Question

557 viewsApril 2, 2024

Melchett 14 March 31, 2024 0 Comments

I have really wanted to try a set of hollow body irons and with the ts1 and ts2 on run out sale, I’m going to build myself a new set.

I’m a 10 handicap – longish hitter (for a weekend player!) And good short game, irons are definitely my weak point.

Currently play the 2005 taylormade rac lt irons. Like the look and have tried many modern irons and always go back to them. Pw carry is 120 yards, smoother swing these days after too many spinal surgeries.

Looking for an iron that flies high and straight and stops, had a hit with the original p790s and apex and found them a bit low and not enough spin to hold greens.

I like the overall look of both the ts1 and 2. My only concern is the thickness of the top line in the ts2 – mainly in the shorter clubs. I can live with a thicker iron in the longer irons.

How do the ts2 pw and gw look in the real world? As thick as the rest of the set?

Was thinking of making a combo set with ts1 pw and gw and ts2 for the rest. I don’t need the extra length of the ts2 but figure they are more forgiving? Or am I better just with a full set either way?

Appreciate any feedback

Britt Lindsey Answered question April 2, 2024

2 Answers

You are viewing 1 out of 2 answers, click here to view all answers.

Answer 1 · 2024-04-02T19:20:58+00:00

TS1 is 5.84mm (.230″) and the TS2 is 7.62mm (.300″). These are the design specs and when I put the calipers on them, they are basically the same. Can vary slightly depending on the radius edges and where you actually measure from, but those numbers are good.

I’ve payed them both over the years and both are awesome. My preference was the TS1 and I played them up until this year when I switched to the TS4. Preference was solely do to the look. I liked the more blade look. The TS2 was the longest iron I have ever hit, and was as solid as any. Just preferred the look of the TS1 between the two.

I have never understood the term point and shoot. If you line the club up correctly, with the blade square, I guess all irons would be point and shoot. I would not say one was easier to align than the other.

As far as them having similar MPF’s, why wouldn’t they and why wouldn’t you want any design to have the highest playability possible for whatever category of club they are in (players cavity, muscle back blade, cavity back, etc.). They are totally different profiles to appeal to different types of players. They can have similar, high playability. Playability is not determined by a perceived category, or the long driven perceptions that, for example, a cavity back iron is more forgiving than a blade. Playability is determined by the overall mass and dimensional characteristics of the mass, the club head, and with our understanding of this and with the technology available today, we can make a blade a Super Game Improvement club. There can be (and are) products on the market that say they are Ultra or Super Game Improvement or Game Improvement clubs and simply are not. It’s all about the key dimensions and the mass distribution that allow the head to be as stable as possible for the design. Actual vertical cg, rearward cg, horizontal cg and MOI are key factors in determining the stability, and ultimately the playability, of any design.

Britt Lindsey