Blade users thread (NO DEBATING CLUBHEADS! NO Buy Sell Trade!)

[Sir Hitalot]

My brain just leaked out of my ears and fell on the floor :)

As soon as your finger touches the sweetspot of your precious baby blade, it is applying a force to the face. And as soon as there is some force, there is some local deformation on the clubface at the point of contact. It doesn't matter if it is a finger, the tip of a pin, or the front of a golf ball. All that changes is the magnitude of the deformation.

 

As soon as you pick the golf ball up and out of the cup, your fingers are applying forces on either side of it and those forces are compressing the ball and deforming it at their points of contact.

 

As soon as the clubface and ball start contacting each other at the moment of impact they start putting opposing forces on each other and therefore BOTH materials start to deform from those forces. During the fractions of a millisecond that impact occurs, they are both in the process of deforming (i.e. compressing, stretching, and bending) and then reforming into their original shapes (for the most part). It is during this time that the ball spin, launch angle, and velocity/acceleration is defined for that particular shot.

 

So to me, after considering all this physics, I see a blade as merely simplifying that interface physics during impact and why I am such a proponent of them for ALL golfers. A blade has the absolute least amount of face flex, there is no question about it. The materials science and physics of the design supports this. And what this does is isolate more of the impact deformation to the ball itself. And by taking away the variability of the face flex (or rather reducing it), there is going to be just a little LESS error because of it. Less number of variables = less error = consistency.

 

Sorry I just had to get a little more techie stuff out of my system.

 

Is there a video, anywhere, showing 'face flex' on ANY golf club?

 

Never mind the so called 'hot, thin faced CB's' even a heavily marketed, supposed seriously thin faced, driver, will do??

 

A blade? Flexing at all, facially?

 

That Titleist Pro V video, using high speed video, didn't even show so much as a wobble on a light weight, thin faced driver never mind a ruddy great thick slab of blade.....

 

Is there any proof?

 

I was in an old thread about 3 yrs ago and a WRX sponsor club maker stated a MB face may flex 1/100" as compared to a CB flex at 1/32". He said this was measured somehow. This is a 3x difference. Imagine how much force is needed to compress a golf ball that much...you definitely can't do it with your bare hands. But regardless a 3x difference is most definitely changing spin.

 

As far as other proof, I don't need it. It is a given materials science property that ALL materials deform under a force. This includes diamond. Given the same material and force, the amount of deformation is going to be proportional to the material thickness. Here is the materials science behind stretch deformation:

 

https://en.m.wikiped...Young's_modulus

 

This is the science behind the Young's modulus. There is also the bulk (for compression) and shear (for twisting) moduli. All three define the force needed to deform the material. There is NO question that all club faces deform from impact with the ball. This is irrefutable materials science that has been proven in a lab for every solid material used in golf. ALL materials deform. The high speed cameras cannot measure it but for sure it has been proven that titanium, carbon steel, stainless steel, graphite, polybutadiene, etc, ALL deform under a force. And double the force, you approximately double the magnitude of deformation. It's been proven time and again.

 

The very reason they make a driver face convex is to help with structural support so that the deformation doesn't hit the point of permanent deformation. (No it is not because of the "gear effect" which doesn't happen.)

 

The clubmaker - what was the 'somehow' method you've quoted that was used to measure 1/100th versus 1/32th of face flex?

 

I'm a metric kinda guy and these two measurements are 0.254mm (about a 1/4mm) versus 0.7938 (about 3/4mm). Correct me if i'm wrong - i'm not used to dealing with such tiny measurements.

 

When i look at a mm on a ruler i see a very small measurement (a whole mm). When i imagine these fractions of mm's i see a very small thing indeed (well, i don't actually see 'it' if you get my meaning).

 

I just get the feeling that face flex is marketing bunkum

 

It may well be 3x (unproven) more flex but i'm guessing.

 

If you hit your thick backed MB with a hard hammer you may well 'flex' it. In fact you'd dent it, lol! Not sure about a modern day marshmallow of a golf ball though.

