Why aren't there any Maltby club reviews?

[wvudiehard]

I really appreciate that, @JAyer38. Very generous of you, but no thank you. I'm the same way as far as giving clubs and equipment away to friends, family or forum members. Much easier than trying to sell stuff on Ebay.

I have not yet switched them out but plan to in the next few months. There are a few other non-golf things I have to get sorted out. Once I get back into club making, there are a few supplies and at least one tool I need to purchase.

I have an unused older release of the MPF shaft left over from an old set and could fit that onto one of the heads. But I'll likely wait and buy a set of the newer release. It just depends if anything else goes on sale from Golfworks. But I definitely want to try those TS3's with a more appropriate shaft. They are nice looking heads and supposed to be more forgiving than they feel.

Ts3 is 2 points away from being Ultra Game Improvement irons, between me and my brother we have 5vswts of them. Very forgiving on mishits, and soft feel. Distance is really good, mid to high ball flight depending on what shaft is in them. I actually built a set for my wife, she only been on the range couple of times and she hits them pretty good for a beginner. I had score lt shafts in mine, 117 gram, high launching shaft, depending on how you tipped them. I bought mpf 80 gram maltby shaft, to try like the feel and trajectory. My brother has met 80, and recoil darts 105 in both of his sets. The other shaft for me was the project x lz 120 gram, felt smooth and a touch higher ball flight. As an experiment I put a steel fiber i110 in one , really smooth good trajectory, hardly felt the ball coming off the face.

 

[Chow]

Ts3 is 2 points away from being Ultra Game Improvement irons, between me and my brother we have 5vswts of them. Very forgiving on mishits, and soft feel. Distance is really good, mid to high ball flight depending on what shaft is in them. I actually built a set for my wife, she only been on the range couple of times and she hits them pretty good for a beginner. I had score lt shafts in mine, 117 gram, high launching shaft, depending on how you tipped them. I bought mpf 80 gram maltby shaft, to try like the feel and trajectory. My brother has met 80, and recoil darts 105 in both of his sets. The other shaft for me was the project x lz 120 gram, felt smooth and a touch higher ball flight. As an experiment I put a steel fiber i110 in one , really smooth good trajectory, hardly felt the ball coming off the face.

Dart must feel pretty similar to the MPF right? Even in different weights?

 

[wvudiehard]

Now the maltby shafts, previous generation plays stiffer, than the current. Haven't hit the current model as of yet. Steelfiber gave me the same consistent results over and over. Trajectory, feel, and workabiliry. Feel was good in the mpf certain shots I tried to hit felt stiffer, boardy, but very close to same distances + - 5 yards.

 

[JonMA1]

Ts3 is 2 points away from being Ultra Game Improvement irons, between me and my brother we have 5vswts of them. Very forgiving on mishits, and soft feel. Distance is really good, mid to high ball flight depending on what shaft is in them. I actually built a set for my wife, she only been on the range couple of times and she hits them pretty good for a beginner. I had score lt shafts in mine, 117 gram, high launching shaft, depending on how you tipped them. I bought mpf 80 gram maltby shaft, to try like the feel and trajectory. My brother has met 80, and recoil darts 105 in both of his sets. The other shaft for me was the project x lz 120 gram, felt smooth and a touch higher ball flight. As an experiment I put a steel fiber i110 in one , really smooth good trajectory, hardly felt the ball coming off the face.

Now the maltby shafts, previous generation plays stiffer, than the current. Haven't hit the current model as of yet. Steelfiber gave me the same consistent results over and over. Trajectory, feel, and workabiliry. Feel was good in the mpf certain shots I tried to hit felt stiffer, boardy, but very close to same distances + - 5 yards.

This is exactly why I want to re-shaft the set. I didn't find the TS3's as forgiving as I expected. The Maltby Playability Factor chart has always been pretty accurate with clubs I'm familiar with. So I believe swapping out the steel shafts for lighter, graphite shafts is probably the way to go (I'm older and not a great player so I need some help there). I still don't believe anything is going to be as forgiving as the Halos currently in my bag, but I do like the variety of having a couple different sets to play every once in a while and the TS3's are nice looking irons.

 

[wvudiehard]

This is exactly why I want to re-shaft the set. I didn't find the TS3's as forgiving as I expected. The Maltby Playability Factor chart has always been pretty accurate with clubs I'm familiar with. So I believe swapping out the steel shafts for lighter, graphite shafts is probably the way to go (I'm older and not a great player so I need some help there). I still don't believe anything is going to be as forgiving as the Halos currently in my bag, but I do like the variety of having a couple different sets to play every once in a while and the TS3's are nice looking irons.

