Connect with us

Opinion & Analysis

Wedge Guy: Do irons really need to go longer?

Published

on

I’m going to admit right up front that today’s post is an update of one I wrote almost 10 years ago, but the subject is just as relevant to all golfers today, if not even more so, in my opinion. Back then, it was interesting to me that the two most “aggressive” marketers of irons that year began touting how long they are, because up until then, the “distance war” had been mostly limited to drivers.

Until then, we had been through almost 40 years of drivers being sold by touting that they are longer, and that kind of makes sense. Then this “longer, faster, meaner” claim worked its way into the fairway woods category, and even the hybrids. Even that makes a little sense.

But what advantage does it give you if your irons’ specifications are “jacked up” so that the new ones go further than the old ones?

While I will admit that golf club technologies have certainly advanced, the main pathway to making new irons longer – on a number-by-number basis – is to lower the center of mass, decrease the loft and maybe make the shaft longer. Essentially, what is today’s “8-iron” for example, has almost the same loft and length as an historic 6-iron. Of course, it goes further.

As a comparison, I was revisiting an old set of Reid Lockhart RL Blades that I designed in the mid-1990s. The pitching wedge had 48 degrees of loft and the 7-iron was 36 degrees in loft. In looking at specs for many of the modern iron sets, many 9-irons have almost that same loft.

So, for fun I got out the launch monitor and hit balls with both the RL Blade 7-iron and a modern 9-iron that was just 2 degrees weaker. What I found was that carry distance was really not all that different at my strength profile, about 140 yards. But the RL Blade launched considerably lower, delivered significantly more spin and was much easier to flight up and down to adapt to varying conditions, particularly wind.

What I also found was that the once-piece design of the RL Blades made “dialing in” those shorter distances much more reliable.

But back to what a jacked up set of irons does for your game . . . what happens if all your irons go further than your last set? Does that really help you hit more greens?

There was an old adage of golf club design called “the 24/38 rule”. What that meant is that only skilled players could proficiently handle an iron with 24 degrees of loft or less, and 38 inches in length or more. I’ll admit that modern iron designs have made the loft limitation a bit outdated, but the longer a club is, the more accurate you are likely to be, both in delivery of the clubhead to the ball and keeping the face angle and path tighter.

But here is what I find really interesting. In many of the major brands’ iron line-ups, they have their “tour” or “pro” model . . . which are typically up to two degrees weaker in loft and ¼ to 3/8 inch shorter in length than the ones they are trying to sell you. How much sense does that make? The tour player, who’s bigger and stronger than you, plays a club that is shorter and easier to control than the one they are selling you. Hmmmmm. Gotcha.

But let’s tie this back to drivers. On Iron Byron, the 46” driver always goes further than the 45, because Iron Byron doesn’t have any swing flaws. So, that’s what the stores are full of. But tour bags are full of drivers at 45”. So, if the tour player only hits 55-60% of his fairways with a 45” driver, how many are you going to hit with a 46?

Same goes with longer irons.

I’m just sayin’…

Terry Koehler is a fourth generation Texan and a graduate of Texas A&M University. Over his 40-year career in the golf industry, he has created over 100 putter designs, sets of irons and drivers, and in 2014, he put together the team that reintroduced the Ben Hogan brand to the golf equipment industry. Since the early 2000s, Terry has been a prolific writer, sharing his knowledge as “The Wedge Guy”.   But his most compelling work is in the wedge category. Since he first patented his “Koehler Sole” in the early 1990s, he has been challenging “conventional wisdom” reflected in ‘tour design’ wedges. The performance of his wedge designs have stimulated other companies to move slightly more mass toward the top of the blade in their wedges, but none approach the dramatic design of his Edison Forged wedges, which have been robotically proven to significantly raise the bar for wedge performance. Terry serves as Chairman and Director of Innovation for Edison Golf – check it out at www.EdisonWedges.com.

16 Comments

16 Comments

  1. Dennis Kovit

    Mar 1, 2025 at 4:45 pm

    I have a full set of Reid Lockhart irons and still use them often as nothing feels as good as hitting a forged blade pure. I’m looking for a Reid Lockhart 56 degree QB Sole wedge if anyone has one for sale.

