Today’s Forum Thread of the Day comes from Aggielefty who asked fellow GolfWRX members whether or not all blades are equally playable. For the majority of our members, different blades are more forgiving and more playable than others, and they give their suggestions for the most playable blades currently on the market, as well as some interesting insight behind their views.
Here are a few posts from the thread, but make sure to check out the entire discussion and have your say at the link below.
- GolfChannel: “iBlades are ridiculously easy to hit through the long irons. This is the main reason I selected them over the MP18 MB’s, I didn’t feel like I had to rock a combo set to game them.”
- Tigerlurch: “Google 690 vs 670 Titleist blades… Just one example of how different “blades” can look and play.”
- dMeeksdc: “Vertical center of gravity, rearward center of gravity, blade length, MOI — all make a big difference and there are many differences among ‘blades.’ Generally, the lower AND deeper the COG, the easier the blade is to launch. A sweet spot moved more to the center of the clubface (traditional blades are hosel-biased) also helps many players. They can differ a great deal. A Srixon 965 is a lot easier to hit for me than an old Wilson Staff or a new TM 730, though all are blades.”
- BMC: “There’s more mass behind the hitting area on a small blade. You don’t want to hit it off the toe of a long blade. I’ve got a set of ’92 Mac VIP muscle backs that are very small, but not that hard to hit solid. Hosel length can make a difference, too. A long hosel puts the sweet spot closer to the heel.”
Entire Thread: “Are all blades equally playable?”