balls, etc) came to be.

Esox had a great point about the PW used to be 50*. Why was it okay to move to 48* after ball flight changed with the lower CG, but not okay to do it now?

Check the link to the page I posted below for the clearest explanation of this.

Lastly, Im still just completely confused with your reasoning. You dont like stronger lofted clubs because you say an 8 iron is supposed to go X distance. If you get stronger and hit it further, that is accepted and despite the ball going further than X distance, it would still be an 8 iron. Yet if the irons get stronger, that is not accepted.

JB, you say your confused, but brother you have done a great job of summarizing my position a few times. But anyway, I answered this here:

To answer Coolbreezes' question; no that wouldn't bother me at all, as your premise introduces another variable, me. Your premise just changes what my standard 8 iron swing distance is. So I'd be fine with hitting my 8 iron further, but would be back to where we started if I tried a different, stronger lofted set and the 8 iron from that set goes 165. It is all relative. Same way I don't care that Bubba Watson hits his 47* PW 160 yards with his standard swing.

Let me make the point a totally different way since it seems my previous descriptions might have been taken in the context of how clubs relate to me. Historically, an 8 iron is seen as a 150 yard club taken on average. Let's say this year's golf census determines that the average 0-10 handicapper has an 8 iron swing speed of 94mph. My contention is that manufacturers targeting that market should stamp an 8 on the bottom of the club that goes 150 yard with a 94 mph swing with their design offering. That makes 8 irons consistent. Then the only variable is individual swings, so I may hit mine 140 and Bubba hits his 180. But we both hit all of the irons we try that far, but their individual design characteristics offer differing flights, forgiveness, workability, etc. to match a golfer's desired performance set The point being that there is no reason to add the variable of clubs going farther than the number on the bottom indicates they should go. While every person's standard swing distances are unique, the clubs are static.

But I'm always game for giving it another try in a different manner. I contend that the clubs should be the CONSTANT and the player the VARIABLE. By this I mean that if OEM's take the data they already have regarding the average swing speed of the average golfer they are marketing their set to and stamp an 8 on the bottom of the club that goes 150 for that average swing speed, that makes iron sets all the same. Club distance constancy is a consumer friendly business model that allows me to go buy any set and only be comparing ballflights, feel, and other secondary variables to pick the one I want with no fear of disrupting my wedges/hybrids/woods and having to make additional purchases. Then it doesn't matter if JB hits his 8 iron 160, I hit mine 150 and Thainer hits his 140; because every set we try will still produce those distances. Now OEM's are competing on secondary design characteristics that allow for personalization of your set to your preferences. So you can buy a muscleback blade and hit it low or an SGI and hit it high and on and on.

Making the club variable is a very industry friendly business model in that it causes disruption in your set and allows a marketing angle.

If the current path continues, soon they will be able to sell you a GW#1 and GW#2 because your hitting something labeled a PW, with as much loft as some 8 irons, that goes 150 yards and now you have a 50+ yard gap in your bag between your SW and PW. OEM's can't get away with delofting a SW without reducing effectiveness, so that club by default is STATIC, so the only way to go is more wedges in between. I can't see how anyone sees that as good for consumers or not being primarily driven by the desire to market distance where it doesn't matter and sell wedges.

If that still isn't clear then check this page out. I think this guy does a nearly pitch perfect job of summarizing my position and the history of loft changes and how that has, and is, hurting the consumers who buy into the distance marketing while benefiting OEM's. The charts are a great graphical explanation of what loft "creep" is really doing.

http://www.leaderboard.com/LOFTINFO.htm

 

[tnc200]

Seems to me, without a set definition of exactly what a "pitching wedge" is any argument is moot.

 

[CharlieMoy]

A pitching wedges standard loft is what the OEM determines it to be for that set, based on the industry standard +/- a degree or two.

 

[JB]

I contend that the clubs should be the CONSTANT and the player the VARIABLE.

That is exactly the way it is now. Yet you seem to keep making this about the distance again and again Yet again, it is CONSTANT on ball flight launch. Years ago, PW were 50* drivers were 43", shafts were all steel, heads were all wood, etc, etc...

Times have changed due to technological changes. Nobody seems to care that someone wants to play a PW at 48*, yet for some reason some seem to really get upset or bothered that others want to play a PW that is stronger lofted than that. Why?

You said something above that I find incredibly interesting here. You said that historically the 8 iron went 150 yards. Which in everything I have looked up is just not true on most levels. Now you are said this.

I would hope we can agree that if you took a random sample of 1000 golfers (who have been playing 5+ years) and 1000 instructors and asked how far the AVERAGE 0-10 handicapper hits an 8 iron, that the most typical response would be 150 yards. It is just kind of the rule of thumb since the modern era (cavity backs, solid balls, etc) came to be.