[Zigzog]

Nice thread - I love blades; have always had a fews sets in my collection. I stopped playing for a good few years and when I first got back into the game I felt I needed a set of cbs - found that they were not for me having always played blades.

 

I present have a set of Mizuno Mp4s, with X100 and also some MB714 with the same shaft; both are very very good - although I do find myself using the MP4s more often.

 

Having said that both seem to lose of more often than not to my Hogan Apex - for me the best clubs I have ever used; even to this day. Used them today and was swinging it well; clubs were like a laser; 5 birdies today although some good putts tbf :)

[Sir Hitalot]

By the way, Sir Hitalot, take care about what you don't observe on a high speed canera. The deformation is happening on the other side of where the ball compresses against the club face. You won't be able to see the deformation this way. But what you do see is the ball compressing, and at this time the side of the ball touching the face is actually molding the face to a curved shape of the ball. The metal clubface (per the science and math) is deforming to "mold" with the ball surface.

 

So, just to clarify.

 

What your saying is, when that driver has compressed and deformed that ball, on the video, there is an 'indent' in the face of the club that goes into the void of the club? Backwards, into the club's insides? Face moulding itself to mimic the ball's deformation?

 

Do you think this happens with a MB?

[DeNinny]

 

The clubmaker - what was the 'somehow' method you've quoted that was used to measure 1/100th versus 1/32th of face flex?

 

I'm a metric kinda guy and these two measurements are 0.254mm (about a 1/4mm) versus 0.7938 (about 3/4mm). Correct me if i'm wrong - i'm not used to dealing with such tiny measurements.

 

When i look at a mm on a ruler i see a very small measurement (a whole mm). When i imagine these fractions of mm's i see a very small thing indeed (well, i don't actually see 'it' if you get my meaning).

 

I just get the feeling that face flex is marketing bunkum

 

It may well be 3x (unproven) more flex but i'm guessing.

 

If you hit your thick backed MB with a hard hammer you may well 'flex' it. In fact you'd dent it, lol! Not sure about a modern day marshmallow of a golf ball though.

 

I have no idea about the method that club designer used for measurement. In my materials science lab in college there was a ginormous press where a pointed and very hard rod was used to apply force to various materials and it would know how much the rod moved to within microns of distance (and what force is being applied). With the right type of vice and mounting, I could have easily put any type of club face in it and measure the flex under a given force(s)

 

If you touch your finger on any solid object enough to apply pressure (i.e. force) it will deform the face. If the object is twice as thick, then it will only deform half as much. If you apply twice the pressure to the same thickness object, then it will deform twice as much. It doesn't matter if the initial pressure started at 1 psig or 1,000 psig. If you double it, the amount of deformation doubles (assuming it doesn't break or deform permanently).

 

It's your prerogative whether or not you want to believe in face flex. The science is real and it applies to ALL clubfaces. The only thing that changes is the relative magnitude.

[Sir Hitalot]

The clubmaker - what was the 'somehow' method you've quoted that was used to measure 1/100th versus 1/32th of face flex?

 

I'm a metric kinda guy and these two measurements are 0.254mm (about a 1/4mm) versus 0.7938 (about 3/4mm). Correct me if i'm wrong - i'm not used to dealing with such tiny measurements.

 

When i look at a mm on a ruler i see a very small measurement (a whole mm). When i imagine these fractions of mm's i see a very small thing indeed (well, i don't actually see 'it' if you get my meaning).

 

I just get the feeling that face flex is marketing bunkum

 

It may well be 3x (unproven) more flex but i'm guessing.

 

If you hit your thick backed MB with a hard hammer you may well 'flex' it. In fact you'd dent it, lol! Not sure about a modern day marshmallow of a golf ball though.

 

I have no idea about the method that club designer used for measurement. In my materials science lab in college there was a ginormous press where a pointed and very hard rod was used to apply force to various materials and it would know how much the rod moved to within microns of distance (and what force is being applied). With the right type of vice and mounting, I could have easily put any type of club face in it and measure the flex under a given force(s)

 

If you touch your finger on any solid object enough to apply pressure (i.e. force) it will deform the face. If the object is twice as thick, then it will only deform half as much. If you apply twice the pressure to the same thickness object, then it will deform twice as much. It doesn't matter if the initial pressure started at 1 psig or 1,000 psig. If you double it, the amount of deformation doubles (assuming it doesn't break or deform permanently).

