1 Club Length

[Del Delaplante]

What's everybody think of this article, for real or just another golf gimmick?
Revolutionary Golf Clubs -- Single Length Golf Shafts

The last real revolution in golf clubs occurred a few years back with the invention of metal woods.. My new irons are not revolutionary because of new technology. They are a revolution in our understanding of what affects distance.
You learned from the time you picked up your first club that short irons are designed to be shorter with more loft so that the ball will travel high and less distance. Long irons have less loft and longer shafts, thus they travel on a lower trajectory and hit the ball much farther. The common misconception, however, is that the difference in length of the irons produce different distances. It's the loft which determines the distance.
Theorists will point to the radial arm length in a golf swing as being the prime determinant of swing speed; stating that the longer the radial arm, the greater the swing speed and resultant distance in a golf shot. A common misconception is that club length alone is used to define this radial arm length. Regardless of how many hinging points and resultant secondary arcs/planes are involved, the true center of a golf swing is a point somewhere between the golfer's shoulders (this center point moves laterally between the shoulders during the swing). Hence, you must include the golfer's arm length into the radial arm length equation for any meaningful analysis.
Therefore, assuming a 37 inch iron length and an arm length of 24 inches, the actual radial arm length in the golf swing is 61 inches. This means that a 1/2 inch increase in club length (the difference between the irons, say a 7 and 6 iron) results in a radial arm length increase of only 0.8%. A 2 inch increase in club length (the difference between a 7 and 3 iron) results in a radial arm length increase of 3.3%. If you could swing your 3-iron 3.3% faster than your 7-iron, then based on clubhead speed alone, you'd hit your 3-iron 3.3% farther. But a player that hits his 7-iron 145 yards hits his 3-iron about 185 yards, or 28% farther.
The major reason for the difference in distance of your irons is their loft, not their length. And besides, even though the longer irons are swung along a larger circle, giving more time to build up speed, they are more difficult to accelerate (because they are longer). An analogy would be picking up a short piece of lumber and rotating it. The end will move in a circle at a certain speed. Pick up a longer board and rotate it. It's much more difficult to rotate, so, the end of the board might not be moving any faster than the short one.
As you can see, these fractional increases in radial arm length will not produce any measurable increase in swing speed or distance. In fact, the only thing that incremental increases in club length will produce is a progressive lack of control and poor ball striking.
For those demanding additional analysis on the affects of club length increases in relation to distance, other factors need to be considered:
1) If the average golfer swings a #5 iron five times he will record five different swing speeds varying +/- 5mph.
2) Each incremental increase in club length results in lessened average center-face contact, which results in decreased distance.
Consequently, any increases in club length have to be analyzed in relation to decreases in center-face contact for each incremental club length increase in order to produce effective data. As per above, a 2 inch increase in club length results in only a 3.3% increase in the radial arm length of a golf swing with a virtually immeasurable increase in swing speed. Even if there was a measurable increase in swing speed testing has shown that a 2" increase in club length dramatically reduces the percentage of center face hits, and impact just 1/4" off center-face can reduce distance by 10 to 15 yards. Add to this the fact that the average golfer is incapable of producing a constant swing speed with any golf club, and you can plainly see through the myth that club length is the primary determinant of distance.
1 Iron Golf has a 30-day Money Back Playing Guarantee. Visit 1 Iron Golf right now.

[Chieflongtee]

Nothing new. Years back EQL were on the market. I am planning on building myself a set in the spring. The heads can be purchased at myostrich golf. Same weight across the set.

[jonf]

Interesting concept. What length would you make them? Obviously you could pick any length, but what would be most beneficial? 5 iron length? 7 iron?

[Del Delaplante]

In a Single-Length set of golf clubs all of the irons and fairway woods within the set are built to the same club lengths - that of a properly fitted #7 iron and #7 wood respectively


For more information click here:


http://www.1irongolf.com/index_files/page0001.htm

[danscustom]

This is David Lakes system. David is certainly a pioneer in the alternative length arena and has had great success with this. There is a ton of testimonials claiming far more on center hits than what they had previously experienced, resulting in a much greater consistency in their individual play. David sets all the irons to the same lie with progressive lofts which is determined through his fitting system (primarily Wrist to floor). He is also an advocate of shorter drivers (which most of us should be playing).
My thoughts are this system will help the mid - high handicapper the most, as the longer the club, the harder it is to hit, will mostly hold true. Originally he bent all the iron heads to the target lie angle as clubheads to fit this design did not exist. He has since developed his own head with a common weight which allows a target swingweight to be met.
This is a wonderful system but is not for everyone, and my hat comes off to David for being a progressive thinker.

Now as another alternative length system is the Trademarked - True Length Technology system. True Length Technology utilizes the progressive lie angles (giving the ability to still build each club longer than the next) but the length is set in perfect proportions to the lie. Clubs are not built to the traditional 1/2 inch increment, as the increment gets progressively less / club. The resultant is that every club ends up in your hands at exactly the same spot.

No more 3 irons that are too long or PW's that are too short! The system is CAD based using mathematical formulas to determine the correct length for the individual. Of course a fitting is required to determine the correct combination, but the feedback from clients is consistency and a common feel (very similar to MOI matching).

[BC MIST]

No more 3 irons that are too long or PW's that are too short! The system is CAD based using mathematical formulas to determine the correct length for the individual. Of course a fitting is required to determine the correct combination, but the feedback from clients is consistency and a common feel (very similar to MOI matching).

How similar? Does your math actually calculate the MOI, and if so, what is the percentage difference between the irons with the highest and lowest MOI. With my formulae, I was able to get both sets of irons that I have to .25%, between highest and lowest.

I know that you are not revealing specific details about your system, but it is obviously better than the traditional .5" if the golfer can get a similar swing feel with all the clubs.

[danscustom]

The similar to MOI comes from a discussion with Tom Wishon, who has been working extensively with MOI. He expressed to me that a much improved moment happens with 0.4 inch increments. Now True Length Technology revolves around a small reduction in length / club - one club compared to the next. In fact, every club is set perfectly for lie with the correct corresponding length. A good MOI set also works best (from what I understand) with a progressive swing weight which is easily achieved with True Length Technology.
I personally have not worked much with the MOI concept as far as programs and formulas go, but I do follow guidelines that will promote a very consistent feel.
I just had a student drop off his clubs for a couple of regrips, and his comments were that his Titliest clubs (set to True Length Technology) have never performed better. Increased on center hits, straight and workable ball flights etc. came with ease. This kid is a low handicap and I can't wait to here the results after he actually get use to them.

[Chieflongtee]

The similar to MOI comes from a discussion with Tom Wishon, who has been working extensively with MOI. He expressed to me that a much improved moment happens with 0.4 inch increments. Now True Length Technology revolves around a small reduction in length / club - one club compared to the next. In fact, every club is set perfectly for lie with the correct corresponding length. A good MOI set also works best (from what I understand) with a progressive swing weight which is easily achieved with True Length Technology.

Seems like a close MOI matched (see Tutelman's explanation on his website) at 0.4(assuming that all clubs and shafts are bang on weight wise )but this method has a flaw as it does not match the golfer's favourite club or the club in the set with the most on centre hits. From what I understand your method involves swinging all clubs with the same posture/hand position while MOI involves swinging all clubs with the same effort.

[danscustom]

Daves theories ends up building clubs to 'club specifications'. True Length Technology first find the perfect length and lie combination - with a 4, 7 & PW - then the set is built to this standard which is the fit that fits the person, not fits the club.
One common addrss position instills repeatability that feels consistent club after club. What the MOI numbers say really doesn't matter as the clubs fit the individual. There are MOI sets that people have built that match the numbers, but do not necessarily match the player.
The golfer needs to decide what is more important. - the fit or the numbers. I know what works for me.
Tuttleman is a wonderful engineer that builds for himself, but does not build for the masses. He is a wonderful formula master, but there are better practical masters IMO.