I see a couple of things very wrong with this. First, I dont think that is true at all. Second, when did a discussion of lofts pertain to 0-10 handicaps only? Especially considering the type of discussion we are having about clubs. I would love to see where any of this data came from, because frankly its just not the case. Your generalizing in my opinion, based on how far you hit the ball and those around you, not any facts.

This entire argument is comical in my opinion. I mean no offense by this (I truly dont), but I find the entire debate in this thread laughable in many ways. Im checking out. I have stated facts in this thread and that is all that is needed on my end.

 

[TwoSolitudes]

I used to hit my 8 iron about 130 yards. I just got new irons and now I hit the 8 iron about 135-140 due to the hotter faces and stronger lofts. But I don't actually think that it's a great thing. Had I been able to I would have bought the 4-GW or even the 5-SW just so I could keep my club distances the same. Instead I have the 3-5 in the closet and use the Niblicks to fill in the gap at the bottom end after the PW.

Seems to me what delofting has done is to boost sales of Hybrids (since most can't hit what are essentially 1 and 2 irons in a standard set now) and as All4 points out, create a new market for wedges to fill the gaps at the bottom between the new PW (8 iron) and the SW. I'm going with it (as my bag clearly shows) but it has to reach a limit at some point...

So on the orignal point. I always use the PW that came with the set. In the 90's I used to also get an after market SW and be content. Now however I need to get two other wedges to hit that distance gap between the PW (45*) and the SW (60*)

 

[Fourputt]

I think some are classifying clubmakers as the "company" and that is not really the case. Many club makers such as two of the best ever (Long & Hoeffy) do not work for companies anymore and are consultants on projects for many different OEMs and individual projects. Is that still a conflict of interest? Virtually retired club makers that were the reason that many of these lofts changed. If the two of them are not experts in the field, I dont know who would be. One of them was one of the 1st to take a PW from 50* to 48* because of the moved weight and ball flight.

Is a 48* PW a PW? If it is then why? Prior to that they were all 50*. They were moved (according to the guy that moved them) because of a changed CG. So the confusion must be that if a PW was allowed to move to 48* why is it not now allowed to move again?

I should add that no where have I said that marketing did not come as a direct result of what transpired. But that was not the reason the change was made. In the end, who cares? No offense here to anybody, but I could care less if someone wants to live in a pretend world where they dont think that a PW I might using is a PW. Nor do I expect them to care that nobody seems to care that they decide to use a PW that is lofted higher.

I have to bring up another point then too. If as you say the PW is still a PW because the Wilson still launches at the same trajectory at 42° as mine does at 47° (which I still dispute), then it only makes sense in the original context of this thread to stay with set-matched wedges. Otherwise, going to a constant 4° spacing from the Wilson PW to a Vokey GW may not be at all logical, since the Vokey will probably have totally different launch characteristics from the Wilson. Your theory also supports my reasoning for going with the AP-2 irons all the way to the gap wedge, and only having aftermarket wedges for specialty clubs.

 

[JB]

I have to bring up another point then too. If as you say the PW is still a PW because the Wilson still launches at the same trajectory at 42° as mine does at 47° (which I still dispute), then it only makes sense in the original context of this thread to stay with set-matched wedges. Otherwise, going to a constant 4° spacing from the Wilson PW to a Vokey GW may not be at all logical, since the Vokey will probably have totally different launch characteristics from the Wilson. Your theory also supports my reasoning for going with the AP-2 irons all the way to the gap wedge, and only having aftermarket wedges for specialty clubs.

Why is 47* a PW?

 

[tnc200]

I just know I've never used my current pw to play a pitch, I just doesn't have the loft. And most guys I play with use their gap or sand wedges as well. Seems kinda odd, that one.

 

[JB]

I just know I've never used my current pw to play a pitch, I just doesn't have the loft. And most guys I play with use their gap or sand wedges as well. Seems kinda odd, that one.

And yet ironically over the modern era, most would tell you that the bump and run should be played at around 42* in many cases. See why the 1st Niblick was set at 42* as an example.

 

[tnc200]

I thought it was 37, bump and run is a chip imo.

 

[JB]

I thought it was 37, bump and run is a chip imo.

I consider them slightly different shots looking for different levels of spin. But lets say its 37* for arguments sake. Then it would be even further away from a PW loft. So "pitching" the ball would be no where near use of a PW based on modern era thoughts.

 

[coolbreeze]

This thread has gotten out of hand, is bump and run a pitch or chip, I don't know, its a bump and run! Just because nobody you know uses a PW to pitch with doesn't make it any less of a PW, I know people who use it all the time, I guess it is for them. The distance argument seems silly at this point, golf is constantly evolving, courses are changing, clubs are changing, and the game in general. There has never been, nor will there ever be a "set distance" clubs can go or what lofts they can be, all that matters is that you know how far you hit each club in your bag and what trajectory.

 

[tnc200]

Bump and run is a chip. What does the loft of a chipping tool have to do with a pitch anyway?