Connect with us


Mitsubishi unveils 2015 Diamana shaft lineup



Few graphite shaft makers can claim the success of Mitsubishi Rayon’s Diamana shafts, which have been used to win more than 100 events on golf’s major professional tours since 2004. That makes it a big deal when the company tests a new line of Diamana shafts, as it is doing this at the Quicken Loans National.

The most well-known of the company’s Diamana shafts are its original S-Series and D-Series models, known as a “Blue Boards” and “White Boards,” respectively, and they’re used by a staggering amount of the world’s best players. 

Tiger Woods uses the original Blue Board shafts in his driver and fairway woods, while Gary Woodland plays the Diamana S+ Series shafts in his driver and fairway wood. Jordan Spieth, on the other hand, plays an original Blue Board shaft in his driver and a Diamana D+ Series shaft in his fairway wood.

The new models are the second-generation of the company’s Diamana +Plus Series that are played by Woodland and Spieth. They’re called the S+ and D+ Series, and use new technologies that make the shafts a viable option for everyone from the best golfers in the world to the weekend player.

The profiles of the first-generation and second-generation Diamana +Plus series shafts are similar, which means that they should produce close to the same launch and spin characteristics for most golfers. There are material differences between the shafts, however, which will make the second-generation shafts a better fit for many golfers.

Mitsubishi Rayon’s second-generation Diamana +Plus Series shafts have a matte gray finish, making them a better fit for many of today’s colorful driver, fairway wood and hybrid heads. The first-generation Diamana S+ and D+ shafts had matte blue and black finishes, respectively. 

The second-generation Diamana +Plus shafts expand the company’s Multi-Dimensional Interlay (M.D.I.) technology throughout the length of the shaft, where it was previously only used in the tip. That allows each shaft to be made about 3-to-4 grams lighter without affecting the shaft’s bend profile, said Mark Gunther, Mitsubishi Rayon’s vice president of sales and marketing. Unlike the original Diamana shafts, it also allows Mitsubish to tune the torque of each shaft to a specific flex, giving softer-flex shafts a little more torque and stiffer-flex shafts a little less torque.

What’s also new is that the the second-generation S+ Series shafts are counterbalanced, which means that they have a higher balance point that allows today’s heavier driver, fairway wood and hybrid heads to be played at a standard length or a longer-than-standard length without a drastic affect on swing weight.

The S+ Series shafts are slated to be released in more flexes and more weight options than ever before as well, with an emphasis on going lighter. Golfers will be able to get a 52-gram S+ Series (R and S flexes) for the first time, as well as more standard-weight options: a 62-gram model (R, S, X, TX), a 72-gram model (R, S, X, TX) and an 82-gram model (X, TX).


TX-flex shafts, which are available in each 62-gram, 72-gram and 82-gram shaft model, use special 46-ton carbon fiber materials that allow the shafts to be stiffer and have less torque than X-Flex shafts.

The D+ Series, which launches lower than the S+ Series, will also be available in a 52-gram model for the first time (R, S and X flexes), as well as a 62-gram model (S, X, TX), 72-gram model (S, X, TX) and 82-gram model (X, TX). It will not be as counterbalanced as the S+ Series shafts, however, because of its target audience. Golfers who tend to be a fit for the D+ Series often want their woods to have either a shorter length, heavier swing weight or both, which generally negates the benefits of a counterbalanced shaft.

Golfers looking for an aggressively counterweighted shaft from Mitsubishi Rayon will be pleased to hear that along with the company’s recently-released Fubuki J shafts, it will release a new Diamana M+ Series shaft, which is inspired by Mitsubishi’s original Diamana M-Series “Red Board” shaft. It’s the highest-launching of the three shafts and is expected to hit the PGA Tour for testing in October. It will be available in a 52-gram model (R, S), a 62-gram model (R, S, X, TX) and 72-gram model (R, S, X, TX).

Like the rest of the line, the M+ Series will be available in limited quantities this fall and will sell for about $300.

Click here to see what GolfWRX Members are saying about the second-generation Diamana +Plus Series shafts in our forum.