 

It's your prerogative whether or not you want to believe in face flex. The science is real and it applies to ALL clubfaces. The only thing that changes is the relative magnitude.

 

So, lets say, for debates sake, that if you put the clubface of a thick MB in said vice and put a golf ball on the end of some other contraption and pushed the two together the face of club would move? Indent move? Hole in face move? Before the golf ball squished itself flat as a proverbial pancake?

 

Sorry you seem to have answered that already. It WILL MOVE.

 

Just not very far at all.

[95124hacker]

New to post here, guys.

 

Long-time players CB user. Recently owned a Miura Retro TB set for 72 hours (another story for another day...).

 

Just getting my feet wet in the world of MB's.

 

Picked these up as a "starter set".

 

1st range session went pretty well. I would rate the SESSION (not the clubs themselves) 7/10, or B-. PW up to 7-iron were great. Strikes were center of club face, Trajectory a mid-height draw.

6-iron to 3-iron is where some inconsistency crept in, but nothing horrible.

 

Does anyone know if the MP-32 Blacks were a released retail model vs Yoro vs aftermarket? I had only seen 32's in chrome, but TBH, I wasn't paying too much attention to Mizuno blades until recently.

 

BTW, MB set #2 is on it's way from Japan... (teaser)

 

 

[NRJyzr]

No it is not because of the "gear effect" which doesn't happen

 

 

Not sure why you don't buy gear effect, amiho. It *is* real. :)

[DeNinny]

By the way, Sir Hitalot, take care about what you don't observe on a high speed canera. The deformation is happening on the other side of where the ball compresses against the club face. You won't be able to see the deformation this way. But what you do see is the ball compressing, and at this time the side of the ball touching the face is actually molding the face to a curved shape of the ball. The metal clubface (per the science and math) is deforming to "mold" with the ball surface.

 

So, just to clarify.

 

What your saying is, when that driver has compressed and deformed that ball, on the video, there is an 'indent' in the face of the club that goes into the void of the club? Backwards, into the club's insides? Face moulding itself to mimic the ball's deformation?

 

Do you think this happens with a MB?

 

Yes this is happening with all club faces. The shape of the boundary will be sort of an average of the two individual surfaces. In this case it will a curved surface but not exactly spherical like the ball. But it will be close.

 

And yes it is happening on the face of a MB. And as you stated in your last post just now, it won't move very far at all. Again, you can approximate how far it will move based on how far a CB face moves and based on how different the MB face wall thickness is in comparison to the CB face wall thickness. That data of 1/100" vs 1/32" 'sanity checks' with reality - a MB face wall is roughly 3x thicker than a CB face wall...given the same force from ball contact, the face that is 3x thicker will flex only 1/3rd as much...and in terms of compressing a golf ball, 1/100" vs 1/32" is pretty far...

[DeNinny]

No it is not because of the "gear effect" which doesn't happen

 

 

Not sure why you don't buy gear effect, amiho. It *is* real. :)

 

We've been down that path in this thread. It's definitely NOT real. No amount of high speed camera resolution will EVER prove it because the physics "theory" of it all is false to begin with. It's only true based on false premises.

 

Edit: And yes I have seen ALL the "gear effect" videos on youtube...LOL and they still don't "prove" anything other than it's NOT happening.

[NRJyzr]

No it is not because of the "gear effect" which doesn't happen

 

 

Not sure why you don't buy gear effect, amiho. It *is* real. :)

 

We've been down that path in this thread. It's definitely NOT real. No amount of high speed camera resolution will EVER prove it because the physics "theory" of it all is false to begin with. It's only true based on false premises.

 

 

You need to hit a persimmon wood a few times, then hit a few off the heel, and a few off the toe. Then you'll have seen what I have seen. :)

 

A toe hit will draw, and a heel hit will fade.

