Connect with us

Iron Reviews

The Big Review – Mizuno MP-62

Published

on

Ask any serious golfer what they think of Mizuno irons and you will more than likely get some variation of this: ‘Top quality forged irons with buttery soft feel’. In the years before big money contracts, Mizuno dominated the major Tours in iron usage with its MP range of irons. The MP-14, MP-29 and MP-33 are all rightly heralded as classic muscleback blades and the more recent award winning MP-32 with its cut muscle technology has proved a huge success.

Mizuno say that they only release new equipment when they are happy that they have something that is an improvement on its predecessor. For them to be releasing 4 irons sets at once indicates that some serious work has been going on in the offices of the Research and Development department. With the MX-100 and MX-200 aimed at the game improvement market and the MP-52 being aimed at the mid to low handicapper, Bag Chatter got to test the newest in Mizuno’s long line of better player irons, the MP-62.

Of all the more recent Mizuno irons, few have been held in higher regard than the MP-33. The classic muscleback blade produced an enviable combination of performance and feel that was adored by the best players in the world. That said, the uptake on Tour of the cavity back MP-60 irons showed that even the best players in the world appreciate a little more forgiveness. Mizuno have obviously taken this on-board, combined the principles behind both and created the dual-muscle cavity back that is the MP-62. When testing the prototype irons with Tour players Mizuno taped up the back of the club so that the players could not tell whether they were playing blades or cavity backs – the MP-62 is the result of the iron that dominated the players preferred choice.

MP-62 showing the Dual Muscle

The MP-62 is described as a Dual Muscle by Mizuno. Unlike a simple muscleback blade where the muscle section is straight across the back, the muscleback on the MP-62 is separated across both the cavity and the perimeter. Unlike many of the recent Mizuno irons, there is no sign of the cut-muscle technology that made the MP-32 so stunning. Mizuno go on to describe this iron as a Tour-ready design that came out from numerous prototypes from the Tour workshop. With minimal offset, a centrally located center of gravity and the same sole grind as one of the finest iron strikers in the game, Luke Donald, this is a club aimed at the better player – one who does not need any help controlling their shot pattern but instead is looking to work the ball, both left and right and high and low.

Technical Specs

Iron 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 PW
Loft 21 24 27 31 35 39 43 47
Lie 59.5 60.0 60.5 61.0 61.5 62.0 62.5 63.0
Length 38.75″ 38.25″ 37.75″ 37.25″ 36.75″ 36.25″ 35.75″ 35.50″
Swing weight D1-D3 D1-D3 D1-D3 D1-D3 D1-D3 D1-D3 D1-D3 D2-D4

Material: 1025E pure select mild steel
Forged U-Grooves (unaffected by the recent USGA and R&A ruling on grooves)
Standard shafts: steel – Dynamic Gold R300, S300, Project X 5.5, Exsar IS2 Tour Spec (R, S, X)
Custom shafts: Dynamic Gold Superlite, Dynamic Gold High Launch, Dynalite Gold XP, Project X, Rifle, Nippon N.S. Pro 950GH, Nippon N.S. Pro 1150GH Tour
Standard grips: Tour Pride M21
Lie Adjustment: +/- 2 degrees
Length Adjustment: +/- 0.5″

Face-on view showing the classic box toe and heel-toe cambered sole


Appearance

An exceptionally handsome set of irons. With the small face and double nickel chrome plated finish at address the MP-62 is almost impossible to distinguish from a blade. The long irons have a classic box toe and sit tight behind the ball with a small but reassuring amount of offset. With the shorter irons the high toe is still present which makes aligning the ball very simple and the transition from hosel to face is as unobtrusive as you could wish for and the top line is super sleek. All things considered, this verges into a new iron category – the cavity blade, where the club is completely blade like at address but still offers the benefits of a cavity back.

Can you tell which is which? MP-62 on the left, MP-32 on the right

Feel

With the research performed by Mizuno into vibration and frequency analysis – where the pitch, volume, length of sound generated by each head was analyzed – a clean strike with these delivers a unbelievably pure sensation that is frighteningly addictive. The Grain-Flow forged heads ring like a bell when you flush one out of the middle. The feel is amazingly solid and harks back far more to the MP-33 than the MP-32 or MP-60 that this iron replaces in the Mizuno line-up. Combined with that trademark buttery soft feel that all Mizuno’s have and you have 8 pieces of heaven.

Thins and shots missed towards the toe or heel are dealt with surprisingly well for such a blade-like club with little or no unwanted vibration, but hit this club too high on the clubface and you are well and truly told that you got it wrong.