Your Reaction?
  • 66
  • LEGIT18
  • WOW10
  • LOL6
  • IDHT7
  • FLOP5
  • OB4
  • SHANK11

Zak is the Editor-in-Chief of He's been a part of the company since 2011, when he was hired to lead GolfWRX's Editorial Department. Zak developed GolfWRX's Featured Writer Program, which supports aspiring writers and golf industry professionals. He played college golf at the University of Richmond (Go Spiders!) and still likes to compete in tournaments. You can follow Zak on Twitter @ZakKoz, where he's happy to discuss his game and all the cool stuff that's part of his job.



  1. brett w

    Nov 18, 2014 at 7:39 pm

    Anyone know what the torque is going to be on the D+ White 70 TX?


    Jul 1, 2014 at 12:35 pm


    • John Muir

      Aug 13, 2014 at 7:53 am

      Hi Dennis:
      From their FAQ page:

      The Mitsubishi Rayon logo is comprised of three diamonds. Diamond weight is measured in carats and there are 5 carats in one gram. Therefore these making signify the approximate shaft weight in carats. (e.g. 63 x5ct means 63 x 5 carats = 315 carats = 63 gram

      John Muir

  3. Mizunopure

    Jun 28, 2014 at 2:22 am

    I’ll take an O.G Blueboard for 90. Thank you!

  4. billm311

    Jun 26, 2014 at 9:05 am

    I wish Mitsubishi would release lighter flexes in the heavier weights. My swing fits the whiteboard profile perfectly, but I usually can’t get maximum benefit from Diamana’s when it comes to weight v flex. Can I get a 60 Regular or 70 regular please?

    Killing me.

  5. Chuck

    Jun 26, 2014 at 7:43 am

    With all of the interest in heavier-weight shafts (including but not limited to Tiger Woods’ earlier move to a 103g Diamana), I sort of expected that if Mitsubishi was going to do anything new, that they would include such choices. Too bad that that appears not to be the case.

  6. West

    Jun 24, 2014 at 5:09 pm

    The matte silver finish does look nice. But how do they stack up against the B and W series?

    • Joe Golfer

      Jun 26, 2014 at 2:47 am

      I like that chrome ion plated finish that is just coming out. Not sure which version of the Diamana shafts it is though.
      If you read the FAQ’s (frequently asked questions) on the Mitsubishi Rayon website, it mentions that this particular finish has already been around in their Japanese market but hasn’t made it to America yet.

      @West asked how this article’s shafts stack up against the B and W series.
      I honestly can’t say, but the Mitsubishi Rayon website does discuss some of that stuff, so one can go there
      and look up the info and hope you can decipher all their lingo.
      Under the “products” section they list each of the types of shafts.
      Once you get to the shaft, you can read their description of what makes them different, and they provide their specs as well as an EI chart, which is their shaft bend profile from butt to tip.
      Hope that helps.

      • west

        Jun 27, 2014 at 4:55 pm

        Thanks for your help, but the site doesn’t actually list these products.

        But after rereading, it looks like these 2nd gen shafts are really just counter balanced versions of the 1st gen shafts for the heavier, lower CG heads, and also with that MDI weave through out the shaft. Wonder how that will affect the “feel” of the shaft???

  7. Pingback: Mitsubishi unveils 2015 Diamana shaft lineup |

  8. JJ

    Jun 23, 2014 at 5:52 pm

    Ummmmm Delish!!!!

  9. Steve Barry

    Jun 23, 2014 at 5:28 pm

    I like the throwback look to the OG Blueboards and Whiteboards.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


10 interesting photos from Wednesday at the Honda Classic



From our featured image of Rory McIlroy putting in a different kind of work on the range in the pre-dawn hours of Wednesday morning, to shots of Tiger Woods’ similarly early pre-pro-am range work, to some intriguing shots Patrick Reed’s prototype Bettinardi putter, GolfWRX has plenty of fantastic photo content from PGA National.

Here are some of the best shots from Wednesday.

Tiger Woods at work prior to his crack-of-dawn pro-am tee time. Gentleman in the foreground: You do know that as the sun has not yet risen, you do not need a hat to aggressively combat its rays, right?

