2024 Maltby Playability Ratings

[BrianW]

I know these are contentious but I thought I would put them here for those who are interested. These are only 2024 clubs. Callaway AI Smoke Max 817, AI Smoke HL 766, AI Smoke 599, Apex CB 486, Apex MB 470, Apex Pro 239.

Cobra Dark Speed One Length 755, Dark Speed 713. Ping G730 555, Blueprint S 513, i 530 480, Blueprint T 386. Takomo 101 573, 101T 571, 301 CB 430, 201 349. Taylor Made Qi 876, Qi HL 744, P 790 697. Titleist T350 820, T200 574, T150 576, T100 553

 

[Jman]

Oh, I have more than just contentions with it. Hahaha

 

[GolfFest]

Wow the Apex Pro is way down the list. Scored a lot worse than the MB even.

Clearly this means I’m a world class ball striker to get the results I’ve been seeing. No other possible explanation lol.

 

[Desmond]

Ugh. Not a believer after reading about it for over two decades. There might be one or two datapoints that are viable. But the "number"? Forget it ... nonsense.

 

[DNice26]

I find the info interesting. Looking at a few heads I have experience with, I'd say the MPF ratings seem reasonable.

 

[erock9174]

The Two data points that I only look at anymore are the actual vertical center of gravity (as a lower number means that the cog is lower in the head) which usually means the club is easier to launch.

And the other data point I look at is the C dimension, which usually the bigger the number usually means the blade length is a little bit longer or vice versa. If the number is shorter, the blade length is shorter.

I do find it interesting though with every iteration of Ping G series irons, they keep raising the vertical center of gravity in their heads, which Maltby does not like it all so what once was ping club that had a ln MPF in the 800s or more they have gone to a 700 ranking to a 600 ranking to a a 500 ranking and so on. But they increase their moi rating each iteration. So it’s interesting to me the direction Ping has gone. Other oems seem to go with a deeper center of gravity each year. And moi kinda stays the same

 

[nostatic]

Well I can forget the idea of G730 and go for T100. What could go wrong?

 

[Hacker67]

The Two data points that I only look at anymore are the actual vertical center of gravity (as a lower number means that the cog is lower in the head) which usually means the club is easier to launch.

And the other data point I look at is the C dimension, which usually the bigger the number usually means the blade length is a little bit longer or vice versa. If the number is shorter, the blade length is shorter.

I do find it interesting though with every iteration of Ping G series irons, they keep raising the vertical center of gravity in their heads, which Maltby does not like it all so what once was ping club that had a ln MPF in the 800s or more they have gone to a 700 ranking to a 600 ranking to a a 500 ranking and so on. But they increase their moi rating each iteration. So it’s interesting to me the direction Ping has gone. Other oems seem to go with a deeper center of gravity each year. And moi kinda stays the same

I also look at the MOI which for PING will be high but VCOG will be high because of the higher MOI, it's a balancing act.

 

[Tywithay]

The Two data points that I only look at anymore are the actual vertical center of gravity (as a lower number means that the cog is lower in the head) which usually means the club is easier to launch.

And the other data point I look at is the C dimension, which usually the bigger the number usually means the blade length is a little bit longer or vice versa. If the number is shorter, the blade length is shorter.

I do find it interesting though with every iteration of Ping G series irons, they keep raising the vertical center of gravity in their heads, which Maltby does not like it all so what once was ping club that had a ln MPF in the 800s or more they have gone to a 700 ranking to a 600 ranking to a a 500 ranking and so on. But they increase their moi rating each iteration. So it’s interesting to me the direction Ping has gone. Other oems seem to go with a deeper center of gravity each year. And moi kinda stays the same

I've always wondered how Ping G irons could possibly have that high of a cg when they have some of the largest soles in the industry. They also have tungsten in the hosel, so I'm not sure if that fits into their measurements. Ultimately, the mpf is largely a waste of time, but some of the numbers are interesting. I'd be interested in seeing how they come up with all the measurements.

 

[MSEASU]

Some of it is a good guide. I know people think that a big club should is always more forgiving. However, I have found some GI harder to elevate based on VCOG. I think the T150/T200 is spot on, T150 is just as forgiving for me.

 

[Tywithay]

Some of it is a good guide. I know people think that a big club should is always more forgiving. However, I have found some GI harder to elevate based on VCOG. I think the T150/T200 is spot on, T150 is just as forgiving for me.

I am high handicap and find GI irons less forgiving for my swing because the sole width hurts my turf interaction. The highest MOI irons don't necessarily help someone.

 

[Jman]

I have written and deleted SO many posts.

 

[erock9174]

I have written and deleted SO many posts.

I get it. It’s Very subjective. I pretty much quit putting any stock into when they rated the Altitude irons in the 500’s.

But Do you find value in any of their measurements ?

 

[Jman]

I get it. It’s Very subjective. I pretty much quit putting any stock into when they rated the Altitude irons in the 500’s.

But Do you find value in any of their measurements ?

No, not really, because even looking at them individually, they're still part of a larger farse. IMO.

 

[Hacker67]

Some of it is a good guide. I know people think that a big club should is always more forgiving. However, I have found some GI harder to elevate based on VCOG. I think the T150/T200 is spot on, T150 is just as forgiving for me.

It must be were you hit the ball on the face lower vcog has always helped me get it airborne when a little thin.