NRJyzr

Took a look on Golf Shaft Reviews.... it seems the EI curve of the $-Taper is nearly identical to the KBS Tour, per Russ Ryden. Which makes me wonder if one of the KBS graphites would be worth a look? <shrug> The static weight could be an issue, of course, coming from $-Taper 130...

Fujikura Pro comes in both stiff and regular at 95g. May be worth a look.

Based only on the $-taper use/success, I would think the 125x would be the way to go. I would also wonder if you would also be a candidate for the Pro 115 Tour Spec X...

It's just a matter of understanding the formula. The vast majority of that MPF score is nothing more than C Dimension minus Actual VCOG. There are penalties applied for clubheads with a CG above 0.840", which is where you can get a negative number. Especially if the CG is closer to the hosel, while also being on the high side.

Interestingly, there's no real difference in forgiveness between the MP64 and the S-3. The MP64's CG is a bit lower. Not having seen either... if the S-3 is smaller and you get better results with the 64, maybe it's just that size. The visual component is often overlooked. The Wilson CB, is this the Staff Model? Assuming so... Wilson seems to be using a higher CG in these irons. Where that's relevant, the lower CG of the mp64 isn't like in play. It hasn't been measured by GolfWorks so no MOI or CG data, so can't say specifically. That said, it's interesting that the Staff Model blades have a higher MOI than the S-3, but they also have a higher CG. I would expect the Staff Model CB would be similar, based on how the Wilson CBs' MOI have compared to their last few MB models. Random ramblings in between meetings.

I have a few of the recent Royal grips. They're OK, but I admit I prefer the Star Sidewinder. Trying the Star Classic Wrap on my driver, liking it a lot more than I thought I would.

I realize this is rhetorical... I'm reminded of the days of the wound balls, the 90 vs 100, and how it was frequently mentioned that even the fastest players didn't play the 100. The irony of that being, per Dean Snell, they were nowhere near that level for overall golfball compression, even for the so called 100s...

Going to add a comment here... If you have a bit of speed, or fight spin issues off the tee, the modern driver landscape is perfect for you. It's the largest improvement in modern clubs, creating drivers that don't spin, but have some measure of forgiveness. Or, in the case of the recent Ping LST models, considerable forgiveness. I would have dearly loved these options back in the day, when I was younger. You can probably do reasonably well to start with your other existing sticks, but the upgradeability in the driver is something to give serious thought to.

Having been there, I have to disagree. In my early days, I had a fair amount of speed, and just learning meant I had no control. I clearly needed something more than stock driver and wood shafts, and as it turned out, that's what it took for me to improve. It doesn't have to be exotic; I would suggest our OP steer clear of that minefield at this point. Something as straightforward as the NV75 or even 85 would be worth a look.

MMT 125 TX was said to be based on the profile of DGX100, I would suggest a demo of one of those. Steelfiber 125 is a stiffer bottom section version of DG. Its stiff enough in the lower half that you could possibly (likely?) get away with i125 stiff. Again, trying them is the only way to know. If demo is hard to locate, just build a demo club of your own? This is the path I went on for most of the last 25 years. It was hard to find xstiff iron shafts to try, back in the day. That still applies, when you're looking at graphite options. They're not a direct equivalent, but the Recoil Proto 125 can still be found by companies who are clearance-selling what they have left in house, with UST moving to the Dart and Dart V.

70s US auto industry might be a notable example...

Small update... played a round this past weekend with the Maxfli Tour to develop a bit of comparison. It was at a different course, with slower greens, for what that's worth. Distance between the Maxfli and XV is roughly equivalent, nothing notable, especially with the limited sample size. The biggest contrast was the short game and short irons spin. The XV checks up noticeably quicker on chips and pitches, and I saw more release with the Maxfli with short irons. I'd given a sleeve to a higher speed friend, who played them during this round. He immediately noticed the improved short game spin, and I got some secondhand side angle views of it. If one likes using that spin in the short game, the XV is a good choice. Going to continue with the XV. So far so good.