Performance

While it is clearly a cavity back, the amount of perimeter weighting is fairly small so while it is more forgiving than a pure blade like the MP-67 or MP-33, it is closer to them than a cavity back like the MP-52. With the minimal offset and the sheer mass of the dual muscle behind the ball, you would expect the ball flight to be mid-low and you are not disappointed. The natural ball flight of this club is one that will pierce through any wind, resisting ballooning or any tendency to be blown off-course. The marketing info contained the phrase “Neutral left / right shotmaker’s bias” which has confused some people into thinking that there is a bias towards playing a fade. This is incorrect as just a few shots will show you that there is no shot bias and that what the marketing blurb is saying is that the neutral COG allows you to move the ball both left and right with equal ease. The same few shots will also show you that these are definitely shape makers clubs. These are a paper-width less workable than the MP-67 blades – but only a paper-width – but the cavity and peripheral weighting makes them far more forgiving in comparison.

As mentioned earlier, the shape of the sole is directly taken from Luke Donald’s personal grind – having both a rolling leading edge and a rolled trailing edge to ensure consistent turf interaction – and has an aggressive camber from back to front and from heel to toe, allowing both diggers and pickers to play their natural shots.

MP-62 6 iron sole grind

Distance is also very good and in combination with the Project X shafts fitted in the review set we were able to really get the ball out there with very little extra effort. This excellent distance was not at the expense of any consistency as the dual muscle setup really came into its own when flag hunting. If you put the same swing on the club, you are able to predict exactly what the ball is going to do: shot height, shape and spin levels are all served on a plate and it’s just a question of what you want to do.

Conclusion

Everything about the MP-62 is 5-10% better than I expected, and I expected them to be seriously good. Mizuno’s determination to only release clubs when they feel they are improvements on what came before has paid off and the high level of customization and the wide array of shaft options mean there is no excuse for not getting the setup that is just right for you. While these are aimed at the better player, the dual muscle weighting makes these more accessible than a blade for almost exactly the same incredible level of performance but it does take a consistent iron player to get the most out of these. Mizuno’s stated aim for these clubs was to produce a Tour ready golf club and they absolutely have succeeded. Fans of blades and Mizuno irons in general will love these and I’m sure that they will also gather a few converts along the way.

Mizuno at their absolute best.

For more information visit golf.mizunoeurope.com or www.mizunousa.com/golf

Your Reaction?
  • 37
  • LEGIT5
  • WOW4
  • LOL1
  • IDHT0
  • FLOP0
  • OB0
  • SHANK3

29 Comments

29 Comments

  1. BobW

    Jun 29, 2009 at 3:36 pm

    I’m always amazed that there are golfers who want to argue that only blades produce the best feel/shot shape/etc. If that’s true, then why do more than 70% of PGA tour players play cavity back clubs? That is the logic for me. Mizuno makes fine golf clubs, but no one can argue that a pure blade is easier to hit consistently that a cavity. No one has commented that Mizuno also offers the chance to mix blades with cavities, or cavity with other models of cavity backs.

  2. Sara

    Jun 23, 2009 at 11:29 pm

    Pretty cool post. I just found your site and wanted to say
    that I have really liked reading your posts. Anyway
    I’ll be subscribing to your blog and I hope you post again soon!

  3. James Lawler

    Jun 23, 2009 at 8:04 am

    Absolute rubbish MJ – a soft girly fade and a nice lazy draw are produced from different swing paths, NOT different clubs. Remember, there is a difference between ball flight and ball height. If you can nail an MP-67 you should crush an MP-62. If you owned MP-32’s and MP-67’s you wouldn’t heed the advice of a shop guy and yield to hitting an MP-57 – a real cavity

  4. brian

    Jun 17, 2009 at 5:51 pm

    After playing my first 4 rounds with these clubs I felt compelled to post a review. I previously played the Mizuno MP 67 (S300 shaft) and loved the classic look, feel, and performance of a true player’s muscle back blade. However, after a year with them i was still unable to consistently hit them where i wanted. They seemed like just too much club for someone who plays only 1-2x’s/week. When i hit them pure, it was amazing, unfortunately it just wasn’t on every shot.

    In comes the MP 52s. These clubs are just truly amazing it’s not fair to my friends i play with. They are straight as an arrow, have great trajectory, amazing Mizuno Buttery feel, and yet are still workable left and right. With all the forgiveness that the 67’s just did not deliver. I’m usually a high 80s low 90s player, but i just shot a 79 for the first time with a pair of 82s and an 84 the first four times i used them!! I can’t believe it. The confidence these clubs inspires are great. I suggest the Project X shafts for players who think the S300s just don’t feel right. I got them in 5.5 flex. Overall, I highly recommend these clubs. Mizuno sacrificed nothing in accomplishing a truly forgiving, player’s style club. Feel is great, trajectory is fantastic and the performance is unattested by any other club.

  5. Walt Shuler

    May 27, 2009 at 9:54 am

    MacGregor MT muscle backs from the late 70s. Remember those? I got out of those clubs finally in 1991 and lived life in the perimeter weighted world of Titleist DTR (’91 – 2003) and then PING IST (2003 – ’09). Finally, I managed to find my soulmates again in the product known as the MIZUNO MP62. One-half inch longer S300 Gold TT shafts and a 1-degree upright build is all it has taken to fall completely in love with the game again. I carry a 7 handicap and in my second round with the MP62 I forged an Even Par round of 35 on the back nine from 3,300 yards. Dollar bill divots. A ball flight that can be easily controlled for penetration (wind) or butterfly landings with a controlled high fade, the new set of MP62 have me reliving the glory days of “blades” but with a nominal dose of forgiveness. Sure, there’s been a little sting here in there but I haven’t begun my work on the practice range to build a solid relationship with the MP62 yet, from 3 iron down to PW. I have ZERO worry that my move into the MIZNO MP62 was the right move for me this Summer.

  6. Doug Maher

    Apr 16, 2009 at 1:12 am

    The MP 62s are a players iron. I played the 67s and noticed that the 62s feel just as good, and hit the ball just as good flush. If you ever mis-hit the ball which all of us do, unless you are Tom Watson or Fred Couples, the ball won’t go offline as bad as the 67s. Overall they are a 67 but more forgiving, and they are extremely workable.

  7. MJ

    Apr 11, 2009 at 11:05 pm

    Having owned MP 32’s ans 67’s (Both were MINT) I hit the 62’s.
    They were crap. Hit a soft girly fade with them. The guy said maybe I would be more suited to a 57. Hit that worse. I said give me a 67. I flushed it so pure and sweet, he made me hit another.
    The purest sweetest shot with a nice lazy draw. Time after time.
    I said don’t give me CAVITY CRAP. I want a real blade. Mizuno release a TRUE Players club a REAL replacement for the MP67 and I will buy it. I will not listen to your HYPE. Stop releasing Cavities.
    Go back and make a Real blade to replace the 67. I have since gone to Callaway Prototype with TTTC X-1 shafts and they are mint.
    I would love to try a New Mizuno blade with the TTTC X-1s in it. If Mizuno don’t bring back a Pure blade, then I may get another set of MP67’s. If you like cavities, go the 62. If you are a Blade man, stay away. The 62 is not a blade, and it does NOT behave like a Blade. The Mp 32’s were great, but I liked the 67’s even better. The 62’s are not in their league. Not even close. They should be compared to the MP60 not the MP67. Articles LIE, Ball Flight does not lie. I love Mizuno. I believe they make the Greatest irons on the planet. But they would be 33’s and 32’s and 67’s Please continue something on this path. Regards MJ

  8. mr yeager

    Feb 19, 2009 at 1:13 pm

    I have a set of MP-32’s and absolutely love them. I haven’t been able to hit these yet but would love too. Ive had my 32’s for 5 years now so it might be time for some new irons. I dont even know if I need to hit them before I buy them. mizuno makes the best irons of any club company out there for lower handicaps and im glad to see that they are still producing something for low handicaps as it seems everyone else is trying to get you to buy something very forgiving with huge offset and thick top line.

  9. teedubyuh

    Feb 2, 2009 at 11:18 pm

    I got these new MP-62 custom fit with the dynamic gold S-300. Ah yeah! These are wicked sweet. The best forged iron out. Mizuno just keeps on making their irons better and better. These play unbelievable. Great distance, trajectory, accuracy, and pretty much anything you can think of. Less offset, thin sole and topline. A true player’s iron. Mizuno’s reputation precedes itself, the best forged iron in the game hands down.

  10. Mr Fingers

    Jan 19, 2009 at 8:53 am

    I have just bought a set of MP 62. Took a few practice rounds/driving range to get use to,but think I have finally got it to work for me. Played a couple rounds in really harsh winds in Cape Town South Africa and believe me the wind did not stand a chance.

    It should take a mid to low handicap a month or two to get the clubs to work for them. Great clubs

  11. rickm

    Dec 7, 2008 at 2:10 am

    Just purchased some mp 57s after playing mx 19 for quite sometime. I am a mid handicap and now wish I would’ve waited for the mp 57’s anybody have some feed back on both the 52’s and 57’s

  12. Michael Mason

    Nov 6, 2008 at 8:39 am

    Phil

    There’s a post on the Mizuno Europe site about this.

    http://golf.mizunoeurope.com/resources/faqsearch.php?id=1336&cat=&search=left%20hand

    Looks like there might be something in the pipeline.