 

(these happen with metal woods as well, but for various reasons, it's not quite as effective)

[DeNinny]

No it is not because of the "gear effect" which doesn't happen

 

 

Not sure why you don't buy gear effect, amiho. It *is* real. :)

 

We've been down that path in this thread. It's definitely NOT real. No amount of high speed camera resolution will EVER prove it because the physics "theory" of it all is false to begin with. It's only true based on false premises.

 

 

You need to hit a persimmon wood a few times, then hit a few off the heel, and a few off the toe. Then you'll have seen what I have seen. :)

 

A toe hit will draw, and a heel hit will fade.

 

(these happen with metal woods as well, but for various reasons, it's not quite as effective)

 

I've hit persimmon and modern drivers and yes I know toe shots tend to draw and heel shots tend to fade. It's not the "gear effect" that causes this. It's the FACE FLEX. A toe strike on a clubface has a biased angle closed and a heel strike has a biased angle open. All because of face flex. This includes a persimmon and modern driver.

 

This and the fact that it is physically impossible for the clubhead to rotate around its CG (false premise #1) when it is attached to a shaft and supported by said shaft is why the "gear effect" is unequivocally false.

[BCULAW]

I asked this about 150-200 pages ago but the entry has 'timed out' of the 'my content' tracker...

 

Can I get some suggestions for muscleback clubs with RELATIVELY wider soles? I've decided life is too short to not play musclebacks in at least the mid and short irons so I have a T-MB/MB combo inbound (I know the 716MB has a traditional narrow sole). However, I would like to keep an eye on the 'Bay for used sets and a little variety.

 

Thanks.

 

Titleist 670s fit your description. Made for diggers with a bit wider sole and more bounce IIRC. A bit chunkier overall. Squat blade length, but wider sole and thicker top line.

[No_Catchy_Nickname]

New to post here, guys.

 

Long-time players CB user. Recently owned a Miura Retro TB set for 72 hours (another story for another day...).

 

Just getting my feet wet in the world of MB's.

 

Picked these up as a "starter set".

 

1st range session went pretty well. I would rate the SESSION (not the clubs themselves) 7/10, or B-. PW up to 7-iron were great. Strikes were center of club face, Trajectory a mid-height draw.

6-iron to 3-iron is where some inconsistency crept in, but nothing horrible.

 

Does anyone know if the MP-32 Blacks were a released retail model vs Yoro vs aftermarket? I had only seen 32's in chrome, but TBH, I wasn't paying too much attention to Mizuno blades until recently.

 

BTW, MB set #2 is on it's way from Japan... (teaser)

 

 

Nice looking irons.

I am pretty damn sure that the black oxide is a custom option only. But I can't say whether it's Yoro or aftermarket. Yoro is most likely, in my opinion.

[No_Catchy_Nickname]

I asked this about 150-200 pages ago but the entry has 'timed out' of the 'my content' tracker...

 

Can I get some suggestions for muscleback clubs with RELATIVELY wider soles? I've decided life is too short to not play musclebacks in at least the mid and short irons so I have a T-MB/MB combo inbound (I know the 716MB has a traditional narrow sole). However, I would like to keep an eye on the 'Bay for used sets and a little variety.

 

Thanks.

 

As Bigmean said, the Srixons. Either the new 965, or the 945s should do the job.

[No_Catchy_Nickname]

Is there a video, anywhere, showing 'face flex' on ANY golf club?

 

Never mind the so called 'hot, thin faced CB's' even a heavily marketed, supposed seriously thin faced, driver, will do??

 

A blade? Flexing at all, facially?

 

That Titleist Pro V video, using high speed video, didn't even show so much as a wobble on a light weight, thin faced driver never mind a ruddy great thick slab of blade.....

 

Is there any proof?

 

I'm not sure if you could call it "flexing", but my face develops a definite twitch after I read through all this Physics :blink:

[No_Catchy_Nickname]

Both amazing but I agree with the consensus... coopers are a must get, especially since you will be over there!

