Stuart_G

@rsballer10 is correct. The WTF chart doesn't mean that. It's only a starting point and there are plenty of situations where going shorter is desirable. If you want to hear it from the source, read this post from Tom Wishon about length fitting. FWIW - it really doesn't take much to be setup to reshaft steel. It's a great place to start.

Where did you get fit for that? I ask because CC is known for artificially fitting people into high swing weights simply because their iron heads are overly heavy due to the shaft change mechanism and they aren't even capable of letting players test out lighter swing weights. The only way to get those answers is to do side-by-side testing. It's not something anyone here will be able to answer for you. D3 with a 105 gm shaft does not feel the same as D3 with a 130 gm shaft so on one hand, just because the value is different isn't any indication of it not being a good fit - nor is it a reason to choose D3 for the new clubs. But on the other hand, without knowing exactly how exactly the fitter got to that value, it's impossible to say how much you might be able to trust the results. The general state of the fitting industry isn't really all that good. There are a lot of people out there doing fittings that aren't really qualified. Ideally you should have been hitting your own clubs along side the clubs you were being fitted into to give a comparison. And when being fit for swing weight, you should have had the opportunity to hit lighter swing weights (such as D3) in order to determine if D5 really was the best fit. So most of those questions should have been addressed and answered during the fitting itself. So the fact that that didn't seem to happen certainly opens up some good questions about the validity of the fitting results. Now that aside, if there is any concern or question about the fitting result - it's always better to go lighter with the head weight - since it's very easy to add weight after the fact, (e.g. lead tape) while it can be a PITA to remove it. That is really the only valid possible reason to go with a lighter swing weight.

Here are a few important things that might help you understand. First is that the swing weight system as a proxy for weight feel has a LOT of limitations. The idea that the swing weight value can be used as a comparative reference for the feel is flawed in many cases. But to the specifics: For some people that might be the case but for most it wont. Both the MOI of the club and the total static weight play a part in how heavy a club feels. The heavier static weight will usually be felt by the user as a heavier club that both have swing weights that high. When it comes to feel, there is a large subjective nature to the weight feel and how we interpret changes to both the MOI and the total static weight as a more generalized heft feel change. Different swing dynamics can play a large part in that as well. Part of the problem is that swing weight is not really about balance. Balance is a static property, not a dynamic property so it doesn't provide any information (looked at in isolation) about how the club will feel when we swing it. Swing weight was developed to use balance but not for the sake of balance. It uses balance about a specific axis as a proxy for the (very rough) MOI matching of clubs. Another important distinction here is that the swing weight scale was designed as a matching tool - not an absolute measurement tool. The second "problem" is that the swing weight system was never developed or designed to handle changes to grip weight or even shaft weight. It was very specifically only designed to manage head weight in the context of (smaller) playing length changes. Now that said, it's not horrible when it comes to shaft weight in a general sense since the shaft does contribute to the MOI of the club. But it does a horrible job when it comes to grip weight. I know you weren't asking specifically about that - but it needs to be said. But it's still not very good at telling us how the feel of a club might change when something other than the playing length or head weight changes. Swing weight can still be used to match the feel of two clubs but only in very limited contexts. As to that limited context, it's only useful if there is no change to grip weight, no change to shaft weight and no big changes to playing length (e.g. matching all the irons in a set that all use the same shaft). For any other change (like a shaft weight change) it's really best to forget the 'old' swing weight value and go back to the range with some lead tape to dial in the feel and find a new "best" swing weight value. The scale itself just is not helpful or reliable for trying to match a club with a 105 gm shaft to a club with a 130 gm shaft - and that's assuming it's actually possible to match two clubs with such different static weights (which is arguable - but also dependent on the subjective nature of how the player interprets the feel).

A full proper fitting is usually recommended when the player gets to the point of being about a mid to high 20's handicap. But even for a rank beginner, a poor fit can significantly impede the learning process when it comes to some of the club specs. The most important club specs for beginners that could impede the learning process if they are a bad fit would be: Grip size Playing length - not too long. Static fit is fine for irons - but stock lengths for hybrids, fairways and drivers way too long for beginners. Shaft weight - not too heavy or too light Static fitting for all but shaft weight wouldn't be a bad starting point in irons. Playing lengths for driver, fairways and even hybrids should be cut down from stock playing lengths. This is where a beginner is going to get in the most trouble. A beginner would probably need some help to determine how much - but 99% of people calling themselves fitters are clueless about fitting playing lengths for those longer clubs so there is not a lot of recourse for them to get this fixed. Shaft weight is bit tougher but a decent starting point could be determined just on basic assessment of the players athletic ability - maybe looking at swing speed as well. With the right shaft weight a fairly neutral swing weight (D0-D2) isn't a bad place to start - except for the weaker players which may be better off going a bit lighter. Flex is only important if the user has enough experience to have developed a sense for how much of a loading feel they think they should be feeling. That's a learned dependence. If it hasn't been learned, it's not nearly as important. Static fitting for lie angle is a decent starting point.