“My feet do not look like that at impact.”

All eyes on the Big Cat…except those focused on the live video on their cell phone screens…

Let’s take a closer look at Patrick Reed’s yardage book cover. Yep. As expected.

Do you think these two ever talk?

It looks like Captain Furyk already has some pre-Ryder Cup swag in the form of a putter cover.

If you’ve ever wondered why Rickie Fowler selected these interesting locations for his tattoos, this may be the answer: Visible when he holds his finish.

We’ve got a Pistol Pete sighting!

Patrick Reed’s droolworthy Bettinardi Dass prototype.

Fun fact: Wedges double as magnetic putter cover holders, as Jon Curran illustrates here. Healthy application of lead tape, as well, from the tour’s resident graffiti artist.

Wednesday’s Photos

Discussion: See what GolfWRX members are saying about the photos in our forums.

Your Reaction?
  • 4
  • LEGIT1
  • WOW0
  • LOL1
  • IDHT0
  • FLOP0
  • OB0
  • SHANK3

Continue Reading

Accessory Reviews

Review: FlightScope Mevo



In 100 Words

The Mevo is a useful practice tool for amateur golfers and represents a step forward from previous offerings on the market. It allows golfers to practice indoors or outdoors and provides club speed, ball speed, smash factor, launch angle, spin rate, carry distance and flight time.

It also has a video capture mode that will overlay swing videos with the swing data of a specific swing. It is limited in its capabilities and its accuracy, though, which golfers should expect at this price point. All in all, it’s well worth the $499 price tag if you understand what you’re getting.

The Full Review

The FlightScope Mevo is a launch monitor powered by 3D Doppler radar. With a retail price of $499, it is obviously aimed to reach the end consumer as opposed to PGA professionals and club fitters.

The Mevo device itself is tiny. Like, really tiny. It measures 3.5-inches wide, 2.8-inches tall and 1.2-inches deep. In terms of everyday products, it’s roughly the size of an Altoids tin. It’s very easy to find room for it in your golf bag, and the vast majority of people at the range you may be practicing at won’t even notice it’s there. Apart from the Mevo itself, in the box you get a quick start guide, a charging cable, a carrying pouch, and some metallic stickers… more on those later. It has a rechargeable internal battery that reaches a full charge in about two hours and lasts for about four hours when fully charged.

As far as software goes, the Mevo pairs with the Mevo Golf app on your iOS or Android device. The app is free to download and does not require any subscription fees (unless you want to store and view videos of your swing online as opposed to using the memory on your device). The app is very easy to use even for those who aren’t tech savvy. Make sure you’re using the most current version of the firmware for the best results, though (I did experience some glitches at first until I did so). The settings menu does have an option to manually force firmware writing, but updates should happen automatically when you start using the device.

Moving through the menus, beginning sessions, editing shots (good for adding notes on things like strike location or wind) are all very easy. Video mode did give me fits the first time I used it, though, as it was impossible to maintain my connection between my phone and the Mevo while having the phone in the right location to capture video properly. The only way I could achieve this was by setting the Mevo as far back from strike location as the device would allow. Just something to keep in mind if you find you’re having troubles with video mode.

Screenshot of video capture mode with the FlightScope Mevo

Using the Mevo

When setting up the Mevo, it needs to be placed between 4-7 feet behind the golf ball, level with the playing surface and pointed down the target line. The distance you place the Mevo behind the ball does need to be entered into the settings menu before starting your session. While we’re on that subject, before hitting balls, you do need to select between indoor, outdoor, and pitching (ball flight less than 20 yards) modes, input your altitude and select video or data mode depending on if you want to pair your data with videos of each swing or just see the data by itself. You can also edit the available clubs to be monitored, as you will have to tell the Mevo which club you’re using at any point in time to get the best results. Once you get that far, you’re pretty much off to the races.

