We've launched the new forums! Read more here

Groove wear - study by Vokey wedges

SuperStroke
obedt

obedt

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 7, 2012
Messages
16,937
Reaction score
3,397
Location
Puerto Rico
Handicap
Creciendo
Saw this on twitter and thought it could be useful info.

https://www.vokey.com/spin/spin-per...m_medium=social&utm_content=groove_wear_video




Spoiler
They recommend changing wedges after 75 rounds. Obviously depends on use but that's their estimate
 
Shocker. A wedge company recommends changing wedges.
 
Interesting watch. I wonder how many shots they equate to be per round usage? Also how much affect driving range use affects this.
 
I didn't realize the differences would be that substantial. Thanks for sharing.
 
blugold said:
Shocker. A wedge company recommends changing wedges.
Click to expand...

Lol I thought the same thing. Not exactly a study by an impartial party...

Still interesting information though. I probably switch every 125 rounds ish anyways, since I only play 40-50 in a given year, tops.
 
blugold said:
Shocker. A wedge company recommends changing wedges.
Click to expand...

I think it was good that they (more or less) quantified roll out. I don't know how many full swings, partial swings, chip shots 75 rounds or 125 rounds equate to though. That would be important info to have imo. Still, I do like that they provided actual data to back up their recommendations.
 
I know my LW has wear on it but I use the hell out of it practice wise. Im out in the yard chipping and pitching balls all the time. I thought about upgrading this year to the SM6's but figured I would try and make it until the SM7's come out.
 
I thought grooves didn't make as much of a difference with a nice clean lie like that. There didn't look like any debris to channel away.
 
SkiBumGolfer said:
Lol I thought the same thing. Not exactly a study by an impartial party...

Still interesting information though. I probably switch every 125 rounds ish anyways, since I only play 40-50 in a given year, tops.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I agree. It would definitely have carried more weight if this were done by an independent company. I hadn't seen that data before though and thought it was worth sharing. Looked like a well done test from what little we could see.
 
just adding in another confusing piece to the wedge spin discussion. This is saying that the grooves have an impact on up to 14 feet of roll out.
 
Last edited:
2BFAST said:
I know mine has wear on it but I use the hell out of it practice wise. Im out in the hard chipping and pitching balls all the time. I thought about upgrading this year to the SM6's but figured I would try and make it until the SM7's come out.
Click to expand...

Hope I didn't cost you $$!
 
obedt said:
Yeah, I agree. It would definitely have carried more weight if this were done by an independent company. I hadn't seen that data before though and thought it was worth sharing. Looked like a well done test from what little we could see.
Click to expand...

I'd agree, though I'd be interested to see the actual data though. Because all the swing variables are being eliminated, the standard deviation of the spin data from a robot will be MUCH lower that with a real swing - even a pro's. I would think if you did this test with a bunch of golfers and recorded their spin data with worn faces vs new ones, you may not come to the same conclusion (although you may).
 
obedt said:
Hope I didn't cost you $$!
Click to expand...

ha, no you didn't. Right now im not seeing much difference but we'll see when the greens get slicker and harder.
 
cbaker2882 said:
just adding in another confusing piece to the wedge spin discussion. This is saying that the grooves have an impact on up to 14 yards of roll out.
Click to expand...

I think the measurements were in feet, so roughly divide that by 3. Difference is 4 to 5 yards. Think that helps to keep things in perspective a little.
 
SkiBumGolfer said:
I'd agree, though I'd be interested to see the actual data though. Because all the swing variables are being eliminated, the standard deviation of the spin data from a robot will be MUCH lower that with a real swing - even a pro's. I would think if you did this test with a bunch of golfers and recorded their spin data with worn faces vs new ones, you may not come to the same conclusion (although you may).
Click to expand...

Great point SBG. And I agree with the premise that we have to take the manufacturer's word on something like this w/ a bit of trepidation.
 
obedt said:
I think the measurements were in feet, so roughly divide that by 3. Difference is 4 to 5 yards. Think that helps to keep things in perspective a little.
Click to expand...

yep that was a typo. It's still 14 feet of difference, which everything I've always heard is that it doesn't effect it.
 
mpeterson said:
Says the guy who curates the deal of the day thread...
Click to expand...
hahahah Touché

cbaker2882 said:
yep that was a typo. It's still 14 feet of difference, which everything I've always heard is that it doesn't effect it.
Click to expand...

Yeah...absolutely.

It's possible that at some event we can measure this. The RTX-3 is a popular model, a few THPers have them. Maybe we can compare newer wedges to ones that have seen heavy use?
 
Mine probably do get changed out before 75 rounds. Not due to a lack of groove wear but club ho'ing hahaha.
 
That's it!!
NOW i know why i'm chipping and pitching the way i am... i'm tossing my wedges out and getting FRESH ones... :banana:
 
obedt said:
I think it was good that they (more or less) quantified roll out. I don't know how many full swings, partial swings, chip shots 75 rounds or 125 rounds equate to though. That would be important info to have imo. Still, I do like that they provided actual data to back up their recommendations.
Click to expand...

It has been touched on. But I wanted to respond.

I have no doubt that wedges wear out and will need to be replaced. I just found it predictable that a company who sells a product says you need to rebuy that product after robot testing. I am not going to get into the groove and spin discussion. It will get heated and not worth it. Yes, wedges grooves will soften and be less effective over time. The real question, how often will wedges need to be replaced if the test was done using real golfers (non-repeatable swings) versus that robot? I do also like the idea of blaming the lack of spin on worn grooves. Even though it's most likely a technique issue, for us amateurs anyways.
 
I have about 250 rounds on my current wedges, play on the same course, and really do not see much of a difference in stopping power between now and when they were brand new. Maybe a couple of feet but nowhere near the 40 or so feet that this study would suggest.
 
cbaker2882 said:
just adding in another confusing piece to the wedge spin discussion. This is saying that the grooves have an impact on up to 14 feet of roll out.
Click to expand...

I really enjoy companies putting out stuff like this personally, but only when they engage. This is a lot of info rolled up into a neat marketing piece, but without engagement and being able to discuss, it is tough.
 
GolfFest said:
I thought grooves didn't make as much of a difference with a nice clean lie like that. There didn't look like any debris to channel away.
Click to expand...

That's precisely what another OEM told us in person 2 years ago.
 
JB said:
I really enjoy companies putting out stuff like this personally, but only when they engage. This is a lot of info rolled up into a neat marketing piece, but without engagement and being able to discuss, it is tough.
Click to expand...

You know, I have noticed Titleist really doesn't "reach out" to the consumers like other brands do. I also don't know how that works behind the ropes with THP and brand X. If they choose not to engage like say Srixon for example? JB can you weigh in on that?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top