Stuart_G

Never been to the forum so can't say - but what trials? Where is the link to documented testing methodology and raw data for independent review? What scientific journal was it published in? I can't say if it's true or not, never really personally cared about it enough to put in the effort to find out. But if memory serves, one the biggest criticism that I'm aware of made by others in the industry is that there never was any real scientific effort by Maltby to actually validate the importance or influence of those measured specs and the valued weighting of those specs in the final value. Without that proper testing, all it really is, is an educated guess by someone with experience in head design. But you could go to a different experienced head designer (like Tome Wishon) and they'll make a different guess - likely with some similarities but still slightly different biases. His experience itself is all one is really leaning on to validate it. And while that certainly does add some worth to it, it's just not enough to say things like how well it will work for "most golfers." But if it's enough to satisfy you, nothing wrong with that. Sorry, no. Random postings by forum members (regardless of which forum you go to) would not be in any way statistically significant indicator of anything. It doesn't matter how many there might be. Way too much bias associated with public posting behavior. At best all it could do is validate that it might be worth looking into in more detail - assuming you could find someone who was interested in investing the time and effort to do a proper study.

Interesting. Do you still have a link to the article?

Sorry, can't help you with shaft selection but ... make sure it really is the shaft that's the problem before putting a lot of time and money into an alternative. Looking at things like playing length and head weight can sometimes be much more important and effective to eliminate or reduce those types of misses. Even pinning down the best shaft weight can play a big part before exploring different stiffness profiles. It's well worth the small effort and cost (some lead tape, foot powder spray, and a bucket of range balls) to go through this self tuning tutorial before moving onto checkout out different shaft options. PS - nothing wrong with testing shafts in other heads as long as things like. playing length, swing weight, grip size and face angle are kept the same or very similar. If those things are not kept constant, you never can tell whether it really was the different shaft that was responsible for the different ball flight results - or something else.

I can't say I've paid much attention to it, but I wouldn't expect that to really be statistically significant to be an indication of anything. Of all my time reading posts here in the forums - my first impression what they are telling us about what's important in a iron head fitting - would be that the subjective influences actually tend to be more important than the objective ones for a good percentage of individuals. The "human factor" is famous for throwing a monkey wrench into the various scientific analyses that I've read about and can easily come back to bite you when studies try to ignore it. But as I said, that's just an impression. Not any type of valid scientific conclusion.

No. Lie angle doesn't change when switching between lefty and righty. Think of those cheep, double sided putters you find at mini-golf. If you bend it upright, it's still more upright regardless of whether you use it right or left handed. Unlike loft, lie angle is independent of which side of the club the ball is on.

Feel is 100% subjective, sorry but no one here can answer that question at least not in useful way. Only good guess is that it will probably feel heavier. 🙂 Since you didn't mention the flex of the i110's - I'm guessing you're more interested in how the weight or head weight feel might change? One thing I can tell you is that "same head weight" is a very bad assumption - it means not paying attention to swing weight - which is going to significantly effect the feel. The i110's are a high balance point shaft. For the same head weight and playing length, they will swing weight 4 points lighter than DG's. That's a big difference. So what the person did to manage the swing weight (if anything) for the i110 build is going to play a big part in how the feel will change going to the DG's. If they did nothing, then you should get a significant increase in the head weight feel. On the other hand, If they did adjust for it, that could have softened up the stiffness feel of the i110's - the equivalent of a full soft step at standard length.

Before you go too far, for realistic expectations, it's important to realize that: 1) trajectory and spin in irons really comes more from your swing than the equipment and there is only so much the equipment can do to go against your natural tendencies. 2) Launch and spin in irons can NOT be optimized - there is no ideal or optimal set of numbers that you should target. It's really about balancing out carry distance and stopping power. And the "best" numbers can vary quite a bit for different individuals playing different course conditions. Not to confuse things even more - but delivery issues (face impact location and also including dynamic loft) are usually more related to a core problem with the fit of the playing length, shaft weight and/or swing weight (when just looking at equipment influences, not mechanics). In the case of irons, if the "miss" is roughly similar throughout the set, you can discount playing length as the problem. You might want to go through this tutorial to double check the fit of the shaft weight and head weight. Yes it's title says driver, but if you ignore the parts about playing length - the methodology for testing and checking shaft weight and head weight works for any club (except putter). Those specs should be fit first an dialed in before considering what head (or loft) might be the best to get your desired flight.

