This list of the best blade irons in golf isn’t like the Gear Trials: Best Clubs Lists that we’ve published for 2015. It couldn’t be, because the type of golfers who are generally using blade or blade-like irons are generally looking for something more specific than adding distance or forgiveness to their iron game.

For that reason, we went about this story in a different way. We’re calling it our 2015 Blade Iron Shootout, and we hope it will help golfers understand the differences between some of the most popular blade irons currently available.

Click to enlarge. See individual charts for each category at the bottom of this story.

We had six golfers with handicaps of 1 or better hit 15 of the latest blade irons on the market in their stock 7-iron configuration in a special session at Miles of Golf in Ypsilanti, Mich. After they hit all the irons, we had them pick their favorites, which was easier for some than others. And of course, we recorded all their Trackman data so readers like you can have all data you want to make the most informed decision about your next set of blade irons.

Below, you’ll see the 15 irons we tested, as well as a full analysis of the average ball speed, launch angle, spin rate, smash factor, landing angle, carry distance, club speed, attack angle, and max height from each iron in the test. We also added a category called “Consistency Ranking,” which ranks the standard deviation of the carry distances we saw from each iron. And you’ll also learn a little more about each of our testers and see what irons they chose at the bottom of the story.

Editor’s Note: We weren’t able to test every model we hoped to for this list. Miura and Epon declined to participate, and Bridgestone was unable to supply us with samples in time for the test.

Related: 2015 Gear Trials, The Best Clubs in Golf

The 15 Irons Tested

Ben Hogan Ft. Worth 15

  • Loft/shaft tested: 34 degrees (measured 33 degrees), True Temper Dynamic Gold S300
  • Length: 37 inches
  • Construction: Forged, 1025 carbon steel
  • Consistency Ranking (carry distance, standard deviation): 7th
  • Launch Angle Ranking (highest to lowest): 1st
  • Spin Rate Ranking (lowest to highest): 11th
  • Ball Speed Ranking (highest to lowest): 7th

Overview: Our Ben Hogan’s Ft. Worth 15 iron actually measured 33 degrees, which was slightly stronger than average. Despite its lower loft, however, it proved to be the highest-launching iron in this test. On a side note, Ben Hogan’s Ft. Worth 15 irons allow golfers to pick their own set makeup with lofts that range from 20 to 47 degrees.

Callaway Apex MB

  • Loft/shaft tested: 35 degrees, KBS Tour-V (Stiff Flex)
  • Length: 37 inches
  • Construction: Forged, 1020 carbon steel
  • Consistency Ranking (carry distance, standard deviation): 3rd
  • Launch Angle Ranking (highest to lowest): 6th
  • Spin Rate Ranking (lowest to highest): 5th
  • Ball Speed Ranking (highest to lowest): 12th

Overview: Callaway’s Apex MB was the third-most-consistent iron in our test. It had a higher-than-average launch angle while also being the fifth-lowest-spinning iron in our test. Despite its impressive launch angle/spin rate combination, however, the Apex MB had below average ball speed (12th).

Chikara CB-1

  • Loft/shaft tested: 32.75 degrees, True Temper Dynamic Gold S300
  • Length: 36.75 inches
  • Construction: Forged, S25C carbon steel
  • Consistency Ranking (carry distance, standard deviation): 1st
  • Launch Angle Ranking (highest to lowest): 15th
  • Spin Rate Ranking (lowest to highest): 2nd
  • Ball Speed Ranking (highest to lowest): 1st

Overview: Chikara’s CB-1 had the lowest loft of any iron on this list (32.75 degrees), and also had the highest ball speed and lowest launch angle of any iron tested. It was also the second-lowest-spinning iron in the test. In terms of carry distance, it was the most consistent iron in the test.

Two out of our six testers chose Chikara’s CB-1 as their favorite iron. 

Chikara MB-1

  • Loft/shaft tested: 33.75 degrees, True Temper Dynamic Gold S300
  • Length: 36.75 inches
  • Construction: Forged, S25C carbon steel
  • Consistency Ranking (carry distance, standard deviation): 11th
  • Launch Angle Ranking (highest to lowest): 13th
  • Spin Rate Ranking (lowest to highest): 9th
  • Ball Speed Ranking (highest to lowest): 6th

Overview: Chikara’s MB-1 had 1 degree more loft than its CB equivalent. It had slightly above average ball speed (sixth), a middle-of-the-road spin rate (ninth) and a lower-than-average launch angle (13th). It was below average in terms of carry consistency (11th).