Testing the Mevo

I tested the FlightScope Mevo with Brad Bachand at Man O’ War Golf Center in Lexington, Kentucky. Brad is a member of the PGA and has received numerous awards for golf instruction and club fitting. I wanted to put the Mevo against the best device FlightScope has to offer and, luckily, Brad does use his $15,000 FlightScope X3 daily. We had both the FlightScope Mevo and Brad’s FlightScope X3 set up simultaneously, so the numbers gathered from the two devices were generated from the exact same strikes. Brad also set up the two devices and did all of the ball striking just to maximize our chances for success.

The day of our outdoor session was roughly 22 degrees Fahrenheit. There was some wind on that day (mostly right to left), but it wasn’t a major factor. Our setup is pictured below.

Outdoor testing setup with FlightScope X3 (foreground) and Mevo

The results of our outdoor testing are shown below. The testing was conducted with range balls, and we did use the metallic stickers. The range balls used across all the testing were all consistently the same brand. Man O’ War buys all new range balls once a year and these had been used all throughout 2017.  The 2018 batch had not yet been purchased at the time that testing was conducted.

Raw outdoor data captured with range balls including metallic stickers. Mevo data (blue) and X3 data (orange) were both generated from the same exact shots.

You’ll notice some peculiar data in the sand wedge spin category. To be honest, I don’t fully know what contributed to the X3 measuring such low values. While the Mevo’s sand wedge spin numbers seem more believable, you could visibly see that the X3 was much more accurate on carry distance. Below is a quick summary of the percent differences between each of the parameters as presented by the Mevo and the X3 in our outdoor session when separated out for each club. As previously mentioned, though, take sand wedge spin with a grain of salt.

Table showing the percent difference of each parameter between Mevo and X3 grouped by club (outdoor testing).

The first thing we noticed was that the Mevo displays its numbers while the golf ball is still in midair, so it was clear that it wasn’t watching the golf ball the entire time like the X3. According to the Mevo website, carry distance, height and flight time are all calculated while club speed, ball speed, launch angle and spin rate are measured. As for the accuracy of the measured parameters, the Mevo’s strength is ball speed. The accuracy of the other measured ball parameters (launch angle and spin rate) is questionable depending on certain factors (quality of strike, moisture on the clubface and ball, quality of ball, etc). I would say it ranges between “good” or “very good” and “disappointing” with most strikes being categorized as “just okay.”

As for the calculated parameters of carry distance, height and time, those vary a decent amount. Obviously, when the measurements of the three inputs become less accurate, the three outputs will become less accurate as a result. Furthermore, according to FlightScope, the Mevo’s calculations are not accounting for things like temperature, humidity, and wind. The company has also stated, though, that future updates will likely adjust for these parameters by using location services through the app.

Now, let’s talk about those metallic stickers. According to the quick start guide, the Mevo needs a sticker on every golf ball you hit, and before you hit each ball, the ball needs to be placed such that the sticker is facing the target. It goes without saying that it doesn’t sound like a whole lot of fun to spend time putting those stickers on every ball, let alone balls that will never come back to you if you’re at a public driving range. Obviously, people are going to want to avoid using the stickers if they can, so do they really matter? Below is a table of data showing the percent difference between the Mevo’s data and the X3’s data of what we collected outdoors with a driver and range balls with and without the use of the stickers.

Table showing how the percent difference of each parameter changes between Mevo and X3 when you use the metallic stickers and when you don’t

The FlightScope website says that the metallic stickers “are needed in order for the Mevo to accurately measure ball spin.” We observed pretty much the same as shown in the table above. The website also states they are working on alternative solutions to stickers (possibly a metallic sharpie), which I think is wise.

Another thing we thought would be worth testing is the impact of different golf balls. Below is a table of data showing the percent difference between the Mevo’s data and the X3’s data of what we collected outdoors with a driver and range balls as compared to Pro V1’s. All of this data was collected using the metallic stickers.

Table showing how the percent difference of each parameter changes between Mevo and X3 when you switch from range balls to Pro V1’s

As shown above, the data gets much closer virtually across the board when you use better quality golf balls. Just something else to keep in mind when using the Mevo.

Indoor testing requires 8 feet of ball flight (impact zone to hitting net), which was no problem for us. Our setup is pictured below. All of the indoor testing was conducted with Titleist Pro V1 golf balls using the metallic stickers.