No. The biggest question is if you get the heads separately, what will be their raw weight? When those clubs are built at the factory, the head weights are adjusted for the specific build request. If you take heads built for one set of specs, you're throwing the dice as to what might be needed to get your specs. e.g. A set of heads from a +1" build with a heavy shaft can be significantly lighter than a -1/2" build with an ultra-light shaft. Also swing weight can be very sensitive to even minor variations in the cut shaft length. So should always be checked against the actual shaft you cut down for each club. The second potential problem, was he actually fit for swing weight with the heavier grip on the club while he was swinging it? D4 with a mid-size grip is actually more equivalent to a D6. The third issue is that club champion uses heads that are heavier than normal due to the shaft change mechanism. They aren't capable of fitting to lighter swing weights and they frequently end up fitting people to swing weights that are really heavier than they should be as a default. It would probably be safer to build one club to a lower swing weight (e.g D0 or D2) and then use lead tape on the range to double check the target swing weight.

What exactly did you do with the swing weight? If you used the swing weight "rules" to increase the head weight for the lower playing length - then yes, there is a decent chance you messed up and added way too much. If this is what you did, then the next question is how excactly did you add the weight? e.g. A changeable head weight is not a problem to fix - but might have just been a little money wasted. It can be easily removed and replaced with a different size. However If hotmelt was used, it's not impossible but it can be a PITA to remove. If you did nothing to the head weight - that may not be a problem. Lot's of people go shorter with the driver and are fine with needing to add any weight to the head. And if not, it's actually easy to add weight. The question is how much. But in either case (assuming you can remove any added weight), there is a useful guide to help you dial in what the new head weight should be with the new playing length. All you need is some lead tape, foot powder spray, and a bucket of balls at the driving range.. Don't jump the gun on the shaft quite yet. You're not an idiot - you just haven't finished the process. Why are you seeing those changes? Because head weight - and the combination of head weight and playing length can have a HUGE impact on release timing and the dynamic loft delivered and on face impact location - both of which are WAY bigger contributors to launch and spin and even ball speed than the shaft for most. Before you blame the shaft, get the head weight properly adjusted first for consistent center face impact, good shot shape control, accuracy and dispersion. Then take another look at your numbers. Second, shaft should not be fit for launch and spin - that can end up as a wild goose chase. Shaft should also be fit primarily for consistency, dispersion, shot shape control, accuracy and many times just for a good feel. Leave launch and spin to the loft and head model. But even if you do want to try to tweak launch and spin with a shaft change (some still do) - then you still have to FIRST dial in the head weight for the new playing length before the results with any other shaft are going to be usable or meaningful. If the shaft was a good fit before reducing the playing length and the added head weight negatively effected the feel of the shaft - it just means you probably should have tipped the shaft a bit more (then butt cut the rest).

For length (and head weight) - most likely. Especially if you are capable of regripping the clubs yourself, then this is something you could easily do yourself. For lie angle - probably not. A degree or two of the lie angle being off is only a few yards of lateral change in ball flight for most - and it's consistent enough to easily adjust to. But there can be a big subjective aspect to this so you never know for sure until you try it - which is why you got some good advice on how to test things out yourself to make it easier to get answers.

I'm self taught 😁

For some people it will, for other people it wont. It's 100% subjective and it has nothing to do with the actual underlying physics of the swing and actual resistance of the club to being swung. So the real important point to take away is that the swing weight scale is not very useful at telling you how the feel might change with a different grip weight and the wrong tool to fix it if the feel does change.

God no. Correct. No real information just some example graphs and vague claims as teasers. But you'd think if someone wanted to sell data like that, they'd put at least some effort into "selling" or validating that the data is actually worth the money being asked. But we're kind of getting off on a tangent and away from the OP's issue. Maybe we should take this to a PM if you have any interest to keep going.

That's why I said "10 tpi" (teeth per inch) 😉 But yes I do admit I mistakenly thought you were implying tpi in your teeth count. Without a diameter, I've found total teeth counts for blades aren't all that helpful - probably because I've just been ingrained only to use tpi so don't usually consider the alternatives.

I haven't seen any of his videos but I have been to his web site. At first glance it does look impressive but it really didn't take long to figure out he really doesn't understand the science he's using to justify his results and he's not very transparent with his methodology and even rationalizations in many cases.

