Connect with us

Iron Reviews

Ping i20 Iron Review



By Editor Todd Hibbert

GolfWRX was invited to test drive Ping’s i20 irons in late 2011, and after hitting them I told the design team they had a decided winner here.

An iron that will compete with the best cavity-backs in the game in design, feel, and performance.

Tour proven these heads are packed with as much technology engineers can add to an iron that still looks like a players type package.

An iron to compete with the last set of irons I had purchased & bagged — the 2008 AP2s.

In fact, I was naively wondering if Ping was going to have the production capacity to meet the increased demand I was sure would meet Ping upon the release of the i20 irons ( of course they do. )

It kept rolling through my head, though: you guys will need extra shifts to meet demand … have to take on more help … might have to re-open a closed factory …

You’re gonna need a bigger boat!

Such was my resolve after our initial testing.

Now it’s time to do some real world testing of the i20 irons — on my courses, in all conditions, with production samples. I’ve always found the proof is in bagging a set of irons and getting 15-20 rounds in with them to see how they perform over time with good & bad swig days, on multiple types of courses. Too often in the past I’ve had an intense honeymoon phase with irons that quickly, disappointingly wanes into indifference after a few weeks. Perhaps it just takes me a little longer to get to the heart of the matter. Perhaps I need to dot all the “i”s and cross all the “t”s. Lets call it thorough. Consider this my first installment in a rolling Editor Review of Ping’s new i20 irons ….. I hope it doesn’t rain tomorrow. Posted Image

ping i20 irons

A high-density tungsten toe weight provides forgiveness across the face for accurate results and a high-launch, low-spin trajectory.

And so it begins…

The i20s arrive with cute little protective socks on each one ( that are actually quite functional ),
and a pink tag letting me know a real person built my irons and checked the specs to ensure they matched my requirements.
Kind of like my own personal Ping elf.

Sky blue day today with highs around 50 gave me my first chance to hit the new i20s. I head over to Memorial Park Golf Course because it’s close.

I warm up with wedges and get to it. Off the bat I notice the head weight a bit more than usual. Coming from 130 gram Dynamic Golds to these 109 gram CFS shafts, I’m dropping a decent chunk of cut shaft weight. Now I ordered my i20s to swingweight at my usual D3, which may be a point or two too high if trying to match the feel of a D3 with DGX100s.

So I’d recommend you consider this, and maybe drop your swingweight spec. by a point or two, if you’re trying to match in the hand feel. Word to the wise. Does it make a big difference to me? No. We’re only talking 2/3 nickels worth of weight here.

ping i 20

A vertical Custom Tuning Port (CTP) positions the CG for optimizing launch conditions. Tungsten toe weighting elevates forgiveness.

So I’m hitting off the mats — Memo only has mats — and I’m liking the i20s fine. Feel/sound is as remembered. Loving them? Nope. Why? They’re new irons to me, with new shafts. They feel different than what I’m used to. Of course they do, they’re supposed to because they are different. Plus, I’m hitting off mats.


Stabilizing bars and a thicker face ensure distance control and a solid feel. A ferrule offers a clean, high-performance look.

Range mats are no place to judge iron performance, imo. Mats don’t allow an iron to do what it does naturally, which is deflect down into the ground off impact. You don’t get the “down” part. And mats hurt over time. I know personally that I subconsciously alter my swing if/when I have a long irons session on a mat. My attack gets shallower — helps minimize the impact of beating a rod with a metal object on the end of it into an unforgiving surface repeatedly.


The long irons are slightly larger, high launching, more forgiving, and have more offset. The smaller short irons feature less offset and provide exceptional control.

But this is the thing with new irons. For many of us they’re not going to be perfect out of the box. You have unfamiliar clubs in your hands. It takes time to adjust to the differences of your new dance partner. For some it’s just not an issue. For me, it takes a handful of range sessions and a handful of rounds to stop being conscious of my new “different feeling” irons and just point & shoot. Too many times I see guys with new irons one week that they traded in for something different a month later: “Ahh, they just didn’t suit me,” … “Liked them in the store, but awful on the course,” … “Couldn’t hit a fade/draw/high/low/stinger/knuckler with ’em.” Well give it more than a couple of weeks, for crying out loud.


Even though I’m purposefully down at the end of the range, a few folks around me are ohh’ing and ahh’ing about the i20s. I let a number of guys try them, then I go through my usual routine with new irons. I hit 10 or so balls with each iron, PW up to the 3-iron. They all get to get dirty. Posted Image I try not to judge much other than feel … I’ll consider the rest further down the road. ( By the way, feel is very good with these. )

ping golf 2013

Here are comparison Photos of the 2013 G25, the Anser Forged and the Ping i20’s

ping golf irons g25

From left to right… Ping G25, Anser Forged and Ping i20

One thing I’ve learned over the years trying/testing/reviewing irons is you just have to wait a while before making up your mind. Or as Diana Ross And The Supremes said, You Can’t Hurry Love.

