AskMyGolfSpy Vol. 38

AskMyGolfSpy is an opportunity to submit questions to our experts here at MGS. Today we’re focusing on some frequently left comments on our Most Wanted and Buyer’s Guide tests.

If you’ve got a question for a future edition of AskMyGolfSpy, you can pass along your questions to the team on Twitter, Facebook, Instagram or right here in the comments section below!  

Q: Why don’t you test irons at the same loft? 

First, a quick reminder – in our annual Most Wanted series, we test off-the-rack clubs. The intent is to provide guidance for the off-the-rack buyer and to put clubs on the radar of golfers who plan on being fitted. 

We test how manufacturers design and retailers sell clubs. Why would we manipulate and normalize lofts across an entire category when that’s not how golfers experience (and buy) the product?

Equally true, lofts are inherently part of the design – and not just to create distance. There’s a reason why Mizuno Pro 23 and JPX Hot Metal have different lofts and it’s way more complex than because Mizuno wants Hot Metal to go farther.

There is a not-so-insignificant relationship between loft, CG location and the performance intent of the design.

Ultimately, while ranting about loft-jacking is a popular pastime in golf forums (and our comment section), I’d wager that most golfers don’t care about the lofts, only the result. 

That result is more distance. 

That’s not to say normalizing lofts to better understand the influence of things like face tech, CG, and MOI, wouldn’t make for an interesting test. I think it would, which is why we have something in the works that, in part, considers performance with normalized lofts. 

With all of that said, while fine-tuning (FYI, that doesn’t mean bending clubs four degrees to make everything the same) static lofts should be a part of every fitting, it doesn’t make sense for an off-the-rack test. 

We’ve built some things into our test to account for distance differences, and while we’ve had some winners that have been the longest, in many cases, the extra distance comes at the expense of accuracy and consistency. 

That’s not a recipe for success in our tests. 

Q: Why don’t you test drivers will the same shaft?

At the risk of repeating myself, we test how manufacturers design and retailers sell clubs.

As with iron loft, it’s an interesting test, but again not reflective of marketplace realities.  

Our approach in Most Wanted tests is what we call fit from stock. We look to fit our testers into the best-performing shaft each manufacturer puts on the shelf at retail. 

It should be obvious enough that when the goal is to provide the best fit, using the same shaft for everyone doesn’t achieve the objective. 

It’s also true that there isn’t anything close to industry-wide overlap. That is to say; there isn’t a single shaft option that’s part of every manufacturer’s lineup. With that, we don’t think it makes much sense to test clubs with a build that golfers can’t get from the manufacturer. 

Q: Why don’t you test left-handed clubs? 

The biggest issue is we don’t have any left-handed wrenches, and, besides, the ball doesn’t care from which side the swing is coming from. 

But seriously … left-handed should perform the same as their right-handed counterparts, so from a performance standpoint, there isn’t much point. 

It’s also true that it would be hard to round up enough lefties for a proper test, and that’s before we start talking about the fact that not every product for lefties. 

We’re confident that testing right-handed models translates just fine. 

Q: Why don’t you test the cheaper golf balls most golfers play?

First, we do test some cheaper balls, but not at the rate that we test performance balls. 

The only reason cheap balls exist is to appeal to some sort of golfer preference (price, color, feel, etc.) that’s entirely unrelated to perforamnce.

Sorry to break it to you, but if performance was always the most important aspect of the design (and ultimately buying) decision, “cheap” balls (other than lower-priced urethane offerings) wouldn’t exist.

Period. Hard stop.

The cheap balls we test are typically among the best-selling cheap balls or those that present a particular curiosity. 

The reality is that more dollars are spent on performance balls than on the cheap stuff, though in some cases (Supersoft, for example), the volume of cheap balls sold outpaces the good stuff.  

But again, the ones that sell well are typically the ones we test.  

Keep in mind, many OEMs outsource their ionomer balls to overseas factories, and the data we have suggests the quality control isn’t as good as what we see from the top urethane producers. 

As anyone who has followed ball lab knows, occasionally, a higher-priced ball can have quality control issues, but I’d point out that of the 19 ionomer (i.e., cheap) balls in our Ball Lab database, only 6 have scores above the current database average and all 6 are Titleist balls. Even then, only two have scores above 80. 

