Who plays blades and why or why not?
 

Lets assume that the correct shaft/lie/loft/swing-weight variables are fit perfectly to a player's Stroke. Pros and Cons of going with the blade versus a more "game improvement" type of iron?

It just seems that we discuss so much about precision alignments and the importance of sustaining compression that may be it would make sense at least from a training perspective to use a blade . . . if just for feeback.

Seems like the hands could be get a "masters degree" education with feedback from a blade. But I guess the flipside is this game is hard enough as it is.

Thoughts?

Re: Who plays blades and why or why not?
 

Exactly why I purchased blades a few years back. I found a good clean practice set of MP14's, 2-PW and told myself if I could master the set, I could probably play anything.
It took me about a week before they found a permanent home in my bag. I love the feel, and that is a very subjective word. I can feel the clubhead weight and roll around the sweet spot better than anything else I've tried. The legendary cold day mishits give me a pause. Mishit feedback is not only felt but heard. The flip side is sweet spot compression where the feedback is sublime.

Now that the chrome and nickle is worn through to the copper in nickle-sized circles, I'm considering the next thing...

Bagger

Re: Who plays blades and why or why not?
 

NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Don't do it man! Those nickle circles are your "badge of courage and honor." Keep those clubs in the bag. You earned those circles.

I play blades...even my 2 iron. Gotta have the feedback, and I don't think they're that much harder to hit than some of the other non-blades I've played. I bought my first set of blades almost 2 years ago - a beat up set of MP14's...best set of clubs I've ever owned.

Ever-Blades
 

If you can consistently impact the ball in the middle of the clubface, blades are your club. If not, go with perimeter weighted.

Flame Suit on:

When the majority of the tour is using CAVITY BACKS, so should you! Simple as that. There are so few many TRUE BALDES in play is ridiculous. Plus the "blades" of today are nothing like the blades of yester years. They are basically game improvement muscle backs.

Blades
 

I have played everything from Callys to Clevelands to Hogans, and I have stuck with an old set of Hogan Directors, circa 1985, 2-pw (3-gap in todays lofts), and they are wonderful! They are about as blade as you can get, but I find 'em easier to hit than anything I've ever owned. Go figure. :D

Agreed that the blades of today are not even close to the same as older models.

Case in point - the difference between my FG-17's and Mac 1025M's. They may 'look' like they would play about the same, but the difference in better feel vs forgiveness (respectively) is dramatic and obvious.

That said, I'd still take the 1025's over any true cavity back because there is more feel. The 'mid point' of the spectrum IMO.

I will add one more thing to this thread:

If you play blades and truly SCORE BETTER WITH THEM compared to Cavity backs (you must've tried a set) then keep playing them.

HOWEVER

If your scores are inconsistent with the blades due to mishits/missed greens/etc, you should probably be playing some form of cavity back AT LEAST in the long/mid irons....from 6 or 7 on up, blades work great.

I have played everything over the years from butter knife blades to cavity back graphite shafted clubs. It seems to me, if you can get you right forearm on plane you can hit anything. I currently play a 1956 set of Spalding "syncrodyned" irons--2 thru 9. I did bore them out and install 6.5 rifle shafts. they are the softest irons I have ever played. I am not gifted by any means, but playing the blades has only helped my game.

My last three sets
 

My first real set of golf clubs were Ping i3's. I loved them. Then I tried Baggers' MP14's and thought I might like a set for myself. So I bought a set of MP29's. When I went back to try the Pings for fun, couldn't stand the lack of feedback - so those got sold.

I had the MP29's in my bag for about a year and really liked them. A couple of months ago I hit some Titlest 704's on the range and liked them so much I bought a set. I sold the MP29's.

I've found the 704's to be a good mixture of feel and forgivability. I can work the ball just as easily as with the MP29's, yet they are more forgiving on mishits.

Btw, MP29's are really muscle-back forged irons, not really true blades.

Is it easier to 'drag' or feel the sweetspot with blades? I have Cleveland TA7s, about as forgiving as they come. Do people use blades out of ego, or does one achieve better ballstriking with a well struck shot from blades?

