# Rocketbladez Irons - what a con



## Rory130911 (Nov 28, 2012)

Its just fiddling with the lofts & lies or should I say LieZ?

May old sticks have these specs:

[TABLE="class: bodytext, width: 100%"]
[TR="bgcolor: #CCCC66"]
[TD="width: 104"]*Iron*[/TD]
 		[TD]*2*​[/TD]
 		[TD]*3*​[/TD]
 		[TD]*4*​[/TD]
 	[TD]*5*​[/TD]
 		[TD]*6*​[/TD]
 		[TD]*7*​[/TD]
 		[TD]*8*​[/TD]
 		[TD]*9*​[/TD]
 	[TD]*PW*​[/TD]
 	[/TR]
 	[TR="bgcolor: #FFFFCC"]
 		[TD]*Loft(Â°)*[/TD]
 		[TD]18​[/TD]
 		[TD]21​[/TD]
 		[TD]24​[/TD]
 	[TD]27​[/TD]
 		[TD]30​[/TD]
 		[TD]33.5​[/TD]
 		[TD]37​[/TD]
 		[TD]41​[/TD]
 	[TD]45​[/TD]
 	[/TR]
 	[TR]
 		[TD]*Lie(Â°)[SUP]1[/SUP]*[/TD]
 	[TD]59.5​[/TD]
 		[TD]60​[/TD]
 		[TD]61​[/TD]
 		[TD]61.5​[/TD]
 		[TD]62​[/TD]
 		[TD]62.5​[/TD]
 		[TD]63​[/TD]
 		[TD]63.5​[/TD]
 		[TD]64​[/TD]
 	[/TR]
 	[TR]
 		[TD]*Length(")[SUP]1[/SUP]*[/TD]
 	[TD]39.5​[/TD]
 		[TD]39​[/TD]
 		[TD]38.5​[/TD]
 		[TD]38​[/TD]
 		[TD]37.5​[/TD]
 		[TD]37​[/TD]
 		[TD]36.5​[/TD]
 		[TD]36​[/TD]
 		[TD]35.5​[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

Rocketbladez have these:

[TABLE="width: 100%"]
[TR]
[TD="bgcolor: #666666, align: left"]*CLUB*
[/TD]
                 [TD="bgcolor: #666666, align: left"]*3*
[/TD]
                 [TD="bgcolor: #666666, align: left"]*4*
[/TD]
                 [TD="bgcolor: #666666, align: left"]*5*
[/TD]
                 [TD="bgcolor: #666666, align: left"]*6*
[/TD]
                 [TD="bgcolor: #666666, align: left"]*7*
[/TD]
                 [TD="bgcolor: #666666, align: left"]*8*
[/TD]
                 [TD="bgcolor: #666666, align: left"]*9*
[/TD]
                 [TD="bgcolor: #666666, align: left"]*PW*
[/TD]
                 [TD="bgcolor: #666666, align: left"]*AW*
[/TD]
                 [TD="bgcolor: #666666, align: left"]*SW*
[/TD]
                 [TD="bgcolor: #666666, align: left"]*LW*
[/TD]
               [/TR]
               [TR]
                 [TD="align: left"]*LOFT*
[/TD]
                 [TD="align: left"]18Â°
[/TD]
                 [TD="align: left"]20Â°
[/TD]
                 [TD="align: left"]23Â°
[/TD]
                 [TD="align: left"]26.5Â°
[/TD]
                 [TD="align: left"]30.5Â°
[/TD]
                 [TD="align: left"]35Â°
[/TD]
                 [TD="align: left"]40Â°
[/TD]
                 [TD="align: left"]45Â°
[/TD]
                 [TD="align: left"]50Â°
[/TD]
                 [TD="align: left"]55Â°
[/TD]
                 [TD="align: left"]60Â°
[/TD]
               [/TR]
               [TR]
                 [TD="align: left"]*LIE*
[/TD]
                 [TD="align: left"]61.0Â°
[/TD]
                 [TD="align: left"]61.5Â°
[/TD]
                 [TD="align: left"]62.0Â°
[/TD]
                 [TD="align: left"]62.5Â°
[/TD]
                 [TD="align: left"]63.0Â°
[/TD]
                 [TD="align: left"]63.5Â°
[/TD]
                 [TD="align: left"]64.0Â°
[/TD]
                 [TD="align: left"]64.5Â°
[/TD]
                 [TD="align: left"]64.5Â°
[/TD]
                 [TD="align: left"]64.5Â°
[/TD]
                 [TD="align: left"]64.5Â°
[/TD]
               [/TR]
               [TR]
                 [TD="align: left"]*OFFSET*
[/TD]
                 [TD="align: left"]6.5mm
[/TD]
                 [TD="align: left"]6.0mm
[/TD]
                 [TD="align: left"]5.7mm
[/TD]
                 [TD="align: left"]4.8mm
[/TD]
                 [TD="align: left"]4.2mm
[/TD]
                 [TD="align: left"]3.4mm
[/TD]
                 [TD="align: left"]2.7mm
[/TD]
                 [TD="align: left"]2.0mm
[/TD]
                 [TD="align: left"]1.4mm
[/TD]
                 [TD="align: left"]1.0mm
[/TD]
                 [TD="align: left"]1.0mm
[/TD]
               [/TR]
               [TR]
                 [TD="align: left"]*BOUNCE*
[/TD]
                 [TD="align: left"]0.5Â°
[/TD]
                 [TD="align: left"]1.0Â°
[/TD]
                 [TD="align: left"]3.0Â°
[/TD]
                 [TD="align: left"]4.0Â°
[/TD]
                 [TD="align: left"]5.0Â°
[/TD]
                 [TD="align: left"]5.5Â°
[/TD]
                 [TD="align: left"]6.0Â°
[/TD]
                 [TD="align: left"]7.0Â°
[/TD]
                 [TD="align: left"]8.5Â°
[/TD]
                 [TD="align: left"]11.6Â°
[/TD]
                 [TD="align: left"]5.9Â°
[/TD]
               [/TR]
               [TR]
                 [TD="align: left"]*LENGTH*
[/TD]
                 [TD="align: left"]39.5â€
[/TD]
                 [TD="align: left"]38.875â€
[/TD]
                 [TD="align: left"]38.25â€
37.25â€
[/TD]
                 [TD="align: left"]37.625â€
36.625â€
[/TD]
                 [TD="align: left"]37.0â€
36.0â€
[/TD]
                 [TD="align: left"]36.5â€
35.5â€
[/TD]
                 [TD="align: left"]36.0â€
35.0â€
[/TD]
                 [TD="align: left"]35.5â€
34.5â€
[/TD]
                 [TD="align: left"]35.5â€
 34.5â€
[/TD]
                 [TD="align: left"]35.25â€
34.25â€
[/TD]
                 [TD="align: left"]35.0â€
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]



Basically they have just swapped the numbers on the head, made a 6 iron into a 7 iron

What a load of con-merchants!


----------



## pbrown7582 (Nov 28, 2012)

this isnt new its been happening for a few years now with most manufactuerers


----------



## brendy (Nov 28, 2012)

Not quite matey, they are the game improvement specs.
Proper rocketbladez TP irons (which any reasonable handicap golfer should concern themselves with)

Far more manly.


----------



## BTatHome (Nov 28, 2012)

Great review !


----------



## fundy (Nov 28, 2012)

Strangely the lofts spread on that set are pretty much what I would want and call ideal to carry the 4-PW and then 3 wedges, driver, 3 wood and hybrid. Basically they cover 20 to 45 degrees in 7 clubs not 8 which in my mind is pretty much ideal so that I wouldnt be left leaving one club out from my ideal bag of 15 clubs.

With regards to the number on the bottom, its really time the manufacturers were required to stamp the actual loft on the bottom of the club as well as a generic number


----------



## brendy (Nov 28, 2012)

fundy said:



			With regards to the number on the bottom, its really time the manufacturers were required to stamp the actual loft on the bottom of the club as well as a generic number
		
Click to expand...

Exactly, the numbers used to mean something, these days it is much simpler, 6 goes longer than a 7, 5 goes longer than a 6 etc. 
Imagine turning up with a hire set on holiday and shooting for greens and putting them OOB beyond each time. lol the carnage!


----------



## Fader (Nov 28, 2012)

Doesn't look like those those lofts are disimilar to my own S2 Forgeds (you need to enlarge to see, as won't let me load full size image)


----------



## One Planer (Nov 28, 2012)

BTatHome said:



			Great review !
		
Click to expand...

Which is exactly why I moved in to the lounge :thup:


----------



## USER1999 (Nov 28, 2012)

But if the GI version is biased towards a high launch, with a low cog, then the lofts need to be tweaked to keep the ball on a sensible flight.