 

And to be a really good friend, I must suggest also checking out the new srixon z965, absolutely gorgeous and best feeling I don I have ever hit. Here is my recent review:

http://www.golfwrx.c...8#entry14407928

 

I looked at that, and was interested by what you said about the difference looking down at the club. I've got to go back to the local secondhand shop and hit the demo 965s they have there now. The only problem with both the 945 and 965s is that the 745s and 945s are also really good. To me, the 7-series are the closest "muscle cavity" clubs I have hit that were close to a blade, and I played the MP-64s for over a year.

Did you end up buying the 765s?

[Aviador Naval]

I much appreciate all of the responses on my question regarding MB with a bit more sole. Currently leaning toward Hogan '88 Apex Redline (a set I owned and enjoyed years ago) and Titleist 670 but will keep an eye out for the other suggestions as well.

 

Separate but related...

 

Anybody had irons reconditioned and if so were you happy? This is not likely an option as I want to keep the cost of the 'spare' set reasonable but it could be possible with a set of Hogans in the event I want a cup of nostalgia with my stroll down memory lane. I took a quick look at the Iron Factory website but couldn't find any "before-after" type pictures.

[kaaayelll]

Iron Factory does great work.

[Sir edward of putternut]

Had my first playing experience with single shaft irons yesterday. It was a "custom" set to put it nicely that i had traded for, a nike pro forged combo set, 3 iron-58' wedge, all at 7 iron length.

On the first hole, after hitting a 3 iron straight down the middle, most of myvreservations dissapeared. I had 0 distance loss (actually gained distance on most shots rxcept wedges ).

I know we see a lot of gimmicks, but i havecto say, these may be game changers. If anything, i feel the biggest drawback is that the game may become too boring.

However, for those with back issues, try these....an easy 7 iron swing on every club.

It may have been conicindence, but taking a set id never swung b4, walking onto to a pretty difficult course and shooting my best round of the year....im pretty sold on the idea. Hybrids may become obsolete when u can hit ur 3 iron the way its supposed to be hit....i even thought....man, i need a 1 iron. I hit the 3 iron off the tee from several holes.

It may have been a good day, but i was surprised at how little even the pro thought of them. Afterward, when i was talking to him, he had the same misconceptions i had anout gapping, etc....

The wrdges were the only issue with difference(54 @ 58)....i got a short high flight most likely due to angle of attack (7 iron swing) but i did get a unique wedge shot where once i had the confidence it wasnt gonna fly off, i took a full low attack awing and got great spin to whete the ball pulled back-ive only done that with my clevelands...either way...thumbs up here

[Sir Slicealot]

I have never had issues with the the three iron. 3&4 are friendly. If I went single length, it would be everything in a 40" shaft. Those are more comfortable than tiny little clubs. I think it will be a nice option for people with back issues, but you're still losing something somewhere when you go single length.

[Kingcat990]

you're still losing something somewhere when you go single length.

 

It seems to me that the biggest thing you give up is flexibility in equipment. When I first came across that concept, it appeared to be a good idea. The more that I think about it, the more I could see the concept really hindering a persons game in the long run. You stick your iron game to a single length set, get used to it, then you're put in a special category of equipment from there on out because you're used to only that concept. Damaging effects in my eyes.

[Sir edward of putternut]

The 4 iron is one of my best clubs, but a 3 (maybe because i rarely have used it) was trouble to the point i got a hybrid. Also, those with elbow issues should benefit as well. The 7 iron swing a single length shaft requires isnt just length, its also the effort required.

However, ur last sentence is almost exactly like my opinion before i tried them. Afterward, i literally looked around and thought, how is everyone not using these. Hopefully, those here who know my love for clubs and passion for the game(despite switching to the 714 ap2 this week for the remainder of the season) that im pretty conservative with what i play (from mp 33 to mp 4, to vips, pcbs, 690.mb, etc and that i am quite the tinkerer) i am only saying what i saw with my eyes and experienced, i had my best round of the year and literally walked onto the course without having used the clubs ever.

