Titleist iron
The Titleist T350 Irons is an iron in 9 options from 20°–53°, RH and LH.
Image not published
Titleist iron
Image not published
The field is every iron in the database that publishes both of the chart's figures — every brand, not just Titleist.
This set's 7-iron is 29° — 19th percentile, stronger-lofted than 81% of the 889 sets that publish one. The median is 32°.
Loft at each club in the set over the middle half (p25–p75) of every comparable iron set on record — the busiest rung here is built from 900.
A break in the line is a club the set does not publish a loft for — it is never bridged, because joining across a gap would draw a loft the manufacturer never stated. Every brand's name for the gap wedge is pooled into one rung, since only 25 of 917 sets publish two of them.
Titleist T350 Irons · 7
The 7-iron of every comparable iron set on record publishing both loft and lie — 889 of them, binned by density.
Titleist T350 Irons · 7 — the leading edge sits behind the line of the shaft by the published figure, drawn to the scale marked and seen from the toe, which is the one view that shows offset truly: it runs perpendicular to the face, so a picture square to the face would have it pointing at you. The outline is a nominal iron — this database holds no head geometry — so the gap the arrow spans is the only measured thing in the frame. The dashed edge is the median of the 7-iron of 580 iron sets on record that publish one.
Titleist's published offset at each club, over the middle half (p25–p75) of every comparable set on record that publishes one.
A break in the line is a club the set does not publish an offset for — it is never bridged, because joining across a gap would draw an offset the manufacturer never stated. Every brand's name for the gap wedge is pooled into one rung, since only 25 of 917 sets publish two of them.
What this record publishes. Across 9 options: loft, lie and length on every one.
9 rows, unsorted, collapsed — use the button below the table to show every option.
| 20 | 4 | RH / LH | 61.5 | 0.213 | 38.5 |
| 23 | 5 | RH / LH | 62 | 0.185 | 38 |
| 26 | 6 | RH / LH | 62.5 | 0.165 | 37.5 |
| 29 | 7 | RH / LH | 63 | 0.146 | 37 |
| 33 | 8 | RH / LH | 63.5 | 0.126 | 36.5 |
| 38 | 9 | RH / LH | 64 | 0.106 | 36 |
| 43 | P | RH / LH | 64 | 0.087 | 35.75 |
| 48 | W48 | RH / LH | 64 | 0.075 | 35.5 |
| 53 | W53 | RH / LH | 64 | 0.063 | 35.5 |
Head geometry doesn't change with the shaft, so it's stated once. A blank cell means Titleist did not publish that figure — we don't estimate.
Titleist publishes offset in millimetres; the offset (in) column is that figure converted, and the record keeps Titleist's own figure verbatim.
Where this club's published fitting specs sit among comparable clubs — never how good it is.
| Figure | Published | All irons | 2026 | Among its peers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Strongest-lofted 7-iron | 29° | =119th of 953 | =11th of 56 | =4th of 124 Titleist irons · =12th of 237 mid-handicap irons |
| Most offset at the 7-iron | 0.146" | =158th of 583 | =13th of 47 | =10th of 85 Titleist irons · =34th of 145 mid-handicap irons |
| Widest loft range | 33° | =432nd of 1,104 | =16th of 57 | =24th of 129 Titleist irons · =97th of 237 mid-handicap irons |
| Most upright lie | 63° | =33rd of 941 | =5th of 56 | =1st of 124 Titleist irons · =7th of 233 mid-handicap irons |
| Longest | 37" | =265th of 894 | =30th of 53 | =1st of 115 Titleist irons · =74th of 227 mid-handicap irons |
This iron reads as built for a mid-handicap player — our deterministic reading of 7-iron offset 0.146", 7-iron loft 29°. A design classification, not a rule about who may play it. How the bands are read →
Or go straight to a comparison: vs Honma BERES 10 3-Star Iron · vs Cobra COBRA 3DP MB Irons · vs Wilson DYNAPWR Forged Steel Irons
Other Titleist irons on record. Irons released in 2026 by other brands, one per brand. Nothing here is a ranking or a recommendation. Browse every club →
2 of 3 parts of this club page are built, and we're filling in the rest.
The site is in beta and the database is still being built, so expect gaps. Know something we don't? Help us fill it in — a link to where it's published is worth more than anything else you could send.