We've launched the new forums! Read more here

TaylorMade SpeedBlade Irons Preview

SuperStroke
JB said:
Okay first impression time. I spent some time with these irons today and came away pretty impressed. The one thing that got me was the one thing that kept me away from RocketBladez and that was the sound of the irons featuring the slot. That has been fixed by a pretty big margin for my ears which was nice. The other thing that got me overall was the feedback in the hands vs sound. These remind me a lot of the R9s in that aspect (which is a good thing) in that they improved upon that muted feel to create a softer feedback in the hands. Something that really should help players of all skill level.

Those that liked the RocketBladez are going to love these irons. Those coming from the Burner 2.0s or irons like them are going to love these even more. I think they got this one right by a pretty big margin.
Click to expand...

That sounds like some pretty high praise. I'm more than a little jealous of the folks at the ultimate club testing who get a set of these.
 
JB said:
Okay first impression time. I spent some time with these irons today and came away pretty impressed. The one thing that got me was the one thing that kept me away from RocketBladez and that was the sound of the irons featuring the slot. That has been fixed by a pretty big margin for my ears which was nice. The other thing that got me overall was the feedback in the hands vs sound. These remind me a lot of the R9s in that aspect (which is a good thing) in that they improved upon that muted feel to create a softer feedback in the hands. Something that really should help players of all skill level.

Those that liked the RocketBladez are going to love these irons. Those coming from the Burner 2.0s or irons like them are going to love these even more. I think they got this one right by a pretty big margin.
Click to expand...

Noice. The sound/feel was the only thing I didn't like about the RBladez... These are now officially at the top of my must try list.
 
Looking at what club I use for short distance the most, my current A-wedge, I am a little bummed that the A wedge in these isn't in the cavity back iron shape of the 3 - PW. Will have to of course try them out, but that's the one thing I am not excited about with these right now.
 
I've been reading other reviews on these and I want to hit them badly...
 
JonD said:
I've been reading other reviews on these and I want to hit them badly...
Click to expand...

Other reviews? :alien:

I cannot wait to put these to work and start unloading thoughts.
 
Glad to hear that they've improved the sound and feel over the Rocketbladez line. Can't wait to hear what testers think and see out of them as well as the stock shafts too.
 
I am sure they perform as well as any other Taylormade irons. however they do look quite chunky.. I wonder tour model would look a little less chunky?
 
nicedivot said:
I am sure they perform as well as any other Taylormade irons. however they do look quite chunky.. I wonder tour model would look a little less chunky?
Click to expand...
I like chunky.
 
The look is really nice and I would like to see this in a tour version, similar to the rocketbladez tour. I'm currently hitting a G25, an 11 handicapper, and feel that my G25s are long enough. I can hit my 7 Iron 172 yds consistently and 185 with a draw. The problem with golf today is that everyone only cares about distance and companies are simply lying to customers about their technology. I really don't need my 7 to go that far, but that's what I get with the clubs. Speed pocket, slot, tuning port, yada yada... but consumers fail to see the truth. My G25 game improvement irons, released last year, is aggressively lofted by 1 degree compared to their pro/tour irons. Looking at the speed bladez, they are at an aggressive 3 degrees. A 20 degree 4 iron??? You're basically hitting a 3 iron or more compare to standard lofts. Is the speed pocket and other whiz bang really doing anything? I will see if these will come out in a tour version, with standard lofts, and I will consider them as an option for my next upgrade once I can get my handicap into single digits.

speedblade-spec-data.jpg
 
It's because of all the technology and innovation that companies are able to produce a playable 20* 4 iron. I want a company to make the most out of there R&D department. It's not like hitting a 3 iron at all the set has a 3 iron your hitting a 4 iron. What ever a company wants to stamp on the sole is up to them.
 
sf_loft said:
The look is really nice and I would like to see this in a tour version, similar to the rocketbladez tour. I'm currently hitting a G25, an 11 handicapper, and feel that my G25s are long enough. I can hit my 7 Iron 172 yds consistently and 185 with a draw. The problem with golf today is that everyone only cares about distance and companies are simply lying to customers about their technology. I really don't need my 7 to go that far, but that's what I get with the clubs. Speed pocket, slot, tuning port, yada yada... but consumers fail to see the truth. My G25 game improvement irons, released last year, is aggressively lofted by 1 degree compared to their pro/tour irons. Looking at the speed bladez, they are at an aggressive 3 degrees. A 20 degree 4 iron??? You're basically hitting a 3 iron or more compare to standard lofts. Is the speed pocket and other whiz bang really doing anything? I will see if these will come out in a tour version, with standard lofts, and I will consider them as an option for my next upgrade once I can get my handicap into single digits.

speedblade-spec-data.jpg
Click to expand...

