Swing Weight/ Static Weight

[J295]

I’m experimenting with some different lengths (longer) and shafts (lighter graphite)… See the attached which is the outcome of the new set of existing Ping irons and new Titliest wedges. 

 

What would you do next in your experimentation process? Anything jump out at you from these numbers?

 

I’m aware that swing weight is personal preference and it’s not one-size-fits-all.   Nonetheless, I’m wondering if these numbers generate any insights from the group.  
 

If it matters … fit 65 year old shifting from stiff to regular shafts.  

[Phabs]

Pretttty heavy.  If that’s what you like or are comfortable with then swing away.

The 9/PW at the same total weight is a little interesting.  Usually the PW swing weights little heavier than the 9 due to being a shorter club with a shorter balance point.  Believe the typical

rule of thumb is around 7g’s difference between but that’s just a suggested baseline. 

[Stuart_G]

8 hours ago, J295 said:

I’m experimenting with some different lengths (longer) and shafts (lighter graphite)… See the attached which is the outcome of the new set of existing Ping irons and new Titliest wedges. 

 

Nothing against experimentation - but it does beg the question of why?  What are you hopping to gain?

 

And what are the actual playing lengths to go along with those numbers?   What playing lengths do/did you play before the experiment?

 

 

8 hours ago, J295 said:

What would you do next in your experimentation process? Anything jump out at you from these numbers?

 

That's a pretty severe swing weight progression through the set.   It's almost what I might expect to see if someone tried to turn a standard set of heads into an overly long (5i or 6i length) - single length build, instead of using heads designed for a single length build.  Not something that generally works out very well for those that try it.

 

Even an MOI match (which is considered a big progression) is only about 2/3 of a swing weight increment per 1/2" of length progression (per club).  You have a full 2 sw pt increments through most of the set.    Not saying it's wrong or it wont work - but it's very unusual.  However, I do have serious doubts about how well matched the clubs will feel.   Now whether that might be a problem or not - only testing will answer that question.

 

What would I do next?   Have you actually taken them to the range to hit them yet?   If not, that's definitely the next step. 

If you have hit them, how do they feel?   Are you seeing what  you're hoping to see?

 

 

6 hours ago, Phabs said:

Pretttty heavy.  If that’s what you like or are comfortable with then swing away.

 

Agree - that would be WAY too heavy for me - but might be fine for the OP.

 

6 hours ago, Phabs said:

Usually the PW swing weights little heavier than the 9 due to being a shorter club with a shorter balance point.  Believe the typical rule of thumb is around 7g’s difference between but that’s just a suggested baseline. 

 

A 1/4" length increment is now fairly common between PW and 9i.  That would drop the head weight difference down to only about 3-4 gm.   And grip weight tolerances can be pretty poor and could easily explain that.  That's one reason it can help to weight sort the grips before installing.

 

Edited June 4 by Stuart_G

[cardoustie]

Looks close to my set .. but I change a pt per club .. run d5 in woods then go up .. steelfiber +1” fwiw 

 

lead tape your 6i to d4 and your pw to e0

 

love wedges heavy … like you have them 

[Streuner]

I did experimental swing weight changes with my older Titleist 818 hybrid. The one with the weight zylinders, it was super easy to swap around different zylinders and feel the different Swing Weight. On the Range I could surprisignly handle Most changes and even with no zylinder inside the head the results have been good. On course and on different lies and different angles I noticed that I felt most comfortable with Heavy weight with the Trade Off the swingspeed. The heavier clubhead / total weight reduced carry and total distance significant, but dispersion front to back came down to a level I have never seen before. 
so for me the goal was, to stay heavy enough for the good feel and tight dispersion without losing to much club head speed. This was somewhere around D5-6

[J295]

Big shout out to all of you for weighing in to give me your insights. Pun intended. Ha ha.  
 

Next, I’m going to post some replies, and based on the comments, here is an updated sheet that includes length info. 

Edited June 4 by J295

[J295]

2 hours ago, Stuart_G said:

 

Nothing against experimentation - but it does beg the question of why?  What are you hopping to gain?

Hoping to gain tighter dispersion. I play at Pete Dye course and the penalty for missing is rather severe. And to be blunt, my iron play stinks. It has probably been around seven years since I got new (Ping) clubs, and at age 65 I was just wondering if I still had a good fit.

 

I did a fitting recently and they landed on Mizuno Pro 245 with a dart recoil 90 stiff shaft. I took the stiff and the regular shaft to the course and did a blind test and settled in on the regular shaft.  Then I stumbled across a 10-year-old thread from here about club lengths for tall golfers (I’m 6’4”), and decided to experiment before buying new irons.  So I had new shafts put in existing clubs. 
 

2 hours ago, Stuart_G said:

 

And what are the actual playing lengths to go along with those numbers?   What playing lengths do/did you play before the experiment?

Great question. Just above this I posted more info with that detail.   You can see everything is over standard ranging from 0.75 inch over standard up to 1.5 inch over standard for the 60° wedge. The wedges are direct order from titliest with regular shafts. I have done nothing with those wedges. I ordered them in those lengths.  

2 hours ago, Stuart_G said:

 

 

 

That's a pretty severe swing weight progression through the set.   It's almost what I might expect to see if someone tried to turn a standard set of heads into an overly long (5i or 6i length) - single length build, instead of using heads designed for a single length build.  Not something that generally works out very well for those that try it.

Great detective work. That’s exactly what’s happening, although I’m not looking at single length I am taking Ping i500 and experimenting.  

