Opinion & Analysis
The Wedge Guy: Why modern irons don’t make sense to me
One of the things that really bothers me about most of the newer iron models that are introduced is the continued strengthening of the lofts — I just don’t see how this is really going to help many golfers. The introduction of driver and hybrid technologies into the irons – thinner faster faces, tungsten inserts and filling the heads with some kind of polymer material – is all with the goal of producing higher ball flight with lower spin. But is that what you really want?
I’ll grant you that this technology makes the lower lofts much easier to master, and has given many more golfers confidence with their 5- and 6-irons, maybe even their 4- and 5-. But are higher launch and lower spin desirable in your shorter irons? I’ve always believed those clubs from 35 degrees on up should be designed for precision distance control, whether full swings are when you are “taking something off,” and I just don’t see that happening with a hollow, low CG design.
Even worse, with lofts being continually cranked downward, most modern game improvement sets have a “P-club” as low as 42-43 degrees of loft. Because that simply cannot function as a “wedge”, the iron brands are encouraging you to add in an “A-club” to fill the distance void between that and your gap wedge.
But as you ponder these new iron technologies, here’s something to realize . . . and think about.
Discounting your putter, you have 13 clubs in your bag to negotiate a golf course. At one end, you have a driver of 10-12 degrees of loft, and at the other end your highest lofted wedge of say, 58 to 60 degrees. So, that’s a spread of 46 to 50 degrees. The mid-point of that spread is somewhere around 35 degrees, the iron in your bag that probably has an “8” on the bottom.
Now consider this: From that 35-degree 8-iron downward, you have a progression of clubhead designs, from the iron design, to hybrids, to fairway woods to your driver, maybe even a “driving iron” design as a bridge between your lowest set-match iron to your hybrids. At least four, if not five, completely different clubhead designs.
But in the other direction, from 35 degrees to that highest lofted wedge, you likely only have two designs – your set-match irons and your wedges, each of which all essentially look alike, regardless of loft.
I feel certain that no one in the history of golf ever said:
“I really like my 6-iron; can you make me a 3-wood that looks like that?”
But do you realize the loft difference between your 6-iron and 3-wood is only 12-14 degrees, even less than that between your 6-iron and “P-club”? So, if you can’t optimize an iron design to perform at both 28 and 15 degrees, how can you possibly expect to be able to optimize the performance of one design at both 28 and 43 degrees?
And you darn sure won’t get your best performance by applying 6-iron technology to an “A-club” of 48 to 50 degrees.
This fact of golf club performance is why you see so many “blended” sets of irons in bags these days, where a golfer has a higher-tech iron design in the lower lofts, but a more traditional blade or “near blade” design in the higher lofts. This makes much more sense than trying to play pure blade long irons or “techy” higher lofts.
Most of my column posts are oriented to offering a solution to a problem you might have in your game, but this one doesn’t. As long as the industry is focused on the traditional notion of “matched sets,” meaning all the irons look alike, I just don’t see how any golfer is going to get an optimum set of irons without lots of trial and error and piecing together a set of irons where each one works best for the job you give it.
If you want to see how an elite player has done this for his own game, do some reading on “what’s in the bag” for Bernhard Langer. Very interesting indeed.
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
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!
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
“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.
‘Why would anybody want to change that swing?’ – Brandel Chamblee says PGA Tour star was wrong to change his swing
‘The stupidest freaking thing I’ve ever heard’ – Billy Horschel slams Open idea suggested by Padraig Harrington
WITB Time Machine: Brandt Snedeker’s winning WITB, 2018 Wyndham Championship
Golfer proudly posts photo of ball mark on iron, receives immediate roasting
WITB Time Machine: Matthew Wolff’s winning WITB, 2019 3M Open
Oakmont Country Club bans Wyndham Clark over locker incident; Reveals specific conditions to earn reinstatement
Adam Scott puts Callaway blades in the bag at Wyndham Championship
Report: LIV star fires caddie and coach in shock shake up
Rickie Fowler makes equipment change to ‘something that’s a little easier on the body’
The championship formula: How 3 key stats separate winners from the field
Peter Malnati WITB 2025 (August)
Peter Malnati what’s in the bag accurate as of the Wyndham Championship. More photos from the event here. Driver: Titleist...
Cameron Young’s winning WITB: 2025 Wyndham Championship
Driver: Titleist GT2 (9 degrees, A1 SureFit setting) Buy here. Shaft: Mitsubishi Tensei 1K Pro Orange 70 TX 3-wood: Titleist...