Golfworks acquired the Royal brand, such as I understand it.

It's largely a myth. Brother Forged4ever has commented on that a few times, having spoken to engineers at Mizuno. It's mentioned in marketing because people choose to believe it.

This is largely marketing. The CGs are roughly the same as they've always been. Modern G series Pings still have a CG higher than the Eye2. Early G series had a much lower CG.

I would suggest Cobra. If you don't mind one generation old, Darkspeed drivers and woods are great deals.

MS-11 / MP-11 are the blades for me. Honorable mention to the MP-14

Disagree with this. First thought... even 44½" is too long for a great many people, much less 45". Length is a fitting parameter, and the full potential you mention as the goal is realized for many golfers at 44" or even shorter. OEMs choosing the lengths they use as "standard" in the current marketplace has nothing to do with actual fitting. Inserting myself into that concept... I'm good up to 44", maybe 44¼". Going longer than that makes dispersion a problem. It just doesn't work with my swing (neither do sub-70g shafts). It doesn't affect distance for me, in fact, my swing is slower at 44½" than it is at 43" or 43½". Both lucky and unlucky, depending on the perspective approach. 😐

"Frequency Matched" is a term that started showing up in the mid-80s, related to the Precision iron shaft. Ram was a company that got on board fairly early with Brunswick (eventually Royal Precision) for iron shafts. It's interesting that companies would continue to use a reference to "Frequency Matched" shafts, even when using Dynamics or DG. When looking at the models of the Australian Blades, there appear to be nothing in the late 80s, until the DP-30 was released in 1990 or so, and then the TM-92 beginning in 1992. After that model, the next edition was the MCT-97. This suggests (to me) this club might come from mid-80s at the latest. I wasn't able to find anything in the Maltby Club ID Guide that matched up with this. Which suggests they may well be a UK item. Sorry for rambling all over the place there. 🙂

There was a graphite clubhead "movement" in the 80s into the early 90s. Primarily drivers and fairway woods, but even some irons. Yonex was a big player in that. I can't pin down the exact model, but with the "Tour" on the sole, it's evidently a tour model of whatever model year this club is. I suspect it's a Boronwood model, and not from the later ADX line, but I admit it's largely just a guess. Added comment... Yonex were big players in the graphite shaft world, and were rather good at it. Their graphite iron shafts were said to be of a quality that they'd likely play in today's golf sphere.

Not everyone does well with larger clubheads. It's just something that exists, far from a "mental block." LOL Ping came out with the Blueprint line due to this, they came to the realization that some golfers just hit smaller clubheads significantly better. There's not much in the relative difference between a G series iron and a Blueprint / Blueprint S / Blueprint T, and a 300cc to 340cc driver and something in the 440-460cc range.

It's the same as with any other club. It's a matter of matching up the flex. I play my drivers at 43½" for the most part, regardless of size. I use the same shafts in both 440-460cc clubheads and my 300 mini, and play them at the same swingweight. Were I playing 45"+ drivers, I would probably look to tip the shaft like it was a 3w installation. It's important to note, not everyone would be affected by the shaft being softer at the shorter length with heavier clubhead; some players are not particularly affected by flex. And, as Brother Stuart often says, weight is (generally) more important than flex. The only way to know for each of us is through actual swings, demo or range/course use.

Yes sir, the PC were the Apex sets many considered to have a sweet spot the size of a quark...

Those V Foils are from around 2002, prior to Golfsmith's acquisition of MacGregor, which occurred in 2009.

Skipped the ZStar largely due to the results with TP5x sleeve. I've played the ZStar relatively recently, and wanted a larger departure from the QStar Tour. On XV vs Diamond, was a coin flip. 😉 The feel was an adjustment but it hasn't been bad. The MS11s are pretty soft, the 986 Tours aren't too far behind. Based on today's results, it seems like I'm getting a few yards off the tee, but it's very much small sample size theater, too early to say for sure.