I agree with this. I play the original Snake Eyes Smith and Wesson blades which were designed as a game improvement blade. They were selling at about $1200 in the US and over £1000 in the UK. When Snake Eyes went bust I waited a bit a located the UK distributor and bought two sets at £200 each . I don't have any problems hitting them and don't hit game improvement long irons better. I find the real benefit with blades is in the short game . Game improvement clubs such as bulky Callaways just seem like clumsy implements when chipping and the blades feel like precision instruments around the green. Matched progressive sets with long irons with game improvement features and short iron blades makes a lot of sense to me.

What i find a little humorous about those who commented about themselves playing blades and now hue's comment about the bulky callaway's is that if, in a perfect world, there were not endorsement contracts on tour A LOT of players would be using those weird looking Ping Eye 2s :wink:

What do you think the odds are that so many tour players who, as earlier stated, play cavity back/game improvement-type clubs do so because of sponsorship. I would assume that these are the style of club most marketable to the ever-growing population of new golf enthusiasts and that OEM's might 'sweeten the pot' for tour players to use these over what they might actually prefer.

Back to the topic at hand...I play an old ('79) set of Wilson forged muscle backs and I will take them with me when I leave this world. Have played Eye2's and Titleist 962b's in the past. I liked both these sets, but now cannot stand to look at anything offset and large. To me, lots of these new clubs belong in a gardener's tool shed.

Because of reasons listed above, I have not tried going back to cavity-back irons. However, I do know that in the time I have played my 'blades', my game has improved immensely. Reason? I think it is the fact that blades reveal more symptoms of my less-than-perfect swing. This has pushed me to be more of a student of the game, to work harder and more productively to improve.

Conclusion: The clubs you play should depend on long term goals. If you are just looking for what will help you improve NOW, cavity backs probably are the ticket. For long-term improvement from a committed golfer, go with the blades.

Sorry for the length of this, but it will probably fall on deaf eyes because the thread is a bit old. Just wanted a little rant in my first post on the A1 golf forum.

I would not like to sacrifice the feel of compressing the ball with a good blade even if it it shaved off two strokes.

Another funky reason is this:

A bad hit with a forgiving clubhead will send the ball FURTHER into the forest 8)

GSED Chuck Evans stated that the only true game improvement clubs are blades. I am not sure what the other two resident GSEDs say about this.

I recently switched from Tommy Armour 845s to Mizuno MP 32
 

For the record, I have a HCP of 6.5 with a varying ball striking quality. It's the short game that regularly gets me under 80.

The MP 32s are not quite a blade but they do have a lower Maltby Playability factor then severeal of the Mizuno blades.

I've played the original 845s since 1990 so they have worked pretty well. But there were three things I didn't like about them. 1) Progressive offset. IMO, offset is just a disturbing factor at address. 2) Lie angle - too upright and 3) A slightly balooning tencency when I hit steeply down on the ball. The combination of fade and distance control was also very difficult to obtain. Also, hitting low punches was risky business unless I used a very easy stroke. A fourth moment that eventually developed, was a sense that the feedback was better than the result on certain shots.

The MP 32's have stiffer and heavier shafts, which probably accounts for several differences. There's probably a difference in center of gravity height as well. I bought them because of very good reviews - they looked slightly more forgiving than pure blades - and because Mizuno have a lie angle that suits me much better than for instance Titleist.

I haven't noticed any more penalty on off-center hits than before. But the feedback is corresponding better to the actual result than it used to be. At address, they look much better - so it's easier for me to do a good swing with these clubs. And fades and punches works much better. I've punched shots under trees with 6 iron that I previously would be anxious to do with a 3 iron. Also I can - and should - hit down more aggressively with these clubs - something I often was penalized for with the TA's

Only negative thing sofar - I haven't quite adjusted to chipping with the pitching wedge yeat. Whether it is due to stiffer shaft/heavier club or higher center of gravity I don't know, but I am struggling a bit with a low and hot trajectory on those little shots.

All in all I am very very very happy with the new clubs.

