IMO a set of heads with way less offset would sell well. All the current offerings have way too much.

The length is part of the fitting process. We would offer heads only. It's up the the fitter to determine what length works best.

    My initial thought is the better Bryson does, and the longer he does it, the better the concept will sell. But if he doesn't make any more leaderboards, it will disappear just as fast. Simple, I know. But it's just my $.02. Regarding pdx's post, I would love to see more options in the reduced offset area. And even fewer of them are LH avail...

    Bangoman

    But the weight is in your hands... So there's the real rub.

      Bangoman

      Does BANG still have the Mellow Yellow square heads in production, for $170 retail, or are you still trying to sell off the inventory from a few years ago?

      Think about the question........

          I vote for single length high loft woods & hybrids with offset for us hackers 😩 😖 😭

          Personally, I'd like to see some SL players irons. Most of what is available is "game improvement" type stuff with clunky looks and offset. The Edel set Bryson played were players clubs, raw, with minimal offset. They were sweet looking. I'm not a fan of chunky irons at all.

          Make a clean set with minimal offset and make them available in lefty and I'd grab some.

          To that note... if there were a clean, raw set of forged irons available in lefty , (SL or not), I would game them.

          Spuzz

          ...and Par4. Now there was a design that should never had been a "Fad". The square heads are a great design! Just perfect. A friend of mine designed either the first one or he was second. You may know of these. Not sure of the actual order BUT....The Square Shooter (S.S.) was on an info commercial in the early 80's or so. Designed by Don Martin Jr. The other was the 4X4 (Laminated wood) and designed by (?) in Seattle, Wa. Also around that time or earlier. Both were just so EZ to hit off the tee. Both clubs died and then 25 years later they make a comeback by Nike with a ton of followers. And they died. Sometimes great or good designs are simply overlooked or the public doesn't buy into it.

              Bangoman I think square heads were good at keeping shots straight but they were lacking in the total distance department. Now, some will argue that 225 in the fw is better than 250 in the rough... but truth be told, distance sells. 15 yards longer? Sure... longer in the woods!!

                  I am surprised that Maltby hasn't jumped into the fray considering that the MO5 and those following
                  were very well received. These player cavities would be the perfect vehicle for an SL iron head that
                  would be accepted widely if the tech details could be worked out. JMO...

                  Bangoman

                  We could also discuss the flyweight driver heads played at extra lengths(47"+). They worked, for some/few, but not the majority, but for the most part the ones they worked for eventually have gone back to "normal" drivers. From what I read.

                  Will I try SL irons......perhaps, if I have the time to tinker. Had thoughts of such things myself years ago as I could hammer a 6i, but nothing longer and few shorter; always wanted a set of clubs at 6i lengths. Many people have had the same thoughts thru the years, no doubt. But 1 or 2 fellas having a modicum of success with them will not make them a mainstay in bags.

                  If you truly want to help BANG Co. get back on the right track......I'd say pass on this outlay of moolah. Keep on with what you know best.

                  Now, if I'm wrong a year from now, you can always come and kick my ass! : )

                      Par4QC

                      Now, this brought up an interesting point.

                      For you, the 6 iron length seemed to be the magic length for your golf swing. For someone else it might be a different length.
                      Because we all have the variables to determine the best length for individual's golf swing.

                      In view of this point; to maintain the desired swing weight / MOI, to fit different length of the set; we'll need the flexibility of changing the head weight to fit different length of irons ???

                        Par4QC

                        EXACTLY what I thought when I opened the thread.

                        Don't waste your money Steve. One guy uses them, and he's never won a tour event, nor is he high up on the money list. Why would someone copy him?

                        People would be better off with golf lessons to hit what they own.

                          pike51

                          P51...You don't hve to sell that theory on me...LOL I have been preaching that for 30+ years! While some try and sell accuracy my thoughts have always been...........hit it shorter but straighter...I DON'T THINK SO!!!

                            Par4QC

                            Kick your ass??? Your wife could kick mine Par...the shape I'm in. Everyday is an adventure.

                            I am pre-booking mainly overseas.......trying to get an overseas customer to commit to 200 sets which looks probable. Working out the details as they want theirs assembled! Pain in the ass...but, the profit margin gets much stronger on assembled product. Standby.

                            We have to bring in a minimum of 500 to 1,000 sets to make it even viable.

                              Would a back weighted shaft i.e. Paderson, work better for SL irons than the current available shafts?

                                Umfaan Would a back weighted shaft i.e. Paderson, work better for SL irons than the current available shafts?

                                That sure seemed easier than adjusting weight in the heads.
                                I think the customizing might be the different length each individual golfer demands. For me it might be the 8 iron length.