![]() In a nutshell, I find the measurements he provides very useful to help me narrow down my choices but the rating is not something to rely on IMO. which is where a lot of modern tech lives now. It also does not take into consideration other features that have a significant impact, like face design, sole design/interaction, etc. My personal clubs, Ping Zings are great, but arent as easy to hit, hence the lower rating which is in the high 700s. Basically, his overall rating severely punishes any design as the HCOG moves toward the heel, and even more severely punishes a higher VCOG. Maltby Playability Factor - which irons are easiest to hit CYBER MONDAY DEALS AND FINDS Titleist White Box Testing - On Going Maltby Playability Factor - which irons are easiest to hit. The MOI numbers are interesting, I would expect a higher number to be more forgiving but I don't know how much of a difference that makes unless the numbers are really far apart. The M890 irons feature and incredible Maltby Playability Factor rating of 982 points making the M890 irons one of the most forgiving irons ever designed. I also know that my game likes a lower VCOG, less than. PING’s irons are engineered to achieve higher and farther ball flight with incredible stopping power, made even better by a pleasing sound and feel. For example, from experience I know that I play my best golf with irons that have a HCOG (C dimension) of the mid 1.3 to 1.5 range as I am not a heel-side striker. It gives me an initial basis of comparison between designs, especially when I can compare them to ones I've played before. Adams XTD Ti 12. I like to refer to his ratings because of the raw data measurements. Re: Iron Forgiveness Ratings by the Maltby Playability Factor Good point about the wrist injury from shovels. The only way the rating is useful is if you know that the playing characteristics RM emphasizes are the ones that are best for your game. Also, you may not get the type of feel and feedback you will get from other clubs. What is even more crazy is the newer ping irons.i200, i210, and i500 all have pretty low playability factors. Its crazy that a majority of the 'S' line of irons and iBlades have a higher playability factor than the 'i' line. I do think the list is still fascinating-there are blades that rate more forgiving than CB's from the same manufacturer.Lots of people think the MPF data is useless, and I would pretty much agree with the rating part. I am a ping fan so I was specifically looking at the ratings for their irons. But even in this context it seems suspicious that their irons rate the highest in a point system that they determine. Looks like it's dated 05/2016.noted on your point about rating being about club forgiveness and not what is better. ![]() Attached it for others who want to check it out. I don't know about the bias, but I thought the results were interesting. or could overrule how forgiving the club is. Rallph Maltbys GolfWorks operation, besides its MPF for iron heads, puts out a playability rating for different shafts. ![]() ![]() For example, top line looks, sole interaction, shot-shaping abilities, feel at impact, etc. I wouldn't choose a club just because it is more forgiving than others because there's a lot more that goes into which irons go into my bag. Adams XTD Ti 12.5 / TightLies 2 Ti / Super 9031 Tour / Ping WRX i20 Irons Ping WRX Tour Gorge / YES Natalie Putter B-CG / Leupold GX-4 Rangefinder Personal Best: 79, hoping for another sub 80 round before the Twilight Zone. I took a closer look at the ratings and on ralphmaltby website it says, "In short, the higher the Playability Factor value generated by the formula, the more playable and forgiving the particular design should be."Ī higher rating doesn't necessarily mean a better club, it just means it's more forgiving.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |