Connect with us

Iron Reviews

Review: Miura CB57 irons



Pros: The CB57’s have an incredibly soft feel. They’re made to some of the tightest tolerances in the industry, and have a beautiful nickel satin chrome finish.

Cons: Price. They’re roughly $275 per iron.

Who they’re for: Golfers who aren’t scared to pay a premium for a set of top-notch forged irons. These are slightly bigger than blades, and will work best for better players looking for irons with great feedback, workability and impressive consistency in their class.

The Review

I’ve spent my golfing life trying every club made from pretty much every brand. Although I have never designed a club myself, I often sit back staring at my clubs wishing that there was a different grind, toe shape or hosel shape. Getting those tiny details right, at least to my eye, is what I’ve found Miura does better than just about any other forged iron maker.


According to Miura, the design of the CB57’s had been percolating in the minds of the Miura family for quite a long time. They have a lot of technology packaged in these beautiful forged clubs, and the Miuras wanted to make sure it was absolutely right before they released it.

Before we go any further, let’s discuss the price. When you come across these at a Miura authorized fitting center, they will run approximately $275 per club, depending on the shaft. That’s about $2200 for an eight-piece set. Still with me? OK, read on.

The Series 1957 class has been reserved for the benchmarks of the Miura line. From the small blades, the K-Grind wedge and the KM-350 putter, these clubs are in a special class of distinction that is reserved for the most favored designs of the Miura company.


I’ve been playing the CB57’s for more than a few months now, and have spent some time examining the heads during range sessions and rounds of golf. I try to picture myself as Katsuhiro or Yoshitaka Miura and wonder what they saw when they designed clubs. What made them feel a change or development was necessary?

When I look at these irons, I’m amazed at how so much of the little features I liked in past Miura irons are how they are incorporated into the CB57 design.



For this review, I tested the CB57’s (3-PW) with Nippon N.S. Pro Modus 3 Tour 130 shafts. I’ve been playing the clubs for a few months now and have been working on this review throughout. Each time I’d have something down in print, I would have to keep updating this review, as the CB57’s continued to amazed me.

Having played several sets of Miura irons this past year including the Passing Point 9003, CB-501 and MB-001 blades, the CB57 was a set I was especially looking forward to testing.


There were many features I liked in the PP-9003, CB-501 and MB-001, but like any golf club aficionado, there were qualities in performance and looks that I wished were improved in each club. When testing the CB57’s, it seemed that all my wishes were answered and amazingly completed — in one club.

After picking up my set of CB57’s from my certified Miura fitter, I stepped into the hitting bay to give the set a few test shots. The familiar Miura feel was there, along with that lovely sound that premium forged clubs emit. The strike of the CB57 was pure and made me wish there was daylight left to get to a golf course. For that, I’d have to wait a few days.

Even after many (many) rounds with my CB57’s, they’ve continually impressed me. The forgiveness in the head, which was only slightly larger than my MB-001 set, was thrilling.

Early in the testing, I found myself wishing a shot to get legs over water. It easily hit the green, even though I struck it off the heel. I returned to my club fitter to do a few sessions on the Trackman and found that I was correct in my on-course assumptions. The CB57’s lost very little ball speed and an average, compared to similar forged cavity backs.

The irons also pleased me throughout the configuration. The 3 iron (22 degrees) was just as much of a joy to hit as the pitching wedge (47 degrees). Much of that performance, as well as the great feel of the irons, can be attributed to the weight bar in the cavity. It’s a design that not only looks great, but works tremendously as well.


A Miura CB57 4 iron.

In the long irons, the weight bar is smaller and positioned lower in the head. That lowers the center of gravity (CG) of the irons, which helps golfers launch the long irons higher. The fact that the weight bar is smaller in the long irons also allows more weight to be redistributed around the perimeter of the club, improving forgiveness, or moment of inertia (MOI) on mishits.

The weight bar in the short irons is positioned higher in the cavity, raising the CG, which causes shots to launch lower and with more spin. I usually hit my 8 and 9 irons much higher than I did with the CB57’s, but I didn’t mind the more piercing shots that stopped where they landed.


A Miura CB57 pitching wedge.

Another contribution of the weight bar is that solid feel you get when hitting shots with the CB57. Unlike many cavity back irons, where many golfers feel that they don’t get that solid “punch” behind the sweet spot, the weight bar of the CB57 creates a feeling of mass to the strike.