There is way more to club head design than just loft.


----------



## Alex1975 (Nov 28, 2012)

I am really interested in this technology. TM have been pretty upfront about the jacking of lofts so it will be interesting to see if these make any difference to a wide range of golfers. I was sent this video the other day of Justin Rose trying them out and I thought his reaction was quite strong. Clearly he will have been asked to react but he seems genuinely impressed to me.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8UjX9bUCAow&dm_i=NBH,127G6,3HUD8U,39R3O,1

I also saw a video on FB today from Gamola Golf with one of them gaining 20 yards, they are usualy pretty up front as a company.

Have we all seen this?:



Click to enlarge

Its all been done before but TM are saying it took a long time to perfect. 

Ok its a TM thing and I dont like them as a brand but I am interested in this technology.


----------



## cookelad (Nov 28, 2012)

Still don't understand the point of "jacking" the lofts 
Golfers (generalisation) struggle to hit a 21* 3 iron so why drop the loft to 18 all thats going to happen is it gets taken out of the bag and probably the 4 iron too and to get replaced by a wedge to fill the gap created at the other end of the bag and a 21* hybrid!

I understand that the number of the bottom of the club is only a reference to where it is in relation to the other clubs in the bag but you'll still end up with idiots showing off that they just hit an 8 iron the same distance as a decent golfer hit their 7!


----------



## One Planer (Nov 28, 2012)

cookelad said:



			Still don't understand the point of "jacking" the lofts except as a penis extension! 

Golfers (generalisation) struggle to hit a 21* 3 iron so why drop the loft to 18 all thats going to happen is it gets taken out of the bag and probably the 4 iron too and to get replaced by a wedge to fill the gap created at the other end of the bag and a 21* hybrid!

I understand that the number of the bottom of the club is only a reference to where it is in relation to the other clubs in the bag but you'll still end up with idiots showing off that they just hit an 8 iron the same distance as a decent golfer hit their 7!
		
Click to expand...

It's like Murph said

GI clubs launch the ball higher, quicker. They jack the lofts to, I assume, give to give them a little extra carry?


----------



## Alex1975 (Nov 28, 2012)

cookelad said:



			Still don't understand the point of "jacking" the lofts except as a penis extension! 

Golfers (generalisation) struggle to hit a 21* 3 iron so why drop the loft to 18 all thats going to happen is it gets taken out of the bag and probably the 4 iron too and to get replaced by a wedge to fill the gap created at the other end of the bag and a 21* hybrid!

I understand that the number of the bottom of the club is only a reference to where it is in relation to the other clubs in the bag but you'll still end up with idiots showing off that they just hit an 8 iron the same distance as a decent golfer hit their 7!
		
Click to expand...


Murph touched on in above...


----------



## cookelad (Nov 28, 2012)

Still sounds counter-productive to me! create a club that launches higher then drop the loft!

Maybe I should get hold of a set + a trackman and compare!


----------



## DAVEYBOY (Nov 28, 2012)

I look forward to Mark Crossfields review as he does have an iron in his possession as we type. Can't wait to see how much mud, dirt, and so on gets in the ermmmm hole as well.


----------



## Alex1975 (Nov 28, 2012)

DAVEYBOY said:



			I look forward to Mark Crossfields review as he does have an iron in his possession as we type. Can't wait to see how much mud, dirt, crap and so on gets in the ermmmm hole as well.
		
Click to expand...


Yep, I have been asking him about it for weeks!


----------



## Imurg (Nov 28, 2012)

cookelad said:



			Still sounds counter-productive to me! create a club that launches higher then drop the loft!
		
Click to expand...

If it launches higher then you need to lower the lofts to stop the ball going up your nose.
The GI clubs are designed to get the ball up, launch high.
Take a 7 iron blade with 34 degree loft and a GI shovel with 31 degree loft.
If the GI 7 iron had 34 loft it would disappear into the stratosphere. By lowering the loft it makes the club more playable and, yes, you also get more distance from it.

I'd still like to know what the distance gap is between the 7 iron RBladz and the 8 iron as the 8 iron up doesn't have the slot. Need for a 7.5 iron?


----------



## User 105 (Nov 28, 2012)

brendy said:



			Exactly, the numbers used to mean something, these days it is much simpler, 6 goes longer than a 7, 5 goes longer than a 6 etc. 
Imagine turning up with a hire set on holiday and shooting for greens and putting them OOB beyond each time. lol the carnage!
		
Click to expand...

Exactly what I did this year with a set of Callaway RAZR Irons. 1st hole, 130 to go, PW in hand after a cracking drive, flew the green by about 30 yards. Admittedly it was a lot warmer so the ball probably flew a bit further as well. 

Although on the plus side, did give me some pleasure hitting my 7i 190-200 . Even though I knew it 'wasn't real'.


----------



## Alex1975 (Nov 28, 2012)

Imurg said:



			I'd still like to know what the distance gap is between the 7 iron RBladz and the 8 iron as the 8 iron up doesn't have the slot. Need for a 7.5 iron?
		
Click to expand...


Very good point, if it is so powerful then the gap will be huge!


----------



## Twire (Nov 28, 2012)

DAVEYBOY said:



			I look forward to Mark Crossfields review as he does have an iron in his possession as we type. Can't wait to see how much mud, dirt, and so on gets in the ermmmm hole as well.
		
Click to expand...


Had a fitting with Mark this afternoon, I should have asked for a go.

Still, happy with my final choice of 825 pro's


----------



## Alex1975 (Nov 28, 2012)

Twire said:



			Had a fitting with Mark this afternoon, I should have asked for a go.

Still, happy with my final choice of 825 pro's 

Click to expand...

You going to do a post for us about your fitting? I would be interested in how good he was and what you tried!


----------



## G1BB0 (Nov 28, 2012)

Alex1975 said:



			You goint to do a post for us about your fitting? I would be interested in how good he was and what you tried!
		
Click to expand...

same here


----------



## Twire (Nov 28, 2012)

I'll see if I can get something together before the weekend.


----------



## Kellfire (Nov 28, 2012)

I can't find the rule that says a certain iron must be a certain loft, can the OP please point me towards it?


----------



## BTatHome (Nov 28, 2012)

Kellfire said:



			I can't find the rule that says a certain iron must be a certain loft, can the OP please point me towards it? 

Click to expand...

only applies to TM gear


----------



## Scottjd1 (Nov 28, 2012)

Alex1975 said:



			You going to do a post for us about your fitting? I would be interested in how good he was and what you tried!
		
Click to expand...




G1BB0 said:



			same here
		
Click to expand...

Yup - me too.


----------



## duncan mackie (Nov 28, 2012)

Kellfire said:



			I can't find the rule that says a certain iron must be a certain loft, can the OP please point me towards it? 

Click to expand...

I realise there's a smilie in there but I think there is a valid point hidden somewhere in the (normal) TM slap.

If there is anything that should be related to the number on an iron it's probably the initial launch angle that a ball will have against a set of fixed parameters; closely followed by the length of the shaft. Before perimiter weighting, large soles etc this was simply 'loft', but this is no longer the case.

Finally, we seem to get a lot of posts about how far some clubs hit the ball, or have stronger lofts - but remarkably few about people who get them and immediately drop 6 shots on their handicap because of this extra 'whatever'!


----------



## Kellfire (Nov 28, 2012)

duncan mackie said:



			I realise there's a smilie in there but I think there is a valid point hidden somewhere in the (normal) TM slap.

If there is anything that should be related to the number on an iron it's probably the initial launch angle that a ball will have against a set of fixed parameters; closely followed by the length of the shaft. Before perimiter weighting, large soles etc this was simply 'loft', but this is no longer the case.

Finally, we seem to get a lot of posts about how far some clubs hit the ball, or have stronger lofts - but remarkably few about people who get them and immediately drop 6 shots on their handicap because of this extra 'whatever'!
		
Click to expand...

This was my first full season with my 42 degree PW and I won two competitions, dropping five shots. 


ps. I also had my first proper lessons.


----------



## Val (Nov 28, 2012)

It doesn't matter what number is on the bottom it matters knowing how far it goes.


----------



## Fish (Nov 28, 2012)

Valentino said:



			It doesn't matter what number is on the bottom it matters knowing how far it goes.
		
Click to expand...

Which is what I was about to say as I scrolled down to here.

Its no different to someone taking an 8 iron to go 150 yards but me using a 6 and so forth.  The number is irrelevant to me as I don't subscribe to what I see and hear sometimes as the macho-ism shows its face at times on short par 3's where some can't wait to tell you they hit their gap wedge to the green but I hit my 8 iron! But the end result was, they were no nearer to the pin than me!

