4-5 in DCB. 6-9 Apex. PW, AW in the pros. MMT 95 shafts. Stock grips (whatever the GP ones are they come with. I have a set of Sonar Tours I may swap them out with).
First Look: Callaway Apex 21 Irons
4-5 in DCB. 6-9 Apex. PW, AW in the pros. MMT 95 shafts. Stock grips (whatever the GP ones are they come with. I have a set of Sonar Tours I may swap them out with).
IndySC
'16 #TheGrandaddy
Nice. Look forward to hearing your feedback on the rotation.
pingman33
Active member
Update to my last post....Got out on the course for 9 holes yesterday and just hit irons.... The 6 & 7 Apex are incredible, what a easy iron to hit and straight...
Hit the Pros much better also, had a problem the day before thinning these. No problem yesterday, solid hits and great feel.
I still prefer the feel of the regular Apex over the Pros so far.
The folks at Recoil really named this new shaft right, it’s like shooting darts for sure!!
Hit the Pros much better also, had a problem the day before thinning these. No problem yesterday, solid hits and great feel.
I still prefer the feel of the regular Apex over the Pros so far.
The folks at Recoil really named this new shaft right, it’s like shooting darts for sure!!
So when's the username change?!
Well hello from NEO, great to see another Ohioan on the board. Awesome selection of the combo set! Can't wait to hear from you on the continued use!
Quoting myself from another thread....
I wasn't the only one! And, the Player Performance category got the nod.
Also mentioned was how blade like these are. It was cool to see the end result, where like @Canadan CBX2 video, the Apex Pro snuck out a win on consistency... "beating the blade at its own game".
On only 3 MB swings. Let's keep that in mind.
"One felt stuck really well, 2 felt okay."
That's a seriously limited comparison. And they nixed 2 shots from his original Pro PW set (kept best 3 of 5) to get their final numbers, which they didn't do on the MB.
For people to draw big conclusions or make definitive statements based on one person making that few swings, and treating the data differently between the two, would be a serious error imo.
If anything. The numbers are still pretty close to identical. So, going back to his original thought of playing MB's in the lower irons to give him a little more consistency and accuracy, if he can get that out of the Pros why not just stick with them. Get a little extra forgiveness out of it.
- Joined
- Feb 27, 2019
- Messages
- 20,310
- Reaction score
- 38,372
- Location
- Minneapolis, Minnesota
- Handicap
- 0.1
The 6 and 7 irons are my favorite for sure in the 19s
i don't think this is fair, though. matt said he wanted the combo set with blades. it's not like they went into this with bias or trying to manipulate the data. they're also big into presenting representative data, so if they thought they needed more i'll give them the benefit of the doubt and assume they would have collected more.
regarding the quality of strike, they addressed this as well and both matt and ian chalked that up to feel more than swing. the pro 21 felt softer across the face and matt thought he was buttoning everything, when in reality the data shows he was missing. the mb just gave him more feedback on his misses, and i agree very much with him on this. the pro 21 is very soft across the entire face, and the feedback on misses isn't quite as harsh as some other clubs.
i think the bigger story isn't that the pro 21 are more consistent than the mb; i think it's that this may be the first hollowbody iron that has incredible consistency. blade-like consistency. to my knowledge that has never been achieved before.
Well no one gets the full truth out of just 3 indoor swings imo. Especially the kind of player considering the MB's. If he wants to decide that way, that's fine, but that's a seriously lacking and slightly biased way to present what will be taken as truth, to me. That's all.
That's true. But, it does tell an interesting story and makes a guy think. If an iron is going to be lower spinning by design it's pretty apparent right away. And, when we're talking about MB vs anything else. Typically the benefit of an MB in terms of ball flight is that it's going to be higher spinning allowing for more control. I get that there is a whole aesthetic/confidence aspect to take into consideration. I watched the video with no sound and pretty much skipped to the results after a bit. So, I did not catch that they removed two shots. Unless those were just absolutely terrible misses they should have stayed in there.
Did though.
Doesn't make a big difference but helps tell the story they ultimately tell with it. I'm not bashing them necessarily. Everyone knows I'm a big fan of their stuff. I wish they had presented that one a little differently and definitely more thoroughly, but it's no big thing.. ... unless people take it as some ultimate truth.
I mean, even with the data being treated differently, and MattyI'mDefinitelyFeelingThem not liking his feedback on 2 of 3, the MB's carried the exact same distance and were therefore more consistent than the Pros which varied by 1 yard. Right? MB's have a tighter front to back dispersion!! Mark it in stone, pass it around...
Sharp eyes, I love it. Those cherry picking MF'ers.
You've got a good point, only three or even five shots is not much of a conclusion, more like a general bellweather. These are close enough that you'd need a ton of shots to be able to start making conclusions on statistics.
Thornton Melon
Active member
Did though.
Doesn't make a big difference but helps tell the story they ultimately tell with it. I'm not bashing them necessarily. Everyone knows I'm a big fan of their stuff. I wish they had presented that one a little differently and definitely more thoroughly, but it's no big thing.. ... unless people take it as some ultimate truth.
