Connect with us

Iron Reviews

Wilson Staff Ci11 Irons Editor Review



By displayname:

Wilson has been an established name in the golf world for decades and in recent years has been gaining popularity with their D and C series of irons. Building off the Ci9 irons, the Ci11 irons are Wilson’s game improvement offering for 2012.

Designed for the mid handicap, or “aspirational golfer”, the Ci11 irons offer a deep cavity back design with a midsize profile, moderate topline, and progressive offset. The more unique features of this design are the exoskeleton which pushed weight further from the face in the heel and toe of the club, a thinner face for higher CT, and a sleek black PVD finish to reduce the visual head size at address.

These irons are on the market now. Stock configuration includes 4-P with 3 iron, gap wedge, and sand wedge available. Stock shaft offerings include Aldila VS Proto II graphite and True Temper TX Flighted steel.

Sleek black PVD design
Great forgiveness and distance
Midsize head
Very easy to launch
Decent feel
Moderate to minimal offset
Decent stock shafts (steel tested)

No chrome/satin offering (black only)
Strong lofts (44* PW, 48*GW)
Grips felt cheaper than other brands
Limited stock shaft offerings
Long stock shafts (stock 36 inch PW and GW)
Durability of the PVD finish

These irons are another solid offering from Wilson in their C series of irons. After 2.5 rounds, and several range sessions, they will be in my bag for time being due to the forgiveness the clubs add to my game. I will, however, be having them fit for length and lie before they have a permanent place in my bag. The black finish is very sleek looking, and its unique appeal will likely get it some attention in stores but it took me a little bit to adjust to the finish on the course. You should also expect to be making changes to your wedges if you are going to bag these with the very strong lofts. Although a 45-50-54-58 set up has become common, the Ci11?s will force you to be creative with 44-48 PW/GW setup. I likely will be going to 52-58 at the end of the bag.

Discuss the Wilson Staff Ci11 in the forums here.


In the bag and on the shelf, the black PVD finish looks outstanding. The finish looks almost like a black chrome, rather than a flatter black that some designs use. Wilson is claiming the black helps to visually reduce the club head size. I think it makes the club head look slightly larger. I have never taken a black iron to the course, so this was a little bit of an adjustment at first, but after about two swings I didn’t even notice anymore. Overall, I would imagine people will either love hate the black.

The top line is a little thicker than what I had been playing, but it is moderate for a GI club, and was not bothersome. When I first set the club down at address I thought the top line was a little thick, but once I was on the range it was not a problem. The clubs are also a slightly more squared design, which is what I prefer. The cavity of the 4 and 5 irons are just barely visible at address, and this maybe when the black actually saves the day because normally seeing the cavity bothers me, but with the finish, I did not notice it.

The best part of the look of the club is the moderate offset. The irons are progressively offset, which was a pleasant surprise. The clubs are easy to align, and set up very nicely behind the ball. Really the only things that prevented this club from being a 5 on looks is the top line which is just a tad larger them I am used to, and the black finish. Those are really subjective and personal items though, and I’m sure several people would put the looks at a 5.

Discuss the Wilson Staff Ci11 in the forums here.

One additional note that I wanted to add was the shaft bands with the serial number. These did not change the visual look of the club in play, but I thought it was very odd, that Wilson chose to place a shaft band with the serial number just below the grip. I have a feeling those may be coming off if the fitter and I decide the shafts need to be cut down.

This is where these irons really shine. They are both forgiving and workable. If you are moving from more of a players club, you might find that these aren’t quite as workable, but I had no problem getting them to move both directions and control the ball flight.

They really do launch the ball on a well struck shot. This was quite nice for me, but I can image that it will not be for everyone. Some players might have issues keeping the ball down, especially with the stock shaft offerings.

The forgiveness of the club was excellent. They can still take a nice healthy divot as the sole is not overly thick, but the perimeter weighting can help when the ball is stuck slightly off the mark. The forgiveness really seemed to standout on the thin shots for me. Although the ball did not launch as high on a thin shot, it was still able to get up and out a good distance. These irons are not the most forgiving club on the market.

Discuss the Wilson Staff Ci11 in the forums here.

Direction: Workable, but straighter then many GI clubs. They will fly straighter then a thinner profile club, especially when stuck poorly. I noticed couple times that the forgiveness saved a few poor shots. The club obviously isn’t going to work any miracles, but a fading ball might end up right side of the green rather off the green to the right. After a few range sessions, it was easy to control the shape of my shots.

Forgiveness: Again, the forgiveness is a pleasant surprise, both in distance forgiveness, and in directional forgiveness. I have hit more forgiving irons, but these offer a good mix of forgiveness and feel. Thin shots and overall ease of launch are where these clubs really shine. I haven’t hit everything that is out there for the 2012 GI lines, but I would think that the Ci11?s fall in the middle of the road for overall forgiveness. They are probably slightly more forgiving than the average GI club.