  13. Phil M

    Oct 31, 2008 at 9:29 am

    As a lefty, I was in love with the MP32s. After 3-4 years of loving them and waiting for their replacement from Mizuno, they’re finally here – BUT NOT IN LEFT HAND !!!!!

    Have since bought a set of Miuras – at least as good as the MP32s….

    Mizuno – if you’re listening – you make wonderful clubs…… Just wish you’d make at least one higher end lefty set ( I do have a set of MP57s which are great too, but they lack the surgical finesse that the MP32s had)…..

  14. Markus

    Oct 27, 2008 at 7:30 am

    Any feedback on how the MP62 compares to the MP60 ? I wonder if I should switch.

  15. James Lawler

    Oct 21, 2008 at 4:13 am

    Brave comments from Big Lou. While the need for wanting Mizuno to stick to making “real clubs” it is a bit below the belt to compare them to the shovel makers of Callaway and Ping (I cannot bare the sight of any Callaway or Ping iron, but the x-forged is a step in the right direction). I have hit the MP62’s and they are by no means “choppers clubs”. Yes they are a lot more forgiving than the classic MP33’s, MP37’s, etc., and yes the short irons are a bit bigger than you would expect. However, if you feel the need to punish yourself at least 20 times per round and love zingy fingers there are many sets of MP11’s and MP14’s on eBay……

  16. Ferando

    Oct 11, 2008 at 2:51 am

    Finally the Mizuno Demo Van came to Madrid (Spain). A pitty that they only had a couple of 6 irons with the same DG 300R. I tested them for 45 minutes alongside the MP 52 (same 6 iron and shaft). Conclussion: they are great!: better feeling and NO less forgiving than the MP 52. Compared to my MP 67, they are much easier to meet the sweet spot consistently.

    I would have liked to test them with the Project X and Nippons though.

  17. Pman

    Oct 6, 2008 at 11:15 pm

    Good review. I hit the MP62s next to my MP30s and I didn’t notice enough of a difference to buy a new set, even though I would like a slightly more forgiving iron. Any comments?

  18. Big Lou

    Sep 30, 2008 at 11:48 pm

    I hate to say this, but Mizuno looks like they are going soft. All the hot air in the world can try to explain away how great these new irons are, but one look at them and there’s no hiding the fact they are choppers clubs. If I wanted to buy an oversized forgiving cavity back I’d go look at Ping and Callaway. When I think Mizuno, I think forged muscle back blades in their purest form. I’m not thinking oversized hackers shovels like the MP62 seems to be.

  19. Gary

    Sep 30, 2008 at 10:45 pm

    Great review!! Confirmed what I have experienced. I picked up a set of 62’s with s300’s two weeks ago. I have played mizuno’s for years and they are replacing my 32’s. My 32’s had x100’s and I haven’t notice any difference in performance with the s300’s. I have played six rounds and spend 6-8 hours on the range. These 62’s are for real. Solid, accurate and predictable! I am able to work the ball at will. Best ever!

    Hcp +3

  20. Tex

    Sep 30, 2008 at 9:54 pm

    Great review! Just ordered a set today with S-400’s, and look forward to receiving them!

  21. juansky

    Sep 29, 2008 at 12:18 pm

    The point of a review is to get you interested in buying. I think Mizuno has released too many forged irons lately and would like to see them slow down a bit. It also hurts the resale value of my just released MP-57’s. Nice looking blade though!

  22. Sakman

    Sep 29, 2008 at 8:56 am

    Excellent review Martin!

  23. Josh

    Sep 28, 2008 at 9:42 am

    CORRECTION: It looks like the MP 30 (not the MP-14).

  24. Mark Lipton

    Sep 28, 2008 at 9:00 am

    As a Mizuno irons enthusiast, I read and follow everything new.
    It would be difficult to move me from blades and thin top lines, but this review has certainly piqued my interest!
    Looking forward to demo

    • Mark Lipton

      Aug 30, 2013 at 12:27 am

      Interesting to see my reply of 2008.

      The grooves on my Mp33’s are wearing thin, and I just put into play a barely used set of Mp62’s! Interesting fact, it is now 2013!
      The major difference is that I have gone from dg s300 to dg s300 sl.
      To me, Mizuno has a feel that truly sets them apart!

      • Mark Lipton

        Mar 4, 2014 at 10:56 am

        It took only a month of solid play, and one one on the course comparison, to prove it is all about feel!!
        The feel of the shaft is just as important as the club head!