Click here to go to the original thread in the forums


Review by editor George (beruo)

Pros: Feel, feel and feel. Performance and looks are awesome to

Cons: You can see the back of the sole from address on the 3 and 4 iron

Bottom Line: This is a hit from Ping! At first glance, the i20 irons are an obvious departure from the i-lines of the past. The most obvious of these changes are the use of the vertical custom tuning port (CTP) and stabilization bars in the cavity; carryovers from PING’s S56s.

Just a few short days after PING announced the G20 irons, interest immediately shifted over to what the i20s might hold. With nothing more than a low-quality TiVo’d screen capture of a wedge on a desk and lots of hearsay, WRXers speculated on what PING had up their sleeves. Last month PING had a few of us come down to put the rumors to rest and let us know exactly what we had to look forward to. And I gotta tell you, the buzz was warranted. Now, because of the interest generated on this site, PING is letting GolfWRX showcase the i20 lineup!

At first glance, the i20 irons are an obvious departure from the i-lines of the past. The most obvious of these changes are the use of the vertical custom tuning port (CTP) and stabilization bars in the cavity; carryovers from PING’s S56s. The stabilization bars help improve feel along with a thicker face in the impact area, while the vertical CTP construction allows for a lower center of gravity and different options for weight positioning.

Another key feature to the design of the i20s is PING’s blended set concept. As was the case with the i15s, the i20s are noticeably longer heel to toe in the long irons, gradually decreasing in size to the wedges. This time around, PING made the top rail thicker in the long irons transitioning toward a thinner topline in the wedges, dramatically increasing the MOI where golfers need it most.

Great discussion thread in the forums about the Ping i20 irons

Along with the tungsten weighting in the toe, these three features increase the MOI across the horizontal axis by about 3% throughout the set, and between 4% (PW) and 12% (3iron) more vertical axis forgiveness over the i15 irons. Given the greater headweight and smaller size that irons have compared to drivers, that increase is substantial. Basically, the i20 irons provide golfers a pitching wedge that has almost the same workability as the S56s with a 3 iron that’s even easier to hit than the i15 counterpart.

New to the i20s is the variable cavity pull construction. Here, PING moved the center of gravity down and toward the front in the wedges to give players a more piercing trajectory, progressively pulling the COG back to elevate ball flight in the long irons. This feature makes the clubs more user friendly while maintaining workable distance control throughout the set, prioritizing accuracy in the short irons and forgiveness in the long irons.

The last key design change in the latest i-iron, is the decreased moment of inertia around the shaft axis. In keeping with the varying nature of the blended set design and the cavity pull construction, PING decreased the axis MOI in the i20s by 14% in the 3 iron and 22% in the pitching wedge over the i15 irons (with the middling 7 iron coming in with a 20% decrease). This makes it easier for golfers to manipulate the club through rotation, working the ball left or right as needed, while not losing forgiveness off mishits.

To accommodate all these new features, the differences in how they’ll cause the ball to react, and the adjustments that golfers may make, PING adjusted the sole design so that turf interaction wouldn’t detract from the clubs’ utility. Changes include more material in the heel to decrease digging, more bounce, a slightly blunted leading edge, and a little trailing edge relief. These changes were needed because when the lower the center of gravity is placed, the more the clubhead wants to deflect down into the ground when impacting the ball (which is why you don’t take divots on practice swings).

In standard PING fashion, the i20 irons will be available both lefty and righty in 3-9, PW, UW, SW, and LW configurations. The standard shaft offering will be PING’s proprietary CFS shaft.

For those new to this shaft, it’s based on the ZZ65, but has been expanded from the original hard stiff flex. One of the characteristics that made the ZZ65 unique was the thicker tip section, which reduced tip action at impact and flutter immediately after. In the Stiff flexed CFS, PING extended the tip by an inch to bring the stiffness to the current industry standard. Short irons get slightly less tip reinforcement to help with feel. The X-flex CFS shafts have a tip that is 1″ shorter and 5 grams heavier, while Regular and Soft Regular CFS shafts have no tip reinforcement to help activate the tip.

I am REALLY looking forward to these irons. My impressions were…very favorable.

Great discussion thread in the forums about the Ping i20 irons

2012 PING i20 Irons with Mike Nicolette

Your Reaction?
  • 86
  • LEGIT7
  • WOW9
  • LOL3
  • IDHT1
  • FLOP7
  • OB1
  • SHANK12

GolfWRX is the world's largest and best online golf community. Expert editorial reviews, breaking golf tour and industry news, what to play, how to play and where to play. GolfWRX surrounds consumers throughout the buying, learning and enrichment process from original photographic and video content, to peer to peer advice and camaraderie, to technical how-tos, and more. As the largest online golf community we continue to protect the purity of our members opinions and the platform to voice them. We want to protect the interests of golfers by providing an unbiased platform to feel proud to contribute to for years to come. You can follow GolfWRX on Twitter @GolfWRX and on Facebook.