Ball flight: For me this was another standout category, particularly in the long irons. Some may find the high launch to be an area of concern, but I felt it was excellent. I did not feel that I was over launching the short of middle irons, but I was getting a nice high ball flight. Launching a 4 iron has previously been an issue for me, and I still do not launch these as high as some players, but I can easily say I launch the 4 iron of the Ci11?s higher than my previous clubs, and higher than anything else I have taken on the course. Because of the increased launched and strong lofts, you should expect to gain a half or full club distance as well.

Discuss the Wilson Staff Ci11 in the forums here.

The feel of these clubs is very good for a deep cavity back iron with perimeter weighting. I ranked it at a 4 though because there are better feeling irons out there. I was able to tell where I was hitting the ball on the face, but it was often muted. The sound is great, and a well struck shot comes off like the ball was never there. However, I would prefer a little more feedback. That is the trade off with forgiving clubs though.

The shafts play into feel as well. The stock TX Flighted steel had decent feel, but are also not a category winner in my mind. I personally prefer smoother steel shafts such as KBS or Nippons. The TX Flighted is a nice light weight shaft, but it is not as smooth as others. It is on par with other TT shafts I have hit before, so if you are a TT fan, these will work nicely. The shafts do have a nice kick you can feel through impact, and they are fairly easy to load. In my opinion they do play close to the listed flex, which also can be lacking in many other stock shafts from other companies.

These clubs are solid performers. They get the job done, and should appeal to a wide range of golfers. The main elements that limit them from being a 5 for me are the feel, the shaft offerings, and the black PVD being the only finish option. I was tempted to add the lofts, stock lengths, and cheap feeling grips in as a strike against the clubs, but if you are getting fitted for new clubs when you buy them, these things should all take care of themselves. I have been playing these clubs at the stock specs during my testing, but I think once I have a fitting and some more time to dial these in, I should be pretty happy with these overall.

They are a good offering in the GI category at a great price point. I think if they expanded the shaft offerings, and put a silver version of some kind out there Wilson would have a real winner. As much as it’s easy to fall in love with a black PVD in the store, it will wear down over time. At the end of the day though, performance is what matters and these clubs do great in that category. Even if the full set doesn’t fit your eye, the long irons are really outstanding. With the right shafts, these clubs would be a great fit for a wide range of players.

Discuss the Wilson Staff Ci11 in the forums here.

Video Reivew:

Your Reaction?
  • 25
  • LEGIT5
  • WOW4
  • LOL0
  • IDHT0
  • FLOP0
  • OB0
  • SHANK0



  1. paul

    Dec 1, 2013 at 5:01 pm

    recently purchased c11 4 to g, graphite regular. only a couple og games so far but found them very easy to hit. i used to play blades as a pga memberbut a back injury and old age has convinced me to use these ‘shovel’ clubs. dont know if its coincidence or back surgery easing pain, but as a former yips sufferer on chipping, i suddenly feel cured with these clubs. yes they are a little strong but i am able to compensate by once again getting consistent contact. i will definitely stick with them.

  2. Marc

    Nov 5, 2013 at 9:48 pm

    These Irons Really do it for me!
    I love the Black Finish & the Grips are Fine
    Even in the early morning mist or light rain
    They are very workable & easy to launch
    My Pal has the Ping G20 irons
    They look like a shovel on a stick lol
    The minute I first tested the Ci11 irons
    I knew they were going in the bag
    My Girlfriend surprised me on Christmas with them
    & I couldn’t wait to hit them @ my local course
    The 3iron goes long & low
    6 iron BEST club in the set
    Hit Em’ Long & Straight Fellas

  3. Joe Golfer

    Nov 10, 2012 at 2:41 am

    The Wilson “ci” models are very good clubs, especially for the price, as the older models are really reasonable.
    I saw the ci-9 model being sold (new) for
    $269 at RockBottomGolf, and they are really similar to these, but without the black finish.

  4. Kyle

    Jul 10, 2012 at 1:19 am

    Excellent review. I purchased these clubs this spring and have logged at least 15 rounds with them so far, not to mention the hundreds of range balls. I just love the accuracy I gained from my old DI9’s. The only complaint is the black finish…they get pretty beat up looking pretty quickly. But, I bought them to play and not to look at, so I can live with it. I’m 6’4″ and the longer stock shafts are almost perfect for me. The strong lofts allow me to hit a smooth PW from 150 dead on. The only problem is the huge gap between the PW and my 56* SW, but that’s what a gap wedge is for. Probably gonna go with a Wilson Tw9 50* since the brand has been very good to me. I highly recommend these to anyone with a mid handicap looking for reliable control and distance

  5. displayname

    Apr 13, 2012 at 11:29 pm

    Sorry for the delayed response. Before this I was playing Bridgestone EC603 with the stock Nippon 950 Firm (S/R) shafts.

  6. vill

    Mar 29, 2012 at 11:45 am

    great review…what were you playing before so I can get an idea of your idea of high launch etc…thanks!

