True Length Technology?

[RickinMA]

was curious if any of you had tried a set of irons that were built using Dan's "math models"?
Dan's Custom Golf Shop

seems logical to me, but there aren't any local builders for me

any thoughts?

[limpalong]

Lots of math and he attempts to build a good case. Yet, if it looks good on paper... I guess I can't believe this mathematician has hit on some formula that has gone totally unnoticed by the industry up until now. Here's my quick take... First, he proposes irons with smaller incremental lengths than currently 'standard'. I feel one needs a specific progression in distance, not shaft length. Hence, if I begin shortening my long irons, will I still hit them farther than my middle irons? Likewise, if my short irons are longer, won't I now hit them longer? Would not the lofts need changed, if we change the lengths, to maintain the same distance increments?

He also states he found himself holding his long irons with an inch of grip butt showing. And, he held his short irons with the grip fully extended. Part of shotmaking is the ability to do 'interesting' things with moving the hands up and down the grip. If I want to hit a low-flying punch with the 3-iron, I'll choke down and do so. If I want to hit the 3-iron a full shot... full distance... full trajectory... I'll grip it 'full out' and do so. I don't want someone taking away my ability to change shot trajectory and distances by choking down on the grip through some mathmatical formula.

Sorry! I just don't hold his premises to be completely valid. But, then, that's my opinion.

[RickinMA]

I don't disagree with many of your points - I thought the loft had a much bigger impact on distance than shaft length though - I know with a driver, 1/2" is only good for like 1-2 yards, so I'm thinking it might not make much difference with the irons either - maybe the clubmakers could comment?

I'd be curious to see some more reviews and talk to people that have tried it - MOI matching is fairly new too, but makes alot of sense (to me anyway)

anything that helps me gain consistency is worth looking into

[dave.]

As far as I know,there isn't really any real reason why irons get longer,apart fromt he fact the heads get smaller so they get lighter.I am sure you could make a set with equal length shafts and not lose any distance

[Pa Jayhawk]

Originally Posted by RickinMA

I don't disagree with many of your points - I thought the loft had a much bigger impact on distance than shaft length though

According to what I read by Tom Wishon, in standard set makeups loft seperation accounts for 80% of the distance gap, while shaft length accounts for 20%

[Bignose]

Pa J., that's what I read too. I've seen some variations on the numbers, and each individual person's swing is going to increase the variability some, but it would seem that loft is the primary reason for distance increases. Sticking with that 80% loft, 20% length number, I have often wondered what a set of irons that were all the same length but have 5 degrees of loft between each club would play like.

Also, are long irons' head lighter because of their inherent design and hence they had to be put on longer shafts, or is it because they are put on longer shafts that they are made lighter? My intuition says the latter, because I don't see any reason why the head couldn't be as heavy as a wedge head, just built at a different angle. But, so long as the heads are made lighter, they almost have to go on a longer shaft, or else they will feel very different.

Oh yeah, and I always find it funny and even a little suspicious when someone has to capitalize the letters, like Dan does in "Math Model." Capitalizing it tries to make it seem so special and grand -- it's just an equation, guy. When I add up my strokes on the scorecard, it isn't "The Score Tabulation" or "The Great Sum", or when I calculate the differential for handicapping purposes it's not "Round Differential" -- capitalizing it just tries to make it seem more important that it really is. Math is a tool for getting the job done. It's not a Hammer or Screwdriver or Floor Polisher, it's a hammer; it's a tool.

[RickinMA]

I actually first read about this TLT stuff on Wishon's website - Tom Wishon Golf Technology - April 2007 TWGT eTECHreport

[Pa Jayhawk]

Originally Posted by Bignose

Also, are long irons' head lighter because of their inherent design and hence they had to be put on longer shafts, or is it because they are put on longer shafts that they are made lighter? My intuition says the latter, because I don't see any reason why the head couldn't be as heavy as a wedge head, just built at a different angle. But, so long as the heads are made lighter, they almost have to go on a longer shaft, or else they will feel very different.