I believe he is right. The forgiveness of forgiving clubs are IMO overrated. They may have a forgiving feeling, but the result often tells another story. Better then with clubs that tell the truth.

I believe tip stiff shafts are very game improving. Better stability combined with a more harsh feeling on off center impact. I recently built a 3 wood with a Harrison Ti shaft (Titanium reinforced - especially in the tip) What I can do with this club from the rough is amazing compared to my previous experience. It seems to cut through the grass like a knife. And when I hit it in the "hard" spot I really get a sting in the hands. But the result is probably better than it would be with a more "forgiving" shaft installed.

I rather missed this topic somehow. But here is a good story about relative feel. Picture this, a master craftsman talking to a pro about feel in the workshop.

Pro, " Heck you cannot feel a graphite shafts feedback"
Clubbie, "Here Jed, stick your hand on the vice there"
Pro being a ball crusher duely puts hand on the vise and Clubbie slaps it with his hand.
Pro "Hey that was not very nice"
Clubbie "stick your hand back back on the vice"
Pro not being very smart puts his hand back there.
Clubbie picks up hammer.....
Pro "Hey I may look stupid but..."

The point here is that the feedback was just going to be very different.

The same can be said for blades vs cavity backs vs vibration dampening devises built into clubheads. If you want more feel then you want a head design that will vibrate more, muscle backs.

As training tools a muscle back will take no prisonsers but the are probably not most players PLAYING tool of choise.

I noticed the Snake Eyes and Mizuno's mentioned above. They are as most blades not that forgiving. Maltby's came out with a heel and toe weighted blade that made them play like a cavity back....now Ping have followed the design idea into the G2 as an extreme. Point here is that a blade is not just a blade. Its how it is designed that counts COG wise that makes them possible for anyone to play with with a bit of thought.

Training wise use a hard task master, a muscle back. For the money end of things give yourself any break you can muster.

i personally have always played my best golf with blades they seem actually easier to hit with me. think about it if i gave you a callaway big bertha sandwedge and had you hit a 100 yard shot at a flag and a cleveland blade type sand wedge i think you would be able to really hone in on the flag with the blade obviously as the shafts get longer it gets harder to hit the center of the club but in the scoring clubs where its more about control i think blades will make you a more accurate player. really forgiving clubs just make you sloppy and it just makes your swing worse. blades keep your game sharp.

Might keep you sharp but why cut your nose off to spite your face :D I have the blades all the way down but I got the easier ones rather than the Muscle backs.

I am considering purchasing a used set of muscle back/blades, to take advantage of their feedfack. I have a set of Ping Eye2s and Cleveland TA-7. I got the TA 7 since they were very difficult to mishit. Tried my Pings for the first time in a year, and they were easier to hit then I remembered. I can better sense when the heel of my irons are digging in with the Ping EYes, probably because of the sensicore shafts of the TA-7s.

According to the PGA value guide website, I should be able to acquire older model blades or muscle backs for under 200 bucks. FG17, the blade version of Ping Eye 2s( I understand that cavity backs haven't improved much since Ping Eyes2s, if at all, and the same goes for FG17s), should be acquirable for well under a hundred. However, according to reviews I have read on golfreviews.com, blades are susceptible to denting and groove wear,which the EBAY auction descriptions denote. Brand new sets would cost 800 full retail, so that is definately not an option.

So, any recommendations for a used set of blade/muscle backs?
THx

http://stores.ebay.com/3balls-Golf
They usually have some excellent sets particularly in the off season.
They move a ton of equipment, leases, closeouts etc from the manufacturers.
The club conditions are usually much better than what they list them as.
I have had very good luck with 3balls golf.

blades/improvement
 

here is an interesting article regarding this debate....
http://www.departures.com/tr/tr_0998_mb1irons.html

..i agree with what Ernie is saying.

has anyone seen any testing ever done between some of the newer game improvement clubs like a callaway x 18 and a mizuno mp33 the main difference for me would just be forgiveness on off center hits, i wonder if you miss the sweetspot with a blade verses a x 18 by a quarter inch how much yardage you would lose

I've always played blades then went to cavity back and that was a big mistake. I hated them. So I went back and bought the mp-32's and will never look back. I've had the mp-14's and 32's and will never play a different iron than Mizuno. Simply nothing compared IMO.
Hitting blades in the 80's was a lot different than todays. If you didn't hit the sweet spot you knew it. The hardest blades I ever hit were the Hogan Apex. I think the sweetspot was the size of a pin.