  7. Pingback: GolfWRX April 2012 Editors Choice: Best Game Improvement Irons « wgtgolf

  8. David

    Mar 2, 2012 at 6:52 am

    Great review! Really summed up these irons well. I’ve been playing them for a few months now, but here in Australia they come in a chrome finish. I would have liked the black pvd as it looks bad***, but I’m happy with the chrome.

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.

Iron Reviews

Review: Honma TW737-Vs Forged Irons



Your Reaction?
  • 235
  • LEGIT30
  • WOW17
  • LOL1
  • IDHT0
  • FLOP5
  • OB1
  • SHANK36

Continue Reading


GolfWRX Member Reviews: TaylorMade 2017 M1 and M2 Irons



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.


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!


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.


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.


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.


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.


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.


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.


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.


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.


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.


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. 


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. 



– 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


– 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


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?
  • 28
  • LEGIT4
  • WOW0
  • LOL1
  • IDHT1
  • FLOP3
  • OB3
  • SHANK19

Continue Reading


Members Choice: The Best Irons of 2017



To help golfers find the best irons for them in 2017, we enlisted the services of GolfWRX Members, the most knowledgeable golfers on the internet. They not only understand the technology used in the latest golf equipment, but they also test new clubs extensively. Following their detailed experiences and words of wisdom about the latest products is the perfect starting point for anyone interested in purchasing new golf clubs.

To gather their votes and feedback, we as a company first needed to properly sort the irons into categories. We aimed to keep the categories as simple as possible with 2017’s crop of irons, and we broke them down into three general categories:

  • Players Irons: Basically, small-sized irons. These irons have sleek top lines and soles. They place workability and control over distance, and for that reason they’re irons you can expect to see in the bag of a professional golfer.
  • Game-Improvement Irons: Basically, medium-sized irons. This category includes a wide-range of clubs that blend distance, forgiveness, good looks and workability.
  • Super Game-Improvement Irons: Basically, large-sized irons. These irons are juiced with hot faces, wide soles, thick top lines, big offset and a low center of gravity, among other engineering feats, that are often unique to each company.

Note: Because of the abundance of Players Irons currently available, we divided that category into two categories: Players Irons and Exotics Players Irons. The Exotic Players Irons list included players irons from companies such as Epon, Fourteen, Miura, PXG, and Honma, which are not as widely available for testing in the U.S.

Below you can access the full results of our Members Choice 2017: Best Irons lists, as well as feedback about each iron from the GolfWRX Community. We’d like to sincerely thank all the GolfWRX Members who participated in the voting and provided feedback on the irons. We also want to thank those of you who provided feedback on the voting process itself. We assure you that we read and consider everything, and we’re going to continue to improve our process in order to provide the best and most useful information about the latest golf equipment.

Members Choice: The Best Players Irons


Vote Leader: Mizuno JPX-900 Tour

“WOW! Great mix of buttery feel and forgiveness.”

Overall, the Mizuno JPX-900 Tour irons earned nearly 15 percent of votes on the Players iron category, giving them top billing for players irons. One GolfWRX member said he was “weak in the knees from first look at the satin finish and compact size,” and that the “feel is excellent, and there’s just enough forgiveness.” Another said the JPX-900 Tour irons are the “best irons out there right now in terms of blending feel, forgiveness, and the ability to shape shots.”

Full List: The Best Players Irons of 2017

Members Choice: The Best Exotic Players Irons


Vote Leader: PXG 0311T

“I can’t say I have ever hit anything that feels as good as the PXG.”

With more 21 percent of votes for the Best Exotics Players Irons of 2017, PXG’s 0311T irons were described by GolfWRX members as “a great looking club,” and that they “felt unbelievable.” When comparing the irons to Titleist’s 716 MB irons, one member said, “The fact that you can barely tell if it has or doesn’t have more offset than the MB 7 iron just shows how little it has.”

Full List: The Best Exotic Players Irons of 2017

Members Choice: Best Game-Improvement Irons


Vote Leader: Callaway Apex CF ’16 

“Apex CF is simply the most explosive, best feeling iron I’ve ever hit in this category.”

Acquiring nearly 20 percent of votes of all models in the Best Game-Improvement Iron category, GolfWRX Members described the Callaway Apex CF ’16 irons as “simply the most explosive,” and that they “perform very well on center hits and almost as good on mishits.”

Full List: The Best Game-Improvement Irons of 2017

The Best Super Game-Improvement Irons 


Vote Leader: Ping G

“The Ping G takes what Ping has done for years and added in increased ball speed, improved feel and much better looks.”

An iron that “will appeal even to Ping haters.” GolfWRX Members described the Ping G as “stupid easy to hit,” providing a “high and straight ball flight,” and “an eye opener.” The irons also accumulated more than 22 percent of the total votes in the category.

Full List: The Best Super Game-Improvement irons of 2017

Your Reaction?
  • 295
  • LEGIT39
  • WOW16
  • LOL18
  • IDHT8
  • FLOP15
  • OB10
  • SHANK115

Continue Reading