Indoor testing setup with FlightScope X3 (foreground) and Mevo

The results of our indoor session are shown below.

Raw indoor data captured with Pro V1’s including metallic stickers. Mevo data (blue) and X3 data (orange) were both generated from the same exact shots.

Below is a quick summary of the percent differences between each of the parameters as presented by the Mevo and the X3 in our indoor session when separated out for each club.

Table showing the percent difference of each parameter between Mevo and X3 grouped by club (indoor testing)

On the whole, the data got much closer together between the two devices in our indoor session. I would think a lot of that can be attributed to the use of quality golf balls and to removing outdoor factors like wind and temperature (tying into my previous comment above).

As far as overall observations between all sessions, the most striking thing was that the Mevo consistently gets more accurate when you hit really good, straight shots. When you hit bad shots, or if you hit a fade or a draw, it gets less and less accurate.

The last parameter to address is club speed, which came in around 5 percent different on average between the Mevo and X3 based on all of the shots recorded. The Mevo was most accurate with the driver at 2.1 percent different from the X3 over all strikes and it was the least accurate with sand wedge by far. Obviously, smash factor accuracy will follow club speed for the most part since ball speed is quite accurate. Over every shot we observed, the percent difference on ball speed was 1.2 percent on average between the Mevo and the X3. Again, the Mevo was least accurate with sand wedges. If I remove all sand wedge shots from the data, the average percent difference changes from 1.2 percent to 0.7 percent, which is very, very respectable.

When it comes to the different clubs used, the Mevo was by far most accurate with mid irons. I confirmed this with on-course testing on a relatively flat 170-yard par-3 as well. Carry distances in that case were within 1-2 yards on most shots (mostly related to quality of strike). With the driver, the Mevo was reasonably close, but I would also describe it as generous. It almost always missed by telling me that launch angle was higher, spin rate was lower and carry distance was farther than the X3. Generally speaking, the Mevo overestimated our driver carries by about 5 percent. Lastly, the Mevo really did not like sand wedges at all. Especially considering those shots were short enough that you could visibly see how far off the Mevo was with its carry distance. Being 10 yards off on a 90 yard shot was disappointing.


The Mevo is a really good product if you understand what you’re getting when you buy it. Although the data isn’t good enough for a PGA professional, it’s still a useful tool that gives amateurs reasonable feedback while practicing. It’s also a fair amount more accurate than similar products in its price range, and I think it could become even better with firmware updates as Flightscope improves upon its product.

This is a much welcomed and very promising step forward in consumer launch monitors, and the Mevo is definitely worth a look if you’re in the market for one.

Your Reaction?
  • 59
  • LEGIT3
  • WOW0
  • LOL3
  • IDHT0
  • FLOP5
  • OB3
  • SHANK8

Continue Reading

pga tour

Sergio Garcia WITB 2018



Equipment is accurate as of the 2018 Honda Classic (2/20/2018).

Driver: Callaway Rogue Sub Zero (9 degrees)
Shaft: Mitsubishi KuroKage Dual Core 70TX

3 Wood: Callaway Rogue 3+ (13.5 degrees)
Shaft: Mitsubishi KuroKage XT 80TX

5 Wood: Callaway Rogue Sub Zero (18 degrees)
Shaft: Mitsubishi KuroKage XT 80TX

Irons: Callaway Apex Pro 16 (3, 4), Callaway Apex MB 18 (5-9 iron)
Shafts: Nippon Modus Tour 130x

Wedges: Callaway Mack Daddy 4 (48-10S, 54-10S, 58-08C)
Shafts: Nippon Modus Tour 130x

Putter: Odyssey Toulon Azalea
Grip: Super Stroke 1.0 SGP

Golf Ball: Callaway Chrome Soft


Discussion: See what GolfWRX members are saying about Garcia’s clubs.

Your Reaction?
  • 68
  • LEGIT7
  • WOW3
  • LOL2
  • IDHT0
  • FLOP2
  • OB2
  • SHANK4

Continue Reading

19th Hole