I do miss the balata ball because it felt so good hitting with a blade against one of those balls.

Blades all the way
 

While I'm not a low handicapper, I have used blades since I began in 1976 and love the way they feel when hit on the sweet spot. I have tried cavity backs on the range and don't like the feel even when hit on the sweet spot. Feels dead to me.

Everyone who has tried my Hogan Musclebacks love the feel when hit right. Of course, you have to hit it right.

Blades Since Day One
 

When I started playing(1970)I was using mass produced cast irons like the Wilson Sam Snead Blue Ridge. Drifted away from golf for a while but when I returned in the early 90's I played Hogan Redline's, BH Grind's and Titleist Tour Model's (bulletbacks). I now play Mizuno MP37's, SWEET. Once though I had a set of Hogan Edge's for a back-up set. I liked them but something was just missing. I find blades just force you to not get sloppy. You got to give them your full attention.

Blades a Handicap?
 

Hi All,

As I was reading thru the various posts on the pros and cons of blades vs. cavity backs, a thought struck me. I know, I know, a rare occurrence indeed!;) In looking at the average handicap over the past 20 years, it would seem that there is really only an insignificant improvement.

That said, if the so called game improvement irons were really that much better, then wouldn't it stand to reason that the average national handicap should have decrease significantly?
I know that there are a lot of factors other than just the clubs that figure into this, but, and I am serious here, are game improvement irons really that much better for the mid to high handicapper or have we just become victims of the club manufacturing industry's advertising hype? Sometimes I wonder.

Although, I currently play a set of Armour 855s, I have a set of Burke blades, circa 1960, that I occasional play and other than the more harsh feel on mishits, the only real major difference between them and the 855s is that the 855s are about a club to a club and half longer due in part to the stronger lofts.

So my question to the group is, "Are the game improvement irons really that much better that the blades, or is it as it has always been the Indian and not the Arrow?

Regards,
Magic43

Magic43,

For what it's worth I think this is an EXTREMELY GOOD POINT. Big drivers, high tech shafts, large sweet-spots, better greens keeping etc. etc. But on average nobody's gettin' better.

I have blades. I'm a club shorter. But what difference does it make. It's just a number on the bottom of a club. What if the put the actual loft number on the irons instead of pw-3. "Well yeah Dick . . . I hit my 32 degree iron there." What's the big deal?

My eye has adjusted to the smaller head size. Blades just LOOK LIKE REAL GOLF. Back in the day you didn't have a choice about buying the big waffle iron and gravy boat driver.

I play blades. Started with them.

Got used to the thin top line, minimal offset and minimum bounce.

I have two sets of cavity backs and I still like the feel of my Hogan's or old staffs.

Great Point
 

Great point. I have friends who swear by cavity backs but over the years, they don't play any better. What I like is the look on their faces when they use one of my clubs and hit it flush, they just love the feel. I actually had a guy try to buy my clubs on the course after hitting my 5 iron (he broke his on the previous hole (head came loose) so he borrowed mine. Hit it pin high from a bad lie, and offered me more than I paid for them back in 1989. Needless to say, they are still in my bag. Fortunately for me, I had to lay off of golf for a while (went back to school for about 8 years (slow learner) and they are in great shape. Only problem is I am starting to detect wear on the sweet spots on some of my mid irons. Thanks TGM, Yoda and Homer.

Average Golfer (Critical Analysis)
 

I have seen the advertisement "average handicap of the average golfer not getting better" in 40 years so many times. But where did this study come from...and why. Have the folks that conducted the study just used USGA Handicapping? Have they taken into account that the "average golfing population" changes every day. Every day a new hacker joins the ranks of the beginners and every day a seasoned cracker is lost from the ranks of the single digiters. And nobody is improving?