        My old MP33’s are back in my bag! The lighter dg s300 sl are too light for me! When the grooves are really gone, I will re-shaft the MP62’s w/ s300’s!

  25. Ferando

    Sep 28, 2008 at 4:37 am

    I’m in between the MP 62 and the MP 52, coming from the MP 67 (not consistent enough to hit sustained solid shots). I’d love to read the review on the 52, so I could make up my mind, but after this excellent review…… Just one more thing: if PX 5.5 is equivalent to DG 300S, then the PX 5.0 would be like the DG 300R, right?

  26. Josh

    Sep 28, 2008 at 1:10 am

    Thanks for the review!

    I’m wondering how these compare to the MP-14s, which appear very similar and are cheap on e-bay? Any insight?

  27. jon

    Sep 28, 2008 at 12:42 am

    Great review! Thank you. I wish that they make these in Left Handed!!! Mizuno…..there’s a lot of Lefties out there that would love to get a hold of these…..are you hearing me????

Leave a Reply

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

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Club Junkie

Club Junkie Review: Cobra’s new King Tour irons

Published

on

The Cobra King Tour irons have been proven on the PGA Tour already and will be in bags of better amateur players this year. The previous King Tour MIM irons were very underrated and offered great precision with a solid shape that many players liked. Cobra went away from the Metal Injection Molded construction and went with a five-step forging process for soft and solid feel.

Make sure to check out the full podcast review at the links below and search GolfWRX Radio on every podcast platform.

I was a big fan of the previous Tour MIM irons and played them in rotation throughout the last two years. Out of the box, I was impressed with the more simple and clean look of the badging on the new King Tour. Badging is mostly silver with just small black accents that should appeal to even the pickiest golfers. I didn’t notice the shorter blade length in the new irons but did notice that the leading edge is just slightly more rounded. Topline is thin, but not razor thin, but still has enough there to give you the confidence that you don’t have to hit it on the dead center every shot.

Feel is solid and soft with just a slight click to the thud on well struck shots while mishits are met with a little more sound and vibration to the hands.

These King Tour irons are built to be cannons and place more emphasis on consistent and precise shots. I also felt like the new irons launch easily and maybe a touch higher than some irons in the same category.

My launch monitor showed my 7 iron with an average launch angle of 22 degrees and spin right around 5,800 with a Project X LZ 6.0 stock shaft. Ball speed isn’t the ultimate focus of this iron but it did well with an average around 108mph and the iron was able to keep the speed up well when you didn’t strike the center. You will still see a drop off in speed and distance when you miss the center, but you don’t have to be Navy SEAL sniper accurate on the face to achieve a good shot. Dispersion was very tight, and while there are bigger irons with more forgiveness, this players cavity still allows good playability when you aren’t bringing your A-plus game to the course.

Cobra lists the King Tour as an iron for a Tour level player up to a 7 handicap and I think this iron could see the bags of more golfers than that. I am a 9.4 handicap, and I felt more than comfortable playing this iron even on less than perfect days.

Your Reaction?
  • 14
  • LEGIT4
  • WOW2
  • LOL0
  • IDHT0
  • FLOP0
  • OB0
  • SHANK0

Continue Reading

Iron Reviews

Review: Honma TW737-Vs Forged Irons

Published

on

Your Reaction?
  • 247
  • LEGIT31
  • WOW17
  • LOL2
  • IDHT0
  • FLOP8
  • OB1
  • SHANK37

Continue Reading

Equipment

GolfWRX Member Reviews: TaylorMade 2017 M1 and M2 Irons

Published

on

One of the many benefits of being a GolfWRX Forum Member is exclusive access to Giveaways and Testing Threads. For Giveaways — we give away everything from golf clubs to golf balls to GPS units — all it takes is a forum name. Enter any Giveaway, and we select winners randomly. You’re then free to enjoy your prize as you wish.

For Testing Threads, the process a bit more involved. GolfWRX Forum Members sign up to test the latest and greatest products in golf, and then they provide in-depth reviews on the equipment. Being the intelligent golf-equipment users they are, GoflWRX Members are able to provide the most-informed and unbiased reviews on the Internet.

df5745825623a9697f92315cd9d8f1d7

In this Testing Thread, we selected 75 members to test a TaylorMade M1 2017 7-iron and TaylorMade M2 7-iron. Each of the clubs were built with the stock lofts and shafts — M2 2017 (28.5 degrees) with a TaylorMade Reax shaft, and M1 2017 (30.5 degrees) with a True Temper Dynamic Gold S300 shaft — and the testers were instructed to post their review of the clubs here.

Below, we’ve selected what we’ve deemed the most in-depth and educated reviews out of the 75 testers. We have edited each of the posts for brevity, clarity and grammar.

