golfrewind.com

Ditto to you. End of typing at you.

You should, because we won't take your word for it blindly.

Was I even referring to you? Use some common sense, you know who that was directed at.

The way you treat others on this site, common sense is clearly something YOU are lacking.

..good grief....
A person gives wrong information on a forum and you don't expect a response? If you think I was mean...then you need to grow some thicker skin.


LOL....that really is amusing.

To every one on this site other than GolfvsWife.

Every thing I have posted on this topic has been correct and accurate, based on past experience. I havent' given any wrong information, quite the opposite in fact. If you go back and read my original post, I was asking for any information other site members might have with a set of irons built with 1/4" between clubs, rather than the normal 1/2. I never asked any one to tell I need to learn how to hit a 3 iron. That's not the point, or maybe it is, The whole ideas of building a set of irons starting with a 36" 9 iron and working up to a 37.5" 3 iron, is to make hitting the longer irons easier. In theory, hitting a 3 iron the same length as a normal 6 iron, should be just as easy, and therefore a good way you improve a golfers iron game. This is not something I invented, it's an idea I read about someplace, and it's being done as I type this by other club makers. As I mention in an earlier post, I have built the 37.5" 3 iron, and tested it one time at the range. I hit it side by side with my standard length 6 iron, and the quality of my ball striking was equal for both clubs, It was also somewhat better than what I did with my normal length 3 iron. The only thing I really need to do is determine how far on average I can hit the shorter 3 iron, and compare the yardage to a normal set of irons. I would have the information now, if I could see the ball land when I hit my longer irons, but my eyes don't allow that any longer. I can just about see a ball in the fairway at 175 yards since my eyes got worse.Up until a few months ago, I couldn't see a ball on the green from 100 yards out. Thankfully, my eyes seem to be getting a little better lately. So I need to go back to the range, and get the help of someone with good eyes to watch the balls and see where they land. Then I'll have the numbers to report back with, and I'll know if the idea is worth more time and building a full set of irons. Going just by how well I was hitting the shorter 3 iron, I'd say things are looking pretty good so far.

Also to all site members here. I respect everyone's right to their opinion. What I do not do, is put much faith in the opinion of someone that have no facts or data, or experience to back up said opinion. If someone tells me a certain driver is a piece of junk, and they couldn't hit it. all that tells me is "THEY COULDN'T HIT IT". Fact is, just about everyone here has hit a driver they didn't like or couldn't hit, but that doesn' mean it was a bad driver, it just means it didn't fit the golfer or he/she was haveing a bad day with the driver. We have all had bad days with a driver, some more bad days than others, but we all have them.
I've been a member of this site for 3 years now, and to the best of my knowledge, I have never posted anything that was false or inaccurate. Certainly not on purpose. I've been building golf clubs for 5 years, and I know what I'm talking about. I don't claim to know as much as some, but I know enough to build a very good set of irons, and woods. I do a spine alignment and FLO test every shaft I use, even built my own spine finder and FLO device. I think most of the site members know me well enough to know I type from experience, and not my unsupported opinions. I try to help where I can, when I can. I first came to this site to learn as much as I could. Since then, I've learned a lot, and now I'm trying to help others by passing on what I've learned, If I do post something here that is in fact incorrect, I hope someone will correct me, I'm still willing to learn and we all have things we don't know.
Have a nice day everyone. Type at you later,

ONEPUTT.

I have some range results for those interested in this idea about a set of irons, Went out to the range with my playing partner and hit a bunch of balls. Hit a standard length 6 iron to get warmed up, and then hit the shorter 3 iron. Next came a normal length 3 iron. The results were that we both hit the short 3 iron between 5 and 7 yards shorter than a normal length 3 iron. The good news is it was easier and more consistant ball striking with the shorter 3 iron, so we both felt more comfortable using it. Then my friend hit his 4 iron to get a comparison, and he hit the 4 about 10 yards less then he was hitting the short 3. This would put the short 3 right in between a normal 3 and a normal 4 iron for distance. This is pretty much exactly what I had predicted would happen, based on choking down 1-1/2 inches on an iron. The next step is to build some more clubs using the same 1/4 inch progression and see if I get the same results. Since the 3 iron is going to have the most change in length, 1-1/2 ihches shorter than normal, all the other irons should be effected even less. For example, the short 7 iron will be only be 1/2 inch short and the same length as a normal 8 iron. I doubt a half inch will have enough effect on distance to be noticable, if will just be slightly easier to hit well. The short 5 iron will be the same length as a normal 7 iron, and should be as easy to hit. After yesterdays testing, I can see why this idea is being used by some club makers and why it would be popular with the golfers that try it.

Oneputt....have you ever heard of "True length Technology"?
This is basically what you are doing in your experiment. They say TLT will be the way all manufs. build clubs in the near future.

Tom Wishon has praised TLT as a great new way to build clubs. Dan Connelly is the inventor of the system, it is based on the premise that long irons should be shorter, and short irons should be longer...in a nutshell. Look it up and check it out.

Your program most likely fails to account for intangibles like how it is easier to sync your swing with a shorter shaft, and how much more a pure vs sligtly off center hit goes...most likely more "sweet" hits will occur with a shorter shaft...


Very interested in the results Oneputt...please keep us updated...

Again...you said it not me...


Curious why this experiment rubs you the wrong way...I'm a low handicapper and I don't hit my long irons as consistently as my short irons...true for most people, hence the widespread use of hybrids...irons are more accurate and controllable and I prefer to use them but hybrids are flat out easier to use...interesting if Oneputt comes up with a way to make long irons more playable with a small distance sacrifice...

A few months ago I switched the shafts in a couple of hybrids that I rotate...dropped the graphite diamana and put in s300 at about 2 inch shorter lenghts...strangely, I actually hit them farther now...I just feel like it's easier to sync and pour the power on in the right places...


But you have to start off with more than a 187 3 iron distance I'd think if you were going to trade away 10% of distance I'd think...maybe that's the issue?

And I don't know about your program, but this one is generally fairly accurate...

Here it is...

Golf Club Distance Calculator


Funny thing about technological "advances"...lofts on irons are getting stronger, the shafts longer all in pursuit of more distance...I think that clubs have actually gone over the brink and standard sets are too long for standard people...I switched to an old set of irons from my fitted mp60s...irons I found off the rack in a used shop...all shaft lenghts were standard for 1991...- 1/2" over today's standard and the lofts were considerably weaker by about one club...I immeditely hit them more solidly and longer...very long, about a club to a club and a half longer and straighter as well...so much for modern day clubfitting...

No computer program is going to explain that but common sense will...

Good stuff! Can you build me a -2 iron?

I don't recall saying I had a problem w/ the experiment....but whatever you say there Bump.

and come on' ...of course the program doesn't account for everything....did I really need to emphasis that? It's a fun thing to use, just like the one you linked above. I'll make sure and be REALLY specific next time especially for YOU.

You've got to do better than that.....LOL

Just nipping a little issue clouding, argumenitive for the sake of argument misinformation in the bud...Bud...

Not sure where the issues are, but perhaps try a little hot tea rather than heating up that flamethrower...


We're a happy little community here...don't step on the flowers...

Is this what you do? Post useless **? Out of 3879 posts is 3870 just like the ones above? At least I know who the ******are here.