I think 37 is a good length because you have to remember your not just swinging irons at that length, but wedges too. The wedges were the only part i thought werent great...swinging a 58 defree wedge like a 7 feels strange but after the 2nd hole, my only bogey, i just ran with it.

Obviously im not selling all my clubs. Like i said, i think it might get boring doing the same swing every time. But for many of us, i hope ive earned the right to be trusted when i say these might just be the game changers some are looking for.

[Sir edward of putternut]

you're still losing something somewhere when you go single length.

 

It seems to me that the biggest thing you give up is flexibility in equipment. When I first came across that concept, it appeared to be a good idea. The more that I think about it, the more I could see the concept really hindering a persons game in the long run. You stick your iron game to a single length set, get used to it, then you're put in a special category of equipment from there on out because you're used to only that concept. Damaging effects in my eyes.

I see these as enabling "older" people with health issues, i.e elbow, wrist, back

To play again.

I had the same misgivings as you, and maybe after a few more weeks ill change my mind, but every single doubt i had, distance, gapping, tragectory.....all were dispersed once i played.

You still have to swing and hit. But for someone takung up the game late in life, or for those not insane like us who only get out a few times a year, this will make the game easier....we need this game to grow, especially as our generation declines into the instant gratification, results with no effort age,-and this is a way to do it.

The guy who onky plays axfew times a year can work on one swing to play, instead of a pitching iron tempo, etc....

[duffer987]

you're still losing something somewhere when you go single length.

 

It seems to me that the biggest thing you give up is flexibility in equipment. When I first came across that concept, it appeared to be a good idea. The more that I think about it, the more I could see the concept really hindering a persons game in the long run. You stick your iron game to a single length set, get used to it, then you're put in a special category of equipment from there on out because you're used to only that concept. Damaging effects in my eyes.

 

Agreed. If something works for someone great! :)

But IMUO, the single-length thing is akin to a knuckleball pitcher in baseball. Broadly speaking there is a standard for how best to complete a particular action. It got to be the standard for a reason. Like everything else, not everyone fits into that standard model, and they go a different way, but whether it's the pitcher who ripped up his shoulder or the golfer who lost his swing, it seems more an exasperated choice than the first pick.

 

Putternut, always liked your equipment choices and posts, so I'm not trying to be a d1ckhead, hope the swing and the game work for you one method or the other!

Surely the z9s if you still have them can right all wrongs ;)

[Sir edward of putternut]

Appreciated duffer! Game is going well, just always love trying new stuff, and with all the new toys and gadgets coming out, im usually left thinking.....gimmick...i think thats why i was so surprised these seem to work as advertised...my dad cant play too much anymore and gets epideral shots in his spine every 6 to 8 months and has pretty severe elbow issues, as have i since hitting a root with a 4 iron in high school. These single lenth irons are gonna be sent to him after i play them a few more times.

 

Im gonna finish out the season with the 714 ap2s (got rid of them last year but always felt i didnt give them a chance...only 3 rounds) and my mp 33s or 99 hogans. Already packed up all my other extras for the winter so i cant switch up. Gonna look for a driver for mext season and am leaning toward cobra.....

[2over]

I am a 0 handicap currently and play MP-33s. I have MP-69s but the 33s are just something special so I am gaming them. I prefer blades simply because the thin sole works for the way I swing better than wider soles. I tend to get much better distance control with them as well over CBs. I also tend to like heavier shafts in my clubs, like DG weight, than lighter shafts. I like to swing hard and with lighter shafts I get out of sequence.

 

This year, I would like to add Titleist 714 MBs to the arsenal. I've always loved Titleist irons as well as Mizuno and some of my best golf has been played with Titleist MBs, the 681 to be precise. Still have those irons too and pull them out time to time.