Thanks to all of those involved in the testing!

Brock9007

To be honest, looking down on the TaylorMade M1 and M2 irons at address, there is really not much difference. I would have to pick one up to see which is which.

The first 10 balls I hit were with M1 and 6/10 felt great, while the other 4 were toe hits, which I felt and the distance reflected that. Kinda what I expected with a club design for lower-handicap players. Distance was about 1/2 longer than my Srixon iron and dispersion was close, as well. I will say they did not feel as good as the Srixon on center hits.

Next 10 (ok, 15) balls were with the M2. Wow, can you say “up, up and away? The ball really popped of the club face, but wasn’t a ballon flight. Waited for the ball to come down and WTH, with the roll out it was 5-8 yards longer than balls hit with M1, and that is with a few toe shots. I did some smooth swings and then very aggressive swings and was a little amazed at this iron. Just like the M1, it does not have the forged feeling and does have a clicky sound (which I hate).

Bottom line: M2 is the longest iron I have ever hit. I love my 545s, but I could see myself playing M2 very easily. Matter of fact, I will be taking this M2 7 iron in my bag and play it more head-to-head against my Srixon 545 on the course.

deathbymuffin

These are both beautiful clubs. What surprised me the most is how much alike the two clubs look at address. I was expecting a chunky topline and significant offset in the M2, but it’s footprint looked almost exactly the same as the M1, outside of the chrome finish on the M2 versus the frosted finish of the M1. The M2 could almost pass as a player’s iron to my eye at address. These clubs both get A’s from me in the looks department.

The M1 felt a tad thicker than most player’s irons I’m used to, but it seemed to come with a bit of added forgiveness too. Well-struck shots felt good, with a nice mid-trajectory and with the workability that I’ve come to expect from a player’s iron. But true to TaylorMade’s claims, the M1 seemed more forgiving than a traditional player’s iron. Had a nice soft feel at impact, mishits didn’t sting and left you with a more playable result. A really nice combination of the better attributes of both player’s and game improvement irons. I’ve been playing with an old set of Tommy Armour blades, but I’ve been recently wanting more forgiveness for when I’m stuck with my B or C swing. Based on the early returns, I could definitely see myself bagging these.

I’m not sure if it’s the shaft, the design of the clubhead, or a combination of both, but the M2 is definitely a different animal than the M1 at impact. This club launches the ball high, arguably ridiculously so. I was hitting Jason Day moonbombs with this bad boy. Didn’t seem to matter what kind of swing I put on it, the ball launched high, flat and dead straight. The club was super forgiving and if not for the insanely high ball flight, I would love to have a set of these for when my swing is out of sorts. I didn’t really try to flight it at all, so I’m not sure what it’s capable of at this point. One other note was that the M2 had a clicky feel at impact. It didn’t bother me since it still felt so sweet… so strange as it sounds, clicky, but smooth and sweet at the same time. I think these clubs will be big winners with the mid-to-high handicap set.

The M1 is a fine iron, but doesn’t really stand out in any way from other irons of its class.

The M2, on the other hand, is an iron on steroids. I’m really starting to love this thing. It’s super forgiving and just goes and goes. According to my laser, flush shots were going 195 yards (my usual blade 5 iron distance) and very high. I can’t help but think golf would be a whole lot easier, particularly longer courses with long par 3s, with a full set of these in my bag.

poppyhillsguy

M1 feels softer than the M2 and I felt the ball flight was more consistent and what I want in an iron. The M1 did have a harsher feeling in my hands than I typically like, but I’m going to credit a lot of that to the range balls.

M2 flies very high. It was a windy afternoon and about 100 degrees. I love the high ball flight on the range, but I have a concern what that ball flight would be like on the course. I like to hit the ball different heights for different shots and I don’t think I could do that confidently with the M2, but I could with the M1. I don’t like the sound of the M2. It sounded “clicky” to me.

Fourpar18

Initially on the range I was scared because the M1 had a regular flex in it, so I took it easy for my initial 10-15 swings with it. Ball SHOT off the face, loud crack (didn’t care for it, but not too bad) and ball just kept rising and rising but didn’t balloon. I thought, “whoa,” that’s not what I expected…did it again…another CRACK and the ball just flew. I set another down and I paid attention to how it looked behind the ball, not much offset for a game improvement and I thought…”I could actually play this club!”  The 5-7 were EASY swings, aimed at a target of 170 yards away (my normal 7 iron distance) and with a EASY swing I was flying it by 20 yards or so. The next 5-10 I really went after it, same CRACK and ball just flew but to my surprise it was a nice draw, harder draw than the first but it was a nice 10-yard draw. This time the balls were landing just short of the 200 yard marker. Damn, 200 yards with a 7 iron! I know they are jacked lofts but it feels good to say “my 7 irons just few 190-200 yards!”