More is certainly nicer but even 10 tpi will work perfectly fine if you're careful. And it doesn't have to be all that sharp or carbide. I routinely use my bandsaw for graphite shafts with a 3/16" x 10 blade. Of course, it dulls the blade and makes it useless for wood - but I keep around an older one around just for use with the graphite shafts.

Usually the epoxy is balanced out by the single layer of double sided tape - so no it's not usually heavier because of the epoxy. At least not if you're only the amount of epoxy that's needed and not too much excess. In addition to what others (especially Howard) has posted: How much lighter? and how consistent is it? How exactly are you "adding" the grip during the dry check? Are you installing additional layers of tape to build up your grip size? For the dry weight check, is the ferrule (and therefore the hossel insertion depth and playing length) in the exact same place as when its' glued up? If you push it down further during the epoxy, that will shorten the playing length - which will lower the swing weight.

Don't get me wrong - play what you want and feels comfortable. Nothing wrong with that. What you gain in comfort could certainly offset some of the downsides to the longer length and heavier swing weight. If it's only the short end of the set you have problems with, maybe a one length set might be something to consider. Regardless, when it comes to whether or not you really are crouched over too much, I'd be more inclined to go to my pro to get an honest evaluation of whether that's really the case or not - or evaluate why. There is likely some atypical nature about your setup and posture that has become the "norm" in your mind - although I'm not here to judge whether it's good or bad. But that's me, I actually like working on my swing to improve it - including posture. But many people are happy with what they got and just want to go play and that's fine too.

Yes, static weight does matter. "Too light" is the weight at which performance and feel starts to degrade. It can show up in many different forms. Just to name a few: dispersion, accuracy, shot shape control, face impact consistency, rhythm and/or tempo issues, or just a lack of confidence in where the club is during the swing. The specifics can be different for everyone.

You meant the guy that joined here and left after a week in a hissy fit because he wasn't willing or able to back up any of his "opinions" (pseudo science) and was insulted that they would even be challenged? That wouldn't' be my recommendation but everyone has to make up their own decision.

What gave you that idea? The only thing that's important is how they actually perform for you. You just have to look at more than just the launch/spin/distance when evaluation performance. What's the dispersion? How consistent and good is your face impact location (use foot powder spray)? Is there really a forgiveness issue or not? Any issues with accuracy or shot shape control? That's the only way to judge whether it really is out of your league or not. Forget all the things people say about what you "should" or "should not" be playing. Anytime anyone tries to tell anyone what they should or should not be playing based on anything other than actual test data from you hitting the club or shaft or head (such as things like swing speed or handicap) - that is the person you want to walk away from and find someone else to help you decide.

Sorry, not even close to being true.

Most people don't know to pay attention to butt diameter, they just use the same grips (and or same # of tape layers) on every club. Would they be better off if they did? Hard to say. I doubt it would make a significant difference but you never know. However, it might not be a high percentage, but there are people who intentionally play different grip sizes in different clubs. Forget "normal" and stick to whatever works. 😄

Unfortunately, just looking at the shape of the curve on Russ' graph doesn't tell you very much about how similar the profiles really are. Those graphs are auto-scaled and each graph is scaled differently. That can significantly distort the comparison. And even two identical curves with the same scaling can be separated in value will look the same side-by-side and yet be completely different profiles. You actually have to be able to plot the different curves together on the same graph to get an accurate comparison. It's the values that are important, not the shape. And not sure, but as I understand it, you need the advanced (more expensive) subscription to be able to do that.

What was the lightest swing weight you tested? and for the lower swing weight values, was it artificially lowered by a heavy grip weight? That is a very common reason for fitting into heavier shaft weights and swing weights. And many times it works well, although there are some potentially valid arguments against going away from someone's natural tendencies. It's not always easy to change those natural tendencies so it doesn't always work out as well as it might. But you never know, only time will tell. It's easy to overthink things. But fitting isn't an exact science by any means - so there is no way to say for sure you should go one way or another. You just make the best choice based on the information you do have and go forward. It's much like playing golf itself. For every shot, you make the best decision you can on how to play it and then hope that decision is the right one - but you never know for sure until you actually take the shot and see the result. You have to accept (or even embrace) the risk in order to play your best. Sorry, it wont. Thanks. And good luck.