 

Yep, that pretty much sums up my fondness and reasons for blades. The thin soles simply work better for me as a sweeper (attack angle measured on Trackman is between 2-3* down with a 7 iron and right at 0* with irons lower than 5). The shot feedback is crucial for me as a feel player. A MB blade tells me exactly where I missed it and by how much and lets me correct without thinking about it at all and thinking is a bad thing for me on the golf course. I would be lying if I said that looks don't matter--a compact MB blade looks terrific to my eye in the bag and at address, but honestly I play them for performance more than aesthetics--though both are strong reasons why I play them. Plus it's what I've played for 46 years (I'm 53) and this dog is too old to learn new tricks. If the wheel isn't broken...

 

I also play the MP-33s that I've had for 16 years now. But I love the looks and the performance of the old Titleist 680 and the current 716mb is very tempting to me as well. I've hit the Mizuno MP-4 and MP-5 and they look and perform virtually identically to my MP-33 but the faces of the 4s and 5s appear a bit taller (same blade length as near as I can tell) and I like the shallower face and more compact look of the 716mb (even slightly shallower and more compact than my 33s). I've found the 716mb performs virtually identically to my MP-33 which is very high praise. It's a lovely iron and terrific performer--turf interaction is especially great for a sweeper like me. The Titleist just doesn't feel quite as soft to me as the Mizzys. Now, that is not necessarily a bad thing in my book--the shot feedback from slight misses with the 716mb is perhaps even more detailed and clearer than the MP-33. But that "hitting a rubber ball" sweet-sticky "thump" with the Mizunos (the MP-4 and MP-5 feel just as sweet to me as the 33s) is addicting.

 

When my college age kids quit draining my bank account, I foresee a set of 716mb as "back-ups"...

[Nic1972]

I do not know if I have to leave Golfwrx after this post, let's see.... I play blades for the last 3 years, coming from Mizuno MP-53, and this was the best decision ever. My ball striking improved a lot, and my iron game became my strength. However I feel some pain in my elbows, it started a few months ago, and it seems it is not going away. Therefore I am considering graphite shafts which I would like to install in my current heads. Has anybody else tried graphite in blades / Muscle backs? I play blades for the feedback, and I fear to loose some of it with with graphite, but my elbows just cannot take the vibrations anymore. Any feedback would be appreciated. Thanks.

[duffer987]

I do not know if I have to leave Golfwrx after this post, let's see.... I play blades for the last 3 years, coming from Mizuno MP-53, and this was the best decision ever. My ball striking improved a lot, and my iron game became my strength. However I feel some pain in my elbows, it started a few months ago, and it seems it is not going away. Therefore I am considering graphite shafts which I would like to install in my current heads. Has anybody else tried graphite in blades / Muscle backs? I play blades for the feedback, and I fear to loose some of it with with graphite, but my elbows just cannot take the vibrations anymore. Any feedback would be appreciated. Thanks.

 

They're just irons like the rest of them at the end of the day, if your body is telling you something needs to change then listen to it :)

Maybe drop down to some C-Taper Lites with Prosoft inserts and you can keep the iron shafts? I only had two inserts left and put them into some MP4s I just got and I don't feel the feel is compromised as such compared to those without. I also have, and have had, graphite shafts in a bunch of sets and assuming their weight, balance, etc... works for you, they can only help.

[bladehunter]

whew..... it took a live chicken.... multiple visits from a Priest and one Rabbi....but the spirit of Big bertha has been exercised... whew.. it was close for a second there .. :stink: :swoon:

[NRJyzr]

I do not know if I have to leave Golfwrx after this post, let's see.... I play blades for the last 3 years, coming from Mizuno MP-53, and this was the best decision ever. My ball striking improved a lot, and my iron game became my strength. However I feel some pain in my elbows, it started a few months ago, and it seems it is not going away. Therefore I am considering graphite shafts which I would like to install in my current heads. Has anybody else tried graphite in blades / Muscle backs? I play blades for the feedback, and I fear to loose some of it with with graphite, but my elbows just cannot take the vibrations anymore. Any feedback would be appreciated. Thanks.

 

 

Seems to me Verplank did fairly well with them. He used Golfsmith Professional Grind blades with UST Tour Weight shafts for a fair amount of time, late 90s into early 2000s.

 

So worry not about that.

 

I'm afraid I can't offer much assistance on which shafts to use, though.