New KYOEI Website

[chiromikey]

1 hour ago, TourSpecGolfer said:

Yes, FP is identical but that doesn't sort the CG locations to be the same,  heel to toe length,  sole width,  bounce,  camber,  topline thickness, and shape. 

Let's use Yoro as an example.  They can match it all except for CG and shape and I still do not recommend that if given the choice.

I really do not mind #3 and #4 irons,  maybe even #5 is ok to slap 2 sets together but when we get into mid and short irons consistency is king.  

I know I don't want a high launching and straight flying #7 iron with a lower flight workable #8 iron when I can easily have consistency throughout my set,  progressive offset,  and a lower CG by design where it is needed.

The player does not see it but as someone who designs and owns brands, I get to see the limitations and differences each mold has.

That all makes sense. When the MBs and CBs look so similar in size and shape and spec with the same lofts, lies, and offsets, you can see our eagerness to think these would match well.

[nobmontana]

5 hours ago, TourSpecGolfer said:

The wrong way to do combo sets is slap 2 different designs together that have 2 different molds, sizes, cg locations, topline thickness,  FP,  bounce etc.. etc..

We want consistency right?

The proper way to do "combo's" would be to design clubs for that purpose.  

The reason why people want combos is that they think they need more forgiveness in the long/mid irons or smaller short irons or simply to be trendy.  Bridgestone has combo's done right with the XBL's.

 

The X Blade 709 limited combo they had,  appearance wise looked like it was designed for a combo but in fact they just slapped 3 different models in one set...  colored them the same and called it good.   The hosel length transition was really bad,  the shaft set that I used for this set could not be re-used in another normal ironset   4,5 were CB ,  6,7,8 were MC and 9, PW were MBs.  Hosel length varied quite a bit from one model to another with the MB hosel being significantly longer than the other two models.   Hopefully they thought about those things in the new XBLs. 

 

 

 

[+TourSpecGolfer]

18 hours ago, nobmontana said:

The X Blade 709 limited combo they had,  appearance wise looked like it was designed for a combo but in fact they just slapped 3 different models in one set...  colored them the same and called it good.   The hosel length transition was really bad,  the shaft set that I used for this set could not be re-used in another normal ironset   4,5 were CB ,  6,7,8 were MC and 9, PW were MBs.  Hosel length varied quite a bit from one model to another with the MB hosel being significantly longer than the other two models.   Hopefully they thought about those things in the new XBLs. 

 

 

 

Now that you bring that up,  I do not see them buying fresh molds to produce a combo set.  It is possible but even big brands re-use molds and adjust them.  Nothing wrong with that except it's a little deceptive.

I wish brands would just keep updating older designs and only release new models when they use a new mold.  It makes no sense to trick us by using the same mold 3-5 models running and adjust the aesthetics or tiny things that barely make a difference.

[nobmontana]

In that case,  would a sensible way going about a true combo set could be to produce a mold for MB blank that has extra mass on the back to allow flexible CNC machining for creating a pocket cavity, cavity and muscle back all from the same blank?  Perhaps the process for taking off that much mass with CNC is too costly?   Not sure...   maybe I'm just dreaming.   

Srixon Z series are often used in a combo capacity and their designs have a nice flow from one type to the others.  However, they dropped the MB in their newest release!!    Weren't A-Grind CMBs designed with combo in mind as well?   

 

[+TourSpecGolfer]

44 minutes ago, nobmontana said:

In that case,  would a sensible way going about a true combo set could be to produce a mold for MB blank that has extra mass on the back to allow flexible CNC machining for creating a pocket cavity, cavity and muscle back all from the same blank?  Perhaps the process for taking off that much mass with CNC is too costly?   Not sure...   maybe I'm just dreaming.   

Srixon Z series are often used in a combo capacity and their designs have a nice flow from one type to the others.  However, they dropped the MB in their newest release!!    Weren't A-Grind CMBs designed with combo in mind as well?   

 

I don't think Combo's sell well enough to invest a mill into molds.  To small groups of people, yes but to be honest game improvement irons sell the best. 

Srixon's specs are decent for combo's.  A-Grind has a few combo sets.  pretty much every combo set is cutting corners. 

I could do one full CNC the proper way but I do not think its necessary.   A designer can just increase the thickness of sole,  maintain progressive offset to make longer irons easier and move mass lower or adjust the shape to be more shallow.  Perimeter weighting in a 1 piece players cavity is overrated anyway IMO.  

[+TourSpecGolfer]

It's not as simple as taking a larger forging and milling and grinding what we need to make a combo.   for example, sometimes you need a lighter forging for less offset or to get the CG in a certain spot.  They must also consider how long it takes them to grind the weight off.  

I used to think as you do too.  I pushed factories to do this sort of thing and they told me the result is not good.  They were right.

 

[nobmontana]

4 minutes ago, TourSpecGolfer said:

A designer can just increase the thickness of sole,  maintain progressive offset to make longer irons easier and move mass lower or adjust the shape to be more shallow. Perimeter weighting is overrated anyway imo.  

Sounds like a design I can live with!!   easy to hit MB 4 iron!   

 

[chiromikey]

2 hours ago, nobmontana said:

Sounds like a design I can live with!!   easy to hit MB 4 iron!   

 

Make it 4, 5, and 6 while we’re at it!