Bat

Does anyone know how the Callaway Legacy 2012 golf balls compare to the Titleist, Bridgestone, or Srixon's golf balls? http://www.callawaygolf.jp/product/ball/legacy_12 Thanks

I've been using the KBS Tours for almost 2 years now. Had the Nippon 1150 Tours in my previous sets for at least a couple of years. I had only demoed the Project X a few times. To me it felt like I couldn't load the Project X properly even when going with softer flex than recommended. If you have a quick transition then maybe you'll like the stable feel but they're just not for me. They also felt a bit harsh at impact IMO. KBS Tour VS Nippon 1150GH Tour 1.Feel - Both the KBS Tour and the 1150 Tour felt much better than the Project X but are both very different. The first thing you'll notice coming from the 950GH is the weight. If you've been playing the 950GH for a while then these will feel quite heavy to you. The CUT weight of both shafts are pretty close but the 1150 Tour will feel heavier than the KBS Tour at the same length without any tip weights. The 1150s felt very similar but a bit more stable than the 950GH at transition. I felt like I can load the 1150 a bit more but with less control than the KBS Tour. At impact the 1150 has a distinctive kick similar to the 950GH but much more solid and not as hollow. The KBS Tours felt smoother at impact but with less kick than the 1150. 2.Dispersion - Compared to the 950GH the 1150s have much much better dispersion. That said, my dispersion with the KBS Tours have improved over the 1150s. Both have very good dispersion but I get better distance control with the KBS Tours. Especially in the long irons. 3.Trajectory - The 1150 launches much lower than the 950GH and also spins less. The KBS Tour launches noticeably higher than the 1150s. The initial launch is almost as high as the 950GH but with less spin and a nice boring flight. 4.Length - For me they are very close in distance but this can be very different to others in different irons. The 1150 has more kick and lower launch while the KBS has lower spin. Bat

My first choice would be Tourstage as well. Followed by Epon and Mizuno. Bat

I think you're misunderstanding something. Offset is the measurement from the front of the hosel to the leading edge as they are set up parallel to each other. You do NOT need to know the hosel diameter of the iron to know it's offset UNLESS you need to convert the number from FACE PROGRESSION. The numbers given on Ping, Titleist, and Mizuno websites are all offset numbers NOT face progression numbers. They are, however, listed in inches as opposed to millimeters. All I had to do was multiply these numbers by 25.4 to get the offset measurements in millimeters. Tourstage, Srixon, and Epon, on the other hand, list face progressions on their web sites. For these irons you'll need to know the hosel diameter to be able to convert to offset. At the moment, the Srixon numbers were calculated "assuming" they have the same hosel diameter as Tourstage and Epon. All other numbers should be accurate conversions from their respective web sites. Hope this helps. Bat

According to the specification on the official web site the numbers on the chart should be accurate. However, I had a chance to hit both of their 7 iron and compare them side by side for a couple of hours and I must admit that the 302 "appears" to have slightly less offset. IMO, the front of the hosel looks slightly more tapered in the 302 and there is less curve where the hosel meets the topline. I think those features along with chrome finishing might have something to do with how the iron appears. There's a comparison picture on another thread but you'll have to be careful when comparing offsets because the shafts appear to be leaning in the different directions from that viewing angle. Just to be clear to everyone reading this post, all numbers on the chart are from manufacturer's specifications on their web sites. Some of them were just converted to the same format for comparison purpose. I did NOT go out and measure any of these manually. Bat

Bridgestone numbers were just copy and paste. Ping, Titleist, and Mizuno numbers were converted from offset measurements in inches and rounded to the nearest tenth. Tourstage and Epon numbers were calculated using their 13.5mm hosel diameter. Srixon numbers, however, were calculated from face progression "assuming" they have the same hosel diameter as Tourstage and Epon. I suspect that their hosel diameter may actually be 13.6mm but I can not verify this. If anyone knows the exact measurement of Srixon hosel diameter I'd be happy to correct their numbers on the chart. As a side note, please keep in mind that offset numbers are just a part of how the iron appears when addressing the ball. Even with the exact same offset numbers, one iron can "APPEAR" to have more offset than the other just by having different head size, leading edge design, neck design, top line design, etc. For example, the X-blade 701G and CB3 have the same offset numbers but (to me) the 701G looks much more blade like at address due to it's design. Looking down at two irons side by side can be tricky as well. At the wrong angle the iron on the right can often APPEAR to have less offset than the one on the left due to different viewing angles. Bat

First post updated.