As long as I know how far (roughly) I get from each of my clubs, the number in relation to loft is rightly or wrongly, irrelevant. 

If I changed clubs or just like when I buy a new club, I soon know how far I hit that particular club and chose it accordingly.

May not be politically correct, but it works for me.


----------



## SAPCOR1 (Nov 28, 2012)

I agree that getting to know how far you can reasonably reach with each of your clubs is the key point.

Know your own game rather than worrying about what club your playing partners hit or the manufacturers marketing


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Nov 28, 2012)

Valentino said:



			It doesn't matter what number is on the bottom it matters knowing how far it goes.
		
Click to expand...

Spot on. What I do whenever I buy new clubs is go to the practice ground and hit 10 balls per club and measure the average distance via Sky Caddy. I tend to do it down wind and into to get a good idea of how far I hit it and go from there. I couldn't care less about the number on the bottom as long as it gets the ball where I want it. Same with the loft. As long as I can trust how far it goes and the flight suits me then I'm happy


----------



## SocketRocket (Nov 28, 2012)

There is a club maker that use the same shaft length for all irons, I think they are called 'one iron'  I think there is something to this system that could help a lot of golfers.


----------



## Stuey01 (Nov 30, 2012)

I've nabbed this review from a thread on Golfwrx, I thought it was the most coherent and fact based critique of the Rbaldez irons that I've seen yet so I thought it bears repeating.

(It is not my review).

I found it really interesting that he compared the clubs like with like, based on length and loft, rather than the number written on the sole. The results, predictably, were the same.




			Here is my grain of salt review of the Rocketbladez. I went to my local PGA Tour Superstore today to hit the MP59 and S56. The iron I play now is the Callaway X-16 Pro Series with Rifle 6.0 shafts. I got on the simulator to warm up with my 6 iron (30*) and was hitting it around 170-180 yards, which also seems to be the case on the course. I then alternated the MP59 and S56 and I got similar results with the exception of the MP59s feeling sooooooo good. Right around 170-180. The MP59 had the PX 6.0 and the S56 had the CBS stiff. What I didn't know was TMAG would have a demo with the Rocketbladez today, and with all of the hype, I couldn't pass it up. I compared the 7 iron to my 6 iron. About the same length and about the same loft. This was the steel RocketFuel 85 stiff shaft. On the simulator, I was swinging my own 6 iron around 90-95mph swing speed and launching it around 20*. When I hit the Rocketbladez 7 iron, I got very similar results. 90-95mph with a 20* launch. And it went around, wait for it....170 yards. Not what I expected. I haven't given up on the Rocketbladez yet since the tour version comes out in February. I will hit these again, where it should be more of an apples to apples comparison, but if I would have compared my 7 iron (34*) to the Rocketbladez 7 iron, then I would have gained about 10 yards. Maybe I'm missing something. I was hitting all of the irons well, so I couldn't really tell how they would have done on mis*****, but all 4 different irons were going about the same distance with the same dispersion. YMMV, but the Rocketbladez didn't do a whole lot for me. The MP59s on the other hand will probably haunt my dreams.
		
Click to expand...


----------



## Alex1975 (Nov 30, 2012)

Stuey01 said:



			I've nabbed this review from a thread on Golfwrx, I thought it was the most coherent and fact based critique of the Rbaldez irons that I've seen yet so I thought it bears repeating.

(It is not my review).

I found it really interesting that he compared the clubs like with like, based on length and loft, rather than the number written on the sole. The results, predictably, were the same.
		
Click to expand...


Nice one!


----------



## Rory130911 (Dec 1, 2012)

Earlier this year I nearly bought some Wilson Ci9 or Ci11 irons - they added 10-15yards.

When I checked the lofts, its the same story as the RBZ irons, they have just fiddled with the lofts making their 7 iron the equivolent loft of my 6 iron.

There is only so far they can go with this design strategy or we'll all end up with 3 irons labelled as pitching wedges!


----------



## HughJars (Dec 1, 2012)

Rory130911 said:



			Earlier this year I nearly bought some Wilson Ci9 or Ci11 irons - they added 10-15yards.

When I checked the lofts, its the same story as the RBZ irons, they have just fiddled with the lofts making their 7 iron the equivolent loft of my 6 iron.

There is only so far they can go with this design strategy or we'll all end up with 3 irons labelled as pitching wedges!
		
Click to expand...

Dunno about anyone else, but I carry 4 wedges already, and that's with the i20s in the bag, which are not that strong compared to some.

