Shovels

scotts33

For an experiment, I tried playing a shovel over the weekend for 9. I don't usually play wide sole ultra game improvement heads. Heads I put in play were Swing Science FC-One Plus 6i, 8i, PW, SW (Jeff Sheets design). Other than lower offset (3.3mm in the 6i to 1.1mm in the PW) they are the widest iron sole I know of in component form (bounce 1 deg. in 6i and 7 deg. in PW.) I am not overly steep in descent angle more of a shallow picker. Shaft is a Swing Science graphite Series 200 "R". I was very surprised at the contact and impact of these heads. Huge topline which I can get over. For some reason iron optical's aren't as important to me as putter optical's. Seemed to me that the leading edge which I wouldn't call sharp but not blunted either got under the ball better. Muni turf is tight right now and very short is why I tried the experiment. I always thought the wide sole iron shovels worked better on lush thick turf. Maybe not so? What say you?

Pic of sole width 5i - 9i.

DonM

scotts33
What did you see in the way of ball flight?

scotts33

DonM What did you see in the way of ball flight?

Same as usual. I tend to be a high ball hitter no change in that. Normally use SS FC-One irons undercut design medium width sole low offset or Wishon 771CSI also medium width little more offset.

I used a yellow MG Golf Senior ball 90 compression and chipping/putting was spot on.

JeffTilley

I hit those heads awhile back and they were remarkably easy to hit. I don’t recall what shaft was in them, but they felt relatively soft and ballflight was high, but not ballooning. They were indeed shovels tho.

scotts33

BTW the FC-One Plus irons have a cambered sole which also helps. With the amount of mass and lower CG they propel the ball up.

I just thought it was weird that they have no issue hitting the ball "fat" skip into the ball but no issues there. That was the main factor that I thought was very different. Muni turf is burnt and barren in some places from previous rains and wet conditions to now very tight fairway lies.

DonM

scotts33 I'm sure you're getting some different kind of turf interaction though. When I play a Ping G-something, my turf interaction is more like a thud than I'm used to. Usually takes a very small divot versus the normal one I have with my "normal" irons.

ode

Been playing the Maltby STi's for 2+ seasons and will not change anytime soon. Think Ping G. More bounce and a blunted leading edge help me as I am fairly steep. These guys are sleepers!

colej

ode
I’ve built at least 8 sets of those. Awesome heads

JeffTilley

ode

I've done alot of hoing since I got back into golf in 2012, but I've yet to hit any Maltby clubs. I've heard great things about them too.

DonM

What is the design advantage of having a lot of camber from heel to toe? The STi's for example have a lot of it.

My old Wishon 752's are fairly flat. I think I prefer that to the STi sole. What is good for whom?

ode

DonM only you can figure that out. I'm steep and can move some turf. Still do with these but the sole interaction with the ground is better and contact is cleaner which helps. For me, more bounce and blunted leading edge is important. I can play without but eventually I always come back to these. In between I've played Maltby TE forged, Wishon 560 forged ..... Both forgiving cavity designs that I played well with but they have little to no sole relief....560,s maybe slightly better. Also tried the pinhawk SL, same thing. I'd need to grind the leading edge to play any of those again....where I really notice it is on partials, punches, etc. When quality of strike is paramount! Another design that I've recently tried and really like the sole design is the Maltby TS2......excellent for someone who moves some turf....but pricey!

ode

colej I hope they do an updated version of these someday, but why mess with something that is that good! They have a quirky feel to them, but performance is really good!

ode

JeffTilley not sure what you are looking for but if you don't mind the big clunky look of a sgi iron, the STi are really good with some built in features like a ping g series. I'd out them up against any OEM sgi irons!

scotts33

JMO but if you are steeper and on average take deeper divots a wide soled iron is better. If more shallow and a picker then medium width irons work better. If you are a decent player any design will work just some better than others. What wide sole ultra game improvement iron designs do is offer more miss hit area that's the reason they work so well for the average Joe Hacker.

sdandrea1

I put a short set (7-PW) of Maltby L Tech heads with A flex graphite in the Florida bag last week. Weaker lofts and wide soles were great in the tight fairways AND the deep rough. Sleeper heads for men too!

When you're talking PING G series more specifics are needed. The G10 to G20 had huge soles......G25 and later, more mid sole width.

kelco9

sdandrea1 I have heard a lot of good things about the LTech, but have never seen them. I was strongly considering putting a set together for both my wife and dad, but have never gone through with it. I'll be interested in hearing your experience with them.

sdandrea1

kelco9

Lots of offset, big blade, nice shiny finish. Looks very hittable at address and the sound and feel is old school solid.

Par4QC

sdandrea1 old school solid.

Also, very old school lofts.

DC300

Going to build myself shovels if i ever get around to it, was intending on doing Pinhawks, but Im going to see what the new ones are. I honestly give up on ever being good again, so im just going to make it as easy as possoble on myself.

I have found little to no issue with wider soles off tighter lies and dramatically better performance in fluffy/wet conditions.

sdandrea1

I am building a set in VA (just epoxied them today) of Power Play Select 5000 hybrid irons. 2nd time around with these for me. I was surprised how well they performed last time, but ended up selling to a buddy who REALLY needed them. They are not overly jacked lofts, but I remember them being about a club longer. The 46 degree PW was about 115y for me. I'm using senior graphite this time (Acer Velocity), 6 - PW.

johnnydoom

My 2 sets are somewhat opposite in profile with one being Alpha C1 Pro forged and the other being Ping Raptures, but I have difficulty finding much difference in playability. My divots look similar with both. It may be due to the shallow swing plane (I'm 5'8"). The Alpha's draw more and go a bit farther, but I think that is because the Pings are 2 degrees flat and are lighter clubs with the graphite shafts. It would seem to make sense that the wider soles would dig less and be more forgiving if your swing is steeper though.

scotts33

johnnydoom My 2 sets are somewhat opposite in profile with one being Alpha C1 Pro forged and the other being Ping Raptures, but I have difficulty finding much difference in playability. My divots look similar with both. It may be due to the shallow swing plane (I'm 5'8"). The Alpha's draw more and go a bit farther, but I think that is because the Pings are 2 degrees flat and are lighter clubs with the graphite shafts. It would seem to make sense that the wider soles would dig less and be more forgiving if your swing is steeper though.

Alpha C1 Pro Forged weaker in loft per iron than the Ping Rapture.

johnnydoom

scotts33 They are. But I hit them 5 - 10 yards farther than the Pings. The Alphas have Dynamic Golds in them that I think weigh quite a bit more than the Ping graphite shafts, so I'm thinking it may be the overall heft of the club. I don't use launch monitors, so I don't have numbers, but I don't think there is a significant difference in trajectory between them. I'm short and fat (working on the fat part, but still going to be several more months before I'll get to less than obese), so I don't think I have a swing that would move the lighter clubs significantly faster. All speculation on my part as I am not good at swing analysis, even my own.

scotts33

johnnydoom They are. But I hit them 5 - 10 yards farther than the Pings. The Alphas have Dynamic Golds in them that I think weigh quite a bit more than the Ping graphite shafts, so I'm thinking it may be the overall heft of the club. I don't use launch monitors, so I don't have numbers, but I don't think there is a significant difference in trajectory between them. I'm short and fat (working on the fat part, but still going to be several more months before I'll get to less than obese), so I don't think I have a swing that would move the lighter clubs significantly faster. All speculation on my part as I am not good at swing analysis, even my own.

TT DG way more heft. Ping original specs C9 on Raptures if std. length way to light for majority of average male players for a decent heft match from my experience. Heft match is a huge "fitting" parameter that I'd guess over 50% of golfers struggle with. I never see discount golf stores in their so called "fitting" stalls (really marketing stalls) vary heft in irons. That ain't "fitting" in my book. 😉