  2. Golfer

    Jan 20, 2023 at 9:27 am

    I’m curious about Wishon’s 24/38 rule.  Does that still apply given today’s more forgiving, hotter iron heads?  I’m curious as to the timing of when this rule came out and then also what he/we define as “average” golfer.  What handicap is that?  Anything above 10? 

    Curious as to thoughts here….

  3. Steve

    Oct 30, 2022 at 9:11 pm

    This is such a silly look at this issue. One of the biggest differences between better players and average players, the average players do NOT know how to deloft irons at impact. In fact, many amateur players are actually adding loft at impact. As a result, to get ball launch conditions into an ideal window without changing a swing, the iron lofts get stronger. And that really does HELP that player who can’t deloft at impact. And, it increases launch ball speed and efficiency. For the first time, that amateur is seeing a launch window closer to an ideal for each iron number. That’s not a bad thing. Yes, Maybe they should take hours and hours to rebuild and learn a new swing, but many just don’t have that much time and don’t care, it’s a leisure activity not a profession for most! If stronger lofts don’t work for you, great, select one of the more standard lofted iron choices. But it doesn’t mean there isn’t a true market for stronger lofted irons, because they work for many amateur players!

  4. Blaiser

    Oct 29, 2022 at 5:28 pm

    Distance (and ego) is a thing in golf. Has been, and will be forever.

    I get how having jacked lofts can make a golfer happier, and I see nothing wrong with that. If it makes them enjoy the game more, then I’m all for it.

    But yes, it’s doing them a disservice if their gapping is messed up. But it looks like OEMs do a good job of providing gap wedges to combat this.

    All in all, it’s just a number on the button of the club and it really doesn’t matter “what is a 7 iron ‘supposed’ to be”

    My take is it would be easier to just have the loft stamped on the club. But that would probably be a bit too confusing for the new or casual golfer.

  5. Ned

    Oct 29, 2022 at 5:55 am

    Easy to say but wait to you get to be my age “79”. You will be looking to get all the distance you can get so you can play a reasonable round of golf. I don’t really care how much they jack the lofts if it gets that added distance. The new tech makes the launch angle almost the same as the older lofted clubs. The number in the bottom is meaningless it is all about gaping.

  6. Jay

    Oct 28, 2022 at 1:33 pm

    Have never understood the distance obsession with irons. The point of an iron is to hit a ball a particular distance, not to hit it as far as humanly possible.

  7. Fred

    Oct 28, 2022 at 10:55 am

    You mention lower COG’s. Clubs seem designed now to get in the air by the force applied to them rather than spin, which plays into the unfortunate tendency of most golfers to hit up on the ball.

    That is to say, many modern clubs seem designed to groove a bad swing.

  8. Rich Douglas

    Oct 27, 2022 at 4:24 pm

    I’ve played single-length irons for 6+ years. Wishon–first Sterling now EQ1-NX. I’m way more accurate throughout the set. You’d expect to be more accurate with the 4-7–they’re set at an 8-iron length. But the 9-SW are more accurate, too. That’s because I’m putting the exact same swing on every ball throughout the set, and every club in the set feels exactly the same. Same length, weight, swing weight, shaft, offset, lie angle, and MOI. The only difference you can see or feel is loft. (CG is a big player, too.)

    I carry an 8-iron 157 with 87mph swing speed. I don’t need it to go farther. If I do, I can reach for a 7-iron (ore more) that will feel exactly the same. What I really need is accuracy, and the single-length set certainly provides it.

  9. Jeff B

    Oct 27, 2022 at 8:35 am

    You are right this is still very relevant. The issue for most amateurs is the long iron lofts all getting crammed together and then having 5-6 degree gaps in their scoring irons and wedges. They often can’t hit a long iron consistent distances anyway. It would be much better for their game to have smaller gaps in the short irons and wedges.

    But that doesn’t “sell” apparently when you’re hitting 7-irons on the monitor and just want the longest one. You often see tour pros testing new clubs and saying the opposite, i.e. “This one goes too far, not enough spin, don’t like it.”

