Connect with us

Equipment

Spotted: Titleist 718 MB, CB, AP2, T-MB, AP3 and AP1 Irons

Published

on

We spotted Titleist’s new 718 irons at the Quicken Loans National, where the clubs were officially released to PGA Tour players for testing. We photographed the company’s new AP1, AP2, T-MB, CB and MB irons, as well as its all-new AP3 model. The irons have also been released to players at the European Tour’s HNA Open de France.

Titleist_718_Irons_Side

“Product seeding and player validation is a critical step in the go-to-market process for all Titleist equipment,” Titleist said in a press release. “Earning the validation of the game’s best players, as well as dedicated golfers at every level of the game, ensures that new products are faithful to the Titleist brand promise of innovation, performance and quality excellence.”

The 718 Lineup

PrototypeTitleist718Irons

From Left: Titleist’s AP1, AP3, AP2, T-MB, CB and MB Irons (Photo from Titleist).

Titleist isn’t sharing any details of the new irons at this time, nor do we expect any details from the company any time soon (those will likely come closer to the retail launch, which is expected this fall). The most anticipated details are about the company’s new AP3 irons. We can make some educated guesses about the AP3 based on our photos, as well as a photo Titleist released of the clubs.

Titleist_718_Irons_Soles

The new AP3 irons seems to fill a gap between the company’s AP1 and AP2 irons. It appears to be larger in size than the AP2, which is one of the most popular iron models on the PGA Tour. It looks smaller than the AP1, however, Titleist’s longest-flying iron model that targets higher-handicap golfers.

Titleist_718_Irons_Toplines

On Friday, Ian Poulter shared photos of the new 718 irons in his bag on Instagram. He appeared to be testing a mix of AP3 and T-MB irons as his long and mid irons, along with a mix of AP2 and MB irons for his short irons. The arrangement indicates that the AP3 irons, or at least the AP3 long irons, will have hot faces like Titleist’s 716 AP1 and T-MB irons to create additional height and distance.

718 MB

Titleist_718_MB_Cavity Titleist_718_MB_Topline

More Photos of the 718 MB and CB Irons

718 CB

Titleist_718_CB_toplineTitleist_718_CB_Cavity

More Photos of the 718 MB and CB Irons

718 T-MB

Titleist_718_T-MB_Cavity Titleist_718_T-MB_Topline

More Photos of the 718 T-MB and AP1 Irons

718 AP2

Titleist_718_AP2_Cavity

Titleist_718_Ap2_Topline

More Photos of the 718 AP2 and AP3 Irons

718 AP3

Titleist_718_AP3_CavityTitleist_718_AP3_ToplineMore Photos of the 718 AP2 and AP3 Irons

718 AP1

Titleist_718_AP1_Cavity Titleist_718_AP1_ToplineMore Photos of the 718 T-MB and AP1 Irons

More Photos

Your Reaction?
  • 696
  • LEGIT58
  • WOW76
  • LOL15
  • IDHT15
  • FLOP25
  • OB13
  • SHANK69

We share your golf passion. You can follow GolfWRX on Twitter @GolfWRX, Facebook and Instagram.

22 Comments

22 Comments

  1. ooffa

    Jul 10, 2017 at 5:12 pm

    Grumpy much!

  2. JD

    Jun 28, 2017 at 8:32 pm

    So do the 718 AP2’s have tungsten in 4-7 and no tungsten in 8-P just like the 716’s?

  3. DrRob1963

    Jun 27, 2017 at 3:00 am

    Any idea about the specs???

  4. I'm Ron burgundy??

    Jun 26, 2017 at 10:53 pm

    So are the AP3 supposed to be similar to the AP2 Korean Forged? I sure hope so cause they’re fantastic looking.

  5. Twalkrz

    Jun 26, 2017 at 10:22 pm

    Titleist and callaway work together? The new drivers look similar and these look like Apex irons.

  6. H8R

    Jun 26, 2017 at 8:13 pm

    AP3 will do well

  7. D

    Jun 26, 2017 at 7:53 pm

    It’s great that Titleist does not add clutter to the AP3 by etching the word “forged”. They should remove the word “forged” from the AP2 as well. Best to avoid as much badging as possible.

    • Beefhouse

      Jun 27, 2017 at 6:42 am

      If it’s forged they’ll you about it. Fairly strong guess that the AP3s are not forged…

  8. golfraven

    Jun 26, 2017 at 6:05 pm

    The more I look at the CBs the more I can see the subtle changes Titleist made. I like the fact the head is partly chrome (back, sole) and brushed (face) which gives it a nice style and should reflect less. I don’t think this was as dominent oin the 716 line. Same for MBs from what I can see. The topline of the MBs is like a toothpick – rather sick. Fans of the 690 might love it.
    718 line looks OK but does not excite me as much as the Bridgestone Tour B CB and MB. Will need to compare both in fall.