I would agree your intuition is probably dead on in trying to maintain the same swing weight throughout the set with the longer shaft. Same with mentioned in most readings including Wishon, with the lack of reasoning for making graphite shafts 1/2" longer than the same steel shafted clubheads. Certainly not because graphite shafts need to be longer. They have to do something for the sake of having similar swing weight with a much lighter shaft. Much more cost effective than making two separately designed clubheads.

[Bignose]

Originally Posted by RickinMA

I actually first read about this TLT stuff on Wishon's website - Tom Wishon Golf Technology - April 2007 TWGT eTECHreport

That's a good find, Rick. I would be curious just how different the lengths are for the average person. When Wishon started touting his MOI matching, sure, the basis behind the idea is sound. However, swingwieght is a rudimentary MOI system. It certainly isn't exact, but, it is "in the ballpark." Couple that with the fact that the vast majority of amateurs can't feel the difference between a few swingweight points anyway, and I'm still unsure of how important it really is.

Same sort of thing with the club lengths. Ok, so you change the length of a few clubs, does it really make that big of a difference? I guess it it did for Dan, since he says he was gripping was down on his long irons, but for most people? I'm unsure. I suspect that the average amateur wouldn't notice too big of a difference if his clubs were made a half inch longer or shorter.

I mean, really, it still ultimately comes down to a good swing is a good swing.

[limpalong]

Originally Posted by Bignose

I have often wondered what a set of irons that were all the same length but have 5 degrees of loft between each club would play like.

Tommy Armour EQL irons, released during the early '90's were all the same length. From the 3-iron through the PW they were all 6-iron length, I believe. Don't know what the loft gaps were.

[Augster]

Funny. I am actually "licensed" to fit folks with the TLT system.

I have only dabbled with it, really, as I don't do a whole lot of business. Usually friends and relatives, and mostly just before the season starts. They want their irons bent a little, they'd like a new hybrid, etc. etc. This is neither here nor there.

I am still relatively new to the TLT system and I haven't built a lot of test clubs. Just a few in a series I thought would be about right for myself. I haven't built enough test clubs yet in order to compare how one series compares to another.

All that said, the TLT system does make sense. When I was running with a TLT'd PW, 7-iron, 5-iron in among my normal set, I did hit a lot of good shots with them. The strange thing was that I would look for reasons not to hit my 6-iron, which was a custom fit 1/2" long, 2* up roughly. Having the two TLT irons on either side of it definitely made me want to choose those more often.

I think that ultimately what the TLT system does, besides letting you assume the same hand height address position for each club, is that it more or less "accidentally" MOI-matches the clubs. I have the Wishon software and older machine in order to do MOI-matching and I MOI match all my irons to my 2-hybrid which I just love.

In a so-called "standard" set, the lengths increase by 1/2" all the way up from PW to 3iron etc. This allows all the clubs to have the same swingweight when the clubhead weight changes by 7 or 8 grams in between heads.

In order to "simulate" an MOI-matched set and use your swingweight scale, you would take your "favorite" iron and work up and down from that.

For instance, if your 7-iron is your favorite, and is a SW of D-2 and a length of 37" in order to "simulate" an MOI-matched set, as the clubs got lower in number (6-3) you would decrease the length .4" or 3/8" (whichever is handier for you) and decrease the SW by .5. You would do the opposite going from the 7-iron to the PW. Add .4" and .5 SW

In this way, your 6 iron would be 37.4", or 37 3/8", but the SW would GO DOWN to D-1.5. Conversely, your 8-iron would be 36.6", or 36 5/8", and GO UP to a SW or D-2.5.

Thusly, in "simulating" a true MOI-match, your short irons get a little longer, and your long irons get a little shorter. Also, the SW of your longer irons get lighter.

In doing an MOI-match this way, instead of a SW match, you have almost "accidentally" done a TLT fitting. Thus for someone coming from a SW-matched 1/2" increment set to a TLT pseudo-MOI-matched set, the TLT set is going to be much easier to hit. (NOTE: Doing a true MOI-match with TLT is simple. There just might be a few grams here or there to move around.)