[Weirfan]

I dare say that there are many ways to skin a cat.....

while I have not delved to much into MOI ....the feel factor is fo real....I am yet to be convinced that it improves performance though.

Also am not aware of any pros using MOI built sets???

Finally, any clubfitter who still builds sets only to a prescribed 0.5 inch differential btn clubs is living in the dark ages

[LobWedge]

How does this effect the lofts of the different irons? I'm also assuming that the lie angles would be pretty much tha same throughout the set as well.

[danscustom]

Yes, with 1 iron, the lengths and lies are determined through the fitting - then all irons would be set to this single target (same length and lie for every club). Loft however continue in their normal progression - like 4 degrees / club.

With True Length Technology the lengths progress non uniformly with the difference between a 3 and 4 being near 0.4 inches - down to the wedges with length differences near 0.3 inches / club. The lies are all 1 degree different from the next. The lie variation allows for the added length / club - set to a perfect math modelled position - putting every club in your hands at exactly the same position. The benefit here is you still get progressively longer irons but maintain a perfect lie angle relative to the individual club length.
Lofts of course continue on there traditional design position.

[BC MIST]

With True Length Technology the lengths progress non uniformly with the difference between a 3 and 4 being near 0.4 inches - down to the wedges with length differences near 0.3 inches / club. The lies are all 1 degree different from the next. The lie variation allows for the added length / club - set to a perfect math modelled position - putting every club in your hands at exactly the same position. The benefit here is you still get progressively longer irons but maintain a perfect lie angle relative to the individual club length.

Interesting!! It seems that you determine the length of the club by having a uniform difference in lie angle between clubs, versus having a uniform difference in length between clubs, and then adjusting the lie angle accordingly. Am I on the right track? Do you provide a dynamic lie test on a lie board to confirm accuracy?

A good MOI set also works best (from what I understand) with a progressive swing weight which is easily achieved with True Length Technology.

While an MOI set has progressive swing weights, the swing weights are incidental to matching the MOI of all clubs.

I played with some numbers:
1. With a length difference of .4" between clubs and with matching grip weights, grip lengths, grip balance points, raw shaft weight, shaft balance points, an MOI match was achieved with weights that varied by the traditional 7 grams.

2. With a length difference of .5" and all the rest the same, an MOI match was achieved by having the head weights vary from about 8.8 to almost 10 grams.
The resulting swing weights of this 4 to PW set, were:
C-7.8, C-8.7, D-0.0, D-1.1, D-2.1, D-3.7 and D-4.7

Swing weights of an MOI set are UNIMPORTANT, unless they are extremely low or extremely high, which really means that the MOI is NOT suitable.

[Chieflongtee]

Finally, any clubfitter who still builds sets only to a prescribed 0.5 inch differential btn clubs is living in the dark ages

Wouldn't that be 98% of them? Please elaborate.

[danscustom]

BC, yes you are on the right track with your thinking. See if you calculate the lie based on the length the lie would get to flat, and beyond what most heads can be bent to.
As far as dynamic fitting, yes this often is reviewed, but all lie angles must remain to the math model or else you are starting to introduce variables in your swing. If the golfer needs 1 degree flat, then the whole set goes 1 degree flat.
Proper length + proper lie = 1 consistent swing.
In my sets if you draw with one club you will draw with all. Of course the desire shot is straight and therefore the lie separation must remain intact at the lie angle that suits your game.
And on Weirfans comments, I agree with Peter as well as yourself. I bet 98% do still build to the 1/2 inch rule.

[Weirfan]

Wouldn't that be 98% of them? Please elaborate.

well it is 100% of OEM manufactured clubs because as with everything else about assembly line manufacturing...getting it done quickly and cheaply is the key.

