Blades Versus Cavity Backs: A Golf Club Epiphany

[markTHEblake]

I have always believed that there is no difference whatsoever between blade and cavity when struck dead centre of the sweet spot, apart from obvious trajectory differences due to varying CG. The difference is only when the ball is struck off centre.

However consider this analogy: Which implement will be more efficient at hammering in a nail; a small hammer, a sold steel mallet, or a 12 inch frypan? Even if the frypan has as much mass as the mallet, it would be the least efficient. So why wouldn't a cavity back be equally inefficient :)

I found these articles written by Terry Koehler (http://www.thewedgeguy.com/about/) who has a fairly good reputation, he currently makes the Eidolon (http://www.eidolongolf.com/) wedges, used to work for Hogan Golf, and he discovered that on Iron Byron tests, the shot dispersion with Cavities is not as consistent as those with Blades :shock:. In other words, Blades are straighter.

Check out these articles in conjunction, as well as his additional comments below the articles. Also of particular interest is his claim that Cavities make little, if any difference on short irons, and therefore are unnecessary.

Blades Versus Cavity Backs: A Golf Club Epiphany (http://www.thewedgeguy.com/blades-versus-cavity-backs-a-golf-club-epiphany/)

Should Your Short Irons Be Cavity Backs ? (http://www.thewedgeguy.com/should-your-short-irons-be-cavity-backs/)

Blade Irons: Are They More Efficient Than Cavity Backs ? (http://www.thewedgeguy.com/blade-irons-are-they-more-efficent-than-cavity-backs/)


Whilst the margin for error been discussed here is about 1m either side of the hole and hardly an issue for a hack like me, I find this is a very interesting topic. Is anyone aware of any other independent scientific/technical articles on this topic?

Any objective thoughts, we got a few genius's around here 8)

P.s. Thanks but we already have other threads for subjective experiences with blades, please stay on topic :-).

[Rusty]

this sounds like a test for Dave Pelz for sure. now, to only get him interested...

[3oneday]

However consider this analogy: Which implement will be more efficient at hammering in a nail; a small hammer, a sold steel mallet, or a 12 inch frypan? Even if the frypan has as much mass as the mallet, it would be the least efficient. So why wouldn't a cavity back be equally inefficient :)
I quite like your analogy, with a couple of exceptions:

You aren't swinging the hammer 3 or 4 feet from the nail.

If I was to hit a nail with a frypan, I think I would know if I missed the middle as the frypan would vibrate more significantly. This wouldn't be the case with a mallet but may be slightly noticeable with the small hammer ?

I suppose that raises two issues. In the case of efficiency you are correct, but in the case of forgiveness the analogy is flawed (in my opinion of course).

:)

[miro]

I thought the logic of Cavities was more that very very few golfers in the world cosistently hit the ball in the same spot on the club face and Cavs provide the help needed to maximise our pathetic efforts. The fact that blades are slightly more accurate surpirses me a small amount -I would have thought they would be equal.

So in summary if I could swing as consistently as an Iron Byron I would go back to blades until I reach that point Cavs for me.

[virge666]

Have not read yet but will.

The other thing to consider is that blades are more forgiving it a person misses the ball towards the hosel side of the sweet spot. (not the socket to be sure)

Cavs are usually better off toe hits by a long margin, but may depend on path and how open the club is at impact.

[kwantfm]

There was a pretty extensive test done by Golf Digest a long time ago (late eighties or early nineties) that showed that blades were slightly straighter than cavity backs. There were some differences in dispersion according to where the mis-hit was struck on the face but I can't remember what the shape of the results was (I'm thinking that Virge is likely to be correct).

[virge666]

The main problem I have with large Cavs is the moving back of the center of gravity and the huge sole with a lot of bounce.

You are meant to learn to hit DOWN on a golf ball - yet we make clubs to compensate for people not doing that... while the help is good at the start... once you learn to hit it with some regularity, I believe the move to less bounce and a sharper sole can only improve your ball striking.

Hard rubber golf mats don't help the cause either.

