We have not done any robot testing in recent years. There have been tests done over the years that have always confirmed that the higher the MOI, the more stable the iron. Less distance is lost and dispersion is better the higher the MOI when the cg is in a “good” location. That means in a good horizontal location and a good vertical location. Ralph defined this in his book on Playability. Two studies done several decades ago showed similar results. One showed 25% increase in distance and 46% improvement in dispersion on off center hits with a higher MOI design vs. a lower MOI design. Another study showed that a “blade” design with an MOI of 10.9 ou/in2 had a 40% larger dispersion than a “cavity back” design with an MOI of 14.5 ou/in2.
So, we know that it makes a difference. Never a doubt. Defining exactly how much difference in MOI effects how much distance and dispersion, in modern iron designs, has not been done to my knowledge. I think the results would be similar to the stats I listed.
We have not done any robot testing in recent years. There have been tests done over the years that have always confirmed that the higher the MOI, the more stable the iron. Less distance is lost and dispersion is better the higher the MOI when the cg is in a “good” location. That means in a good horizontal location and a good vertical location. Ralph defined this in his book on Playability. Two studies done several decades ago showed similar results. One showed 25% increase in distance and 46% improvement in dispersion on off center hits with a higher MOI design vs. a lower MOI design. Another study showed that a “blade” design with an MOI of 10.9 ou/in2 had a 40% larger dispersion than a “cavity back” design with an MOI of 14.5 ou/in2.
So, we know that it makes a difference. Never a doubt. Defining exactly how much difference in MOI effects how much distance and dispersion, in modern iron designs, has not been done to my knowledge. I think the results would be similar to the stats I listed.
Britt Lindsey