I am an average Joe. I started golf 10 years ago and can remember the first time I broke 50 on the 9-hole Par-3 course I started on. I am no Cracker...but I surely got better than when I started 10 years ago.

I bet if you took a random sample of 50 or so golfers in a point in time with a USGA Handicap and tracked those same 50 golfers 10 years later, their relative USGA Handicap will have indeed improved.

Disclaimer...I am not trying discount anyone's opinion or be critical of anyone in particular. I just find it hard to believe that I am not expected to be better at golf after 10 years of playing, countless hours of range time, better than a year of daily reading of these fantastic forums, playing a set of fitted Pings (instead of a Ping clones), easy to hit hybrids, and a 460cc headed Titanium driver. I have also taken lessons and gone to golf schools.

PChandler

As a clubmaker and teacher I find it interesting to see how many poeple come to me for clubs and end up having a lesson instead to begin with.

The Indian has to be able to pull the bow and if they are really stuggling there I see it as a bad service if I do not offer then the choises on how to 'fix' the issue.

A game improvment club will help higher handicap players to a degree. That degree goes down as the playre gets a better swing.

Now on the topic of blades or cavity backs, we know we have to hit the sweetspot. An old muscle back blade is not forgiving in the off centre stingy finger area vs a cavity back, but the distance the ball travels is about the same off centre. It is still going to travel the same direction whether blade or cavity back.

However there are heel and toe weighted blades, lower COG than a muscleback that will play like a Cav Back. Anyone ever thought about the top line of the Cav backs and all the weight up there in that thick top line? Who hits it up there??? Thats where heel and toe weighted blades win more most middle handicaps as the cog is lower and so the ball will launch cleaner and higher.

So for those who wish to play a blade look at the cog position on the next sets you are comparing and find the easier blades that way.

Cavity backs or blades is personal preference. Just be aware there are different sorts of blades just as there are models of cav backs.

Guru,

Really good info.

What swing flaws are the game improvement clubs masking?

If you are a Dual Horizontal Hinge swinger, are heel/toe weighted clubs more difficult to hit than a blade? Or put another way, are these clubs encouraging Angled Hinging?

Do clubs with lower CoG help prevent early throwaway?

Just curious. I have an old set of forged Mizuno CompEZ's that my wife now uses. They were my first "real" clubs and I really enjoyed them. When I hit them now, I take a few swings and immediately put them down. Not sure why they feel so bad, but it could be the lack of a distinct sweet spot feel. Not sure.

Thanks,

Bagger

Low COGs really hide a lack of down and out so allow for a less perfect strike to get the ball in the air.

Heel weights are known to help close the face - hence all these screw weighted drivers out there these days.

Best example of a heel and toe weighted blade was a Maltby M-03...One day I will work out how to post a pic on the site here and I will show you the look. On some of the custom gear sites they will list the height of the COG for irons. Not been on Golfsmith site for a bit but know the have it in their specs.

Generally look for wider soled blades are you are going to be close. Thin top line.

I beg to differ on one point
 

Talk to many of the guys on the senior tour. Many of them are playing as well or better than they did on the regular tour because of equipment and despite their aging bodies. Most all of them hit it further (or just as far) than they ever did when they were younger.

The newer drivers and more importantly the ball have been the biggest factors in this.

But as we all know, the better players differentiate themselves with their short games and putting. This is where it takes the most skill and finesse and it really doesn't matter much what kind of club you are using. I would say there are a lot of players benefiting from better equipment tee to green - but if they have no short game or can't putt then their scores will never show it.

My first clubs were Pings. Then I went to Mizuno MP29's and loved them. I'm now playing the Titleist 704 CB's which feel great and give me a tad more forgiveness and distance than the 29's. I'd rather hit an 8 iron into a green than a 7 iron because the shorter club gives me that much more control.

Having said all of that, blades sure do feel nice! :smile:

Blades are the only true game improvement clubs.

Anyone tried Mizuno's MP-37? I'm using them at the moment and lovin' it. How do you think it compares to MP-32?

Does anyone know where I can find a set of blades with zero offset through the whole set?

Thanks

Miura - BEST by far.