If you want to buy a cheap ball because of some individual preference, that’s fine, but understand that performance and quality are unlikely to match that of the premium offerings no matter how many cheap balls we test. 

You may not always get what you pay for, but you rarely get more.

Q: Who should play a utility/driving iron?  

As it happens, our Most Wanted Utility iron is coming on Monday, so the timing of this one couldn’t be better. 

When you’re dealing with what I call the transition zone of your golf bag (the space between your longest fairway wood and the longest iron in your bag), there are several different ways you can go. 

Other than the iron from your set (and companies rarely make anything longer than a 4-iron these days), a utility iron is going to be your lowest-flying option. 

So, at the most basic level, a utility iron can be great for anyone who needs a long iron replacement but isn’t looking for the increased trajectory you’d expect from a hybrid or high-lofted fairway wood. 

I’m a high-lofted fairway wood (7-Woods RULE!) and occasional hybrid guy, but I’m considering building a utility iron for windy days or when course conditions favor more roll. 

If you’re looking for the proverbial fairway finder for short par 4s and other tight driving holes and struggle with hybrids (as many golfers do), a utility iron might be a solution. 

That’s your want-/needs-based stuff. From a fitting perspective, you typically want to see 5mph of ball speed difference between clubs. For nearly every golfer, there is a point at which you can’t quite get the speed you need with the next longest iron in the set. 

For example, if the speed gap between the 4 and 5-irons in your set is only 3mph, a 4U will often provide the requisite speed boost while preserving the “iron-like” performance many golfers want from their long iron alternatives. 

The last thing I will say is that while there are no hard and fast rules, in many cases, higher handicap players will be better served by the enhanced forgiveness (and higher flight) offered by fairway woods and hybrids.

Q: How can a club win [a Most Wanted Test] if it’s one of the shortest, least accurate, etc.?

Depending on the category, it might not be able to. 

Our approach to scoring varies by category and sub-category. The best example of this can be found in the differences in how we approach Game Improvement irons vs. Players irons. 

While our performance scores (by-in-large, accuracy) are never a minority contributor to the overall score, we know that game improvement players have greater expectations for distance than somebody looking to buy a single-piece or simple multi-piece players irons. 

In the GI category, we count distance almost as much as accuracy, whereas in the players category, accuracy is far and away the most significant contributor to the overall score. 

With the SGI category, forgiveness is more important than any other iron category we test. 

So, as it relates to the question, it’s possible for a players iron to be our best overall without being among the longest. It’s much more difficult for a short iron to finish on top in the GI category. 

I think it’s also important to point out that the gaps between rankings aren’t uniform across all scoring categories. 

We’ll typically see a much wider spread for our distance and accuracy metrics than we do with our forgiveness metrics. Ultimately what that means is that the performance gap between the clubs that finished 1^st and 12^th for forgiveness isn’t typically nearly as wide as it is with distance. 

With that, it is possible for a driver that finished middle of the pack for forgiveness to finish best overall because, in many cases, middle-of-the-pack forgiveness isn’t miles worse than top-of-the-table forgiveness. 

Q: Why would I buy a rain jacket that costs as much as a driver? 

Valid question. Yes, only some people need the best golf rain jacket. In fact, if you’re like me, some of you would rather stay home if it’s going to rain. That said, some people live in places where it rains nearly every day. Take Scotland, for example, where it rains on average 250 out of the 365 days of the year. In climates like this, spending some extra money to ensure you stay dry is well worth it.  

Think of it this way. Do you have a daily commute? Consider someone with a two-hour commute, as opposed to someone like me who has a 25 minutes commute. The type of car I drive doesn’t nearly matter as much. If I had a two-hour commute, I’d opt for something more comfortable or maybe something more fuel efficient. Does my car still get me from A to B? Sure. But, it may not be best suited for someone with a longer commute.  

When deciding whether the price is worth it, it’s important to consider your personal needs – not project your opinion on others. -Connor 

More Questions?  

As always, if you have any questions for the MGS crew (and they don’t have to be about the golf ball), drop them below for a chance to be featured in next week’s #AskMyGolfSpy!