In this case the loft isn't just jacked up to makebot play like an older technology 3 iron. Yes the loft is stronger but the launch angle is higher and the ball flight is higher. As much as 30 ' in the case of the 7 iron that you mention. Now of the only technological advancement was making the loft stronger 3 deg does that make sense? If that we're the case the ball flight should be lower and the launch angle would be lower as well. To me the number is irrelevant in any case. Let's say you hit your 7 iron 175 yards. I can probably hit your 7 about 148 or so. It's a seven iron either way. The 7 irons in this set may make me play closer to what your 7 iron plays in your hands. It doesn't matter. What does matter is that YOU know how far the ball is going to go when you hit it. Lastly with the higher flight and steeper attack angle, the ball is going to land at a steeper angle and will stay within a closer circle to where it landed. That's called increased accuracy by the way. If you can consistently do that you will be a better golfer at the end of the day.

Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 4
 
Irons are not numbered by loft, it's the LAUNCH that determines that. The irons have lower lofts because they LAUNCH as high (or higher) than the "old lofts" which were higher.
 
The way I see it, a set of irons lets you hit a golf ball at a range of distances between a lower threshold and an upper threshold. As long as the distance gaps are evenly spaced, and as long as I don't lose 20 or 30 yards if I miss the center of the club face by a quarter of an inch, I'll be happy. If they want to call the upper distance club a 2 iron, or a 3 iron, or a 4 iron, or a cleek, or a mashed potato special, it doesn't make much of a difference to me.
 
LeftySean said:
The way I see it, a set of irons lets you hit a golf ball at a range of distances between a lower threshold and an upper threshold. As long as the distance gaps are evenly spaced, and as long as I don't lose 20 or 30 yards if I miss the center of the club face by a quarter of an inch, I'll be happy. If they want to call the upper distance club a 2 iron, or a 3 iron, or a 4 iron, or a cleek, or a mashed potato special, it doesn't make much of a difference to me.
Click to expand...

This ^ I'd like to see a tour version as well, I like thinner lines and lesser offset.
 
LeftySean said:
The way I see it, a set of irons lets you hit a golf ball at a range of distances between a lower threshold and an upper threshold. As long as the distance gaps are evenly spaced, and as long as I don't lose 20 or 30 yards if I miss the center of the club face by a quarter of an inch, I'll be happy. If they want to call the upper distance club a 2 iron, or a 3 iron, or a 4 iron, or a cleek, or a mashed potato special, it doesn't make much of a difference to me.
Click to expand...

It's ego. I'm guilty of it. People don't like it when others hit the ball as far as they do.
 
PureLiquidHell said:
This ^ I'd like to see a tour version as well, I like thinner lines and lesser offset.
Click to expand...

I don't really know what a tour version would do to improve them. The size isn't bad and the ability to flight/launch meets most of the criteria you come to expect out of a smaller top line iron.

It'd be cosmetic at most.
 
Canadan said:
I don't really know what a tour version would do to improve them. The size isn't bad and the ability to flight/launch meets most of the criteria you come to expect out of a smaller top line iron.

It'd be cosmetic at most.
Click to expand...

Could you see pro players playing this knowing it isn't a blade?
 
Thechosen1 said:
Could you see pro players playing this knowing it isn't a blade?
Click to expand...

Lots of pros play non bladed irons... I can work these irons and flight them, so I am sure they can as well.

I said this today, regardless of what happens, the 4 iron (and maybe a 3 iron) could have a real shot of sticking in my bag regardless of what irons I decide to play.

They are flush and long.
 
LeftySean said:
The way I see it, a set of irons lets you hit a golf ball at a range of distances between a lower threshold and an upper threshold. As long as the distance gaps are evenly spaced, and as long as I don't lose 20 or 30 yards if I miss the center of the club face by a quarter of an inch, I'll be happy. If they want to call the upper distance club a 2 iron, or a 3 iron, or a 4 iron, or a cleek, or a mashed potato special, it doesn't make much of a difference to me.
Click to expand...
I really want my irons to be stamped with "Mashed potato special." I can see it now "Hey I didn't grab my right club can you pass me the Mashed Potato's." hahahaha I would love that.

Thechosen1 said:
Could you see pro players playing this knowing it isn't a blade?
Click to expand...

The more I see the WITB from the pro's it's very surprising and very, very few have blades top to bottom. I don't think they would have a problem hitting anything as long as it gave them the desired feel, versatility and results.
 
Texasbrons said:
In this case the loft isn't just jacked up to makebot play like an older technology 3 iron. Yes the loft is stronger but the launch angle is higher and the ball flight is higher. As much as 30 ' in the case of the 7 iron that you mention. Now of the only technological advancement was making the loft stronger 3 deg does that make sense? If that we're the case the ball flight should be lower and the launch angle would be lower as well. To me the number is irrelevant in any case. Let's say you hit your 7 iron 175 yards. I can probably hit your 7 about 148 or so. It's a seven iron either way. The 7 irons in this set may make me play closer to what your 7 iron plays in your hands. It doesn't matter. What does matter is that YOU know how far the ball is going to go when you hit it. Lastly with the higher flight and steeper attack angle, the ball is going to land at a steeper angle and will stay within a closer circle to where it landed. That's called increased accuracy by the way. If you can consistently do that you will be a better golfer at the end of the day.

Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 4
Click to expand...

The reason why they are de-lofted or have stronger loft is because the center of gravity is pushed lower and back in the club and increasing size of the club's sweet spot. Naturally this will cause the ball to balloon, therefore de-lofting was needed to keep the trajectory down. So your statement about higher ball flight and stopping the ball is not accurate. If they didn't de-loft, your statement would be true because you have a very high arc, but shorter distance. Now that they are de-lofted, the arc is longer and it actually allows the ball to carry longer and roll further. The way to stop a ball consistently is to compress it and have it reach its peak height at a later point, thus producing a steep arc at the end.

I do agree with you that it's about your distance and your ability to control it. So it shouldn't matter if 7 or 6 is stamped on your clubs. Now you're simply getting the distance of a 6 iron and the trajectory of a 7 in a 7 body.

Has anyone grabbed a few clubs off the shelf lately and compared. I know this for a fact that Callaway not only de-lofted their heads, but they also lengthened their shafts. Technology has changed, but not significantly over a single season or two. If you read one of the articles on the speedblade it quotes:

When tested, the new SpeedBlade 6-iron traveled almost ten yards farther with a 4% higher peak trajectory than TaylorMade’s Tour Burner iron, which was introduced in 2009
Click to expand...

Why wasn't it compared to a 2010,2011,2012, 2013 Rocketbladez, balls or whatever they make? It wouldn't be as dramatic to say that it has a .05% higher peak trajectory or traveled 1 yard farther. There's a lot of marketing BS in there to target amateur golfers into thinking that their old equipment is hindering their game.
 
sf_loft said:
The reason why they are de-lofted or have stronger loft is because the center of gravity is pushed lower and back in the club and increasing size of the club's sweet spot. Naturally this will cause the ball to balloon, therefore de-lofting was needed to keep the trajectory down. So your statement about higher ball flight and stopping the ball is not accurate. If they didn't de-loft, your statement would be true because you have a very high arc, but shorter distance. Now that they are de-lofted, the arc is longer and it actually allows the ball to carry longer and roll further. The way to stop a ball consistently is to compress it and have it reach its peak height at a later point, thus producing a steep arc at the end.

I do agree with you that it's about your distance and your ability to control it. So it shouldn't matter if 7 or 6 is stamped on your clubs. Now you're simply getting the distance of a 6 iron and the trajectory of a 7 in a 7 body.

Has anyone grabbed a few clubs off the shelf lately and compared. I know this for a fact that Callaway not only de-lofted their heads, but they also lengthened their shafts. Technology has changed, but not significantly over a single season or two. If you read one of the articles on the speedblade it quotes:



Why wasn't it compared to a 2010,2011,2012, 2013 Rocketbladez, balls or whatever they make? It wouldn't be as dramatic to say that it has a .05% higher peak trajectory or traveled 1 yard farther. There's a lot of marketing BS in there to target amateur golfers into thinking that their old equipment is hindering their game.
Click to expand...

What you said about the center of gravity is true. However we are seeing higher ball flight and steeper descents and further carry. That is first hand and in the field. And what I stated was quoted directly from a Taylormade rep and fitter.
As far as the statement about the irons they are comparing to, the life cycle of a set of irons is about 5 years or so, give or take. The advancements in these irons is significant and that is what they want to show. They aren't saying, "if your playing Burner 1.0's go throw them away". They are saying if you are in the market to upgrade, this is the kind of increase you can expect to see. Obviously they are also hoping to see you upgrade if you have later year irons as well. That is what EVERY manufacturer of a product does. Of the 12 testers, all of us have seen longer,higher ball flight. We've not had these for 24 hours yet and testing will be ongoing. I will be doing a lot of side by side testing with various manufacturers over the next few months. Stay tuned.

Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 4
 
Your asking why it wasn't compared to a newer club? There are guys here that hit the Speedblade against the Altitude, still saw higher launch angle AND further carry by a lot more than .05%.
 
sf_loft said:
Why wasn't it compared to a 2010,2011,2012, 2013 Rocketbladez, balls or whatever they make? It wouldn't be as dramatic to say that it has a .05% higher peak trajectory or traveled 1 yard farther. There's a lot of marketing BS in there to target amateur golfers into thinking that their old equipment is hindering their game.
Click to expand...

First off it was. People could hit them against anything they wanted and many of the guys here compared them to recent irons. And they can continue to because the irons are theirs.

But calling what went on here marketing BS is just not accurate.

The only thing that went on was factual data for every single golfer then backed up by real world golf.

Saying otherwise without experiencing it, as well as never even picking up the club being tested is rather naive in my opinion. I understand people are tired of distance claims by all companies, but that was not a story told by Taylormade at our event.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top