46Â° PW, 50Â° U, & 54Â° & 58Â° Gorge wedges.

I now go driver, 3 wood, 21Â° hybrid, then 4-U.  The bottom end of the bag is the scoring end, if you're so far from the green you're hitting 3 wood anyway, whether u carry a 5 wood or not is irrelevant I feel, whereas hitting full shots from 70 yds or so is much more important to me.


----------



## duncan mackie (Dec 1, 2012)

HughJars said:



			Dunno about anyone else, but I carry 4 wedges already, and that's with the i20s in the bag, which are not that strong compared to some.

46Â° PW, 50Â° U, & 54Â° & 58Â° Gorge wedges.

I now go driver, 3 wood, 21Â° hybrid, then 4-U.  The bottom end of the bag is the scoring end, if you're so far from the green you're hitting 3 wood anyway, whether u carry a 5 wood or not is irrelevant I feel, whereas hitting full shots from 70 yds or so is much more important to me.
		
Click to expand...

In such discussions you also have to consider that a lot of people can play round their course without even having a shot between 50 and 100 yds; or ceartainly so few that the odds of it being from exactly a full shot range for the clubs carried that the full shot argument falls apart.

Anyhow, back to the underlying issue under discussion, I don't think it really matters what the club is at all, the only relavant factors are their carry distances and how easy they are to deliver that consistently (for you) through a range of conditons etc

So rather than listing clubs, or debating hybrids, wedges, woods or iron gaps, I wonder if there is any agreement amongst those here on what constitutes a well gapped bag ?

As a 'straw man' I would put forward - 

250, 225, 210, 195, 180, 165, 150, 140, 130, 120, 105, 90, 75 (putter)

which happens to be my normal bag, and for shorter courses with smaller scoring targets I might swap out the 210 for a 65.

as has already been pointed out, what printed on the bottom has no relevance


----------



## SocketRocket (Dec 1, 2012)

duncan mackie said:



			In such discussions you also have to consider that a lot of people can play round their course without even having a shot between 50 and 100 yds; or ceartainly so few that the odds of it being from exactly a full shot range for the clubs carried that the full shot argument falls apart.

Anyhow, back to the underlying issue under discussion, I don't think it really matters what the club is at all, the only relavant factors are their carry distances and how easy they are to deliver that consistently (for you) through a range of conditons etc

So rather than listing clubs, or debating hybrids, wedges, woods or iron gaps, I wonder if there is any agreement amongst those here on what constitutes a well gapped bag ?

As a 'straw man' I would put forward - 

250, 225, 210, 195, 180, 165, 150, 140, 130, 120, 105, 90, 75 (putter)

which happens to be my normal bag, and for shorter courses with smaller scoring targets I might swap out the 210 for a 65.

as has already been pointed out, what printed on the bottom has no relevance
		
Click to expand...

Good post, thats a much better way of considering clubs.


----------



## HughJars (Dec 1, 2012)

duncan mackie said:



			In such discussions you also have to consider that a lot of people can play round their course without even having a shot between 50 and 100 yds; or *ceartainly so few that the odds of it being from exactly a full shot range for the clubs carried that the full shot argument falls apart.*

Anyhow, back to the underlying issue under discussion, I don't think it really matters what the club is at all, the only relavant factors are their carry distances and how easy they are to deliver that consistently (for you) through a range of conditons etc

So rather than listing clubs, or debating hybrids, wedges, woods or iron gaps, I wonder if there is any agreement amongst those here on what constitutes a well gapped bag ?

As a 'straw man' I would put forward - 

250, 225, 210, 195, 180, 165, 150, 140, 130, *120, 105, 90, 75* (putter)

which happens to be my normal bag, and for shorter courses with smaller scoring targets I might swap out the 210 for a 65.

as has already been pointed out, what printed on the bottom has no relevance
		
Click to expand...

That's exactly what I said, which was an argument that had fallen apart?


----------



## BTatHome (Dec 1, 2012)

An awful lot of people don't know what those yardages are though. 

Some people have no idea of their yardages, and some people have the yardages in their head but don't hit them


----------



## Imurg (Dec 1, 2012)

Most people's "yardages" are estimations anyway - not to say it's not a good way of doing it...