Camilo Villegas WITB 2025 (July)
Camilo Villegas WITB accurate as of the Wyndham Championship. Villegas was undecided on a 3-wood when we shot his bag. ...
WITB Time Machine: Brandt Snedeker’s winning WITB, 2018 Wyndham Championship
Brandt Snedeker fired a final-round 65 at the 2018 Wyndham Championship to outlast Webb Simpson and C.T. Pan. His 5-under...
Murv
Dec 2, 2022 at 12:52 pm
I’ll be 79 for next season. A couple of years ago I had a short trial with a 7 wood. Didn’t like it. Put it back in last fall and loved it. Looking for a 9 wood. Will go from 2 fairways and 3 hybrids to 4 woods and 1 hybrid then the 7 iron. Sad when you can’t elevate hybrids anymore. 44 set pw. 49, 54 and 58 wedges.
Neville Hubbard
Dec 2, 2022 at 11:23 am
I have 16.5° 3-wood, 19°, 23°, 25° hybrids, 27.5° 7-iron, 31° 7-iron, then conventionally lofted clubs to a 44° pitching wedge, 50° gap wedge, 56° sand wedge and, I’m ashamed to say, a chipper!!! It works for me!!!
WiTerrp
Dec 2, 2022 at 11:19 am
By trial and error, my set reflects your opinion. In the under 90 mph driver head speed, I only routinely carry 7-P irons. My gap wedge is a Vokey, not the set 48 iron. The wedge is far better at feel shots and the P can cover shots that I would use the 48. The 6 iron is replaced by a 25 hybrid. I have both the 6 and 48 irons, but only carry the 6I based on a specific par 3 distances Since adding the wedge, the 48 is pretty much just for set resale value.
Having lost club head speed, the promise of more distance doesn’t impress me much. When an iron can’t give me 10+ yards over the previous iron, time to add another hybrid.
Larry "Bud" Melman
Dec 2, 2022 at 1:41 am
Naw bruh, I want 4 irons in the bag and 7 wedges. That’s just how I roll.
David Aceto
Dec 1, 2022 at 5:48 pm
good article my irons start 31 to 33 degrees to 36 to 41 to 46 to 51 degrees 5 degree gaps due to my 65 mph clubhead speed with a iron the only speciality is i use r9 tp b irons for my 8 9 and pitching wedge works out great
Rob
Dec 1, 2022 at 5:40 pm
Overfocusing on Loft is just as bad as overfocusing on the number on the bottom of the club.
Loft, and especially static loft, is only one variable in the equation. Work backwards from your ideal ball flight, distances, forgiveness, and feel instead.
Whatever that loft, length, clubhead, and shaft is, let that be.
Jeff
Dec 3, 2022 at 10:26 pm
Many golf ball OEM’S when working with their various tour staff. Start working with their staff from the green to their drivers. The player wants the sound and feel of the ball around the green. Shows the importance of having the right ball for the short game.
Edward Gambler
Dec 1, 2022 at 5:21 pm
You loft jack complainers miss out on one important factor. Shorter shafts are easier to hit and easier to hit straight. So putting a 7 iron loft on an eight iron shaft immediately makes that distance easier to manage for the average and sub average golfer. Simple fact.
You claim we shouldn’t care what number is on the club, but it seems to me you’re the ones who get all bent out of shape with the number not meaning what you want it to. Lighten up…I went from about 6 GIR per round with my traditionally lofted irons to over ten with my new PXGs. All that extra distance with shorter shafts and more forgiveness has been an absolute Godsend.
Philip
Dec 2, 2022 at 9:33 am
You only posted to brag you paid a ridiculous amount of money for clubs made by a dope. I a 5 and he’s ? right… I even published an article about this very topic when I was marketing Director for a HIGH END boutique club maker
Mark Blake
Dec 1, 2022 at 4:02 pm
The number on the club matters because 8 iron and above is a different shape to 7 iron down. i guess because 8 iron is formerly a ‘pitching’ club, and therefore is used for different shotmaking.
So yes its ridiculous to have an 8 iron at <40 deg of loft, because that means a golfer needs even more wedges.
One day golfers will be advised to drop the "hard to hit" short irons, and just use some hybrids then a 30 degree wedge, then more wedges. Then they will call it a 1 wedge and so on.