I would hope that 98% of clubmakers are not still only doing 0.5 increment sets...not that I don't build sets this way...I do.

However, one needs to determone what is the primary goal of the player being fitted ( distance versus accuracy being the 2 main ones) and in combination with their swing plane and stature build the best performing set of irons. It is rare these days that I keep a 0.5 increment btn long irons...and hybrids are build to fill gaps with lofts and lengths to accomdate that.

short irons and wedge lengths will also vary from palyer to player depending on the the above as well as how mamy wedges they will carry and what the lofts on them are.

[BC MIST]

BC, yes you are on the right track with your thinking. See if you calculate the lie based on the length the lie would get to flat, and beyond what most heads can be bent to.
As far as dynamic fitting, yes this often is reviewed, but all lie angles must remain to the math model or else you are starting to introduce variables in your swing. If the golfer needs 1 degree flat, then the whole set goes 1 degree flat.
Proper length + proper lie = 1 consistent swing.

In the same way that there is no standard length for a set of clubs, there is really no standard set of lie angles from club to club. When you get a set of heads from any manufacture, there is no guarantee that the difference in lie between consecutive heads is constant. Therefore, to make a set "2 degrees up," for example, is likely to produce a set of inconsistent lie angles for the player. This is why, IMO, a dynamic lie check must be done, regardless of fitting system. The huge advantages of using forged head, becomes obvious, in this regard.

Example: I have a single axis swing, large hands and a palm grip. Because of the palm grip my right hand is 1.5" lower on the club than it would be if I uses my previous Vardon grip. Effectively then, my clubs play 1.5 inches shorter than with a standard, because the right wrist hinge is the fulcrum of a lever that is 1.5" closer to the club head. As a result, I make all of my clubs 1.5" longer than with the Vardon grip, so now the effective length is the same as before. With longer clubs and a "standard" lie angle, my clubs would be too upright, so I flatten all of my irons by 3* to 4*. Bending cast clubs 4* means breakage; bending forged clubs does not. This unique example confirms the importance of getting the proper length and lie angle, you mentioned above.

I understand that David Lake uses trigonometric ratios to determine the specs for the same length clubs, however, I also understand that this includes a constant angle that the golfer's back is to vertical at address. With the huge physiological differences between golfers, I don't think it is ideal to work toward the same back to vertical, angle.

[danscustom]

Regardless of what the manufactures specification is I set the lie to my True Length Technology charts which are 1 degree of lie difference / club. If the fitting indicates a 1 degree up, the set will be 1 degree up / club to my standard.
With my club length incrementation (less than 1/2 inch - getting progressively less / club) the lie angles remain perfect to the length. A lie board fitting is often done to fine tune, but the lie must remain relative to the length and be 1 degree of separation.
Your type of address always promotes longer clubs than what your WTF indicates, but this comes out in the initial fitting process.

[Chieflongtee]

Regardless of what the manufactures specification is I set the lie to my True Length Technology charts which are 1 degree of lie difference / club. If the fitting indicates a 1 degree up, the set will be 1 degree up / club to my standard.
With my club length incrementation (less than 1/2 inch - getting progressively less / club) the lie angles remain perfect to the length. A lie board fitting is often done to fine tune, but the lie must remain relative to the length and be 1 degree of separation.
Your type of address always promotes longer clubs than what your WTF indicates, but this comes out in the initial fitting process.

So if I understand correctly there will be a 8* lie angle difference between a 3 iron and a pitching wedge. Correct?

[danscustom]

Ya, thats right chief.

[Chieflongtee]

Seems like a lot but I like to keep an open mind. So you determine the lie and length of one club and adjust the rest accordingly using a software or a formula?

[danscustom]

Yes, its very much like that. I have fitting clubs - a 4,7 & PW for all the appropriate lengths, and during the course of a fitting it becomes apparent quickly what is the proper combination. When your 4 feels like your wedge, the confidence goes up quickly.