BUt how do you work out your carry yardage if you don't have access to an accurate launch monitor?
Using a GPS or laser, pitching the ball into sand or very soft ground so there's no run is all very well but even that isn't available to many...You even have to do it off grass to make it worthwhile - again, many don't have this access.
On the course? Many courses don't allow "practicing" so getting a figure from 1 shot isn't the best.

It's a very (pardon the pun) hit and miss science unless you have a launch monitor.


----------



## Fader (Dec 1, 2012)

duncan mackie said:



			In such discussions you also have to consider that a lot of people can play round their course without even having a shot between 50 and 100 yds; or ceartainly so few that the odds of it being from exactly a full shot range for the clubs carried that the full shot argument falls apart.

Anyhow, back to the underlying issue under discussion, I don't think it really matters what the club is at all, the only relavant factors are their carry distances and how easy they are to deliver that consistently (for you) through a range of conditons etc

So rather than listing clubs, or debating hybrids, wedges, woods or iron gaps, I wonder if there is any agreement amongst those here on what constitutes a well gapped bag ?

As a 'straw man' I would put forward - 

*250, 225, 210, 195, 180, 165, 150, 140, 130, 120, 105, 90, 75 (putter)
*
which happens to be my normal bag, and for shorter courses with smaller scoring targets I might swap out the 210 for a 65.

as has already been pointed out, what printed on the bottom has no relevance
		
Click to expand...

I really lilke this idea of having clubs for yardages rather than looking at the number on the sole. But then some will always want the more distance regardless, even though its not distance imo that lowers scores.


----------



## Rory130911 (Dec 2, 2012)

I THINK we have moved off the point.

The issue is that DISTANCE improvement claims are not justified when you have just RE-NUMBERED the clubs to get them I think?

Personnaly I carry a laser and use the same balls all the time.

These two things mean that with wedges & short irons I am never very far from pin-high on approaches...... THATS the distance that counts not which iron I take to get there.

Now I just have to sort the DIRECTION out!


----------



## duncan mackie (Dec 2, 2012)

Rory130911 said:



			I THINK we have moved off the point.

The issue is that DISTANCE improvement claims are not justified when you have just RE-NUMBERED the clubs to get them I think?

Personnaly I carry a laser and use the same balls all the time.

These two things mean that with wedges & short irons I am never very far from pin-high on approaches...... THATS the distance that counts not which iron I take to get there.
		
Click to expand...

you can shout all you like (although it is a little rude) but it's entirely the point.

if you compare the RBladez to, say, the JPX825 which are in the same market, you will find that in the shorter irons the lofts/lengths are the same and it's only as you go to the longer clubs that you get some (small in this case and certainly not enough to consider it a re-number) decrease in loft and increase in length. In association with this transition you also (apparently) get an increased launch angle for the loft ie the 5 is designed to deliver a 'normal' 5 launch angle but with a distance benefit. All the opinions I have seen also suggest that the longer clubs really do 'play' to the number rather than the loft ie the 5 is actually an easy 5 to hit from a variety of lies rather than becoming more difficult because of the loft and length.

So *the* question for most people is whether or not they find these clubs easier to hit longer, and whether the gapping they provide them is appropriate to their play. 

btw you probably should change your signature if you use the same balls all the time - it shows 2 very different ones.


----------



## ScienceBoy (Dec 2, 2012)

I assume the disadvantage of these stronger clubs is that instead of dropping a 3 and 4 iron as you would for a "standard" set  for hybrids you now need hybrids replacing down to the 6 iron... 

IMO a number on a club is just a number, its how far it goes that is important, if I have 150 I pick my 150 club. That simple really, the rest is just marketing terms and any seasoned golfer should build their set around the lofts and distances they hit the clubs, not by the designated number.


----------



## duncan mackie (Dec 2, 2012)

ScienceBoy said:



			I assume the disadvantage of these stronger clubs is that instead of dropping a 3 and 4 iron as you would for a "standard" set  for hybrids you now need hybrids replacing down to the 6 iron...
		
Click to expand...

you could look at it that way - or you could just order 3 to LW (unless you are LH in which case there's no LW) to go with your D, 3w and putter....  it will be really interesting to see how mid handicappers react to (for example) a 4i that feels easier to play than a 4h and goes as far (allegedly)  

not a lot of point musing over it though - time will tell how it plays out.


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Dec 2, 2012)

I don't agree. Wilson in particular were notorious for cranking up the loft a few years back. It really doesn't matter who makes what. It is about knowing how far you hit it and whether you hit them consistently enough. Nothing else matters.


----------