P.S. LOVE the Lamkin UTX grip!

Now, this was interesting, the M2 was quieter then the M1… weird!  Now, there is more carbon fiber added to this one and there is a “Geocoustic” label on the back. I am sure that it has something to do with all that carbon fiber but it does have a better sound. Other than the sound, it played exactly like the M1: long and straight. The REAX shaft felt a little weaker than the True Temper shaft and it flew a little higher but nothing else I could pick up.

noahdavis_7

Finally got out to the range after getting these bad boys in on Friday. My first impression of them is that they look really sharp. The graphics and design really stand out and really give these clubs a cool, modern look.

They were both a little to big IMO, as I am currently bagging Mizuno MP-68s. The M2 isa definite “game improvement iron”, while the M1 was similar in size and shape to my previous irons, Titleist AP1s.

They both really launch it, high and far. Ridiculous for 7 irons. I don’t have access to a launch monitor, but it was about a 20-yard difference between my gamer 7 iron and these (stronger lofts, as well).

The M1 definitely was more suited for my eye, and produced more consistent ball flights. It felt much more smooth and solid as the M2 had a clicky, cheap feel.

The M2 just isn’t for me. I felt like it was launching too high and ballooning, which could be due to the shaft (the M1 had the S300, while the M2 just had a stock “Reax” shaft). The feel off the face of the M2 just turned me off, to be honest.

While I don’t think I’ll be putting either model in play, I can definitely see the appeal for mid-to-high handicaps. Both irons were super forgiving, and they should be a dream to the average weekend golfer who has trouble with ball striking consistently.

golfnut5438

Looks: As expected, I preferred the M1 with less offset, slightly smaller sole and a smoother finish. Less glare looking down on the iron. I must say the M2 did not look as bulky, or have as much offset as I thought it might have.

Feel: This was a close race, probably due to the shafts as much as the heads. The M1 was just a slight bit smoother feeling on solid shots. But the M2 was not bad at all, just not quite as smooth.

Distance and performance: Our range has a slight incline up the length of the range, so specific yardage gains or losses were difficult to measure. Both irons had a higher trajectory than my gamer 7 iron. Neither sole dug onto the turf either. The lofts for both irons are a degree or two stronger than mine, so I would think they probably flew a little further than my gamers. Neither iron flew “too” high, however. Might be a little harder to hit knock down shots, though.

Final thoughts: I had hit both the M1 and M2 irons last year during a fitting day, but did not like either. This year’s model were both better in my eyes. I asked a fellow member at our club to hit both and he felt the M1 was his preferred model, and he is a 20-index player. So coming from both a single digit, and a high double-digit, the M1 won this battle of wills. I will try and see if I can locate both a 5 iron and 9 iron to see if a full set might be a winner for me.

DblEgl

I was surprised that the M2 was the winner in this brief session. It felt better, flew higher, easier to hit and about 1/2 club longer that my gamer Apex CF16. The feel/sound was better than I thought it might be, but really not up to the CF16. I could, however, easily game the M2’s.

Bstein74

Feel: I hit the M2 first, and found it to be very solid when hit on the screws. There was almost no feel off the club face at all. When I mishit it, you knew it was, but it wasn’t harsh at all. Hit the M1 next, and same type of feel when hit solid. Much more harsh when mishit though, but I knew that was coming.

Distance and performance: This is was where I was curious to see how they would play. The M2 went out high in the air, and just kept going forever. Now granted my eyesight isn’t that great anymore, but it looked like I got about 10-15 yards more from the M2 compared to my Wilson D300. The only thing I didn’t like about the M2 was how much I was able to turn it over. Got a lot more hook compared to my D300. Don’t know if that was from the REAX shaft, but would love to find a less spinning shaft to correct that.

The M1 wasn’t a great performer for me. Same height as the M2, but much straighter off the club face. Didn’t get any great distance advantage as compared to my D300. Can’t game a player’s iron anymore, and testing this one just reaffirmed that.

Final thoughts: Was very happy with the distance I gained with the M2 compared to my current gamer. Very good-performing iron for me, and something I would definitely consider changing them out if I could reduce the spin off the face. If you’re looking for more distance, you need to try these out. The M1 just wasn’t for me, but as a player’s iron, I can see it as a great option.