One of our six testers chose Chikara’s MB-1 irons as his favorite iron. 

Cobra Fly-Z Pro

  • Loft/shaft tested: 34 degrees, True Temper Dynamic Gold S400
  • Length: 37 inches
  • Construction: Forged, 1020 carbon steel, tungsten toe weight
  • Consistency Ranking (carry distance, standard deviation): 8th
  • Launch Angle Ranking (highest to lowest): 11th
  • Spin Rate Ranking (lowest to highest): 4th
  • Ball Speed Ranking (highest to lowest): 5th

Overview: Cobra’s Fly-Z Pro had one of the lowest average spin rates of the irons tested (fourth) and one of the highest ball speeds (fifth). Carry consistency was middle of the pack (eighth), while the launch angle was lower-than-average (11th). On a side note, the irons have a tungsten weight in the toe that is said to improve overall forgiveness by moving the center of gravity toward the toe.

Fourteen FH-1000

  • Loft/shaft tested: 34 degrees, True Temper Dynamic Gold S300
  • Length: 37 inches
  • Construction: Forged, S25C carbon steel
  • Consistency Ranking (carry distance, standard deviation): 6th
  • Launch Angle Ranking (highest to lowest): 9th
  • Spin Rate Ranking (lowest to highest): 7th
  • Ball Speed Ranking (highest to lowest): 14th

Overview: The FH-1000 had one of the slowest ball speeds in the test (14th), with an average launch angle, spin rate and carry consistency. Overall, it flew slightly lower and shorter than most of the irons in the test, but had an above average carry consistency (sixth).

Fourteen TC-888

  • Loft/shaft tested: 33 degrees, Nippon N.S. Pro Modus3 120 (S-Flex)
  • Length: 37 inches
  • Construction: Forged, S25C carbon steel
  • Consistency Ranking (carry distance, standard deviation): 2nd
  • Launch Angle Ranking (highest to lowest): 14th
  • Spin Rate Ranking (lowest to highest): 1st
  • Ball Speed Ranking (highest to lowest): 4th

Overview: Fourteen’s TC-888 were the lowest-spinning iron in our test, with one of the highest ball speeds (fourth) and the second-most-consistent carry distance. Similar to Fourteen’s pure blade, the FH-1000, the TC-888 flew lower than most of the other irons in the test and had the second-lowest launch angle.

Mizuno MP-4

  • Loft/shaft tested: 34 degrees, True Temper Dynamic Gold S300
  • Length: 36.75 inches
  • Construction: Forged, 1025E carbon steel
  • Consistency Ranking (carry distance, standard deviation): 14th
  • Launch Angle Ranking (highest to lowest): 12th
  • Spin Rate Ranking (lowest to highest): 3rd
  • Ball Speed Ranking (highest to lowest): 2nd

Overview: Mizuno’s MP-4 had the second-highest ball speed despite its standard 34-degree loft. Its spin rate ranking was third lowest, giving it one of the most impressive launch angle/spin rate ratios in our test. Its launch angle was lower than average (12th), and it ranked only 14th in carry consistency.

One of our six testers chose the MP-4 as his favorite iron. 

Nike Vapor Pro

  • Loft/shaft tested: 35 degrees, True Temper Dynamic Gold S300
  • Length: 37.25 inches
  • Construction: Forged, S25C carbon steel
  • Consistency Ranking (carry distance, standard deviation): 5th
  • Launch Angle Ranking (highest to lowest): 4th
  • Spin Rate Ranking (lowest to highest): 8th
  • Ball Speed Ranking (highest to lowest): 8th

Overview: Nike’s Vapor Pro was one of the high-launching (fourth) irons in our test. It was above average in carry consistency (fifth) and had a middle-of-the-pack spin rate (eighth) and ball speed (eighth). Testers also swung the Vapor Pro iron faster than all the others on average, and it should be noted that its stock length of 37.25 inches was the longest in the test by 0.25 inches.

Scratch AR-1 v2

  • Loft/shaft tested: 35.5 degrees, True Temper Dynamic Gold S300
  • Length: 37 inches
  • Construction: Forged, 1018 carbon steel
  • Consistency Ranking (carry distance, standard deviation): 15th
  • Launch Angle Ranking (highest to lowest): 7th
  • Spin Rate Ranking (lowest to highest): 14th
  • Ball Speed Ranking (highest to lowest): 15th

Overview: Scratch’s AR-1 v2, along with the company’s SB-1, had the second-weakest lofts of any of the irons tested. It had the slowest ball speed of any iron tested, and was the second highest-spinning iron in the test. Launch angle was average. The AR-1 v2 irons were the least consistent iron in terms of carry distance.

Scratch SB-1 v2

  • Loft/shaft tested: 35.5 degrees, True Temper Dynamic Gold S300
  • Length: 37 inches
  • Construction: Forged, 1018 carbon steel
  • Consistency Ranking (carry distance, standard deviation): 9th
  • Launch Angle Ranking (highest to lowest): 5th
  • Spin Rate Ranking (lowest to highest): 13th
  • Ball Speed Ranking (highest to lowest): 11th

Overview: Scratch’s SB-1 v2 irons launched the ball lower, faster and with less spin than the company’s AR-1 v2 irons. Launch angle (fifth) was higher than average, while carry consistency (ninth) and ball speed (11th) were below average. Spin rate (13th) was higher than average.

Titleist 714 CB

  • Loft/shaft tested: 35 degrees, True Temper Dynamic Gold S300
  • Length: 37 inches
  • Construction: Forged, 1025 carbon steel
  • Consistency Ranking (carry distance, standard deviation): 4th
  • Launch Angle Ranking (highest to lowest): 2nd
  • Spin Rate Ranking (lowest to highest): 10th
  • Ball Speed Ranking (highest to lowest): 10th

Overview: Titleist’s 714 CB was one of the most consistent irons in the test in terms of carry distance (fourth) and had the second-highest launch angle. Despite its higher-than-average loft (35 degrees), its spin rate (10th) was only slightly above average, while its ball speed (10th) was only slightly below average.

Titleist 714 MB

  • Loft/shaft tested: 35 degrees, True Temper Dynamic Gold S300
  • Length: 37 inches
  • Construction: Forged, 1025 carbon steel
  • Consistency Ranking (carry distance, standard deviation): 10th
  • Launch Angle Ranking (highest to lowest): 3rd
  • Spin Rate Ranking (lowest to highest): 6th
  • Ball Speed Ranking (highest to lowest): 13th

Overview: Titleist’s 714 MB iron launched fractionally lower than the company’s 714 CB irons and with slightly less ball speed. Spin rate (sixth) was below average and lower than the 714 CB irons, while carry consistency was 10th. Ball speed (13th) was one of the slowest tested.

Vega VM-01

  • Loft/shaft tested: 35.75 degrees, Shimada Tour Stiff
  • Length: 35.75 inches
  • Construction: Forged by Kyoei Golf
  • Consistency Ranking (carry distance, standard deviation): 12th
  • Launch Angle Ranking (highest to lowest): 8th
  • Spin Rate Ranking (lowest to highest): 15th
  • Ball Speed Ranking (highest to lowest): 9th

Overview: Vega’s VM-01 was below average in carry consistency (12th) and ball speed (ninth). Launch angle was average (eighth). It had the highest loft (35.75 degrees) of any iron in the test was also the highest-spinning iron.

Yonex Ti Hybrid MB

  • Loft/shaft tested: 34.5 degrees, Nippon N.S. Pro Modus3 120 (S-Flex)
  • Length: 37 inches
  • Construction: Forged, 1025 carbon steel, titanium insert in club head
  • Consistency Ranking (carry distance, standard deviation): 13th
  • Launch Angle Ranking (highest to lowest): 10th
  • Spin Rate Ranking (lowest to highest): 12th
  • Ball Speed Ranking (highest to lowest): 3rd

Overview: Yonex’s Ti Hybrid MB had one of the fastest ball speeds (third) in our test, with a higher-than-average spin rate (12th), and a lower-than-average launch angle (10th) and carry consistency (13th). On a side note, the irons have an 18-gram titanium insert in the club head that is said to lower their center of gravity and improve forgiveness.

One of our testers chose Yonex’s Ti Hybrid MB irons as his favorite. 

Ball Speed Data


Launch Angle Data


Spin Rate Data


Smash Factor Data


Landing Angle Data


Carry Distance Data


Carry Consistency Data


Club Speed Data


Attack Angle Data


Max Height Data


The Testers and What They Chose

Player 1

  • Handicap: 1 (multiple time club champion)
  • Age: 58
  • Favorite Irons: Chikara MB-1

Player 2

  • Handicap: +2 (former mini-tour player)
  • Age: 26
  • Favorite Iron: Yonex Ti Hybrid MB

Player 3

  • Handicap: +2 (former college golfer)
  • Age: 33
  • Favorite Iron: Mizuno MP-4

Player 4

  • Handicap: +1 (former college player)
  • Age: 33
  • Favorite Iron: Fourteen FH-1000

Player 5

  • Handicap: NA (current teaching pro)
  • Age: 33
  • Favorite Iron: Chikara CB-1

Player 6

  • Handicap: 0 (current teaching pro)
  • Age: 58
  • Favorite Iron: Chikara CB-1
Your Reaction?
  • 280
  • LEGIT52
  • WOW26
  • LOL15
  • IDHT8
  • FLOP17
  • OB9
  • SHANK86


Not seeing your comment? Read our rules and regulations. Click "Report comment" to alert GolfWRX moderators to offensive or inappropriate comments.
  1. It’s surprising KZG blades aren’t included. Their blades are made by Kyoei Golf in Japan, the same people who make the Vega heads. But they have a number of different styles of blades. KZGs are different than Vegas.

  2. Talked to executives at Ben Hogan Golf. They don’t even appreciate it when people refer to the new Fort Worth irons as “blades”. Then throw CB’s and MB’s into it? . . . it’s like they’re just defining anything with a thin topline as a “blade”.

  3. So I liked the write up but agree with many that (paraphrasing) this is not a true apples to apples club test (i.e. shafts, lofts, cb vs true blade, etc) but IMO the data representing ball speed, smash factor, spin rates are a good enough indicator for the rest of us to nail down potential testing/demos based on our personal preferences…… Would love to see this broken out to CB category, true blade category with like loft, shaft combos.

    • The authors of this article are morons. They termed the piece Blade Shootout but included Cavity back’s and Muscle back’s but nary a true blade.

      This was a terrible article and I feel dumber now that I read it. Yikes!

  4. So, it’s Golfsmith that has re-defined what a “blade” is? A true “blade” has NO cavity, nor should it be referred to as a “CB”. Those re-defined designations must be a “feel-good” term designed to make CAVITY-back players feel better about themselves and so they can say “Yeah, I play “blades”.

  5. The more I hit my mp 4s the less I care the little bit of forgiveness I am sacrificing. I am starting to lose the lingering ego/doubt/ etc.. What is my motivation, I guess I will worry about that moral phsyco dilemma/ hang up etc.. For the real world, ( who I marry, etc..) ? 2 thoughts here, when I flush my MP4 5 iron into our tenth green, watch it either roll on check up or stop dead while II am doing my best hogan at merrion pose, then feel that beauty between my calloused hands and terry cloth, feel that angle of muscle….. Oh man, then sneak a look, feigning inspection, admire it and feel that familiar thump before tossing my tools up on my back give little whistle like the old old spice sailor. Uffdah. I. Love love my 09 Xforged and would stack it up against any of these, but fellas, we are a club of enthusiasts here, some would say even a fellowship. A fellowship implies a quest. Fellows are chosen for a higher purpose by a higher power. I am also a fellow in a twelve step program. My golf fellows know what I mean when I say that golf a big part of my spiritual quest. Some of us appreciate the practical info and enjoy the ensuing debate etc.. That these trials provide. Let’s see some positivity men! Are my xforged blades? They feel soooo good to me well struck, but they don’t feel like a blade when I whipe them off. Who cares. See you wrxers’ at the turn as we trudge the road to happy destiny. Now where to go from the xforged w 6.0. Time for this 8 capper, with a love of forgiveness and sole help, to upgrade!

  6. These are the clubs tested
    And these are the results….
    What’s the problem
    If you don’t like it, move on in life
    Noone cares what you think anyways

    • “Blades” refers to the lack of offset, thin sole with minimal bounce, and a thin topline… typically a smaller length as well. There are both “cavity back” and “muscleback” “Blades” in the test. There is no need to start over for your lack of understanding. That said, I myself consider musclebacks the truest form of a blade, but if the three primary ingredients are there, then it is still a blade by definition.

      I agree with others, Miura should have been included in this test. Mizuno’s newest MB is no joke though. Love ‘em.

  7. I thought this test would have the Taylormade Tour Preferred MB considering the photo for the article is actually the TP MB, but I guess Taylormade’s irons just aren’t good enough for this?? Explanation please?

  8. Lets summarize two days of complaining: You didn’t test all possible brands, in identical and/or all shaft combinations, with each head bent to the same angle, by a robot and by real players. In conclusion, all club tests are meaningless because it is all about personal preference and player feel. Boom.

  9. So what happened to the AP2’s, Ping S-55, Mizuno MP-54, Callaway Apex Pro, and other irons in that category?

    Aren’t these the clubs that a majority of folks on the site play?

    • Those fit into another category, for which I think there was already an article. The AP2s, MP54s, and Apex Pros are not blades, which is why they were probably included in the other article.

  10. Some serious JDM love here. Good to see. Not enough people consider JDM clubs and they are often the best you can buy. Might be a little more expensive, but hey, who cares if you they are perfect for you.

    • There isn’t a single JDM club in this test. They are all available and marketed internationally. Hell, Vega is even a British company. JDM = Japanese Domestic Market, meaning a product that is developed for and sold exclusively in the Japanese market. Examples would be Miura Giken, Royal Collection, Tsuruya, PRGR, Baldo, Crazy, Jbeam, XXIO, S-Yard..

      • I know what it means mate but check your facts before you correct someone. XXIO is widely available in golf stores in Australia so is that JDM now? You knew what I was getting at. Oh and Vega? Didn’t see a lot of love for them in the test so how is that relevant?

      • Yeah, sorry, bud, but I’m with Rich. You’re definition doesn’t seem consistent since Miura and XXIO aren’t sold “exclusively” in Japan. You can get those over here in the states. Maybe the clubs you listed are actually JDM, but your description doesn’t match up.

            • The Lines Are Blurring
              These differences, however, are no longer as clear as they once were. Forged blades are now made with shallow cavities to improve accuracy, and cavity backs are being made that provide increased feel and maneuverability. In fact, when manufacturers such as Mizuno unveil new club designs, it can be difficult to see any major difference between their player’s clubs and their game-improvement designs. The once-clear divide between blades and cavity backs is vanishing as the two join and form new easier-to-hit irons
              Definition from GolfSmith.

  11. Perfectly fair test. To everyone moaning about different lofts and lies….. Best way to determine what number iron a club is, is the spin / 1000. Holds true for Trackman PGA tour averages (7097 for a 7 iron, yes slightly higher swing speeds than in this test). In that case the Yonex, Scratch and Vega clubs are closer to 8 irons than 7s.
    Loft alone does not determine spin, launch angle or smash factor. You have to look at the composite design of the head, CG placement etc.
    Completely pointless bending all the clubs identically, away from how each was designed.

  12. I guess for all the shaft junkies out there who split hairs that the same shafts weren’t used are intentionally over-looking the data that shows a club measured with less loft can actually launch higher and travel slower than a club with the same shaft and one additional degree of loft (see Ben Hogan v. Cobra Fly Z Pro comparison). Admittedly, there are points where what would be expected actually pans out, but this just goes to show that what matters most in selecting and fitting a club should be the club head, not shaft (not to be taken to mean shaft isn’t important, but I will probably get roasted on this by other readers)

  13. im a 1.8 call it 2 handicap if you will. 26 years old and have tested many of the irons.. its all subjective but the callaway mb’s are the best feeling of the bunch, even beyond the mp4’s and im a mizzy fanboi…good list none the less. i still game my mp68’s and mp54’s (step muscles blah blah)

  14. The fact that the Chikara CB-1’s did so well go to show you don’t have to be a big name with big budgets to create a nice iron. Just find an open model catalog head that came out in Japan 3-4 years ago and lightly tweak it and you have a gamer…

  15. I think it is a pretty good club test. You cant have every model, from every maker. But there is some good data. It doesnt bother me that some arent blades. Wish they would have golfers of all levels test them. If your not scratch or better it’s hard to relate too. Testing a 7 iron from each set, is that fair test. But this is golfwrx, everyone here plays top level golf.

    • WRX site and forums SCREAMS that shafts completely change clubs yet 4 different shafts were used among the 15 heads…..Is there even a slight chance that Player 2 likes the Nippon over the S300 shaft? If so what do you think you should do inorder for a fair comparison….you don’t even need a High School diploma for that one. And if Miura, Epon, and Bridgstone didn’t provide clubs just use your own like Top Gear does when car companies wont provide…..

  16. The dumbest thing about this entire Club Test is that there wasn’t a true players CB category. They were add ons to the “players” category that were really game improvement while game improvement really should’ve been super game improvement. I think the fact that the Titliest AP2 failed to make any list says it all. Especially on a site like this where the most common demographic is playing a players CB

  17. Not here to complain. Just thought it was funny the TaylorMade Tour Preffered MB was left off but that the picture behind the title is clearly one with a shopped WRX stamp. I’m assuming they were left off because they were a 2014 model?

  18. This probably confirms that no matter what the Trackman numbers tell you, you are gonna play what feels best in your hands. Best thing to do is get fitted by a professional and not by a magazine or something you happen to run into online. To be able to utilize the best equipment, it first and foremost has to fit the player and their swing characteristics.

  19. Like Chuck said earlier, I think there’s plenty of valuable information presented, even if it’s not a direct “apples to apples” type of comparison. Having said that…

    I think that a future test where each tester visits the testing facility on a separate day and is able to hit clubs built with the shaft specs of their current gamers would provide data that WRXers would find valuable. Allowing some time between test events would give time to re-shaft the clubs to each player’s personal shaft preferences.

    The major downside being, or course, that it would require a lot of extra money spent on shafts/grips (public math: 6 golfers x 15 club heads = 90 shafts). If the WRX coffers are a little low for that, I’d be willing to bet that you could crowdsource it, as long as people were sure that the data being produced would be as close to a true apples-to-apples comparison as we could reasonably hope for.

  20. With so much effort going into this comparison, why not use the same shafts and loft, on a robot? What about 5 or 6 different shafts on each club? Why isn’t anyone spec’ing club heads like this?
    If it’s too expensive to do, take up a collection. lol. Also, to call an article a “Blade Iron Shootout” that includes cavity backs doesn’t make much sense.

      • I would certainly like to, but not really the job of an individual.
        And seems it is even beyond the scope of any one website.
        Why not a collaborative effort?
        GolfWRX + GolfShaftReviews + GolfLabs?

        • I’ll start….
          I hit my g20 purple dot 7 iron 185
          Sometimes it goes straight. Sometimes I push it. Sometimes I hit low hooks. When I play cheap courses the ball releases hard on the green. When I play at the country club in my town (soft greens) I see a ball mark and the ball is about 2 yards farther …..
          Why would anyone factor someone else’s results in determining what’s best for their own game

  21. Do the same test with the same loft, length, SW and shaft in each club and then the numbers would mean something.. I believe the point of the test was to show the different launch characteristics of teh club heads, which was not accomplished bc of the different setups.

  22. So you take the time to secure each club for testing, measure the data and break all the numbers down, but you don’t bother bending each iron to the same loft and lie to remove a few of the variables and give the test a bit more accuracy.

      • Disagree – looks to me like there is as much if not more cavity in the CB’s tested here than the s55 has. I’d argue that the s55 have more place here among the blades than the majority of the CB’s. Would have been nice to see them compared.

        • I understand the bit about the CBs being a bit odd, they aren’t a true blade, just a close cousin, but the S55s are much closer to the AP2s. They are designed to “look” like a blade, but the insert and tungsten weighting make them forgiving like a player’s cavity. An odd bird nevertheless because they are the most blade-like iron ping makes, but doesn’t make them blades. Rather they are the irons look like blades and have some of the workability of blades, but underneath the hood they have the perimeter weighting and forgiveness of a cavity back.

  23. what i learned from this test … that all of these blades are very similar and little separates them.

    what i learned from the comments ….is that readers will forever be dissatisfied, are impossible to please, and will always find something to B* about

    • I believe the author noted why some of the brands you mentioned weren’t included. From the article: Editor’s note – “We weren’t able to test every model we hoped to for this list. (Miura) and Epon declined to participate, and (Bridgestone) was unable to supply us with samples in time for the test.”

  24. Unless these were consistent specs/shafts then the information is pretty limited in it’s usefulness. Nice to see what is out there, but there are too many variations in the clubs be able to draw any conclusions. Having said that I appreciate it’s going to be almost impossible to get so many clubs from different suppliers all at the same specs.

  25. As someone who only plays blades I will agree that the shaft can make more of a difference than what is seen in these results. May be a point to consider. Also, no wilson FG100’s? That actually is a true blade iron and many of the ones you tested aren’t.

    The concept was good, the execution of this test left a lot on the table.

  26. Not sure that it would make much difference, but I found it very interesting that the Hogans tested came with True Temper Dynamic Gold S300 shafts. Mine all came with KBS Tour 90s.

  27. So I think this is some pretty interesting information. I don’t think you’ve hidden anything, and I don’t think you’ve tried to skew any results.

    But testing an iron with DG S400, and another one with a Nippon Modus 3, and another with a KBS, is probably as much of a “shaft” test, as it is an “iron” test. It is all information, of course; and I tend to view all information as having value.

    So thank you, for all of the time and everyone’s effort put into this. Interesting reading.

  28. There are too many factors involved and the ranking is not fair in my opinion. Just one example, how can one complain about Apex’s ball speed ranked 12th while the club speed is 2nd to last? It still delivers 2nd highest smash factor and 4th in carry distance. To me that’s impressive.

  29. Why include 5 cavity backs in a blade comparison article ? LOL ! A third of the sample … and two of them even have “CB” in the product name, which is a bit of a give-away n’est-ce pas ? :-)

    • I agree. If this was a blade comparison, CB’s shouldn’t have been included. Also, lofts were all over the place and shafts were different between clubs. The information gleaned from this comparison is null and void, in my opinion. It tells me very little because of the compounding variables.

      • Titleist CBs are basically blades. I have hit both and I can’t tell the difference in forgiveness at all. Seller said that the blades are for pickers and the CBs for someone that likes to take a bigger divot. After hitting them both I agreed.

      • The thing that cracks me up is the modern day focus on all these launch monitor stats. What about outcomes ? Real shots at a target ? The main thing I am interested in with an iron is consistant distance for any given shot, and tightness of dispersion. In short, “how close to the pin am I ?” Not this crap about smash factor, launch angle blah blah blah. Workability also important – can I hit fades, draws, low flight, high flight etc etc, depending on how I see the shot in front of me.

  30. Yes the reviewer stated this is an incomplete list, but choosing to review the Titlesit 714 CB (not really a blade) but not reviewing the S55 let alone the TMAG TP MB, (a commonly used blade)…curious decision..

  31. I have the Vega VM 01 with kbs tour v shafts and love them. They give me better distance and consistency than my miura tournament blades or my scratch SB 1 did. They are nearly as forgiving as my Bridgestone J40 CB. The large muscle in back produces nice high flat shots with good stopping power/spin.

    I really wish golfwrx would have tested the J15 MB and the Srixon z945, they seem really popular on the forums.

    • Agreed. You didn’t test Wilson Staff irons, and if you are talking straightforward blade irons played on tour, affordable, and well engineered, then this is no test at all. No reasonable person would/could ever even purchase Fourteen or Chikara. Super expensive and hard to find. W/S makes the best irons in this category, and from a value perspective it’s a runaway. Leaving out Taylormade and PING S series was a miss as well.

    • I couldn’t agree with this more. Wilson FG tour 100’s are one of the most under rated premier blades out there. They have to be included next time! Not a big TMAG blade fan, but they have to be included as well! Having Titleist CB’s in this category is nonsense. I know they are “pretty much a blade” but so are a million other Player’s Irons. True blades or nothing in this category please!

      Also, I don’t know how it would be done, or if it would even work… But I would LOVE to see the best Blade/CB combo setups out there. Would be nice to find out what brands merge/blend best down their product line with something like 7,8,9 Blade 4,5,6 Cavity Back or something along those lines. I feel like alot of the players on this site play combo setups, and could benefit from a test/information like this.