I mean, even with the data being treated differently, and MattyI'mDefinitelyFeelingThem not liking his feedback on 2 of 3, the MB's carried the exact same distance and were therefore more consistent than the Pros which varied by 1 yard. Right? MB's have a tighter front to back dispersion!! Mark it in stone, pass it around...
And testing, sometimes you are "on", and sometimes you miss a little and it bugs you. He could have buttoned the next three MB PW, but we won't know because only three were hit.
Going to try out and get fit for either Apex or Apex DCBs tomorrow morning. I really hope one will show some improvement over my Apex 14s.
I didn't see the two shots that were removed. Were they removed because they were a lot different strikes? Because if they're trying to do a direct comparison with only 3 shots a piece, they'll want the strikes to be as similar as possible.Did though.
Doesn't make a big difference but helps tell the story they ultimately tell with it. I'm not bashing them necessarily. Everyone knows I'm a big fan of their stuff. I wish they had presented that one a little differently and definitely more thoroughly, but it's no big thing.. ... unless people take it as some ultimate truth.
I mean, even with the data being treated differently, and MattyI'mDefinitelyFeelingThem not liking his feedback on 2 of 3, the MB's carried the exact same distance and were therefore more consistent than the Pros which varied by 1 yard. Right? MB's have a tighter front to back dispersion!! Mark it in stone, pass it around...
Did though.
Doesn't make a big difference but helps tell the story they ultimately tell with it. I'm not bashing them necessarily. Everyone knows I'm a big fan of their stuff. I wish they had presented that one a little differently and definitely more thoroughly, but it's no big thing.. ... unless people take it as some ultimate truth.
I mean, even with the data being treated differently, and MattyI'mDefinitelyFeelingThem not liking his feedback on 2 of 3, the MB's carried the exact same distance and were therefore more consistent than the Pros which varied by 1 yard. Right? MB's have a tighter front to back dispersion!! Mark it in stone, pass it around...
the story they're telling is that these are not your typical hollowbody. and to be fair, i don't think that's the video they started out thinking they would make. but the consistency from one shot to the next was blowing their minds. and that became the story.
would 2 more shots with the mb have altered the conclusion? i'm not so sure it would. i have no problem throwing out two shots with the pro 21 because they ALWAYS throw out bad shots in every video they do (the chyron graphic says so).
they're never going for statistical significance in their videos. for that matter neither does a fitter look for statistical significance in a fitting because we are flawed swingers of the club, and our own fatigue/focus/general dumbassedness can and pretty much always does start affecting the data set.
matt and ian have done over 700 videos together iirc. again i'm giving them the benefit of the doubt that when they find something worthy of concluding, they don't do that lightly. it doesn't have to take 30 swings to draw a conclusion when you and another professional know your game/swing well enough.
but you're right, you're not bashing them and i'm certainly not bashing you. but i - and i believe many others - have found the exact same thing with the pro 21 irons: unrivaled consistency in this type of construction. that's a pretty compelling story imho.
I've said my piece, which wasn't necessarily overly critical. More emphasizing people probably shouldn't draw a conclusion of their own or take one based on 3 swings of anything as gospel. So I'm really just wanting out of this conversation at this point. Lol
I'm working, but at another quick glance it appears for them to get the 143 number for the Pros they went with, they eliminated the first 2 shots he took. First one he nearly holed, second he bombed a bit. 141, 147, 142, 144, 144 were the numbers in order by my eye.
So as long we're in this rabbit hole, the CONCLUSION, as far as such ridiculous conclusions go, based on the internet-video evidence and the preestablished fact that the MB's carried the same on all three shots despite two 'definitely feeling thems', is now that the MB's are better with front to back dispersion by unicorn11%!! Mark it on more and bigger stones, and pass them even further around..
Or realize it was a few shots by one guy, indoors, with limited application to most of us other than the fact that they're all '21 Apex irons and they all kick considerable ass. Each man can decide for himself.
If you want them badly enough, you will find something about them that is an improvement.
Man, ain't that the truth!
If you *'spend some time' with them though @adwillingham I don't think it will be too hard to find some actual improvement over the '14's. I could see it from the '16s to '19s and these are another step ahead.
*Just wanted to throw that phrase out there because it's something @JB says fairly often with a club(s) and it warms my heart, because it implies spending more than a few shots worth of it. Sometimes even multiple sessions.
I wonder if, to that end, should I decide to get new irons this season, it would not benefit me to demo the clubs on my radar before going for a fitting?
Nah, a professional fit should run you through the paces pretty well on the gear. A good one anyway. I'd be inclined, if anything, to go the other way. I like to try a bunch and get things dialed in more like a fitting, and then maybe hit that 'fit' setup another time out two to verify it wasn't a one-off from that fitting day. Any time beforehand is just to see what I like the look and feel of, maybe narrow the selection of things I want to try. That's just me though. If I could only do it once it's trust the fit, and their guarantee.
- Admin
- #1,999
I do?