Which Is Better: A Blade or Game-Improvement Iron?

Have you ever heard someone say, “If I play blade irons, I’ll get better”?

To many of us, it sounds absurd but there are plenty of higher-handicap golfers who truly believe that playing blades will make them a better ball striker. The theory, I suppose, is that if you can master the most difficult, hardest-to-hit level of iron, anything else will make the game child’s play. It’s just like playing a video game on the hardest difficulty when you want to sharpen your skills and conquer the objective.

Of course, in our video game example, many end up frustrated. Throw the controller at the TV. Shut it down. I’m done.

It’s a safe bet the same logic applied to playing blades has led to more than a few thrown clubs and, for the most part, I’d wager few have actually lowered their handicaps in the process.

By comparison, blades are smaller. They invariably have less offset, thinner toplines and while the concentrated mass at the center of the impact zone contributes to better feel, the lack of perimeter weighting creates more inconsistency from shot to shot. With higher CGs, muscle-back designs rely almost exclusively on loft to get the ball in the air.

Conversely, game-improvement irons are bigger. And while that means they’re seldom as pretty at address as blades, the perimeter weighting and modern technology create more speed.

And, yeah, while manufacturers have made loft-jacking (reducing loft to create more speed) standard practice, with wider soles and lower centers of gravity, the advertised theory is that higher flight doesn’t always require more loft.

Whether you want to frame it as blade versus cavity-back or loft-jacked versus traditional, we decided it was worth digging into a bit deeper.

To separate myth from reality, we decided to test muscle-backs side by side against game-improvement irons.

Are game-improvement irons really more forgiving? Is the overall design of loft-jacked irons able to overcome the deficiencies in static loft?

Let’s find out.

Testing parameters

For this lab, we gathered 10 average golfers, just like you and me. Here are the details:

Handicaps ranging from 0-12 6-iron swing speeds ranging from 74-89 mph 14 shots per iron model

About our test clubs

For this test, we hit TaylorMade P7MB and Stealth irons.

As you probably know, there’s not much in the way of consistency in terms of specs across categories. The P7MB 6-iron is relatively traditionally lofted at 30 degrees while the Stealth 6-iron has a stock loft of just 24 degrees. The P7MB has a stock length of 37.5 inches while the Stealth is slightly longer at 37 5/8.

Irons were tested in their stock, off-the-rack builds.

Performance insights

After putting all three irons to the test, we crunched the data. Here’s what we found.

Speed and distance

Ball speed

P7MB – 111.3 mph Stealth – 117.5 mph

The modern Stealth design shows significantly faster ball speeds than the traditional MB with a speed differential of 6.2 mph.

Carry distance

P7MB – 159.7 yards Stealth – 177.4 yards

Given the speed advantages, it should not be a surprise that Stealth irons were significantly longer than the MB. And while that’s to be expected, with 17.7 yards between the blades and Stealth, the distance gap is larger than we expected.

Of course, speed and distance aren’t the only metrics that matter. Too often, golfers overlook playability in favor of distance so we decided to look at two other key metrics: backspin and descent angle.

Backspin

P7MB – 4,691 rpm Stealth – 3,530 rpm

Surprising no one, the higher-lofted MBs produced significantly more spin than Stealth. The Stealth’s results may not be enough spin for some golfers.

Descent angle

P7MB – 43.47 degrees Stealth – 39.86 degrees

Despite promises of higher flight, it’s worth pointing out that Stealth is relatively close to the P7MB. That said, given the loft differences, the height differences are smaller than we would have expected.

Peak height

P7MB – 27.71 yards Stealth – 26.34 yards

The separation in peak height is even closer than the descent angle, which again, is not what we were expecting given the stock lofts of each the P7MB and Stealth irons.

Dispersion (Shot area)

P7MB – 1,094 square yards Stealth – 1,191 square yards

Dispersion is tighter overall with the P7MB which is nearly 100 square yards better than the Stealth.

Broadly, these findings align with what we see in Most Wanted Testing, especially for clubs in the player’s distance and game-improvement irons.

The summary version is that while ball speed and distance are higher than they are with more player-centric designs, backspin and, to an extent, descent angles take a hit.

What does this mean in terms of overall playability?

Playability

With any golf club, you want playability or how I like to describe it, consistency. It is a focal point of any Most Wanted Test: performance over all else.

Accuracy, distance and consistency are all important. The trade-off for distance is often a drop in consistency and accuracy. This is evident in this test, where shot area and consistency favor the TaylorMade P7MB.

With what we would describe as a more playable trajectory, the P7MB produced the smallest dispersion (tightest shot pattern) of the three irons tested. With that, one might argue that the MB was actually more forgiving or more consistent than the modern Stealth iron.

Is everything we believed to be true about modern game-improvement irons wrong? Is the effect of loft-jacking eliminating the on-paper forgiveness advantage of perimeter-weighted irons?

At a minimum, we struggled to dispute the idea that blades could make you a better ball striker.

Hold on just a minute …

As we chewed on the data, we wondered if we might be oversimplifying things a bit.