  1. Michael

    Jul 11, 2014 at 3:27 pm

    Lovely clubs but 3 weights have dropped out using the clubs every week how do i the weights replaced Will try send me 3

  2. sammy

    Apr 18, 2014 at 10:44 pm

    How would these compare to the original ping anser forged irons? Thanks for any replies…

  3. Mario

    Apr 11, 2013 at 10:53 pm

    Got some great advice on this forum in the past so wanted to post my 2 cents: Recently got fitted for a set of ping i20’s and have used them now for about a month and have been very impressed. I was gaming a set of adams idea with hybrids before but outgrew them as my game improved. Tried a bunch of other options including Mizuon JPX, Rocketbladez, Ping g20, and Adams CMB. Nothing could compete with the feel, workability and overall performance of these clubs. They are feel great with a solid hit and are surprisingly forgiving. The stock CFS shaft (I got fit it in stiff) is also solid. I ended up getting fitted for orange dot, -1/4″. I have always had a bit of an issue with hooking the ball and these clubs have completely eliminated that issue. If anything, I hit a nice solid straight shot with workable draw or fade. At any rate, am loving these clubs and look forward to gaming them this season.

  4. Wayne #2

    Mar 15, 2013 at 12:20 am

    Stuart, I”m making a similar decision and confronting similar questions. I am looking to replace my long time Ping i3+ irons and have been trying the Titleist AP1, the JPX 825 (the 825 Pro version is not available in LH), and the G25, all good clubs. I am a 16 index and not confident as to which level of a Game Improvement club I should be getting. I had it narrowed to the 825s and the AP1 until I tried the i20s today. I had not tried them because I thought they were too much of a “Better Player” club but I found them more solid and more forgiving than my i3+ irons plus they were consistently longer and just as forgiving as the other new candidates. I believe my high 16 index is caused more by my inconsistent chipping than ball striking iron play so maybe that is why the i20 worked for me. I would think with your 13.5 index they would be plenty forgiving and may offer more room to improve and work the ball. I have pretty much made my decision but if I had not tried the i20s I would be going down the 825 path. I am going to hit the i20s a few more times before pulling the trigger just to be sure. The Mizuno MP59 might be a possibility for you too.

    • Stuart

      Mar 15, 2013 at 2:07 pm

      Thank you, Wayne. It sounds like we have similar games. My chipping definitely could use some improvement. I think I am going to pull the trigger on the i20s this weekend. They have the added benefit of allowing me to stay with Pings, so I am familiar with the feel etc. and can even switch in a G20 4 iron for an i20 4 iron if I want to experiment a bit with a mixed set. I also like that they have a slightly lighter standard shaft than the Mizunos (99g vs 113g), which is the same that I am currently playing with. The fact that they cost $100 less doesn’t hurt either. I have heard conflicting opinions on which irons are more forgiving (825 Pros or i20s), so I am going to assume they are similar enough that it won’t make a difference. I actually found that I made better contact with both of these irons than my current “game improvement” G20s, and they should be easier to hit out of the rough (where I spend too much time as it is). Good luck!

  5. Stuart

    Mar 14, 2013 at 4:12 pm

    I am trying to decide between the Ping i20s and the Mizuno JPX 825 Pros. I like both of them more than my current Ping G20s, which have a huge sole, and am making better contact with the ball more consistently with both of irons. Since I am only a 13.5 index, I think I should get the irons that are more forgiving as I will likely be happier with them in the long run (and on the course rather than the range). Which irons do you think would be more forgiving the i20s or the 825 Pros?

  6. Dave

    Dec 3, 2012 at 11:12 pm

    Just purchased a i20 used set for 375. Putting extensions in for 1/2 inch height and new Winn grips. Good choice?

  7. spuddy09

    Dec 3, 2012 at 7:10 pm

    I got fitted at a Ping studio in Florida, yesterday. I hit numerous shots with the i20 7 iron using different shaft combos. I then compared these to my current 7 iron, a TM R7 TP with Project X 6.0 shaft. The results were unbelievable! My average carry distance increased from 160yds to 182yds! The dispersion also narrowed.
    I didn’t see a massive increase in distance with the Ping Anser 9.5 Driver, but the dispersion was so much better than my current Driver, that I ordered both the irons and the Driver. The fitting was performed using a Trackman. I have a Flightscope X2 at home and he stats were comparable with my old setup. I can’t wait to take gese babes to the course!