Bobcat271

Like the other testers, I found the M2 to launch the ball much higher and is 10-to-15 yards longer than my Adams XTD forged 7 iron. Of the two 7 irons I prefer the M1. I like the design of the M1 and its visual appearance at address. I feel more confident in trying to work the ball with the M1. The M1 gave me more feedback as to where the club head was in relation to my swing plane. If I had my druthers I would put the M1 in the bag as it stands now. Will continue to test, what a treat to compare the two irons.

myurick2

Once I started making solid contact with a decent shoulder turn, the M2 really came alive in my hands. Towering flat height, for me, and very long. No more clacky hollow feel, just a very mild pleasant sensation… then zoom. Once I started making better swings, back to the M1, which was a very nice iron. Shorter than the M2 (though not short) and a little lower ball flight. Felt nice and substantial without being heavy. Very forgiving on slight mishits.

But the M2 was the star for me. High trajectory and very long. Club felt lively and fun. Frankly, unless a player wanted a lower trajectory, or likes to hit a lot of knock downs or feel shots, I don’t know why anyone wouldn’t choose the M2. They are very attractive and a very fun iron. I think folks who say that the M2 feels and/or sounds clicky, clacky or hollow may be mishitting the iron toward the toe. I am not judging — I mishit a lot of shots at first. I agree on toe mishits the iron did not feel great. It almost felt like plastic. The ball still flew pretty well, but it wasn’t a very enjoyable experience. Not painful, just felt very dead. But when hit nearer the center, the iron felt fantastic. Light, springy and very lively. 

hammergolf

They are both good-looking clubs. Not too long heel to toe and toplines were not that distracting. M1 is more what I like to see shape wise, but M2 was not bad at all. Personally, not a fan of seeing the face slots. But I could see how some people may like how they frame the ball. 

Ace2000

M1 

– Has a very odd sound on contact, almost sounds a tad like a fairway wood “ting. Not a fan
– Looks very good at address with the brushed finish
– Most shots I hit with it seemed to fall out of the sky (very likely a lack of spin). Ball flight was much lower than I would have expected (not super low, just not much different than my 7 iron)
– Inconsistent misses. Next to no distance gains vs RocketBladez Tour 7 iron

M2

– Doesn’t look as good at address as the M1. Chrome finish at address is not an issue in even direct sunlight for me
– Feels and sounds quite nice to my ears at impact. Not a classic sound but very good considering what type of club it is
– Ball flight is very strong (comes off hot). Ball stays high in the air for awhile. Very high and lands soft
– 10-12 yards longer on average vs my 7 iron, it even had the horsepower to hang with my 6 iron
– VERY forgiving on thin strikes. Couldn’t believe how a near-top still traveled to nearly the front edge in the air and still went as far as the M1 did on a good strike
– Shaft is too light

Even though I’m a 2-handicap and don’t fit the M2 “mold,” I could see myself playing this club from 4-6 iron (although gapping would be a major issue mixing these with almost anything else) if it had a heavier shaft in it (I can only imagine how far this 4 iron must go… yikes)

M1 = 2.5/5 stars
M2 = 4.5/5 stars

tpeterson

Visual first impressions: The M1 7-iron is visually appealing to me as far as the finish and overall look. Even though it is classified as a player’s iron, it doesn’t seem so tiny that it would be tough to hit. I am not a huge fan of the bright-yellow badging, but I probably could get over it. The iron inspires confidence with its topline and a little bit of offset. The “rubber” piece on the hosel is a little bit funky to me.

I thought the M2 7-iron would look clunkier than it really is. Besides the finish being a little bit different, the difference between the M1 and M2 is actually pretty small. The M2’s topline and sole are a touch wider, but not by much. Not a huge fan of the fluted hosel since it can be seen at address. The M1’s fluting is only on the rear of the club.

I did notice that the sole’s finish did scratch pretty easily. Overall, I thought the M1 and M2 are pretty good looking, but I would definitely give the edge to the M1. I also preferred the stock Lamkin grip on the M1 vs. the ribbed M2 grip.

On course action: They both feel solid. I tried hitting both irons in all different types of on-course situations over a two week period. Both clubs launch the ball high but I would not say they balloon. For me, the M2 was about 10 yards longer and higher than the M1. Compared to my Cleveland irons, they are 1 to 1.5 clubs longer.

M1 loft = 30.5
M2 loft = 28.5
Cleveland TA7 loft = 33.5

I know this accounts for the distance gain but the ball definitely comes off hot compared to my set. I was hoping I would hit the M1 better since I like the appearance better, but that was not the case. The M2 definitely felt better for me and I felt more confident with it in my hands.

Discussion: Read all 75 reviews and the responses in our Testing Thread

Your Reaction?
  • 30
  • LEGIT4
  • WOW1
  • LOL1
  • IDHT1
  • FLOP3
  • OB3
  • SHANK20

Continue Reading

WITB

Facebook

Trending