Kourt
Dec 1, 2022 at 11:13 am
This dude just loves blades, which is fine, but I’ve seen many high handicap golfers find much more joy in their games by playing game improvement irons. Even with my dad switching to cbx cavity wedges has helped him. Yes if you’re an elite striker they might not be “as precise” but for most high handicappers they are just trying to avoid bunkers and hit more greens.
Livininparadise
Dec 9, 2022 at 11:57 am
I have to agree with you. Many high handicapped golfers can’t hit blade style wedges any better than they could a 1 iron. I notice that their distance is very inconsistent with blade style wedges, which causes them more issues than direction.
This article is for some players. Most players should get fitted and not worry about what Bernhard Langer is hitting
Reality
Dec 1, 2022 at 4:29 am
I’ve never been happier than with my new Titleist T300’s. I play Driver, 23 Hybrid, 7, 8, 9, P, W1, W2, 56Vokey and 60Vokey. I am 72 years old with a handicap of 26 and am hitting my 7 iron 15 yards further than when I was 34 years old playing off 2!
sandtrap
Dec 1, 2022 at 4:11 am
Pickles I think one of the main points in this debate is that some manufacturers choose to make their 9 irons with 37 or 38deg lofts while a traditional 7 iron might be 36 or 37deg. These manufacturers know full well that the average person comes out of a club fitting thinking ‘Gee I hit those INSERT BRAND NAME HERE’s 9 iron(not knowing it is 38deg)just as far as INSERT BRAND NAME HERE’s 7 iron (nearly the same loft)… They must be the superior club!’
This is completely deceitful and all it is accomplishing is moving the goal posts. I can’t wait until the day when we are all playing bag consisting of a Driver then a 21 deg 9iron, and then F, O, E, Q, J, X, A, G, P, S and L wedge. The only realistic way to get around this would be to label every club by degrees instead of a number or have industry regulations as to what loft within a degree, belongs on each iron. Then manufacturers would actually be able to sell the clubs due to the actual characteristics and engineering of the club eg.higher launch/steeper descent angle, more forgiving etc.
One writer on WRX argued your same point just as poorly a few years ago after publishing an obvious paid advertisement/review/article by an OEM who had strengthened their lofts considerably in one line of irons and stating that they were revolutionary in terms of length.
However , the only real objective way to compare clubs from a performance perspective is to eliminate as many of the variables as possible and making a decision from there. Same shaft, same flex, same loft, same ball and even as far as same grip and number of papers. However OEM’s knowing that their 8iron is actually a 6.5 iron and still marketing it as an 8 is taking advantage of Average Joe’s ignorance of what they are ACTUALLY hitting.
FYI- I hit my F-Wedge further than your 4 iron 😉
Jeff
Dec 3, 2022 at 11:36 pm
1. Never going to get industry standards. Clubs, balls, shafts, etc. Different strokes for different fokes.
2. Stamping/loft on an iron doesn’t work! We saw that did not work a few years back. I don’t want to have to pull out a piece of paper and match the number to the iron I am playing. That will certainly slow play and we already have that problem!!
3.All OEM’s have on their web sites the specs of their irons. So they are not hiring their lofts
4. Do you only buy one shirt color or pants color?
Jeff
Dec 3, 2022 at 11:42 pm
Paper? Did you mean wraps/tape?Looks like your advocating bifurification. Typo on previous email OEM’S not hiring their specs
Jeff
Dec 4, 2022 at 12:23 pm
Hiding. Finally typed it correct!
Pickles
Dec 6, 2022 at 11:42 pm
Sandtrap, I’d guess we agree on more than disagree. Agreed, many buyers may get confused by loft changes over the last decade. But to be fair, lofts have been strengthening since the modern balata era. At one point, your “traditional” 37 degree 7 iron would’ve been considered strong.
However, you are missing the main points from my post. The author contends that consumers are hurt because OEMs design short irons exactly as they do long irons. My rebuttal was that I disagreed that OEMs do this, giving examples of specific iron sets that contradict authors point.
Additionally, I disagreed with the premise that irons should have an even spread of loft because loft’s impact on distance is correlated with speed. As speed decreases, so too does the impact of loft. Test for yourself, tweak a 64 degree wedge one degree and note the distance change. (Or go to the extreme and tweak your putter). Then tweak your driver a degree and note the change. Surely if you have access to a boutique club fitter you could obtain the data. All loft degrees are not equal, thus it is illogical to gap a set purely on loft. In my set, I don’t care what the number on the sole is, I care how far it goes. Happy to carry a 4iron as my longest, or a 2, whichever hits my number.