Might look at the ke4 Max iron head. Ultra game improvement iron."The KE4 MAX irons feature a deep undercut cavity with an interchangeable 8 gram weight screw positioned extremely low, as far towards the toe and rearward as possible. "

"ideal for a wide range of swing speeds to produce the ideal golf ball trajectory and backspin needed for real world added distance and superb control."

I put the MPF Max Flex in my wifes clubs, as a beginner its lightweight and helps her get ball airborne. 58 to 65 grams depending on clubhead speed.

 

[JonMA1]

Might look at the ke4 Max iron head. Ultra game improvement iron."The KE4 MAX irons feature a deep undercut cavity with an interchangeable 8 gram weight screw positioned extremely low, as far towards the toe and rearward as possible. "

"ideal for a wide range of swing speeds to produce the ideal golf ball trajectory and backspin needed for real world added distance and superb control."

I put the MPF Max Flex in my wifes clubs, as a beginner its lightweight and helps her get ball airborne. 58 to 65 grams depending on clubhead speed.

I bought a set of KE4 max on Score shafts. They are forgiving irons for sure. But the Halos are in a different class, IMO. Ugly as sin, but so much fun to hit - especially the longer irons.

 

[JAyer38]

I bought a set of KE4 max on Score shafts. They are forgiving irons for sure. But the Halos are in a different class, IMO. Ugly as sin, but so much fun to hit - especially the longer irons.

I can 100% agree with this! The Halo's & Baffler's are just beyond forgiving & fun to hit for any player

The KE4 Max irons were really good I just couldn't enjoy the feel after playing TS3's & STi G2's.

 

[JonMA1]

The KE4 Max irons were really good I just couldn't enjoy the feel after playing TS3's & STi G2's.

I meant to say I bought the KE4 Max iron set for my son, not myself. But I took some swings with them and they are easy to hit.

I like the clean look of the newer Maltby irons. I even bought a TS4 7i to try out because I thought they looked cool. Even those are surprisingly to easy to hit despite the blade-like appearance. Still, if I'm going to ever get better at this game, I need all the help I can get.

 

[wvudiehard]

Ke4 max does have a different feel to it altogether bust still a great golf head. If you live within driving distance of Newark, Oh I would recommend highly schedule a fitting. I will have Maltby heads, shafts, clubs at my place come March 1st, but I'm in Charleston,WV.

 

[Tywithay]

Ts3 is 2 points away from being Ultra Game Improvement irons, between me and my brother we have 5vswts of them. Very forgiving on mishits, and soft feel. Distance is really good, mid to high ball flight depending on what shaft is in them. I actually built a set for my wife, she only been on the range couple of times and she hits them pretty good for a beginner. I had score lt shafts in mine, 117 gram, high launching shaft, depending on how you tipped them. I bought mpf 80 gram maltby shaft, to try like the feel and trajectory. My brother has met 80, and recoil darts 105 in both of his sets. The other shaft for me was the project x lz 120 gram, felt smooth and a touch higher ball flight. As an experiment I put a steel fiber i110 in one , really smooth good trajectory, hardly felt the ball coming off the face.

I wouldn't put much stock into the Maltby point system. The TS3's are quite forgiving for their size, especially low on the face, but they're a long ways off from an ultra game improvement irons. I still think they're the best value in golf when considering performance, feel, and price.

 

[wvudiehard]

I wouldn't put much stock into the Maltby point system. The TS3's are quite forgiving for their size, especially low on the face, but they're a long ways off from an ultra game improvement irons. I still think they're the best value in golf when considering performance, feel, and price.

I will agree with you 100 percent on that statement. Definitely worth it and top quality clubs.

 

[NeverWiff]

I wouldn't put much stock into the Maltby point system. The TS3's are quite forgiving for their size, especially low on the face, but they're a long ways off from an ultra game improvement irons. I still think they're the best value in golf when considering performance, feel, and price.

I bought a TS3 in 6i to test (7i wasn't available). After a lot of discussion on what shaft to try, based on my current gamers (Ping AWT 2.0), we tried the AMT white shaft. Did not take long to figure out It was not the right shaft for me but man, when i did make good contact the feel was incredible. I gave the club to my nephew and he loves it... he's considering a full set of the TS3's. Once i get some time, i'm going to revisit the TS3 as a possible iron choice for 2026... just need to figure out what shaft should be used so that i can make some apples to apples comparisons.

 

[Tywithay]

I bought a TS3 in 6i to test (7i wasn't available). After a lot of discussion on what shaft to try, based on my current gamers (Ping AWT 2.0), we tried the AMT white shaft. Did not take long to figure out It was not the right shaft for me but man, when i did make good contact the feel was incredible. I gave the club to my nephew and he loves it... he's considering a full set of the TS3's. Once i get some time, i'm going to revisit the TS3 as a possible iron choice for 2026... just need to figure out what shaft should be used so that i can make some apples to apples comparisons.

