Jump to content

Featured Replies

Posted

Pics here - Full run down in the blog:

XF5A5211-Edit-2.jpg

XF5A5194-Edit-2.jpg

XF5A5228-Edit.jpg

XF5A5172-Edit-Edit.jpg

Screen-Shot-2015-01-13-at-10.21.05-AM.jp

XF5A5173-Edit-2-Edit.jpg

XF5A5223-Edit-2.jpg

XF5A5202-Edit-2.jpg

XF5A5171-Edit-2-Edit.jpg

Thanks for the write up, Chris. I'm curious, what did they do to be able to keep the flight down? Everything in the design, from the cavity design, sole width, tunsten weighting, etc., seems to point to a high launching iron. Did you mean that the trajectory was just lower than expected or actually low, like a player's cavity?

  • Author

Thanks for the write up, Chris. I'm curious, what did they do to be able to keep the flight down? Everything in the design, from the cavity design, sole width, tunsten weighting, etc., seems to point to a high launching iron. Did you mean that the trajectory was just lower than expected or actually low, like a player's cavity?

For sure not low, it had a Repulsion kick ST105 that is somewhat a firm steel shaft.

I would call it almost high and maybe with say Modus125 it could be mid/high

These are excellent irons though, onoff has evolved these into something special.

Quality from on off is superb

These look really good for a GI, clean. Kinda what you'd expect from the major OEMs with their Tour Only or "B" series GIs that contracted players tout on tour as being "the same" as the stuff at Golf Galaxy. Only we can buy it and get the same stuff the JPGA tour players use without having to deal with some "it fell of the tour van" murky guy.

Edited by Vegaman

One thing in the pro shop though, the listing says 4-pw but then you can click on "extra clubs" there is still an upcharge for "4-iron".

  • Author

Updated the title in the pro shop sorry about that :)

Updated the title in the pro shop sorry about that :)

Make sure it's changed on the OnOff "brand page" too. It's still listed as 4-pw there.

Any comparisons to the 2014 VG3?

  • Author

Any comparisons to the 2014 VG3?

I sure can, the RB247G is not as soft, it's a bit bigger, it's longer and more forgiving, RB has more offset.

The two look and play very different.

Wow these look great, not 247s though

  • 1 month later...

Currently using the older RB 247 F - any bigger improvements with the new "G" model?

Im surprised labospec would release a GI iron?

Pls correct me if i am wrong?

I have them but too snowy to play

@ Spoon

I meant the RB 247 F -> was followed by the 247 G model.

Just saw on their homepage that they put some comments on the differences between those models. (Inceased sweat spot on the G model with deeper undercut)

Did anyone tested both models?

  • Author

Im surprised labospec would release a GI iron?

Pls correct me if i am wrong?

In Japan some pro's play these types of irons.

@ Spoon

I meant the RB 247 F -> was followed by the 247 G model.

Just saw on their homepage that they put some comments on the differences between those models. (Inceased sweat spot on the G model with deeper undercut)

Did anyone tested both models?

that's correct It's subtle very difference if you have the F I don't think there is a need to upgrade to the G.

In Japan some pro's play these types of irons.

that's correct It's subtle very difference if you have the F I don't think there is a need to upgrade to the G.

yeah i think i should too. lovely design, if they can make it undercut but not overly large with decent offset then they nailed it.

@ TourSpecGolfer

Thank you for the feedback on the G model.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...