Did the results suggest what many golfers want to believe: that modern, loft-jacked game-improvement irons are longer but less playable and ultimately bad for golfers?

Or … and hear me out on this, because it’s wild …

Does the data we collected suggest what, in hindsight, felt kind of obvious: clubs with more loft that produce more spin are easier to hit than clubs with less loft and less spin?

That sounded more likely to us but to try and separate technology from specifications, we went back to TaylorMade to see if we could remove some variables and repeat the test in a more apples-to-apples kind of way.

(Spoiler alert, we could.)

The second time around, we worked with TaylorMade’s R&D team to normalize the irons in our test. For the remix edition, our test clubs had identical lofts, shafts, lengths, swing weights and grips. The only variable was the clubheads themselves.

For testing, we landed on a standard loft of 27 degrees, comfortably splitting the significant differences between stock lofts meant using a 5-iron for the P7MB and an adjusted 6-iron for the Stealth iron.

I suppose this approach partially supports the argument that what gets sold as technology is little more than a change to the number on the bottom of the club.

But is there more to it than that?

Let’s see where this takes us.

Speed and distance

Ball speed

P7MB – 112.7 mph Stealth – 115.1 mph

All things being as equal as they can be, the Stealth iron was still significantly faster than the MB. At a minimum, this suggests there is real technology in the designs and the added speed comes from more than just stronger lofts.

Carry distance

P7MB – 163.2 yards Stealth – 170.3 yards

While the differences weren’t quite as significant as they were in the stock configurations, the game-improvement design still bested the MBs for distance by plenty, though not by as much as they did with the stock builds.

Backspin

P7MB – 4,537 rpm Stealth – 4,043 rpm

With loft out of the equation, spin rate differences narrow, although they didn’t change as much as you might expect. Spin rates for the Stealth increased by nearly 500 rpm while the MB dipped a bit.

Big picture: Even at equivalent lofts and lengths, the higher center of gravity of the P7MB produced the most spin.

Descent angle

P7MB – 42.55 degrees Stealth – 42.21 degrees

With lofts normalized, descent angles move closer together. Built to a stronger loft, the P7MB peaked almost a yard lower. Interestingly, the adjusted Stealth flew nearly 1.5 yards higher.

Peak height

P7MB – 27.21 yards Stealth – 28.11 yards

We saw P7MB produce a higher descent angle but with the normalized lofts, Stealth actually produces a higher peak height. This is a 1.77-yard increase when more loft is added.

Dispersion (Shot area)

P7MB – 777 sq yards Stealth – 886 sq yards

Both normalized irons see a significant improvement in dispersion. P7MB still has the edge but Stealth secures a reduction of 305 square yards.

Loft is your friend

In Phase 1, we saw the higher-lofted P7MB produce higher spin rates and higher descent angles while resulting in the lowest shot area. Traditionally, blades or muscle-back irons are not considered “forgiving.” To an extent, this is true. You won’t hit them as far. Severe mishits definitely don’t go as far. However, they have more loft which helps with more spin and steeper descent angles.

These two performance characteristics lead to more playable shot outcomes. Furthermore, one could argue that this inherently makes them more reliable and more consistent with their performance in relation to game-improvement irons.

Which would you rather have?

Less distance but more predictable outcomes More distance but less predictable outcomes

Before you answer, here’s another scenario: What if you could have more distance and predictable outcomes?

In Phase 2, we see the performance of the Stealth iron increase dramatically. Backspin and descent angles increase. Distance and ball speed take a loss although both metrics are still higher than the P7MB.

All four of these metrics can be attributed to two variables: more loft and the design of the clubhead which is exactly what our goal was. Additionally, Stealth’s shot area decreased as well.

Loft is your friend.

Is there a solution to “loft jacking”?

Yes, more loft. Loft is your friend, especially if you’re an amateur golfer.

In both phases of this lab, we’ve seen a higher-lofted blade iron produce more playable launch conditions versus the modern game-improvement iron. This is evident by higher spin rates, higher (steeper) descent angles and lower shot area. Furthermore, the design properties of a blade iron are not conducive to excessive ball speeds and, in turn, longer carry distances. They’re made for precision, control and playable shot outcomes.

In the second phase, we see the modern game-improvement iron produce more playable launch conditions when loft is added. Spin rate, descent angle and shot area all benefit from the presence of more loft. Yes, ball speed and carry distance see a drop-off but they both showcase the clubhead design and why it is more suitable for amateur golfers. With the addition of loft, the game-improvement iron becomes an even more user-friendly golf club.

The game-improvement iron offers the perfect scenario of more distance and predictable outcomes.

However, not all golfers are the same. There are some who won’t benefit from more loft, especially those with speed and steeper angles of attack. If this applies to you, less loft might be your best solution.

Ultimately, paying attention to the lofts on your irons is the solution to “loft jacking” for all golfers. Just because an iron has a stock, standard loft “off the rack” doesn’t mean it is ideal for you.

The post Which Is Better: A Blade or Game-Improvement Iron? appeared first on MyGolfSpy.