If you played them, what made the the Tommy Armour 845 Silver Scots such a great iron?

[braincramp52]

Looking for players opinions of the 845's. The old ones. I was a Ping Eye2 player back then but there were a boatload of the Silver Scots in bags everywhere. Many said they were a better iron than the Eye2's and I agree they are better looking. What do you guys that played them remember about them?

[Kmagnuss]

I've owned/played the Ping Eye 2's, Ping Zings, and 845s' (and a metric asston of other irons).... out of the three the 845s' were the worst in my opinion.

[jallen0119]

I liked the 845's (I bought a set when I was 16, in 93 or 94). I thought they didn't look quite as bulky as the Eye2 or Zings and they had a solid feel to them. 

[BirdieBob]

The 845 Silver Scotts were my first cavity back irons, #1 - SW as I recall.

Just an off the rack set that I used for about 7 years from 1990.

Seemed fine as I recall and I played well with them.

And coming from Hogan Apex II blades, they were much easier to get performance!

Edited March 27, 2022 by BirdieBob

[jll62]

Because they weren't Ping irons. For many of us, that was the key differentiator. There weren't a lot of great cavity back options in the late 80s / early 90s except for Ping; most players I knew were playing blades or Eye2. The 845 felt like the first good, cast cavity back club if you weren't a Ping fan.

 

From a performance standpoint, I don't recall them being anything out of this world. They were good irons, but not magical. I do recall their marketing campaign around dynamic lie angle fitting, as opposed to Ping's static fitting. That was something that resonated with me even as a teenager. WRX-er from birth, I guess. lol

Edited March 27, 2022 by jll62

[chamgel2]

I tried them, but liked the 1993 Lynx Parralax much better, and then the Lynx Black Cat Tour.  For whatever reason I just never got along with the 845s, but I remember a TON of people playing them.  

[Notashank]

Because Fred couples played them. 

[SlothofDespond]

5 minutes ago, chamgel2 said:

I tried them, but liked the 1993 Lynx Parralax much better, and then the Lynx Black Cat Tour.  For whatever reason I just never got along with the 845s, but I remember a TON of people playing them.  

 

My dad had a set of those '93 Lynx Parallax irons. They were great compared to the hand-me-down MacGregor MCX blades I was playing as a kid. Were the Lynx irons really any better or worse than the 845s? I don't know about that. I sort of recall the 845s were popular but a bunch of similar strong-selling relatively basic cavity backs started showing in the 90s as well: DCI, King Cobra, 845, etc. Being early matters for perception though.

[chamgel2]

14 minutes ago, SlothofDespond said:

 

My dad had a set of those '93 Lynx Parallax irons. They were great compared to the hand-me-down MacGregor MCX blades I was playing as a kid. Were the Lynx irons really any better or worse than the 845s? I don't know about that. I sort of recall the 845s were popular but a bunch of similar strong-selling relatively basic cavity backs started showing in the 90s as well: DCI, King Cobra, 845, etc. Being early matters for perception though.

Thats a great question.. I can’t say the Lynx were better than the 845s, just that they were for me.  I was also a fan for the DCI 962 irons that came out later.  

[Jack Pearsall]

Ping Eyes were expensive compared to 845s. 

In college, money was tight. 

JP's first cb. Loved the iron, reliable. 

King of a neutral look at address, maybe less upright than Eyes?  

[braincramp52]

I still have a set of Eye2's but the offset bothers me more than it should. I have always been able to get used to about anything in a iron but I struggle with the Pings now. And it's weird because I played them for about 5 seasons in a row which is a record for me.😀

 

The 845s have offset but they did a good job of not making it so noticeable.

Edited March 27, 2022 by braincramp52

[phizzy30]

I had a set of those my father got me as a child back in the early 90's.  Used them for 3 years.  They looked really good for the time.  They also felt a little softer/better than the Eye 2 which felt pretty harsh even when flushed.  If I remember correctly, I had the G. Loomis shafts in them as well.     

[SlothofDespond]

35 minutes ago, chamgel2 said:

Thats a great question.. I can’t say the Lynx were better than the 845s, just that they were for me.  I was also a fan for the DCI 962 irons that came out later.  

 

Maybe as simple as the shafts? The Lynx Parallax has DG S300. I'm not sure about the 845s steel shaft.

[kwcsports]

Like everyone else I played the 845's, Lynx Parallax and Eye 2's during that time period. 845's finished 3rd with me in feel, forgiveness and distance. Lynx were the best of these 3 for me by a mile. Played them for 22 years. 

[cgasucks]

After owning a 1-SW set and playing them for a good part since 2000, the 845s are such a great iron because it has great feel in the form of a player's CB that is forgiving and very durable.

 

Also, they're quite affordable in the used market since so many sets were sold.

[braincramp52]

17 minutes ago, cgasucks said:

After owning a 1-SW set and playing them for a good part since 2000, the 845s are such a great iron because it has great feel in the form of a player's CB that is forgiving and very durable.

 

Also, they're quite affordable in the used market since so many sets were sold.

I'm hoping to that will be the case for me. I've got my shovels for golf league and the 845's to dink around with for fun. 