As for turf interaction, I felt that the soles of the clubs worked through the turf very well throughout the set. I tend to get steeper with my angle of attack, but I still appreciated the leading edge grind on the sole. It works great on tightly mowed grass, as well as on some of the more lush rough areas, and golfers with shallower angles of attack will likely get more benefit than I did.

I’ve heard many golfers say that they tend to “dig” too much with Miura irons, but it’s something I didn’t find in my testing. The sole allowed for a clean delivery of the club head to the ball no matter the lie at hand.

Looks and Feel

Like all Miura clubs, the first impression for me has always been wonderful. I love the rich satin finish the company puts on its irons, and the CB57 set is no different.

The Series 1957 crest is set in the middle of the weight bar on the back of each club. The kanji character for “noble” and “striving” that I first saw on the New Wedge Series is located on the heel side of the cavity.


The words “FORGED” are neatly placed in a gentle curve below the kanji, and they remind me that I am playing some of the best forgings from Himeji, Japan. I doubt if it was purposely done, but that upside down curve puts a smile on my face.

The top line has been flattened and squared off a bit more compared to other sets from Miura, which tend to be much more round. This visually gives the impression of much more forgiveness in the head, yet the top lines are still thin enough to not project any clunkiness.

Heel to toe, the CB57 is very similar in size to the MB-001’s, but they are a tad deeper in the face. A very slight offset is present in each head, again projecting a bit of forgiveness, but they’re still very pleasing to the eye of those who prefer minimal offset.

The CB57 sole is similar in width to the CB-501, yet it has the leading edge grind I first saw on the MB-001 set. I absolutely loved this leading edge grind on the MB-001’s and was extremely pleased that it was included in the CB57’s.

Compared to prior Miura sets, the number stamps on the sole have a slightly different typeface, but still project so much class on the silver nickel satin finish.

The Takeaway


There are clubs with vibration dampeners, slots, and all kinds of additions to the cavity that feel the same from heel to toe and from their bottom to the top groove. Those clubs might also allow you to hit them a mile with their boosted lofts, but that is not the golf I want to play.

The CB57’s will not allow you to do or feel any of that.  

Yes, you’ll feel vibration if you mishit your shot, as I feel you should, but you’ll be left with a total unadulterated feeling of a greatly forged club.

If you’re looking for some of the most precise irons we’ve seen in the forged cavity back category, and can stomach the price tag, the CB57’s are a must-hit.

They’re not the longest irons, but they’re one of the most forgiving models in their class, offer excellent versatility, and of course, have the feel for which Miura is known. And this time around, the feel.. well, it feels just a little better.

Your Reaction?
  • 441
  • LEGIT76
  • WOW79
  • LOL4
  • IDHT37
  • FLOP16
  • OB9
  • SHANK66

Reid's been an avid golfer for more than 40 years. During that time, he's amassed quite a putter collection and has become one of GolfWRX's leading equipment nuts. Reid tries all the latest equipment in hopes of finding the latest and greatest of them all to add to his bag. He was born and raised in Honolulu, Hawaii where the courses are green and the golf is great!



  1. Mohamed

    Mar 19, 2017 at 7:05 am

    How do the cb57 compare to the cb202?

  2. Tom

    Jan 17, 2016 at 9:50 am

    I made the leap and bought 5-P, Wedges and Hybrids –definitely a gift to myself. The biggest surprise? They’re forgiving and while the lofts are not jacked-up (I went ahead and bent mine 1 degree strong), I’m not losing anywhere near the distance I anticipated (maybe a 5 yard adjustment over Apex). Finally, I was fitted with MCI 120’s in my irons; SP Orange in my wedges and the MCH’s in my hybrids. Those are all expensive shafts, the irons and wedges were custom fit, great grips, etc., and there was no up-charge. If I had gone to elsewhere and ordered the very same set up in an Apex set, the margin of difference would have been? My point is, a lot less than you think! Love ’em. I enjoy practicing again…

  3. Pingback: March 2015 |

  4. Truth

    Mar 19, 2015 at 4:47 pm

    these remind me of my cally 09 x forged irons except 10 times the price

  5. Billy__Baroo

    Mar 19, 2015 at 3:20 am

    Just saw these at the 2nd Swing in the twin cities and they look beautiful, as they should for a $2,000 price tag!

  6. Mike

    Mar 18, 2015 at 1:42 pm

    Great set of irons! I previously had the Japan version Miura Giken CB1007 which were a little draw biased. I also have the Miura MB001, Titleist CB 714, and Mizuno MP4. So I can honestly say how good the Miura CB57s are compared to these listed. They are my pick of the bunch. I believe the key is the smash factor which generates better results. All of these listed feel good but the Miura CB57s feel better.

    • Tony

      Apr 17, 2015 at 7:28 pm

      Mike, I have a set of the MB001’s. Which set do you prefer and why? I love the way these looks but before i pluck down another car payment, I’d like your thoughts.

      • Mike

        May 11, 2015 at 10:00 pm

        Sorry for the delay. I prefer the CB57 simply because of dead center hits. I love the look of a blade and still love to play and hit my mb001 and mp4 but the CB57 will outperform the blades. I am still confused if I like the Mizuno MP4 more than the Miura mb001. I have a hard time convincing myself to sell any of these three. I do need to thin my herd of irons but all three of these will probably make the cut. The CB57s are still my go to clubs when I need to score low…

  7. Joe

    Mar 16, 2015 at 12:40 pm

    These are beautiful and look eerily similar to my Taylormade X-300 FCI’s, which were also made by Miura! I know modern tech lets them move the cg away from the hosel and closer to the physical center of the face, along with traj adjustment and better forgiveness, but I can’t imagine they actually feel softer and smoother than mine. But if they do, I’m in!!

  8. Jeff Borders

    Mar 16, 2015 at 12:19 pm

    It would be fun to know what the touring pros would really play if they weren’t getting paid to play something. I used to always check out the pros who were in between contracts when they came through Dublin, Ohio for the Memorial Tournament. This was back in the 90’s and 2000’s. Lots of guys going back to Mizuno blades, even older models of Mizunos. Even today you see a few guys playing old Titleist 690 MBs. My other source was college players, but their teams all have equipment deals so that’s not even a good source anymore.

    • Chuck

      Mar 21, 2015 at 10:16 am

      Jeff one of the best places to do that sort of a check on what experienced players use when they don’t get paid to play any particular brand is a US Mid-Amateur championship. You’ll see not just a lot of mixed bags; you’ll see an awful lot of OLD equipment.

      As for Dublin and Columbus, I suggest that you take a day off on the Monday after the Memorial and head up to Brookside to watch the Open qualifier (Sectional). Again, you’ll see the usual flock of tour pros (half of them wearing shorts and letting their caddies carry stand bags); but you’ll also see a lot of ams without equipment contracts. It is one of the best days in golf for spectating. No ropes; galleries numbering in the dozens; lots of pressure.

  9. Ross

    Mar 16, 2015 at 11:10 am

    My first thought was….TM RACs

    • Perry

      Feb 28, 2016 at 2:49 pm

      I completely understand where you are coming from, but having owned both, I can easily say that the CB57’s are easily in a different world in terms of feel and forgiveness. Time does march on.

  10. Henri

    Mar 16, 2015 at 11:09 am

    T-Zoid-like? Maybe.
    The cavity design reminds me of Taylor Made RAC.

  11. Large chris

    Mar 15, 2015 at 2:30 pm

    Identical to mizuno t zoids from 15 years ago…..

    • Desmond

      Mar 16, 2015 at 7:25 pm

      They look similar, but the Miura will have subtle design differences that add up to a “difference” in your hands and on the course. And too many golfers discount the sole grind and ability to get the club out of the turf – Miura has improved their grind over the years. Ten years ago, all one heard were complaints of digging. While they are still not the equal of Edel, or even the Callaway X Forged that Phil plays in terms of grind, their irons have a well thought out design in mild steel … just mild steel, and only mild steel.

  12. Chuck

    Mar 15, 2015 at 12:14 pm

    Wow, these look like old MacGregors. Is this the set that reflects the new relationship between Jack Nicklaus and Miura that was discussed on this site a couple of months ago?

    As far as I can see, the only thing missing is the iconic MacGregor logo and the two vertical rows of diamonds on either side of the grooves.

    I have absolutely nothing against Miura; they are works of art. And for a rich and discerning golfer, they might be just the thing. For a bargain-hunter, I can’t believe that a great-condition set of JNP’s wouldn’t perform the same at a fraction of the price.

  13. KK

    Mar 15, 2015 at 10:16 am

    I can’t believe the comments here bashing Miura fans for snobbery while name dropping the other major brands. Guess what, Titleist etc. also have major snob appeal. If you really are liberated from the influence of branding, go to your local club fitter and get a component set. Until then, go easy on the hypocrisy.

  14. The dude

    Mar 15, 2015 at 8:44 am

    I’ll bet many people buy these as a novelty… Some buy a Rolex…’s about pretentious image as much as performance

  15. BigBoy

    Mar 15, 2015 at 1:47 am

    Absolutely a beautiful feel when striking the ball, but if you believe that they have better technology than the the rest you are deluded. No company is better than the other…those days are over. Its all about the shaft and feel now.

    • Curt

      Mar 15, 2015 at 10:16 pm

      I agree completely, and would add one thing – Sole Grind!

      • Chuck

        Mar 21, 2015 at 11:21 am

        There may be too many people in this thread diminishing these Miuras on the basis of cost. It could be true, if you are a golfer who can easily fit into a standard old-model forging, perhaps with a new set of shafts to fit you.

        But you raise a really excellent point. For the price of these Miuras, as I understand it, you are getting a flock of custom options. And if you know exactly what you need and want from a sole grind, a heel grind, a toe shape, swingweights, lofts, lies, etc., then a set of custom Miuras don’t seem like such a bad deal at all. If you amortize the cost of an extra $1000 over, say, a ten-year life span for a set of superior irons, then that’s about one day of golf or one lesson per year.

  16. theo

    Mar 14, 2015 at 8:32 pm

    The cure to the common HO. I think a lot of the iron flipping and jumping ship would end with the purchase of a set of CB57’s. And likely save the Ho some money. Ho’ing isn’t cheap, but it can quickly become more costly than a new set of $2000 Miuras.

    • Desmond

      Mar 14, 2015 at 10:11 pm

      I also thought my ho’ing would stop after Miuras. And then I hit the Edel with their grind.

      Miura Irons look wonderful, have a different sound, and are custom fit. The best part is if you don’t use all 8 irons, then you can buy 5 or 6, and save some $$.

      I’m sure some a few lucky guys will love these CB’s.

  17. Taylor

    Mar 14, 2015 at 6:49 pm

    I went with the CB 501 over these because I wanted the THINNEST top line with a little forgiveness. Picked up mine slightly used on ebay for a fraction of the cost.

  18. other paul

    Mar 14, 2015 at 10:42 am

    Out of the 92 people who clicked like, wow, legit, or i would hit that. Only one person has clicked I would hit that, as of my reading. That just shows you how small the market is for a $275 iron. I would hit it, if I didn’t have to pay for it.

    • rgb

      Mar 14, 2015 at 5:59 pm

      Probably because 97.63% of readers don’t know (as I didn’t) that IDHT means “I’d hit that”.

      And its only money. Splurge on yourself if you think these would make the game more enjoyable.

  19. Nasty

    Mar 14, 2015 at 9:48 am

    They’re fine irons. Mostly placebo. For that price I’d rather design my own set of irons and have Don White make them through Scratch. Even the author settled for sole grinds that are not perfect for him illustrating the power of placebo.

    • Joe

      Mar 20, 2015 at 12:52 am

      Everything in golf is placebo! There’s no major difference between golf clubs, anymore. Within categories of course, putters-drivers-etc, if it “fits your eye” or “feels” better you play better period. Everybody needs all the placebo effect they can get in golf, especially the Pros.

  20. Golfraven

    Mar 14, 2015 at 9:32 am

    convinces me to choose those over AP2s like clubs. I don’t think I will go ever the MB route but a set of CBs is certainly something to get accustomed to

  21. Mark

    Mar 14, 2015 at 4:28 am

    Only hit a handful of shots with Miuras and whilst they felt good the heads were smaller than my old FG17s. Absolutely no forgiveness. I see them as like a Patek Philipe watch. Ultra high quality but no better than a mid range TAG, Omega or Breitling and much less durable. In the UK they are more than $900 more than a set of AP2s or Mizuno blades and that is simply not justifiable.

  22. Cyd

    Mar 13, 2015 at 6:45 pm

    Some day a set of Miura’s will be the last set I buy. A present to myself and a treasure to enjoy.

    • Curt

      Mar 13, 2015 at 10:25 pm

      Oh come on, they are not worth double what other top clubs sell for. Spend a g-note on another top set and have 1200 left over for other things.

      • RG

        Mar 15, 2015 at 11:45 pm

        I play Mizuno’s (MP 53’s) because I like a soft feel in an iron. But don’t kid yourself, there is no softer feeling club in the world than a Miura. To soft for me, but don’t think for a second you can buy that feeling and precision in a cheaper club, that is absolutely wrong.

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?
  • 229
  • LEGIT30
  • WOW15
  • LOL1
  • IDHT0
  • FLOP5
  • OB1
  • SHANK35

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?
  • 27
  • 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?
  • 292
  • LEGIT38
  • WOW15
  • LOL17
  • IDHT7
  • FLOP14
  • OB9
  • SHANK114

Continue Reading