Actually, I updated the chart for myself to include some of Ping and Titleist irons. I was planning to include Taylormade but there are just so many models to keep track of, I didn't know where to begin. Anyway, I'm going to upload the current version in a bit. Since this was initially for my personal use, I only included the brands that I was interested. However, if anyone has offset numbers for other irons that they would like to share please feel free to post them here. If I get a chance to update the file with more irons I'll make sure to upload it here as well. Bat

Well, I thought it'd be nice to have a chart that lists the offset of different irons in one place. This is actually for my personal reference, but I'll post it here in case someone might find this useful as well. Anyway, let me know what you think. Bat .pdf file format for download Irons_Offset_Chart_02.pdf * Edit - updated to include Ping and Titleist irons

I assume you mean the new AF-151 driver. I'm sorry, I haven't got a chance to try the new drivers yet. FWIW, I'm not currently playing with the new irons but have demoed both the AF-502 and AF-302 at the range. From what I remember of the MP57, I think it's closer in forgiveness to the 302s. The 502s should be longer and a bit more forgiving than the MP57. As far as feel is concern, the 502 is a definite improvement over the 701 and the 501 long irons. They feel very soft with a very subtle twack at impact. But if you prefer a more solid and muted feel at impact then you might be better off looking at the 302s. Maybe I just don't have the game for it, but personally I can't tell the difference between the 301s and 302s. Bat

While the 701s may be slightly longer and more forgiving than the 502s I really don't think you'll miss it too much after trying the new 502s. My initial thought on the 502s was that the cavity design looks a little too busy and I could do without the chrome plating. None of that really matters after I hit a couple of balls with it. The feeling is just so sweet. None of that springy (clicking) feel of the 701s or the 501s long irons. They might not feel as solid as the 301s but if you like a soft feel at impact you won't be disappointed. The 502s should also be a bit more forgiving than the 501s. They look like they have slightly more offset and very slightly thicker top line imo. They also have a bit more bounce and their leading edges are not as sharp as the 501s. If you're looking to change from the 701s I really don't think you'll find a better option than the 502s at the moment. Bat

The AF-502 also looks much better than the "chrome plated" spy picture they had up on the site above. I'm not too crazy about the cavity design but I guess it's something I can live with as long as it performs. So what exactly is the finishing on the 502 going to be? Chrome or Satin? Bat

Thank you so much for your help. That's just what I needed to know. Sounds like the ViQ08 will launch higher due to the CG location. Not exactly ideal for me distance wise but I just can get over how EASY it is to hit these solidly off the deck. I'm going to try a couple more heads, but may very likely come back to these and match it with a higher kick shaft. Thanks. Bat

I've been on a hunt for a perfect fairway wood for a while. I think I've finally found it in the ViQ 08 FW. It's VERY forgiving, has a nice profile at address, and feels great at impact. The problem is I'm launching it much too high with the stock shaft. My friend has the 06 version reshafted with the green QuattroTech and the trajectory is much closer to what I'm looking for. Long story short, I was wondering how the ViQ 08 compares to the ViQ 06 in terms of launch angle and spin rate. I found comparison graphs for the two models but don't quite understand them. In fact, I'm not even sure if they have anything to do with trajectory at all. Anyway, I'd really appreciate if anyone can help me read these graphs or just tell me how the two versions compare. Thanks. Bat

Although the 701 has a bit less offset than the 701G, BOTH are very similar in size to the X-Blade CB which is MUCH smaller than the TS-202. The closest you'll get to the TS-202 from address is the NEW X-Blade GR C-1. The GR P-1 actually has a little bit less offset and the ViQ Forged is a tad bigger. If you're like me and hates the Red "GR" Graphic in the cavity of the new GRs you may also want to consider the older 2008 X-Blade GR Black. It's smaller than the TS-202 but more forgiving than the X-Blade CBs. If you can find it, the First X-Blade GR has even less offset but are also a bit less forgiving. FWIW, my previous irons before these Epons were the X-Blade CB1 and the TS-202. Bat