[MtlJeff]

For me they were just available and inexpensive, and a decent looking iron. I owned like 3 sets of Tommy Armours early in my golf career. You could get them at normal sports stores without having to go to a real golf store

[tatertot]

Really durable, but more traditional profile than Pings.

[shanx]

Wow, some awesome, classic sets mentioned here.

 

I was just out of college, gaming a set of Ping Knockoffs and grandpa's hand me down persimmon woods. I got a job, first thing I did was go to a local retailer (Las Vegas Discount Golf?) to buy a set of new clubs.

 

Ping Eye2s, 845s, DCIs, Parralax, Hogan Edge and Wilson Pro Staffs were all on my list. 

 

It came down to the DCIs or 845s, the DCIs felt the best, the 845s were cheapest.

 

I went with the Gold Triangle DCIs, it was the first and last brand new set of irons I have ever bought..

[jplroper]

26 minutes ago, shanx said:

Wow, some awesome, classic sets mentioned here.

 

I was just out of college, gaming a set of Ping Knockoffs and grandpa's hand me down persimmon woods. I got a job, first thing I did was go to a local retailer (Las Vegas Discount Golf?) to buy a set of new clubs.

 

Ping Eye2s, 845s, DCIs, Parralax, Hogan Edge and Wilson Pro Staffs were all on my list. 

 

It came down to the DCIs or 845s, the DCIs felt the best, the 845s were cheapest.

 

I went with the Gold Triangle DCIs, it was the first and last brand new set of irons I have ever bought..

  Pretty sure the 845'S and early DCI's where designed by the same guy, John H.

[braincramp52]

23 minutes ago, jplroper said:

  Pretty sure the 845'S and early DCI's where designed by the same guy, John H.

You are correct sir.

[SEP1006]

Funny when they came out I bought them on looks alone. Loved the dull aluminum finish and the paint contrast made them look even better. But as far as performance they were very forgiving and had a soft feel off the face at impact. Distances were very consistent as well.

[Fairway14]

10 hours ago, braincramp52 said:

Looking for players opinions of the 845's. The old ones. I was a Ping Eye2 player back then but there were a boatload of the Silver Scots in bags everywhere. Many said they were a better iron than the Eye2's and I agree they are better looking. What do you guys that played them remember about them?

 

The 845's had a small head size with a deep cavity back, which is a winning combination.

Today's cavity back irons have too large of a head size.

[tannyhoban]

I have owned several sets. First set bought new 3-P in ‘89. Picked them over eye 2 irons because they looked better at address. I got used to the offset pretty quickly and played them on and of for roughly 8 years. Still the longest irons I’ve ever owned. I was in my 20’s and early 30’s then and played mostly forged irons around those. The ‘83 Mac Colokroms were my other set most of that time.

A couple times I found sets dirt cheap and picked them up but they aren’t what  they used to be for me.

Loved them but you gotta move on sometime. And I have, oh my have I ever lol.

Edited March 27, 2022 by tannyhoban

[Ghostwedge]

8 hours ago, Notashank said:

Because Fred couples played them. 

Couples played Lynx back then.

[braincramp52]

39 minutes ago, tannyhoban said:

I have owned several sets. First set bought new 3-P in ‘89. Picked them over eye 2 irons because they looked better at address. I got used to the offset pretty quickly and played them on and of for roughly 8 years. Still the longest irons I’ve ever owned. I was in my 20’s and early 30’s then and played mostly forged irons around those. The ‘83 Mac Colokroms were my other set most of that time.

A couple times I found sets dirt cheap and picked them up but they aren’t what  they used to be for me.

Loved them but you gotta move on sometime. And I have, oh my have I ever lol.

I have moved on also but I walk a lot of rounds as a single and I figured these would be fun to mess around with.

[Chunkitgood]

Moderate sized cavity with all the forgiveness you needed then…or need now, low cog, slightly delofted to go with it all, looked like real golf clubs not machines.

 

Are modern clubs better?  If you need to feel there is something at work in your clubs mechanically helping you, maybe so.

[tannyhoban]

27 minutes ago, braincramp52 said:

I have moved on also but I walk a lot of rounds as a single and I figured these would be fun to mess around with.

I did same for a few rounds, fun in a nostalgic way but the magic was definitely gone.

[Anser3]

11 hours ago, jll62 said:

Because they weren't Ping irons. For many of us, that was the key differentiator. There weren't a lot of great cavity back options in the late 80s / early 90s except for Ping; most players I knew were playing blades or Eye2. The 845 felt like the first good, cast cavity back club if you weren't a Ping fan.

 

From a performance standpoint, I don't recall them being anything out of this world. They were good irons, but not magical. I do recall their marketing campaign around dynamic lie angle fitting, as opposed to Ping's static fitting. That was something that resonated with me even as a teenager. WRX-er from birth, I guess. lol

 

Ping never advocated a static fitting.  The static fitting was only intended to be a starting point.  Ping always recommended that the golfer take the static results to a club fitter to fine tune through dynamic fitting before ordering clubs.

 

[hammergolf]

5 hours ago, jplroper said:

  Pretty sure the 845'S and early DCI's where designed by the same guy, John H.

Exactly…