  8. killerbgolfer

    Nov 3, 2012 at 7:10 pm

    I’ve gone through a ton of irons the last few years. Titleist 755, AP1, AP2, PING i10, i15, G15, some callaway, and a srixon. These are the best hands down. Great feel for a cast club, and forgiveness even though they don’t set up huge behind the ball. I haven’t noticed any more length, but the dispersion is definitely tighter. As always, get fitted.

  9. Anchor44

    Sep 2, 2012 at 3:53 pm

    I typically buy new irons every couple of years and have had at least one set of everything except Titleist and Nike. I feel Titleist may be for someone better than a 10 handicap and since Nike signed Michael Vick I won’t even hit a Nike ball.

    I recently bought ping I20s and they are the best irons I have EVER hit. I’m so impressed with them I’ve also bought the 3 wood and 3 hybrid I20. I don’t find them to be any longer than other irons but my ball striking and accuracy are much better.
    I don’t see myself getting rid of these irons for a loooong time.

  10. Chris

    Aug 26, 2012 at 7:26 am

    Very solid. Switched from years of playing S59 w/ ZZ shaft. Tried the S56, but didn’t feel near as solid as the old sticks. Got the i20’s with CFS hard stepped once, and they are SOLID.

  11. Thor

    Aug 17, 2012 at 6:17 pm

    To Dario:
    That was one of my intial concern. I measure the whole club to be 412 grams compared to my old ISI-K at 428 grams. However they are both rated D0 in Swingweight. The strange thing is that when I weight it on my finger the new I20 seems to have equibrium point half a centimeter lower than my old ISI-K and the length of the club in question is definately the same. I think though that the I20 swings a little faster for me I feel but lesser offset and higher ball flight which makes the direction and distance quite similar except that the ball is stopping in a much more reliable way – that is quicker, allows for aiming more for the flag itself rather than in front of it with more roll on the ball for greater dispersion to the shot you had in your mind.

  12. Thor

    Aug 17, 2012 at 5:50 pm

    I have been playing Ping ISI-K for 16 years. I have bought several new iron sets but I have always felt that I had to return to my old set of irons. I just bought the new I20 irons and it is remarkable how similar it feels to my old ISI-K. I felt the similarity in the golfstore and went on the course with it and it really proved to be remarkably similar in feel,distance and shape for me. The difference however is that the I20 never digs taking big turf as the front end is rounded, which I feel is an improvement as I play courses where certain part of fairways may be quite dry and hard. Furthermore, Im really happy about getting new clubs which spin more for me on the 6-9 iron where my Teitleist Vokey takes over from PW-LW and that was the main reason for my purchase as I want my on green shots to really sit and my old irons simply couldn’t take more makeover moves on the grooves. I feel the I20 irons are really really good as replacement for those who are playing good golf with the older Ping equipment and have had bad experience with changes so far. Thank you PING.

  13. Wayne

    Aug 14, 2012 at 8:55 am

    I forgot to mention, after buying my set of Ping i20 irons and my game returning, just last week I had my first HOLE-IN-ONE at my home course. 4 iron from 188 yes, small high draw one bounce, rolled 2 feet into the cup, what a great day to say the least. Ended up shooting 73, LOVE my i20 irons.

  14. Wayne

    Aug 14, 2012 at 8:51 am

    Played a lot of Ping’s over the years, i3, G2, G5, i10. Switched to Titleist Ap2 forged and loved them but could not master them, thus my cap increased to 6-7. Tried the i15 irons, hated them, I mean HATED them. Purchased the Titleist Ap1, ok, but could not control flight the ball, only high and straight (which they were designed to do).
    This spring I went out with the intent of buying AP2’s again but did not like the stock shaft so after reading some Ping reviews regarding the i20 line I thought I would give them a whirl. All I can say is WOW, best Ping iron to date in my opinion. Purchased a set on the spot, along with i20 driver, fairways and 17, 23 hybrid. My game has returned, cap falling back down, currently a 3.4 index.
    One of my buddies who has played Mizuno blades for past 4 years just hit my i20’s, he is buying a set, so that says a lot.
    Great job PING, these irons are awesome.

  15. Roger

    Jul 4, 2012 at 11:08 pm

    Just ordered i20 set (CFS R shaft with cushion inserts) to replace i15 set (R graphite). I loved my i15s, but kept shearing the heads off at the hossel ( every club P-5 — twice each). My question is – would the axis MOI reduction lessen the stress at the the shaft insert ? I am a single digit handicap, so it’s not miss hits. In structural design the higher the MOI – the more concentrated and higher the developed stress.

  16. Jim Laney

    Jun 18, 2012 at 11:31 am

    Started with the driver and 3 wood. Then added 17 and 20 degree utility clubs. Just added 4-gap wedge irons with the Nome putter. Have not played Ping since the Eye 2 Bery days. I am a believer now. I20’s are the “Real Deal”.

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



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



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

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

Continue Reading