I have the stock Score LT shafts in mine that come with the paks. Tipped them extra so they're not quite as high launching and hold up to my speed a little better. I never tried any other shafts, but have no complaints about those. The Ping shafts are actually made my Nippon, so something like the Nippon N.S. Pro 950GH-WF might be a decent replacement. I don't know if they have other descending weight shafts or not.

 

[JonMA1]

I wouldn't put much stock into the Maltby point system. The TS3's are quite forgiving for their size, especially low on the face, but they're a long ways off from an ultra game improvement irons. I still think they're the best value in golf when considering performance, feel, and price.

I know it's not perfect, but here's how I look at that system... it at least uses metrics to come up with those ratings. That seems pretty objective to me, unless they're fudging the numbers to make their gear look better. As a starting point, it seems a lot more scientific, logical, and reliable than reading a review by single-digit player describing how forgiving an iron is. Don't get me wrong, I love the reviews and they have a place, but the numbers seem more relevant.

That said, I found the TS3's to be less forgiving than I expected as well, but the wrong shaft could have been the culprit as opposed to the head design. I built those after several years of using graphite shafts on my irons and thought it would be a good idea to put steel on my TS3's.... Dumb. Every other club I've ever hit that's on that list has been close in terms of forgiveness relative to one another. Granted, I don't test a lot of irons like most on this forum do.

f you live within driving distance of Newark, Oh I would recommend highly schedule a fitting.

I'm not too far - 6 1/2 hours. But unless the fitting takes place on a grass range, it'll be a while before I go to another one. My experiences with fittings have not been stellar. Maybe Maltby does a more thorough job.

 

[wvudiehard]

I know it's not perfect, but here's how I look at that system... it at least uses metrics to come up with those ratings. That seems pretty objective to me, unless they're fudging the numbers to make their gear look better. As a starting point, it seems a lot more scientific, logical, and reliable than reading a review by single-digit player describing how forgiving an iron is. Don't get me wrong, I love the reviews and they have a place, but the numbers seem more relevant.

That said, I found the TS3's to be less forgiving than I expected as well, but the wrong shaft could have been the culprit as opposed to the head design. I built those after several years of using graphite shafts on my irons and thought it would be a good idea to put steel on my TS3's.... Dumb. Every other club I've ever hit that's on that list has been close in terms of forgiveness relative to one another. Granted, I don't test a lot of irons like most on this forum do.


I'm not too far - 6 1/2 hours. But unless the fitting takes place on a grass range, it'll be a while before I go to another one. My experiences with fittings have not been stellar. Maybe Maltby does a more thorough job.

I have actually witness how the Playability is done when attending the Maltby classes. Now they dont do them anymore. Personally been to Ralph's building were he tests all the heads fornthe mpf system, pretty cool stuff to watch. Place was amazing that he built himself. Two full rooms. Now with that being said I've hit clubs that said classic, conventional, game improvement, its a reading of what the machine is used to calibrate the information of the head based on all the characteristics of that particular head or model. It s a reference to help someone that is a great golfer, meditate, or beginner to choose something that will help them determine which one to buy, or try. BUT it all comes down to getting Properly fitted by an expert.

 

[Tywithay]

I know it's not perfect, but here's how I look at that system... it at least uses metrics to come up with those ratings. That seems pretty objective to me, unless they're fudging the numbers to make their gear look better. As a starting point, it seems a lot more scientific, logical, and reliable than reading a review by single-digit player describing how forgiving an iron is. Don't get me wrong, I love the reviews and they have a place, but the numbers seem more relevant.

That said, I found the TS3's to be less forgiving than I expected as well, but the wrong shaft could have been the culprit as opposed to the head design. I built those after several years of using graphite shafts on my irons and thought it would be a good idea to put steel on my TS3's.... Dumb. Every other club I've ever hit that's on that list has been close in terms of forgiveness relative to one another. Granted, I don't test a lot of irons like most on this forum do.


I'm not too far - 6 1/2 hours. But unless the fitting takes place on a grass range, it'll be a while before I go to another one. My experiences with fittings have not been stellar. Maybe Maltby does a more thorough job.

There is a lot of valuable information in the numbers that Maltby posts on their MPF page, but the actual number they come up with is heavily weighted on certain factors. They really value a low vcog and c-dimension measurements, versus something like MOI that another company may weigh differently. They design their irons to fit their own system so it makes them look like they're rated very highly. That's part of the reason they use very short hosels to lower the cg and move the cg further out towards the toe (C-dim) compared to some other manufacturers. It's not a bad system and I agree it's a starting point, but it has to be taken in context. That said, they make some really high quality irons for the price, regardless of whatever numbers are associated with them.