FYI- funny quip about your f wedge. Afraid you’re probably overconfident tho; my college degree was free thanks to golf ?
jamho3
Nov 30, 2022 at 5:20 pm
TK.
I know this matches your club making agenda, but at the same time I still appreciate your being willing to take this on and spread the truth and this perspective. Keep it up.
O_o
Nov 30, 2022 at 2:48 pm
Fittings over the last 4 years have shown me that the average golfer really isn’t interested in improving their game realistically anyway, and it’s obvious that these equipment companies know that. If hitting a 6 iron an extra 15 yards means something to Joe the 27 handicap, more power to him. Whatever makes you enjoy the game
Jeff
Dec 3, 2022 at 11:45 pm
I haven’t met anyone yet who wants to hit it shorter! Age will allow that to happen.LOL
Common sense.
Nov 30, 2022 at 2:42 pm
Ego and salesmanship is the answer. You can sell a 130 yard pitching wedge alot easier than a 110 yard pw.
Clayton
Nov 30, 2022 at 2:14 pm
I agree, but well thought out irons like my Mizuno 223 have a more “wedge like” 8 to Pw based off 46*. A bit strong but nothing crazy. That being said, I’m planning on reshafting some classic CB irons I have based off a 48* PW, bending them all a degree weak and seeing how I like that wider spread from 3 to PW, gaining a long iron slot but not losing my “GW” loft (49-51) that I use so much every round. It’ll just be called a PW again like it was in the 1990-2010s.
Matts
Nov 30, 2022 at 2:10 pm
I agree that current modern day iron sets (4 iron to PW) have too many clubs with lofts less than forty degrees and often with only three or two and a half degrees of loft between clubs, for most average golfers. If you cannot hold a green with a long iron, you should change to a hybrid or a lofted fairway wood if those clubs can.
Matts
Nov 30, 2022 at 2:21 pm
To expand further, the golfer of average driver swing speed (90 to 95 mph) needs a WITB of driver, fairway wood/s, hybrid/s, irons and specialist wedges, meaning buying a set of irons (4I through PW) is wasteful because one should not be putting some of those irons in your bag.
Pickles
Nov 30, 2022 at 1:12 pm
First, I don’t agree with the general argument because it’s circular. If loft is such a critical determinant, why should one care if their set is a 5-A instead of a 4-P? Even with your point about a 6 iron being so close to a 3 wood, why does that matter if it’s the longest iron in one’s bag (and how many people should even carry a 15 fairway anymore)?
Second, a degree of loft doesn’t have a linear impact on distance relative to speed. As clubspeed decreases, more loft is required to impact distance. A degree of loft difference with a driver could account for 20 yards, a 59 degree wedge might only carry 3 yards further than a 60 degree. Surely this should impact one’s set makeup more than sticking to an arbitrary loft spread.
Last the author argues that OEM’s make short irons the same as long. Unfortunately, OEM’s have been incorporating blended sets into one for a decade or more. Taylormade RBZ Tour, Titleist AP2, etc, have had game improvement tech in the long irons (slots, tungsten) with more basic/traditional short irons. This might not even be expressly necessary; as loft increases, the value of these game improvement aspects diminishes.
Cucumbers
Dec 1, 2022 at 3:00 am
Extremely well said
Livininparadise
Dec 9, 2022 at 12:08 pm
Pickles, yes.
Kohler should know this and any article like this that does not give a brief overview of moden club design is disingenuous.
In an effort to make clubs easier to hit, manufacturers have lowered the center of gravity. If traditional lofts were utilized, everyone would just pop the ball up, so lofts have to be dialed down. The result happens to be a club that does hit the ball further, but also is easier to hit. However, just because clubs are easier to hit does not take into consideration lack of practice and lack of overall ability. They players that have benefited from easier to hit clubs get closer to the green in regulation. However, talent gets the ball into the hole.
Raj LP
Nov 30, 2022 at 11:34 am
This quest for low spin and distance has been interesting to me as well but I am a higher swing speed player so I have P770s which are a more traditional lofted. I find those go a specific distance more consistently. Whereas, the modern lofted irons gave me a pretty big variance on distance. I guess the manufacturers point is that, by moving COG lower, the trajectory of a longer shot will give it the same height and landing iron of a shorter iron. Hence, it enables lower swing speed hitters to reach greens further away and still hold them.