Re: Vanity v Function

hi mo
heard a lot of good things about the srixon's
for me i would always go for function but in my mx23's i feel i have a set that perform well and look the part also

Re: Vanity v Function

I have the same feeling about my MP-60's ... beautiful set of irons, AND somewhat forgiving.

Re: Vanity v Function

I agree Qassim,

You made the right choice, my last fitting saw me reduced to Reg shafts, my swing speed had dropped to 91mph right on the line so I opt for Regs, never mind the macho image, I also carry a Ping 3 wood and a Cleveland Halo, although my driver and irons are all TP Taylormade, I love Taylormade but the performance of the Ping and Cleveland suit me better. I just have Taylormade head covers to match my bag up.

Go for performance mate, everytime

Unless your on the tour then go for the one who pays the most money.....lol

Ian.

Re: Vanity v Function

Brand name and look are important to me.

I carry TM LT11's 3-9, RAC wedges, titleist woods and ping putter.

I don't worry bout how much it costs, so long as it suits my game and it looks good when I am at address.

Re: Vanity v Function

Function, that really is what it's all about, when it was time to take the game up again seriously I had to upgrade my clubs. I had a full set of Titelist ( 23 years old, all steel shafts, stiff flex. ) My buddy who happens to be a teaching pro checked my swing speed and we took it from there. I had no monetary limitations, my game plan was to buy equipment suited to me then after a number of non playing years head to the practice tee and work, work, work.
My first choice was Ping, I was fortunate enough to be able to try a number of brands at the practice range. According to my buddy my swing looked pretty good, now we worked on clubs that had nice feel and functional. He brought out a full set of " Nickent " clubs, what a nice feel off the irons and I loved the hybrids. I played a round of golf with these clubs and really enjoyed them, quality and technology wise they are right up there with the big names in clubs.
The woods and hybrids I decided on had Aldila NV shafts, I prefer steel shafts in irons and they were fitted with True-Temper Speed Tip shafts. The clubs had a most comfortable Winn grip, I stored the 3 and 4 iron and opted for a couple of hybrids and added a couple of gun metal gap wedges. I even put the Nickent " Pipe " putter in my ( Nickent ) bag, as you said it's a matter of being functional, price wise the complete set of equipment cost me $ 620.00 less than Ping equipment. Certainly taking nothing away from Ping but Nickent is a growing company and their equipment is first class, the founder of this company was one of the top executives from Adams golf. Anyone in the market for new equipment should give Nickent some consideration, I'm highly pleased with my investment.

Re: Vanity v Function

Aaaah! Damn dichotomy!

While function is my ultimate goal, form (vanity) has to be considered.

For myself, great gobs of offset looks weird to me now. An offset driver ALWAYS looked strange to me. So, needless to say, no matter how much an offset driver may help my game, I wouldn't play one. While I could get used to irons with lots of offset, I instead hunt for designs that have it minimized, but still have forgiveness built in (like my 560's)

That said, my guiding principle as a clubfitter and clubmaker is to recommend gear that offers playable differences, not just laboratory ones. My latest focus has been on iron designs. We all know that a cavity is more forgiving on toe hits (forgiving meaning more yards for missing the middle), but how much more? 1 yard compared to a blade design? 5 yards? 10 yards?

For example, in the Wishon lineup, the top two iron designs for forgiveness are the 770CFE at #1 and the 560MC at #2. How much MORE forgiving is the 770 than the 560? How much more the 560's over #3? This is what I'm trying to deduce, but I haven't quite figured out how, yet. Perhaps with Wishon I can simply ask. But I can pretty much guarantee that no OEM will release that data to me.