  9. Sef

    Jun 26, 2017 at 3:30 pm

    Other than dropping the word tungsten the CB is very similar to the 716. The line above the muscle in the cavity changed slightly, but not much going on there.

    • golfraven

      Jun 26, 2017 at 5:36 pm

      Fully agree. That was my first impression too. You as well may but a set of 716 CBs on ebay or new for couple 100 less. Not sure this line is going to fly of the shelf.

    • izzlist of izzles

      Jul 4, 2017 at 1:07 am

      Subtle difference, true but I think it’s the bullocks.
      Wish I could hit it.

    • Jball

      Jul 31, 2017 at 5:56 pm

      Hopefully the gap the CB’s loft a bit closer to the AP2’s. I would love a blended set, but if its a 2-3 degree change, then I’m guessing bounce starts getting out of line.

  10. Juice

    Jun 26, 2017 at 11:18 am

    They look boring but that’s what Titleist does…make boring looking clubs. They do perform and that’s the most important thing. I like the idea of the AP3. Do something new to offset the boring look.

    • Tom1

      Jun 26, 2017 at 12:14 pm

      Huh… Titleist pretty much ran these gamut with these models

    • TR1PTIK

      Jun 26, 2017 at 12:18 pm

      Some call it boring, others call it classic. No need for orange, blue, or “volt” colors that fade and wear off over time making your clubs look even more dated than they actually are. I even say that with a bag full of Nike Vapors. I’d much rather play Titleist or Mizuno irons, but I wanted (needed) fresh grooves and new tech (at a reasonable price) more than I wanted to keep playing my 735 CM’s which I still think look better. Like you said, it’s all about performance.

  11. Tom1

    Jun 26, 2017 at 10:51 am

    which one did Jordan use to win yesterday?

    • Dat

      Jun 26, 2017 at 11:02 am

      716 AP2. I can see him switching easily to the 718 since they look very similar to the 714s in a certain way. Can’t wait to try them all myself though. Classy looks.

    • Jack Nash

      Jun 26, 2017 at 3:59 pm

      Jordan used the “Horeshoe” model. Specifically made for him.

      • Robert Parsons

        Jun 26, 2017 at 6:32 pm

        What is the horseshoe model? I’m assuming that was the word you tried to type. How is it different from the AP2 off the shelf?

        • Joe

          Jun 27, 2017 at 7:25 am

          Mr Parsons are you trying to steal plans from Titleist for your next PXG irons!?

Leave a Reply

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

Accessory Reviews

Review: FlightScope Mevo

Published

on

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.

Conclusion

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?
  • 30
  • LEGIT1
  • WOW0
  • LOL2
  • IDHT0
  • FLOP2
  • OB1
  • SHANK5

Continue Reading

pga tour

Sergio Garcia WITB 2018

Published

on

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

Related:

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

Your Reaction?
  • 43
  • LEGIT5
  • WOW1
  • LOL1
  • IDHT0
  • FLOP0
  • OB0
  • SHANK1

Continue Reading

pga tour

Gary Woodland WITB 2018

Published

on

Equipment is accurate as of the 2018 Honda Classic (2/19/2018).

Driver: TaylorMade M3 440 (9 degrees)
Shaft: Acra Tour-Z RPG

Fairway Woods: TaylorMade M2 2017 (15 degrees)
Shafts: Accra Tour-Zx 4100

Driving Iron: Titleist 716 T-MB (2)
Shaft: KBS Tour C-Taper 130 X

Irons: Titleist 716 MB (4-9)
Shafts: KBS Tour C-Taper Limited Edition Black PVD 130 X

Wedges: Titleist Vokey SM7 (48-10F, 52-08F, 56-10S), Callaway Mack Daddy PM Grind (60-10)
Shafts: KBS Tour C-Taper Limited X (48), KBS Hi-Rev Black PVD S-Flex (52, 56, 60)

Putter: Scotty Cameron Circle T 009
Grip: Scotty Cameron Pistol

Golf Ball: Bridgestone Tour B X

Related:

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

Your Reaction?
  • 3
  • LEGIT0
  • WOW0
  • LOL1
  • IDHT0
  • FLOP0
  • OB0
  • SHANK1

Continue Reading

19th Hole

Facebook

Trending