Iron Reviews Dilemma

[MVP]

How much notice do you take of Magazine reviews on equipment?

Do they persuade you to get certain sets if they do well , or do you only buy stuff if you like it once you tried it?

Also Do you think Some Magazines are Bias with their reviews because of backhanders and being best mates with Reps of certain brands, so they get the best reviews.

Im in a bit of a dilemma at the mo as i wanna buy a new set but theres only so much feedback you can get from a fitting session or Range demos without having the set for a few rounds etc

eg i liked the MP 67 but a pro told me they are a different story on grass due to the narrow sole etc. So i look to mag reviews for advice yet their is always that doubt in my mind that it is Bias.
what do you think??

 

[bunkered]

I think it was about ten years ago titleist were doing a thing with dci irons where by each pro that was selling them had a full demo set that you could take away and try out on the course, i would like to see more company,s doing this.

 

[RGuk]

I read the reviews and take note accordingly; if a medium standard player rates them, I bank that review in my memory.
It's hard to get a good read off a mat or swing monitor....I think a grass demo is a must. Most pros and shops will surely have a demo 7 iron to lend you if you are serious.

 

[MVP]

Most pros and shops will surely have a demo 7 iron to lend you if you are serious.

True but if you wanna get a combination set , or any set for that matter a 6 or 7 iron to take away isnt gonna give you feedback on a 3iron etc

id like to see more Demo sets sent out by manufacturers than just 6irons for fitting. I hate mats now. I realise at my new club there is not one bit of level ground on the course except the tee box.There is always an uphill/downhill lie, or Ball above/below feet.

 

[RGuk]

I'd like to see more Demo sets sent out by manufacturers than just 6irons for fitting. I hate mats now.

Yes, it would make sense. There are some demos at my club that have a good few no. irons. If I wanted to try Titleist or Benross, I'd could get almost 1/2 a set out of the demo bag.

I reckon pros or shops would understand if you wanted to try more than 1 iron. My mate bought some dci years ago and tested a complete set, to my memory.

 

[HomerJSimpson]

Sadly if I wnat to try more than a couple of makes or models I have to go to AG as my pro just doesn't stock them. I'd love to try Mizuno's G10's etc off grass but can't and have to make do with the driving range next to AG store

 

[DCB]

OK, you may think I'm too cynical here but.....

Most golf magazines rely on the advertising by the mainstream manufacturers to fill their pages at certain times of the year. Most manufacturers are more than happy tooblige and to supply very clever, very well thought out adverts for these magazines. Most magazines obviously get manufacturers equipment to test and report on, and in the case of GM the readers provide some of the fedback.

So....

Are the magazine editors really going to bite the hand that feeds them? I think the editorial reviews will be smoke and moirrors in some cases. The reviews are not going to give a warts and all review of a manufacturers piece of equipment just in case it upsets someone.

The nice glossy pictures are what draws us in, we're always suckers for a nice looking club and if the write up is good then hey it must be the answer to all my woes!

I've looked at some clubs after reading a write up and thought that the club is too ugly, to thick a top line, too broad a sole all that sort of thing but it never says so in the reviews.

 

[TonyN]

How often do you see a review that says, don't buy these clubs, they are over priced, waste of money, complete load of shine a light. Not often i suspect for most of us.

I think as mentioned, demo sets would be the ideal way to choosing your kit.

Other than that its just a case of making the most of what your offered. Good luck with the dilemma!

 

[medwayjon]

Good thread this.

I tend to try for myself rather than take too much notice of reviews.

I personally think that TG must be on the Taylor-Made marketing committee they are so blatant.

From what I have read it would seem that GM is fairly impartial.

 

[DCB]

I think most of us know what we like in the look of a club and as a result we know what manufacturer has clubs in that style as their current offering. As a result we wander about golf shops/stores having a good look to narrow down the field before we get to the point where we ask for a demo set/club to try out.

In my own experience my club pro has been able to get anything I've asked for (within reason) to try out before buying it, hence the reason that I use him for most things. It may be a little more expensive sometimes, but when you've had a club for a week or so you know if it's going to suit you or not.

 

[GB72]

Agree with the comments about TG being well and truely in Taylormade's pocket. You can see the extremes they go to not to anything bad in this months iron reviews when they even found something nice to say about FAST irons. Stil, nice to see Orka clubs appearing in the reviews.

Certainly would be willing to trust the GM Reader reviews as mine was put in word for word irrespective of not being complimentary in parts.

 

[Basher]

Advertising plays a huge part in the magazine industry.
I can imagine what a major advertiser would do if the magazine slated their equipment!

Good reviews = repeat advertising business.
Bad reviews = stuff you, I'll advertise elsewhere!

 

[madandra]

I think the biggest influence regarding a good review is NOT a back-hander. The biggest weight manufacturers like the BIG FIVE (Callaway, Titleist, TaylorMade,Ping and Nike)have is a reduction in advertising within a publication so you may find that over the year the magazine reviews will be 80% possitive, 15% neutral and 5% slightly negative.A magazine could make £200,000 from one Manufacturer so would be silly to put this revenue at risk.

