Power spec or retro spec?

[Grizzly]

I have,

A 46° Darwin
A 52° Hunt
A 58° Gallacher

A 64 degree Saint coming to the rescue?

 

[Voyager EMH]

A 64 degree Saint coming to the rescue?

Got one

 

[Grizzly]

Got one

View attachment 51271

I tried hitting one of those once - ball damn near lodged in my right nostrel!

 

[Captain_Black.]

Power spec, normal or retro...it all depends on the distance you require.
What is often forgotten is that when you get new irons that are, say, 7-8 yards longer than the previous set you're creating gaps at either end of the bag....
Your longest iron is now closer to your shortest hybrid/wood and your PW is further away from the rest of your wedges...
Gapping is more important than distance but gapping doesn't sell as much as distance......we like distance...
The theory of stronger lofts is sound until your swing speed slows down too much and then 25° 6 irons are not going to be functional...and that's when you go to hybrids.
With a 7 iron loft spread between 28 and 34 degrees its a waste of time saying " I hit my 7 iron X yayards

Pretty much sums up what I'm saying.
I get why the manufacturers are making the lofts stronger (bragging rights) but in reality it's not helping anyone.
Hence the introduction of retro lofts (I.e what the lofts really should be)
It also doesn't help when buying used if the power / retro specs aren't easily identifiable.

I've had issues of my 5 iron going further than my 5 hybrid.
Also too big a gap between my gap wedge & SW.

For me, retro lofts make much more sense & will give me the gapping I'm looking for.
I just wish the manufacturer's would stop trying to fix a problem that doesn't exist & instead concentrate on making irons that are easy to launch & accurate.

 

[Voyager EMH]

But "retro-lofts" is a misnomer.
A 30° iron from 1974 is not significantly different from any 30° iron today. The loft is not retro.

Retro Numbering - that is what it should be called.

1 = 15°, 2 = 18° then some 4 and 5 degree differences and on to 9 = 46° or thereabouts.
We should be using all the numbers 1 to 9 effectively and easily for everyone to understand.

 

[Crow]

But "retro-lofts" is a misnomer.
A 30° iron from 1974 is not significantly different from any 30° iron today. The loft is not retro.

Retro Numbering - that is what it should be called.

1 = 15°, 2 = 18° then some 4 and 5 degree differences and on to 9 = 46° or thereabouts.
We should be using all the numbers 1 to 9 effectively and easily for everyone to understand.

I'd make it simpler than that:

SW = 56
PW = 52
9i = 48
8i = 44
7i = 40
6i = 36
5i = 32
4i = 28
3i = 24
2i = 20
1i = 17

And when I find a vintage set with those lofts I'm over the moon!

This 1961 Slazenger set is close enough.

 

[Bratty]

My PW is now referred to as Bernard.

I can guarantee that @need_my_wedge will not be changing his name to need_my_bernard!

 

[GG26]

I got fitted by Ping a few years back and the reason I was put into the Power Spec was because I naturally launch the ball high and based on their monitor I needed to go lower to maximise distance and a lower lofted club achieved that. Doesn’t really matter what the number on the bottom of the club says as long as it does what you need.

 

[Gopher]

Doesn’t really matter what the number on the bottom of the club says as long as it does what you need.

Very true. I can't remember which pro it was, but I saw an interview where they showed the bottom of their irons and they had written a yardage number on them. The number being for a full shot with that iron in normal conditions.. that's all they needed.

 

[Deleted member 15717]

I just wish the manufacturer's would stop trying to fix a problem that doesn't exist & instead concentrate on making irons that are easy to launch & accurate.

This is pretty funny when you think about it for even half a second.

The clubs with strong lofts are easy to launch. They are easy to launch as the manufacturers play with the weights to ensure they are. The issue is that they then need to strengthen the lofts so that the ball just doesn't balloon up because of said easy to launch conditions.

Accuracy is a golfer problem, not a manufacturer problem. Not a whole lot they can do to help with that

 

[Orikoru]

Very true. I can't remember which pro it was, but I saw an interview where they showed the bottom of their irons and they had written a yardage number on them. The number being for a full shot with that iron in normal conditions.. that's all they needed.

I think Westwood does that so maybe it was him?

I'd make it simpler than that:

SW = 56
PW = 52
9i = 48
8i = 44
7i = 40
6i = 36
5i = 32
4i = 28
3i = 24
2i = 20
1i = 17

And when I find a vintage set with those lofts I'm over the moon!

