I searched before posting this. No Hits but my apologies if it has.

On the airplane from San Diego. I picked up the latest Golf Magazine.

Article on Paddy pg 145.

Interesting notes;

1959 Wilson Dyna Powered
VS
Wilson Staff Pi5

All measured via TRACKMAN
1959/Pi5

Driver

105.4/112.8 mph
228.5/254.5 carry
259.4/265.3 total


6iron

84.2/88.7 mph
148/166 carry
148/167 total

9iron

75/80.3 mph
106.5/122.8 carry
107.5/122.8 total

According to article this was 'all-out'. He slowed down only for the older equipment to ensure center face hits.

not much of a difference at all. Important to note the lofts on the irons are much weaker in the 1959 irons than the modern ones.

How did he carry his current driver only 254? That's pathetic. Just a few weeks ago he was busting 350+ yard drives at Firestone.

I noticed that too while I was reading those stats! I know they said he was on the practice range but jeez don't go easy on the driver just to make an old persimmon club look good!

The article said he was hitting into a 15mph wind. Another factor in the irons is the shafts. Not sure but I think the old staff used TT Dynamics and were also a good inch shorter. I reshafted a set of Wilsom fg17 with new TT dynamic gold s300 and they were 10 to 12 yards longer with the golds.

I have the article:

Driver:
Wilson Staff Smooth: 9*, 45", X-Stiff
Wilson Staff 4350 (1959): 7.5*, 43 3/8", Regular Flex

6 Iron:
Pi5: 31*, 37", X-Stiff
Dyna-Powered: 36*, 36.5", R Flex

9 Iron:
Pi5: 44*, 36", X-stiff
Dyna-Powered: 48*, 35", R flex


I am not surprised in the minimal difference in distance. Harrington is a world class player who could probably hit anything with enough practice, but an amateur might experience greater variations in distance due to the lack of forgiveness in the older clubs.

Wow, those number just really say it all don't they...

I wonder if Golfers Magazine would feel comfortable doing a similar test with all modern equipment, where they would test the modern Wilson equipment to lets say Mizuno clubs. Power the Wilson's with x-stiff shafts as Harrington is used to and hand him a 7-iron Mizuno with regular flex shaft and pretend it's a 6 iron. The same goes for the wedge, where you hand Harrington a Wilson PW and a Mizuno GW. And to top it all off he can test driver with very low loft (and center of gravity in the wrong place for todays balls) add another regular shaft so he can't even give it a full swing and lets compare the numbers. I guess Wilson was OK with the way the test was set up as there was no way that Padraig was going to get better scores with the old equipment than with the new equipment, which is OK with Wilson.

I can't believe they made an article, but couldn't even be bothered to get meaningful results. How hard can it be to find a set of '59 Wilson Dynapower irons with x100 shafts. I bet you can find at least one person on golfwrx alone with a set of irons like that somewhere in the garage. Even if they couldn't find a set with the right shafts, they could have installed those shafts in less time than it probably took them to write down the article. I'm betting 99% of the difference in swingspeed is due to the fact that Harrington couldn't hit full shots because of the regular shafts. I also would not be surprised that - if given the chance - Harrington would prefer to play those '59 Dynapowers over the Pi5 irons he hit here (provided they installed the right shafts in the Dynapowers).

Yesterday I played my third round of golf this year (or the past three years as a matter of fact). I used a '51-'52 MacGregor persimmon driver. After getting to the first tee 4 minutes after we arrived at the parking lot, I hit my first drive 250 meters (crosswind) (about 275 yards). I occasionally hit a modern driver borrowed from a playing partner/friend or relative, but only hit it slightly longer than I do my persimmon.

I think what should be taken from the article is that it is the modern ball that creates the distance, because we are still hitting it with forged steel.

I think what should be taken from this article is the evolution of golf equipment. I think that is what they were trying to show. Club heads are now Titanium instead of wood, shafts are now graphite instead of steel, and club iron lofts are stronger now. Hell it could be seen as one of those things that says here is the reason all of you guys hit it so much farther than you did 20 years ago. This article should help show people all this "new technology" is mainly hype.

To make it a fair comparison they should have used similar flex shafts, however I think using the historic club lengths and lofts adds to the value of the article and illustrates that manufacturers have padded their increased distance claims for irons with lower lofts and longer shafts.

Also, the fact Harrington chooses to use the Pi5 irons over everything else available should indicate he thinks they're better than anything else Wilson offers (including their forged clubs).

I didn't see the article, but 20 yards difference for 6-iron and 15 difference for a 9-iron seems about right. When I play my 1954 MacGregor MTs, I add 2 club for every shot - and I add a 5-wood to the bag. Persimmon woods hit shorter than the thin faced metal woods of today, but if you like to work a wood, there's nothing like persimmon.

I'm currently eyeing a set of old blades on eBay, just to try and see how they feel. Part of me just wants to check out how they play, but I also think they would be a good tool to help me with my ball striking. My theory is that if I can hit the ball well with a set of blades from the 70's, then I can hit any iron well.

What would be interesting is to have the exact same test, same clubs, but use a high spin balata ball similar to something from the 1960's.