 

[madandra]

I should have refreshed my page before posting my comment as Basher got in b4 me.

 

[Sam]

Agree with the comments about TG being well and truely in Taylormade's pocket. You can see the extremes they go to not to anything bad in this months iron reviews when they even found something nice to say about FAST irons.

But Taylormade is part of Adidas Group and Slaz belongs to Sports World International (Slazenger, Dunlop, Carlton, Donnay and Lonsdale) or am I missing your point?

 

[madandra]

Agree with the comments about TG being well and truely in Taylormade's pocket. You can see the extremes they go to not to anything bad in this months iron reviews when they even found something nice to say about FAST irons.

But Taylormade is part of Adidas Group and Slaz belongs to Sports World International (Slazenger, Dunlop, Carlton, Donnay and Lonsdale) or am I missing your point?

Forgive me for playing devils advocate here but has anyone actually tried these F.A.S.T. irons?

 

[theeaglehunter]

to be honest I use the reviews as a guide to which clubs I should or shouldn't try, not to decided which clubs to buy. I think they are just designed to try and reveal which sort of player the clubs may appeal to, and often the reviews are a summary of what the club can do, not an evaluation of what it fails to deliver. On that basis then they are just a rough guide which tells the reader what they could get out of a particular set of irons, or any other club.

 

[JezzE]

Hello there everyone,
As the man who has been responsible for putting together Golf Monthly's equipment coverage for the last 5+ years I have been following this thread with some interest!! In response...
1) Firstly let me acknowledge what some of you have already alluded to - equipment manufacturers advertise with Golf Monthly and we do then review many of the clubs that form the basis of their advertising campaigns - there is no getting away from that; that is just the way it is.
2) Having worked in the golf industry for some 16 years, there is considerably less bad golf gear out there now than there was when I started out on the shop floor at Horsham Golf and Fitness back in 1993.
3) I have always seen it as part of my role to undertake some sort of filtering role prior to going to print with regard to each month's selections, as I prefer to present clubs/gear that might be of interest rather than those that I think don't perform - pressure for space is tight and I have never wanted to waste too much of it on gear that doesn't perform.
4) If you were to look back over the last five years, you would find that both big brands and lesser brands have 'won' tests/reviews; similarly both have also come further dowm the pecking order - even the big boys! We have no bias or axe to grind with any brand - I think if that were to be case, the likes of Benross and MD Golf would never have won a test because their relatively lower advertising spend would have mitigated against it. Both have actually won tests a number of times over the last five years...
5) Because I believe there is not a lot of bad gear out there - certainly from the brands that we choose to deal with - it is almost certainly true that the number of positive reviews will have exceeded the number of indifferent or negative ones. And I certainly know for a fact that a modest budget does not prevent you from playing being able to play good golf these days...
6) There have been times when negative or unfavourable reviews have led to very awkward phone calls with 'aggrieved' manufacturers, and, believe me, if I had a free choice I would definitely prefer to give those calls a miss. Who needs unwanted grief in their job? But the fact is, we have sometimes said things that manufactures have taken exception to, and I accept that it is part and parcel of the job to deal with those as and when they arise rather than sugar-coating every review to ensure that they never arise.
7)... and finally, beyond all this, it should never be forgotten that there is massive degree of subjectivity involved when it comes to perception of golf clubs. What looks great to me may not suit your eye; what feels good off the face to me may sound too muted or loud to your ear and so on...

That's all really - just wanted to have a little say from the other side of the fence...
Good golfing everyone
Jezz

 

[MVP]

Good thread this.
I personally think that TG must be on the Taylor-Made marketing committee they are so blatant.

I was just about to right that myself till i read you put it down.
Also there stats results of their test are total nonsense too. I Think anyway.

 

[brendy]

Hey up JezzE, good to hear from the staff as usual!
I believe that magazines do not ultimately tell anyone you must buy this club or set etc. I tend to use the magazine for reference and opinions rather than gospel. Let me elaborate, If I saw a review for the latest TM irons which I had already been eyeing up and the review mentioned that they were the best thing since sliced bread, I would still want to try them out. If anything it would make me more determined to get the lend of a set to try them out in case I opted not to try them then end up with a set that I really couldnt hit after a honeymoon period.
If I really wanted a set of these irons and the review said that they wernt much of an improvement over the previous incarnation, that still wouldnt put me off however it would make me more aware of what else is out there on the market via the rest of their reviews past and present.
In my opinion, there is a very fine line between licking arse and pissing manufacturers off, Im not the most perceptive person in this little golfball shaped world but I can feel the vibe of the writer when they are a little unsure about the equipment on review. I prefer this method as the manufacturer is happy that perhaps their product needs a little more R&D or fine tuning, the mag is not seen to be slating a product and the reader/subscriber is happy to see an honest review.
My tuppence!