This 1961 Slazenger set is close enough.

Always makes me laugh how much things have changed. My PW is 41 - closest to the 7 iron there. If I told someone I hit a 7 iron 125 they'd ask what was wrong with me.

But I don't think it's as simple as that. As @Hobbit said on the bottom of page one - the lofts have changed at least partly because of perimeter weighting and forgiveness meant higher launch angles so they sought to bring them back down. I do wonder how much more forgiveness and loft-changing there can really be though. In 30 years will I be playing an 8 & 9 iron plus seven 'wedges'? Baffling to think about.

 

[Deleted member 1147]

I think Westwood does that so maybe it was him?


Always makes me laugh how much things have changed. My PW is 41 - closest to the 7 iron there. If I told someone I hit a 7 iron 125 they'd ask what was wrong with me.

But I don't think it's as simple as that. As @Hobbit said on the bottom of page one - the lofts have changed at least partly because of perimeter weighting and forgiveness meant higher launch angles so they sought to bring them back down. I do wonder how much more forgiveness and loft-changing there can really be though. In 30 years will I be playing an 8 & 9 iron plus seven 'wedges'? Baffling to think about.

Bear in mind that that 7 iron would have a longer shaft then your PW, which would have an effect distance.

 

[Captain_Black.]

This is pretty funny when you think about it for even half a second.

The clubs with strong lofts are easy to launch. They are easy to launch as the manufacturers play with the weights to ensure they are. The issue is that they then need to strengthen the lofts so that the ball just doesn't balloon up because of said easy to launch conditions.

Accuracy is a golfer problem, not a manufacturer problem. Not a whole lot they can do to help with that

You just wait until you get older & your swing speed drops.
Then you'll begin to understand how difficult it becomes to launch strong lofted irons.

 

[Deleted member 1147]

You just wait until you get older & your swing speed drops.
Then you'll begin to understand how difficult it becomes to launch strong lofted irons.

Then he can buy the less strongly lofted irons. There is no rule to say which irons you should buy.

 

[Orikoru]

You just wait until you get older & your swing speed drops.
Then you'll begin to understand how difficult it becomes to launch strong lofted irons.

My swing speed is pretty low, but I thought the point of strongly-lofted irons - which are nearly all 'game improvement' irons - was to make it easier to launch the ball the required distance, not harder.

 

[Captain_Black.]

Then he can buy the less strongly lofted irons. There is no rule to say which irons you should buy.

Which brings us straight back to my original point.

 

[Captain_Black.]

My swing speed is pretty low, but I thought the point of strongly-lofted irons - which are nearly all 'game improvement' irons - was to make it easier to launch the ball the required distance, not harder.

Not really.
Look in the bag of virtually any senior golfer & you will most likely see no iron lower than a 6 or maybe a 7.
After that, it's usually a hybrid or 2 or fairway woods, which are ok & will launch higher, but maybe not just the required feel or accuracy, especially when going into greens.

 

[Orikoru]

Not really.
Look in the bag of virtually any senior golfer & you will most likely see no iron lower than a 6 or maybe a 7.
After that, it's usually a hybrid or 2 or fairway woods, which are ok & will launch higher, but maybe not just the required feel or accuracy, especially when going into greens.

But if you take a 4 or 5 iron that has higher loft it will generally have less forgiveness as well if it's not a 'game improver' so they'd be similarly unable to hit that particularly well - that's what I was saying. The loft alone doesn't dictate if you can hit the thing.

 

[Deleted member 15717]

Not really.
Look in the bag of virtually any senior golfer & you will most likely see no iron lower than a 6 or maybe a 7.
After that, it's usually a hybrid or 2 or fairway woods, which are ok & will launch higher, but maybe not just the required feel or accuracy, especially when going into greens.

Those senior golfers that have hybrids or fairways woods are being sensible. Not sure what 'required feel' you need to hit into a green. If a certain club goes the required number...who cares what it is. Pass me a shovel if it gets me the required number that I need

 

[Deleted member 1147]

Those senior golfers that have hybrids or fairways woods are being sensible. Not sure what 'required feel' you need to hit into a green. If a certain club goes the required number...who cares what it is. Pass me a shovel if it gets me the required number that I need

Like I stated earlier in the thread, there is entirely too much thought goes into golf for an awful lot of amateurs.
Someone who can't get a ball in the air with a lower lofted iron has no business bothering about feel on approach shots from range.