  10. Bob

    Oct 27, 2022 at 12:43 am

    No. Irons need to be spaced, non-redundant, predictable, reduce distance and direction volatility, perform on mishits, and fill all the gaps between woods and wedges. Take care of these and it’s amazing how much better they look.

  11. Paul Runyan

    Oct 26, 2022 at 10:15 pm

    Or my old set of Haigs with the PW loft of 50 degrees!

    I’m looking at a new set of irons for next year. Standard old lofts of 27 degrees for a 5 iron, 46 degrees on the PW. Works well on my 919Tours. And a Ping TiTec 7 wood from with an A flex shaft for height and distance I’ve had for 20 years or so. Tiny head too! What’s wrong with that!?

    Considering a new set from TXG with Mizuno MP 20’s or MMC’s.

    Some 6 irons are now 4 irons with a length of a 5 wood.

    Why don’t we just have a 6 iron contest and forget about playing golf?!

    Just take another club, I say.

  12. Rory

    Oct 26, 2022 at 10:06 pm

    You have a 3 wood and a lob wedge and typically 10 clubs to fill that gap. Does not really matter what they are called as long as the gapping is good

  13. MICHAEL

    Oct 26, 2022 at 8:15 pm

    With iron lofts getting stronger every year, I’m already planning for my new iron set in 2030. The eight irons I will carry w/b a 7 iron @ 24 deg, an 8 @ 27 deg, a 9 @ 31 deg, a PW @ 35 deg & 4 Gap wedges to make up the rest of my bag up to my sand wedge.

    Why doesn’t the usga require that ‘lofts #’s’ & not just useless club #’s are stamped on every iron? Then comparisons can be meaningful.

  14. Martien

    Oct 26, 2022 at 4:14 pm

    The road leads to single length irons .

  15. Steve

    Oct 26, 2022 at 11:53 am

    Terry, what is your take on the newer iron design with respect to handling the in between distances on iron shots? I find that a choked down 9 iron or wedge goes almost the exact same distance as a regular shot. How does the current iron design affect the ability to adjust the distance you can hit an iron?

  16. Bobby G

    Oct 26, 2022 at 11:24 am

    It’s fun to hit the ball a mile. But scoring is best when you know your distances inside 150. If you have four clubs that you take a full swing and know it will go 150, 135, 120 or 105, that’s more valuable for amateurs than hitting your shortest wedge 150. If your irons are longer then you have to make up for the short yards with less than full swings. Takes a lot of practice to develop that touch.

Leave a Reply

Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Opinion & Analysis

The 2 primary challenges golf equipment companies face

Published

on

As the editor-in-chief of this website and an observer of the GolfWRX forums and other online golf equipment discourse for over a decade, I’m pretty well attuned to the grunts and grumbles of a significant portion of the golf equipment purchasing spectrum. And before you accuse me of lording above all in some digital ivory tower, I’d like to offer that I worked at golf courses (public and private) for years prior to picking up my pen, so I’m well-versed in the non-degenerate golf equipment consumers out there. I touched (green)grass (retail)!

Complaints about the ills of and related to the OEMs usually follow some version of: Product cycles are too short for real innovation, tour equipment isn’t the same as retail (which is largely not true, by the way), too much is invested in marketing and not enough in R&D, top staffer X hasn’t even put the new driver in play, so it’s obviously not superior to the previous generation, prices are too high, and on and on.

Without digging into the merits of any of these claims, which I believe are mostly red herrings, I’d like to bring into view of our rangefinder what I believe to be the two primary difficulties golf equipment companies face.

One: As Terry Koehler, back when he was the CEO of Ben Hogan, told me at the time of the Ft Worth irons launch, if you can’t regularly hit the golf ball in a coin-sized area in the middle of the face, there’s not a ton that iron technology can do for you. Now, this is less true now with respect to irons than when he said it, and is less and less true by degrees as the clubs get larger (utilities, fairways, hybrids, drivers), but there remains a great deal of golf equipment truth in that statement. Think about it — which is to say, in TL;DR fashion, get lessons from a qualified instructor who will teach you about the fundamentals of repeatable impact and how the golf swing works, not just offer band-aid fixes. If you can’t repeatably deliver the golf club to the golf ball in something resembling the manner it was designed for, how can you expect to be getting the most out of the club — put another way, the maximum value from your investment?

Similarly, game improvement equipment can only improve your game if you game it. In other words, get fit for the clubs you ought to be playing rather than filling the bag with the ones you wish you could hit or used to be able to hit. Of course, don’t do this if you don’t care about performance and just want to hit a forged blade while playing off an 18 handicap. That’s absolutely fine. There were plenty of members in clubs back in the day playing Hogan Apex or Mizuno MP-32 irons who had no business doing so from a ballstriking standpoint, but they enjoyed their look, feel, and complementary qualities to their Gatsby hats and cashmere sweaters. Do what brings you a measure of joy in this maddening game.

Now, the second issue. This is not a plea for non-conforming equipment; rather, it is a statement of fact. USGA/R&A limits on every facet of golf equipment are detrimental to golf equipment manufacturers. Sure, you know this, but do you think about it as it applies to almost every element of equipment? A 500cc driver would be inherently more forgiving than a 460cc, as one with a COR measurement in excess of 0.83. 50-inch shafts. Box grooves. And on and on.

Would fewer regulations be objectively bad for the game? Would this erode its soul? Fortunately, that’s beside the point of this exercise, which is merely to point out the facts. The fact, in this case, is that equipment restrictions and regulations are the slaughterbench of an abundance of innovation in the golf equipment space. Is this for the best? Well, now I’ve asked the question twice and might as well give a partial response, I guess my answer to that would be, “It depends on what type of golf you’re playing and who you’re playing it with.”

For my part, I don’t mind embarrassing myself with vintage blades and persimmons chasing after the quasi-spiritual elevation of a well-struck shot, but that’s just me. Plenty of folks don’t give a damn if their grooves are conforming. Plenty of folks think the folks in Liberty Corner ought to add a prison to the museum for such offences. And those are just a few of the considerations for the amateur game — which doesn’t get inside the gallery ropes of the pro game…

Different strokes in the game of golf, in my humble opinion.

Anyway, I believe equipment company engineers are genuinely trying to build better equipment year over year. The marketing departments are trying to find ways to make this equipment appeal to the broadest segment of the golf market possible. All of this against (1) the backdrop of — at least for now — firm product cycles. And golfers who, with their ~15 average handicap (men), for the most part, are not striping the golf ball like Tiger in his prime and seem to have less and less time year over year to practice and improve. (2) Regulations that massively restrict what they’re able to do…

That’s the landscape as I see it and the real headwinds for golf equipment companies. No doubt, there’s more I haven’t considered, but I think the previous is a better — and better faith — point of departure when formulating any serious commentary on the golf equipment world than some of the more cynical and conspiratorial takes I hear.

Agree? Disagree? Think I’m worthy of an Adam Hadwin-esque security guard tackle? Let me know in the comments.

@golfoncbs The infamous Adam Hadwin tackle ? #golf #fyp #canada #pgatour #adamhadwin ? Ghibli-style nostalgic waltz – MaSssuguMusic

Continue Reading

Podcasts

Fore Love of Golf: Introducing a new club concept

Published

on

Episode #16 brings us Cliff McKinney. Cliff is the founder of Old Charlie Golf Club, a new club, and concept, to be built in the Florida panhandle. The model is quite interesting and aims to make great, private golf more affordable. We hope you enjoy the show!

Continue Reading

Opinion & Analysis

On Scottie Scheffler wondering ‘What’s the point of winning?’

Published

on

Last week, I came across a reel from BBC Sport on Instagram featuring Scottie Scheffler speaking to the media ahead of The Open at Royal Portrush. In it, he shared that he often wonders what the point is of wanting to win tournaments so badly — especially when he knows, deep down, that it doesn’t lead to a truly fulfilling life.

 

View this post on Instagram

 

A post shared by BBC SPORT (@bbcsport)

“Is it great to be able to win tournaments and to accomplish the things I have in the game of golf? Yeah, it brings tears to my eyes just to think about it because I’ve literally worked my entire life to be good at this sport,” Scheffler said. “To have that kind of sense of accomplishment, I think, is a pretty cool feeling. To get to live out your dreams is very special, but at the end of the day, I’m not out here to inspire the next generation of golfers. I’m not out here to inspire someone to be the best player in the world, because what’s the point?”

Ironically — or perhaps perfectly — he went on to win the claret jug.

That question — what’s the point of winning? — cuts straight to the heart of the human journey.

As someone who’s spent over two decades in the trenches of professional golf, and in deep study of the mental, emotional, and spiritual dimensions of the game, I see Scottie’s inner conflict as a sign of soul evolution in motion.

I came to golf late. I wasn’t a junior standout or college All-American. At 27, I left a steady corporate job to see if I could be on the PGA Tour starting as a 14-handicap, average-length hitter. Over the years, my journey has been defined less by trophies and more by the relentless effort to navigate the deeply inequitable and gated system of professional golf — an effort that ultimately turned inward and helped me evolve as both a golfer and a person.

One perspective that helped me make sense of this inner dissonance around competition and our culture’s tendency to overvalue winning is the idea of soul evolution.

The University of Virginia’s Division of Perceptual Studies has done extensive research on reincarnation, and Netflix’s Surviving Death (Episode 6) explores the topic, too. Whether you take it literally or metaphorically, the idea that we’re on a long arc of growth — from beginner to sage elder — offers a profound perspective.

If you accept the premise literally, then terms like “young soul” and “old soul” start to hold meaning. However, even if we set the word “soul” aside, it’s easy to see that different levels of life experience produce different worldviews.

Newer souls — or people in earlier stages of their development — may be curious and kind but still lack discernment or depth. There is a naivety, and they don’t yet question as deeply, tending to see things in black and white, partly because certainty feels safer than confronting the unknown.

As we gain more experience, we begin to experiment. We test limits. We chase extreme external goals — sometimes at the expense of health, relationships, or inner peace — still operating from hunger, ambition, and the fragility of the ego.

It’s a necessary stage, but often a turbulent and unfulfilling one.

David Duval fell off the map after reaching World No. 1. Bubba Watson had his own “Is this it?” moment with his caddie, Ted Scott, after winning the Masters.

In Aaron Rodgers: Enigma, reflecting on his 2011 Super Bowl win, Rodgers said:

“Now I’ve accomplished the only thing that I really, really wanted to do in my life. Now what? I was like, ‘Did I aim at the wrong thing? Did I spend too much time thinking about stuff that ultimately doesn’t give you true happiness?’”

Jim Carrey once said, “I think everybody should get rich and famous and do everything they ever dreamed of so they can see that it’s not the answer.”

Eventually, though, something shifts.

We begin to see in shades of gray. Winning, dominating, accumulating—these pursuits lose their shine. The rewards feel more fleeting. Living in a constant state of fight-or-flight makes us feel alive, yes, but not happy and joyful.

Compassion begins to replace ambition. Love, presence, and gratitude become more fulfilling than status, profits, or trophies. We crave balance over burnout. Collaboration over competition. Meaning over metrics.

Interestingly, if we zoom out, we can apply this same model to nations and cultures. Countries, like people, have a collective “soul stage” made up of the individuals within them.

Take the United States, for example. I’d place it as a mid-level soul: highly competitive and deeply driven, but still learning emotional maturity. Still uncomfortable with nuance. Still believing that more is always better. Despite its global wins, the U.S. currently ranks just 23rd in happiness (as of 2025). You might liken it to a gifted teenager—bold, eager, and ambitious, but angsty and still figuring out how to live well and in balance. As much as a parent wants to protect their child, sometimes the child has to make their own mistakes to truly grow.

So when Scottie Scheffler wonders what the point of winning is, I don’t see someone losing strength.

I see someone evolving.

He’s beginning to look beyond the leaderboard. Beyond metrics of success that carry a lower vibration. And yet, in a poetic twist, Scheffler did go on to win The Open. But that only reinforces the point: even at the pinnacle, the question remains. And if more of us in the golf and sports world — and in U.S. culture at large — started asking similar questions, we might discover that the more meaningful trophy isn’t about accumulating or beating others at all costs.

It’s about awakening and evolving to something more than winning could ever promise.

Continue Reading

WITB

Facebook

Trending