 I’m hoping either I settle on something that works with the experimentation, and then either use that or feel confident enough to order the Mizuno (or TM 790). 

2 hours ago, Stuart_G said:

 

Even an MOI match (which is considered a big progression) is only about 2/3 of a swing weight increment per 1/2" of length progression (per club).  You have a full 2 sw pt increments through most of the set.    Not saying it's wrong or it wont work - but it's very unusual.  However, I do have serious doubts about how well matched the clubs will feel.   Now whether that might be a problem or not - only testing will answer that question.

 

What would I do next?   Have you actually taken them to the range to hit them yet?   If not, that's definitely the next step. 

If you have hit them, how do they feel?   Are you seeing what  you're hoping to see?

Hit them  for just a bit on the range, and will do some more today and play with them.   So just starting that actual process, but first session the 8, 9, W were awesome, and the 6 and 7 took a more work and clunky.    
 

Just got the 50°, 56°, and 60° delivered yesterday so we’ll take them out now.

2 hours ago, Stuart_G said:

 

 

 

Agree - that would be WAY too heavy for me - but might be fine for the OP.

 

 

A 1/4" length increment is now fairly common between PW and 9i.  That would drop the head weight difference down to only about 3-4 gm.   And grip weight tolerances can be pretty poor and could easily explain that.  That's one reason it can help to weight sort the grips before installing.

 

You and some of the others seem to really know your stuff. Thanks for helping. I have a couple of club build/ adjust guys in our larger senior group (excellent players too), and I’ll be curious to get their thoughts.  
 

 

Edited June 4 by J295

[cardoustie]

I think the longer short irons for taller golfers may have been my post

[Stuart_G]

21 hours ago, J295 said:

Hoping to gain tighter dispersion. I play at Pete Dye course and the penalty for missing is rather severe. And to be blunt, my iron play stinks. It has probably been around seven years since I got new (Ping) clubs, and at age 65 I was just wondering if I still had a good fit.

 

Well, in general longer lengths is not the way to go for more accuracy and less - dispersion.  But there can be exceptions to that for taller golfers.  However, I would expect it to be more at shortest end of the set, not an equal improvement through the whole set.

 

Heavier weights (either shaft weight or swing weight) can be a possible route to better dispersion.

 

My biggest suggestion is focus on one change at a time so you know what might be responsible for the change in the results.  If you change too many things at once (shaft weight, swing weight and playing length) - there is no way to know which change or changes are responsible.  They could even be fighting against each other - one of the changes might be more beneficial in the absence of one of the other changes.   

 

Finally, when such a large increase in swing weight actually becomes helpful - yes it may mean the heavier swing weight is a good fit - but it also could be an indication that the shaft weight was dropped too much and the higher swing weight was needed as a compensation.

 

[Howard_Jones]

50 minutes ago, Stuart_G said:

 

Well, in general longer lengths is not the way to go for more accuracy and less - dispersion.  But there can be exceptions to that for taller golfers.  However, I would expect it to be more at shortest end of the set, not an equal improvement through the whole set.

 

Heavier weights (either shaft weight or swing weight) can be a possible route to better dispersion.

 

My biggest suggestion is focus on one change at a time so you know what might be responsible for the change in the results.  If you change too many things at once (shaft weight, swing weight and playing length) - there is no way to know which change or changes are responsible.  They could even be fighting against each other - one of the changes might be more beneficial in the absence of one of the other changes.   

 

Finally, when such a large increase in swing weight actually becomes helpful - yes it may mean the heavier swing weight is a good fit - but it also could be an indication that the shaft weight was dropped too much and the higher swing weight was needed as a compensation.

 

 

 

I aggrea to most of it, and think that for overlenght players, 3/8" clubs can be a gamechanger if we start out "right" using the #9 as starting point. It does NOT have to be a "poor mans MOI match", for some, flat SW works better, so my thinking is strictly the shaft lenght progression in the set.

[J295]

Good info, thanks again.   
 

So I don’t have to have the pro shop do it all the time, perhaps I will need to ask one of the guys I play with who tinkerers to coach me up on basic club work so I can do it myself

[J295]

PS.  Tried the Vokey extended length wedges and they are not playable for me. Feel like sledgehammers.  E2,E4,E7.  I’ll probably cut them down to stock size.  

Edited June 5 by J295

[Howard_Jones]

7 hours ago, J295 said:

PS.  Tried the Vokey extended length wedges and they are not playable for me. Feel like sledgehammers.  E2,E4,E7.  I’ll probably cut them down to stock size.  

 

What is your wrist to floor measurement?

 

Not that it matters alot, but since i cant see your stance with a short club from behind, and it seems like you can handle STD PL in wedges, the question that pops up is.

 

Do you realy need overlength irons?

- maybe not as much overlenght as you are using now?

 

The critical point is the short end (the shortest full swing clubs), so focus for PL should be on those.

 

Since play lenghth is the most important specs of them all, its important to start out right on that.

[J295]

5 hours ago, Howard_Jones said:

 

What is your wrist to floor measurement?

 

Not that it matters alot, but since i cant see your stance with a short club from behind, and it seems like you can handle STD PL in wedges, the question that pops up is.

 

Do you realy need overlength irons?

- maybe not as much overlenght as you are using now?

 

The critical point is the short end (the shortest full swing clubs), so focus for PL should be on those.

 

Since play lenghth is the most important specs of them all, its important to start out right on that.

Good point.  Thanks