I think this is the main reason the TLT-system works for golfers. The second benefit, when you get dialed into the correct "series", your hand height stays constant. In theory, with the clubs built this way, you should be able to take the same stance and posture with a 3-iron as with a PW. Play the ball in the same place in your stance, and hit the ball more consistently because of it. You no longer need to widen your stance, or narrow it for the shorter irons.

Of course, this only holds true if you swing your irons the same way. You need to swing your 5-iron the same as your PW, and you need to have the same stance width because the club is going to be at the same hand height. At least this is the theory.

Because of this, it should produce more consistent shots. Like I said previously, I know the system and I can create sets with it, I just haven't had the time to really give it a good experiment yet. When I get time, I plan on making all of my SE600c's built to a TLT series, MOI-match them, then take them up against my MP-60's for a few weeks. I just haven't had the time.

I am quite sorry for the long post.

[Pa Jayhawk]

Great post Augster. From thinking about it, my concern would be that while you may gain accuracy on longer clubs, you may actually lose accuracy on the shorter clubs (which I consider my scoring clubs) due to the increase in shaft length for those clubs. Just the concept of the shorter shaft being easier to control.

Based on your experience, is that the case or would you say that they play pretty similar. I like the idea of consistent length, but not sure I could ever do it because increasing the length of my shorter irons would scare me.

[Bignose]

My thoughts on these ideas, MOI matching and True Lengths or anything else that may come along, is that they always sound really, really good for new golfers. But, the established avid golfers that have really gotten to know their sets, or at least the makeup of their sets (if they change irons a lot), and have gotten used to having a different stance and the corresponding different swing for a 9 iron than a 5 iron.

My set is traditionally built, swing weight matched, 1/2" increments, and I know that I use a slightly wider stance for the long irons than the short irons (though I use a fairly wide stance for all my shots), so I am sure that my 9 iron swing is different than my 5 iron swing. The thing is, I don't consciously think it is different. The only conscious difference is that the swing plane is different.

The true lengthed and the MOI clubs still have different lie angles, right? At to me, then, the only conscious difference would still be the lie angle, swing plane difference.

Like I said, I think that these are great ideas for new golfers, but for someone who has played with their current set makeup for a long time, they might be pretty uncomfortable. I could definitely be wrong on this, though. It is very interesting, and maybe someday it'd be interesting to tinker with, but I am pretty happy with my current set so I don't feel a yearning to replace them at the moment. The ho'ing of this forum hasn't worn off on me yet.

[danscustomgolfshop]

Originally Posted by Pa Jayhawk

Great post Augster. From thinking about it, my concern would be that while you may gain accuracy on longer clubs, you may actually lose accuracy on the shorter clubs (which I consider my scoring clubs) due to the increase in shaft length for those clubs. Just the concept of the shorter shaft being easier to control.

Based on your experience, is that the case or would you say that they play pretty similar. I like the idea of consistent length, but not sure I could ever do it because increasing the length of my shorter irons would scare me.

Hi guys, just found this forum, can't wait to spend some time here. Where is this forum based?

I'm Dan Connelly, the developer of TLT.
I would like to address some issues I read hear.
Keep in mind TLT clubs do vary in length, just not to the traditional 1/2 inch increment.
Have you ever wondered why company A builds there sets in 1 degree lie change and another in 1/2 degree lie chang / club, but yet both companies build to the same length.
Someone has a lie issue, well guess what - both do.
They do this because of mass producing.

TLT clubs address this if your 4 foot or 6 foot 6.
Both of these people will address a TLT set - in their athletic address position, ready to hit every club in their bag. The length vrs. lie is the math model. Each of these patrons get to stand in a stable address position and hot every club from this position.
Long irons are now not too long.
Short irons are now not too short.

The length separation is less than the 1/2 inch cut and progressively the cut gets less / club. This is true custom fitting, beyond what has been there forever.

I want to spend some time and reread some of these notes and respond when I have some extra time.

With respect

[Eracer]

Welcome to our little community. We've got some pretty knowledgeable folks here. And I don't think anyone is averse to learning new things.

Glad to have you.

The owner is Slingblade61