Sorry, also That's more of another branch than a completely different option as I see it. It's certainly not a bad idea when changing grip weight to re-evaluate the shaft weight. But sometimes just checking out how it feels with the heavier grip and the same shaft is enough for many to decide they are fine with the existing shaft so it's still usually the best first step.

That's fine. Check it both at full playing length (if you want) and also at the choked up playing length. Checking it choked up is really the same as checking it cut down (as far as the head weight is concerned that is). It just sounded to me like you had already made up your mind to go forward with cutting them down.

The most important thing to understand is that Swing weight was never intended to manage grip weight. So forget the rules about what grip weight will do to swing weight - they should never be used. That's not to say changing grips can't change the weight feel - it can for some people but not others. But the swing weight scale or it's "rules" is not a good way to figure out how it will change or how to fix it. Shortening the playing length will change swing weight - but not the effective swing weight if you've already been playing the clubs choking up. So if they were D2 at full length, playing them choked up is not playing a D2 set. So it's possible you might not need to make any changes to the head weight. But it's impossible to say for sure. So what does that mean? Simple, get some lead weight and go to the range, you're going to need to do some testing to get the answers you're looking for. No one here will be able to give you any (useful) quick answers on what you need to do. Start with one club and make the desired length and grip change. Don't do anything to the head weight and forget about swing weight values or what you think your preference for swing weight might be. Then take it to the range and (once you get warmed up) add the lead tape to the head in 2 gm increments. Forget about swing weight values and just try and find the head weight feel that works best for you. When you're done, now it's time to put that club with the lead tape and the desired grip and put it on a swing weight scale to get a value that can be used to build the rest of the set. And if you want, replace the lead tape with some tip weights on the test club.

True but it does mean that blindly taking anyone's word for it - no matter what position they hold or how long they've been doing it - can get you bad advice and lead to bad decisions. Yes they have. But that's actually as much of the problem as anything else. It's very common for that data and information that they put out to be frequently mis-interpreted. There are lots more but the classic example is using the TM tour averages as some type of valid target for a fitting and believing that they are some kind of ideal or optimized numbers. The number of people coming here to the forum asking about equipment advice trying to achieve those numbers - or even telling stories about how their fitter was trying to hit those numbers is mind boggling. Another common misconception. It's true that what we feel from the club can (for some people more than others) contribute to aspects of how we control our swing. And it is a learned relationship. We're not born with any natural swing tendencies. But still many of those tendencies can be deeply ingrained and they are not as easy to change as most people think. I know many people that have spent months and even more than a year "trying to get used to" an equipment change before giving up and going back to something that works without needing any adjustment. More importantly, there is no good reason to switch to a shaft that goes against those tendencies. If you want to make some small tweaks to the launch/spin - just have the lofts bent. If you need to make bigger changes to the swing, it's much more effective and reliable to address the swing changes directly with the equipment you're already used to than it is to rely on equipment feel changes to do it for you. But that's not saying some people can't make it work - I'm just trying to show you the easiest path to what you seem to be looking for. But of course it's your journey and your choice. As long as you enjoy the process that's all that counts.

Glad to hear it. Sorry, none of that holds any weight with me. There is little in terms of standardized or validated curriculum that is used in training fitters and even PGA pros about fitting. What's out there is usually passed on from person to person by word of mouth - mentor to mentee. And bad info gets passed around just as much as the good info. Not to mention all the wide range of opinions and information online. On top of that, most don't have either the training or discipline to really evaluate the validity of the ideas floating around. And there is no such thing as optimal ball flight with irons. The only time it might be an issue is for some one who is unable to control their trajectory when playing into the wind - but that's not really an equipment problem. But regardless, flight issues with irons is actually largely a swing issue. Sure the equipment can be used to tweak it a bit but there are limits to what it can do. Sometimes equipment changes (both shaft weight and swing weight or really head weight or even stiffness feel) can be used to "encourage" a change in release timing for some people. But it can commonly be accompanied by negative side effects it if it takes the player away from their natural swing tendencies. It's also not something that always has much longevity. Sometimes it does but sometimes as the player gets used to the new weight or stiffness feel, it's not uncommon that they will regress back to their natural release tendencies. That's why it's better to stick to things like dispersion and consistency and shot shape control. It doesn't mean it's not possible to get those changes from the equipment, just that it's not very reliable or dependable way to do it. I wouldn't exactly agree. Sure the numbers aren't helpful but IMO - the fact that there is a need to "get used to it" by itself is a pretty good indication that it isn't a good fit. The whole point of a fitting is to fit the equipment to you, not fit you to the equipment. The game is hard enough as it is, don't make it worse by adding the need to fight with your equipment.

First of all, tThe fit of a shaft, particularly an iron shaft, can not be determined in isolation, just looking at the numbers for that shaft. It must be a comparative test. How did you hit this shaft compared to an alternative option. Second, the averages are not important but rather the deviation within the group of shots for a particular option. Shaft fitting is about dispersion, accuracy, shot shape control and even just feel and how that feel might effect confidence. Maybe in some cases balancing those things with swing speed. Forget launch, spin and ball height. That usually should be left to the head and loft selections. Finally, the results you get hitting several shots - enough to adjust or groove in the swing for the given option - can potentially be unreliable. On the course, you only get one attempt for any shot. You need to limit the repetitions before 'resetting' your swing. Maybe only 2-3 shots with option A, then move on to option B - or back to a few swings with your current gamer before moving on or going back to that club. By what basis are you making that judgment? There is a LOT of really bad info out there when it comes to peak height and how irons should be fit for ball height. Most of it is just BS. e.g. Rory seems to do OK with a very high ball flight. Forget height and stick to looking at carry distance and balance that with stopping power on the green. If you want better stopping power on the green, are you willing to give up distance to get it? Or if you want more distance, are you willing to give up some stopping power? When it comes to fitting launch and spin, that's what it really comes down to. There is no ideal or optimal numbers. You have to find a balance between those two that works well for you, your swing, and the courses you play.

As long as you keep the specs the same (specifically playing length and head weight) the specific head model doesn't really play much of a part in how well a shaft works for you. So if you have a modern shaft that works well for you, it should work just as well with the older head models.

If the flex label is not apparent in the shaft graphics, it might be on a label under the grip.

There is nothing magic or special about stock lengths or swing weights. In fact, they are usually pretty bad for most ams. Find and play what works best for you.

No. Balance point alone will not tell you whether they are MOI matched or not. There are ways to alter balance point that don't all have the same effect on the MOI. But you can typically get very close approximation w/o the expensive machine. You could use the balance point and total weight (or just a swing weight scale) to see the swing weight of each club and how it changes through the set as the length changes. A particular swing weight - length progression can be an indication of a close match to an MOI matched set. There are some assumptions that go along with that to be usable. Identical grips, no butt weight added, and reasonably small shaft weight increments (doesn't work for AMT shafts).

Don't worry about matching shafts to a new set of heads. The shafts need to be matched to you and your swing, not the heads. So if you know what shaft works well for you, it's a pretty safe bet to stick with that shaft. Head weights (for the most part) are fairly standardized and usually just need some tip weights to manage swing weight. And with few exceptions the variations in swing weight from the shafts are more commonly just +/- 1 sw pt. If you want to see if a heavier shaft might work, you can just use lead tape to simulate a heavier shaft weight. Wrap it around the shaft about 4"-6" below the bottom of the grip. 5 gm or 10 gm increments usually works out the best. However, for testing different shaft profiles or lighter shaft weight it's a bit different. If you want to see how well a different shaft profile option works or see if something better might be out there, testing it out is the only way to get any answers to that question. And if you can't find any place local to test out a particular shaft model (e.g. demo day, retail fitting cart, getting fit, etc...), just buy a single shaft to test out before you commit to buying a full set of shafts.

It's no so much that I overlooked it (I did) but I was only really concerned about "addressing" any ideas of tipping that might have been planted in the OP's head. I wont argue against the fact that it might be important for some. And I don't doubt those included a good percentage of your previous (high level playing) customers. As to what percentage of average Am's it might make a difference - I certainly can't say and wont try to guess. But what we do know for sure is: 1) that it doesn't matter to enough people to make it worth it for KBS or TT to manufacturing a separate wedge shaft from the 9i for many of their popular shafts. TT originally designed a separate W shaft for the orignal AMT's but ended up scrubbing it from production based on feedback from the players. 2) and if it did matter to the OP, there would be a decent chance he'd know about it based on his experience with his current set of hard stepped shafts. And the best guess is that no special treatment would be the most likely way to get the new set to match the old set - especially if they were factory ordered as hard stepped. 3) he also said 🙂 So in that regard, I'll tend to err on the side of recommending no special actions for a beginner doing his first build and waiting to see if there really is a problem before trying to fix it. But regardless, I still think it's great that you will post alternative views and options. I never hurts to provide different perspectives and let the OP decide how important it might be for their case.

To figure out what to buy - you only have to know the raw uncut length of the shaft for the iron you want to install it in. The playing length doesn't really matter for the purchase. It only matters when it comes down to butt cutting the shaft to get the desired playing length. And the golfworks web page for the $-taper explicitly tells you which uncut length goes with each iron. At least it does on the us web site. So e.g. no matter what the playing length will end up being, if you want to hard step x1, you buy the 38" 8-iron shaft to install in your 7 iron, and then the 37.5" 9/w shaft for your 8 iron through PW. Yes, you wont technically be hard stepping the 9 and wedges - but at that short length it usually doesn't matter. I would not recommend that for the OP. Messing with tipping on taper tip shafts is a bit advanced for such an inexperienced club builder like the OP. To do it properly involves some risk if you don't understand how to figure out the limit for how much it can be tipped and a need to bore out the hossels if you want to tip it enough to actually make a difference. There is a reason they don't bother making separate 9i and W shafts. It just doesn't make much difference to most when the clubs get that short.

Hitting off a short tee inside can help get around that limitation. Well it's not impossible - but it's very rare for the lie angle being off a few degrees to cause drastic changes to the shot shape. More commonly it would just mean only a few yards change in lateral motion - only 2-3 yards per 1* the lie angle is off.