 

[ger21]

They really value a low vcog and c-dimension measurements,

Yes, 95% of the MPF score is how low, and towards the toe, the CG is.

 

[ger21]

I built those after several years of using graphite shafts on my irons and thought it would be a good idea to put steel on my TS3's.... Dumb.

AMT White is a reasonably stiff and heavy shaft.
I used to play AMT White for the last couple years, and built my TS4's with 120g Dart V F4's. Different feel, but comparable ball flight. Dart V's are far more precise, though.
Best clubs I've ever owned.

 

[JonMA1]

There is a lot of valuable information in the numbers that Maltby posts on their MPF page, but the actual number they come up with is heavily weighted on certain factors. They really value a low vcog and c-dimension measurements, versus something like MOI that another company may weigh differently. They design their irons to fit their own system so it makes them look like they're rated very highly. That's part of the reason they use very short hosels to lower the cg and move the cg further out towards the toe (C-dim) compared to some other manufacturers. It's not a bad system and I agree it's a starting point, but it has to be taken in context. That said, they make some really high quality irons for the price, regardless of whatever numbers are associated with them.

Yes, 95% of the MPF score is how low, and towards the toe, the CG is.

Interesting stuff. I’m an idiot when it comes to physics in general and iron designs specifically. But somewhat understand how adding weight towards the bottom and toe might help some of us who struggle to make face contact higher and more centered left to right. I think strategically adding the heavier metals help keep their designs looking less “SGI”. Again, I’m guessing at this.

As a player who is all over the face, whatever they’re doing generally works well for my crappy game. I realized this when I took a gamble and built a set of the KE4+ Tour irons. They weren’t massive irons and the sole was relatively narrow (compared to some of the OEMs releases at the time), but I instantly got decent contact. I’ve since given that set to a nephew.

 

[wvudiehard]

Sti2, ke4 Max, are really good clubs that has alot of forgiveness to them. Ts1m is similar to the p790 but more feel and forgiving. Ts2 (2) sets easy to hit veryb forgiving, little bulky. Ts3 really solid forgiveness around the perimeter and solid feel all around. Ts4 is a blade but very easy to hit mid trajectory hit out toward the toe or heel will lose some yardage but not extreme. All comes down to what feels good to you, waybill looks to you might not be approved by others but that's okay. Maltby makes fantastic products the draw back if your not within 1 to 6 hours away its hard to gonthere for a fitting. Since solid hit they shut down the learning center and they shut down the small grass range they had at one time.

Back before the stock market crashed in 08, Maltby sold the company to Golf Galaxy. Galaxy was going to reduce the buildings, totally revamp the learning. Center. Have a bigger pro shop. Build a driving range golf course was talked about and possibly a hotel. But after stock market dumped golf galaxy stock noise dived Dicks Sporting Goods bought them.

Golfworks also has another location in Canada.

 

[JAyer38]

Will say the STiG2 & the TS3 are probably the best all around clubs I've ever hit without being "chunky". If your new to the game with a year or 2 then the KE4 Max is the way to go without a doubt.
Recently bought a used set of PTM irons heads that Maltby released in 2018. Let me tell you these have been something special just not a fan of the color & paint so thinking of sending them off to be refinished to raw since I cant find a new set.

 

[AverageJoe]

Thanks to @ak3putt for the fast disassembly. They literally came all the way across the US haha. Was a fun little build and I look forward to playing them.

 

[wvudiehard]

Thanks to @ak3putt for the fast disassembly. They literally came all the way across the US haha. Was a fun little build and I look forward to playing them.
View attachment 9403940View attachment 9403939

Sweet looking ts4 iron set

 

[Tywithay]

Thanks to @ak3putt for the fast disassembly. They literally came all the way across the US haha. Was a fun little build and I look forward to playing them.
View attachment 9403940View attachment 9403939

Maltby's dbm finish looks so good. Very durable too.

 

[ChipNRun]

I think basically you're either a guy who considers Maltby equipment or you are not.

• R&D dollars are obviously less than many OEMs. Whether this manifests itself in performance is something you'd have to consider. The primary source of back to back data I've found is from Popeye and I haven't seen any performance loss.

If you're going to keep equipment for a while I think the Maltby line is a great option. If you are a club ho and will buy multiple sets a year then I would not recommend it.

Dave

Back in 2012, I attended the three-day Club Fitting, Assembly & Repair course at GolfWorks HQ in Norwalk, OH (near Columbus).

Besides learning a lot of skills, we got to test out different Maltby club models. Basically, Maltby has a longer production run for its models than the major OEMs. Maltby avoids the marketing ploy of issuing a new model with only cosmetic/trivial advances over its predecessor.

The longer production runs give Maltby economies of scale on R&D; plus, Maltby clubs don't have to pay tour pros for endorsements. This leads to stable products with lower prices.