[goughy]

A coach I was going to years ago (Darryl Jefferies who I think is now at Alice Springs) liked people to come and have a little hit off the mats some time before a round of golf. He believed the mats to be much more forgiving than turf, and compensating to a degree for bad shots.

This advice might sound strange, as you'd think you'd wanna practice off of what you play on the course. But he believed that hitting off the mats, with them making it easier could give you a boost of confidence in your ball stricking directly before a round. I certainly found it 'easier' to hit off of mats.

[Shaneo]

well what i've been told and i still beleive is that as a general rule the cavity backs are more forgiving only due to the fact that most cavity backs have a larger head than a blade.
in saying that you have to be able to hit the ball consistantly out of the middle (or close to it) with a blade to hit the ball solidly.
because the heads are smaller on a blade the shot accuracy will be far greater if hit correctly.
all comes down to the persons swing and timing (i beleive)

[virge666]

well what i've been told and i still beleive is that as a general rule the cavity backs are more forgiving only due to the fact that most cavity backs have a larger head than a blade.


While size is an issue - it has to do with the club twisting less at impact. The perimiter weighting is what does this, especially with toe hits.

If I move the weight to the outside edges of the club - then I get a more stable impact. If the weight is low and inthe middle - I get more control of the ball flight and spin.

Like everything in golf - There is no secrets - it is just a trade off.

[lucky]

A coach I was going to years ago (Darryl Jefferies who I think is now at Alice Springs)

Daryl is now teaching at Pacific in Brisbane - been here a while now. Nice guy.

[goughy]

Wow. He was a great coach, and had an easy teaching style. I also found he didn't try wholesale changes to my swing, but augmented what I had with little changes. The others I'd seen afterwards tried to teach me a completely new swing and put me off coaches again.

I also believe he and a group from Alice won the Holden Scramble a few years ago!

[v205]

In mentioning the club head path, I believe that's the major difference in performance between blades and CB.

A blade forces you to have a good swing (aka, good club head path) to get away with a bit from not hitting the sweet spot. A CV will allow a bad swing path to get away with more when not hitting the sweet spot.





Have not read yet but will.

The other thing to consider is that blades are more forgiving it a person misses the ball towards the hosel side of the sweet spot. (not the socket to be sure)

Cavs are usually better off toe hits by a long margin, but may depend on path and how open the club is at impact.

[leighthebee]

Having a set of blades and cavities, one thing I do know is that I hit the cavities sweet after playing with the blades for awhile and progressively get worse in ball striking regardless of how much I play. Then back to blades and I hit it like crap for awhile then get some decent ball striking back again.

Repeat.

I believe I would score in comps better if I practice blades and play cavities. But then you have the whole issue of distances and carry's.

[moree golfer]

I use an old MP14 5 iron for range sessions alongside my MP30 5 iron and I think the blade gives me a lot of feedback on whether I am hitting it close to the middle or not.

[leighthebee]

yep. good plan.

[markTHEblake]

I use an old MP14 5 iron for range sessions .......

I like it, makes so much sense! why didnt anyone think of that before. and it wouldnt be hard at all to make a couple of clubs swing exactly the same as your main set.

[moree golfer]

I like it, makes so much sense! why didnt anyone think of that before. and it wouldnt be hard at all to make a couple of clubs swing exactly the same as your main set.
MtB I am finding it difficult to decide if you are being facetious or not :?.

[Scottt]

Likewise. I'm going with "taking the piss"

[BrisVegas]

I'll go against the grain here and suggest blake is being serious. :shock:

[3oneday]

I'm with Bris... lets run a poll.

[markTHEblake]

MtB I am finding it difficult to decide if you are being facetious or not :?.

Sorry, I was being genuinely serious, but dont worry, it was a moment of weakness - I'll be back to normal soon.

When i get my new irons I am going to do exactly that.

[Rusty]

no Blakey - don't do it... new irons... sacre bleu!!

[markTHEblake]

why do you think i am making all these posts about golf clubs?

[Jarro]

you're full of it Blake !

[3oneday]

another KTK, great :roll: