Connect with us

Iron Reviews

Review: Mizuno MP-5 and MP-25 irons



Pros: At $999, both irons are reasonably priced for their category and can be purchased with a variety of custom shafts and grips for no additional cost. The MP-5 irons are exceptionally forgiving for a blade-style iron. The MP-25’s supply additional forgiveness without sacrificing the soft feel associated with Mizuno’s MP line.

Cons: The MP-5’s are not available for lefties, and are slightly larger than previous Mizuno blade irons.

Who’s it for?: Better players who prefer compact, forged irons. Mizuno says the the MP-5’s will be most effective for golfers with a handicap of 5 or better, and the MP-25 users should have a handicap of 10 or better. We agree.

The Review

I don’t typically start with looks when writing reviews, however, the classic simplicity and elegant shaping of Mizuno’s MP-5 are stop-you-in-your-tracks-and-make-you-smile gorgeous. If you’ve seen these irons in person, you know what I mean.


There’s nothing loud or ostentatious about the MP-5’s. In fact, it’s the absence of excessive lines, logos and stamps that give the irons an aesthetic most better players want from a muscle-back iron. Less is almost always more.


The MP-25’s, which have a marginally busier cavity, don’t stray too far from the compact, forged cavity back recipe. They have thin top lines, short blade lengths and minimal offset. Their minimalist design — chrome accents on a satin body — allow the performance and feel of the clubs to, once again, speak for themselves.


Mizuno’s MP-25 7-iron at address.

People talk about the feel of Mizuno irons the way they talk about the best Italian restaurant in town or their favorite vacation spot. For many, it’s a near religious experience. On purely struck shots, the MP-5’s feel every bit as good (if not marginally better) than my MP-69 and MP-64 irons. For me, “better” is a feeling that approaches nothing. There is no sensation of thin, fat, toe-side or heel-side contact. It’s almost as if the sole of the club quickly enters and exits the turf and the ball just gets in the way.

There’s a concern that Mizuno’s decision to use 1025 Boron, which is stronger and lighter than the company’s 1025 Grain Flow Forged Carbon Steel, in the forging process creates a firmer and thus less pleasing sensation at impact with the MP-25 irons. I can’t say the MP-5 and MP-25 irons feel exactly the same, but to label the MP-25’s as firm or harsh is completely unfounded. If anything, the MP-25’s felt softer and more solid on slight mishits than the MP-5’s. On pured shots, I found no discernible difference in feel. I guess that’s why they call it the sweet spot.

Mizuno engineers use HIT (Harmonic Impact Technology) to fine tune acoustics and vibration at impact. After all, sound is feel and the better the club sounds at impact, ultimately the better it will feel.


Mizuno’s MP-5 6-iron at address.

What golfer doesn’t want to bag a set of blades like the MP-5? Not many. How many actually should? That is perhaps a different answer. Part of the backdrop to this conversation is the increased forgiveness realized by the channel-back construction that gives the MP-5 all the workability golfers want from a blade, but the forgiveness of a compact, forged cavity back iron like Mizuno’s MP-64.

Related: Learn more about the tech in Mizuno’s MP-5 irons here.


The MP-5’s are the evolution of Mizuno’s MP-32 “cut muscle” concept, and when compared to traditional blade irons they are certainly easier to hit — especially in the 5, 6 and 7 irons. Better players typically don’t struggle with 8 iron through PW, where the ability to hit the ball on a lower trajectory becomes even more important to attacking tight pins and controlling distances in windy conditions.

That said, the MP-5’s are the least-forgiving iron in Mizuno’s 2016 lineup and each player has to gauge whether the minimal increase in workability is worth the potential loss of distance and direction on mishits. As golfers, we’re hopeless optimists, but in selecting the best set of irons, you have to consider how much frustration you’re willing to endure on days when your ball striking may look less like Henrik Stenson and more like Henrik Ibsen.


The MP-25’s are somewhat larger in every respect, but for the better player they may be the more logical choice. In testing, there’s absolutely no shot a competitive amateur/professional golfer needs to hit that the MP-25’s can’t deliver. For me, they offered all of the workability and feel I need out of an iron and with a little extra forgiveness to boot.

I’m not sure if the forgiveness I enjoyed from the MP-25 irons was due to the 1025 Boron construction, or in the 3-6 irons, the combination of boron and a hidden CNC milled Micro-Slot behind the club face, which is said to add additional ball speed and forgiveness. I didn’t really see a “distance boost” with the long irons, but I will say that I was impressed with the MP-25’s ability to create consistent distance gaps and launch slightly higher than previous models.

Related: Learn more about the tech in Mizuno’s MP-25 irons here.


Turf interaction with both clubs is sublime, however, the MP-25’s had less of a tendency to dig on slightly steeper swings. If you play in softer conditions and your typical mishit is fat, the MP-25’s are the better option.

The numbers: MP-25 vs. MP-5 irons

I hit 10 shots with each club and threw out the lowest/highest and any other anomalies, and here’s what I got. All clubs were tested with KBS C-Taper Stiff shafts at +0.25 inches over Mizuno standard and shots were measured on a Flightscope X2 launch monitor.

MizunoIronsMP (1)

Based on the numbers, the MP-25 irons launched a little higher, spun slightly more and carried farther than the MP-5 irons, but the performance differences were minute. If you have it narrowed down to one of these two irons, both the devil and your decision may very well be in the details.

Using my set of MP-64’s as a barometer, the MP-5 short irons mirrored trajectory and flight of the MP-5’s, whereas the MP-5 long irons were a bit more challenging to hit consistently. That said, when struck well the MP-5 long irons didn’t want to reach the same apex as my MP-64’s. Given this reality, I can see a lot of players who want the control and trajectory of the MP-5’s using these as the top half (7-PW) of a combo set. The MP-25’s are easier to launch, especially in the long irons, which make them an ideal match for a combo set or for the player who wants a little more forgiveness across the board.

The Takeaway

The MP-5 and MP-25 are both stellar irons, in part because they each offer something new: a channel-back construction in the MP-5 irons, and 1025 Boron construction in the MP-25 irons.

What will probably be more important for interested golfers is the blend of new and old. Yes, the MP-5 and MP-25 are more forgiving than their predecessors, but they still look and feel very much like Mizuno’s most celebrated irons from the past. For that reason, they’re must hits.

[wrx_retail_links productid=”21″]

Your Reaction?
  • 444
  • LEGIT51
  • WOW32
  • LOL11
  • IDHT6
  • FLOP9
  • OB8
  • SHANK35

I didn't grow up playing golf. I wasn't that lucky. But somehow the game found me and I've been smitten ever since. Like many of you, I'm a bit enthusiastic for all things golf and have a spouse which finds this "enthusiasm" borderline ridiculous. I've been told golf requires someone who strives for perfection, but realizes the futility of this approach. You have to love the journey more than the result and relish in frustration and imperfection. As a teacher and coach, I spend my days working with amazing middle school and high school student athletes teaching them to think, dream and hope. And just when they start to feel really good about themselves, I hand them a golf club!



  1. tim doreen

    Jan 15, 2017 at 6:31 pm

    thumbs down for mp25.. 1 month of tweaking a giving a fair shot. Going to the mp5. been playing mizuno 25 years

  2. Sam H

    Aug 3, 2016 at 9:13 pm

    I was fitted for the MP5s (4-P with KBS Tour) and I believe this may be the best set I have ever owned. I’m not one of the gorillas here on the forum who carry a 7 iron 185 yards, but I have reduced my shot dispersion within 5 yards., which is much better than my cast irons. My 7i carries 167 to 171 which is plenty for me. The turf interaction made me a Mizuno believer as I found my less than perfect shots ripping through the rough. I wish I can find some of Mizuno’s older blades for a side by side comparison.

  3. John M.P. thirty-three

    Jul 10, 2016 at 10:16 pm

    On my to a quick putting practice I spied the Mizuno tent on the driving range. I play MP 33 and was eager to compare to new offerings. Mp5 and mp25.
    Only hit about 25 each; 5 irons. The boron infused hidden cavity 25 was slightly longer plus forgiving but with less “soul”…more old school Hogan than mizuno.
    The 5’s were amped up 33’s….thicker top line…demo shafts was DG300 same as my current set so I felt comfortable and settled in…and hit perfect arrows off a plush range mat.
    I couldn’t deny that this was a better engineered iron than the 33. Enough to push me over the edge and buy now? No. But it’s inevitable.
    It’s like my running shoes. I run in ASICS Nimbus. There are 16 updates. I fell for them at $89 for Nimbus 4. Later at nimbus 12 I settled and bought several pairs on sale . THAT was MY shoe. But recently got a pair of nimbus 16 and realized it’s a better engineered shoe. (Worth the $149? Yeah. Maybe…)….there’s now a nimbus 18 out there.
    I’m still hanging onto my 33 for the summer…but it’s inevitable. I’m going to get fit for the first time and maybe take some of this post’s advice and go combo.

  4. Justin Wells

    May 16, 2016 at 2:43 pm

    I’ve been demoing different iron sets for months now and have tried so hard to find something better than the MP-5’s for my game and I just can’t do it. I really want to go with one manufacturer for all clubs, but I think these irons prove to me that if you want the best, it really can’t be had by utilizing only one company. I’ve hit the newest Mizuno drivers set to my specs and they don’t touch the Taylormade or Cobra offerings (2 that I hit the longest and straightest).

  5. CraigB

    Feb 29, 2016 at 9:14 am

    MP-5/25 Combo’s are surely the way to go? well….that’s where i’ve gone. I have been playing golf properly for 18months now and started at my first club on 24HCP. After 16 months of ebay addiction resulting in buying, using and selling probably 15 different sets of irons, I have now found my babies for the next few years. I now play of 12 and feel these MP-5/25’s will have me down to mid single figure in no time 🙂

  6. Ryan mp-5

    Jan 23, 2016 at 3:58 am

    The mp-5 are fantastic. They are like a throw back to the old hogan channel backs. It seems every negative review is a failure of the golfer, not the tool. Disclaimer: I did need to range these more than my mp 4s, and my 68s. They reminded me of my old 1025ms (gosh what a club!), and once I dialed them in, I have that itch every day.
    They are not as easy as the 690.mbs(what blade is?) But now that I’ve figured them out, they are pure buttery goodness. Distance Is REMARKABLY COMPETITIVE (Why Is My Phone dping this?)
    So, to summarize, my mp4s are on vacation while I take the channel plunge and so far I’m loving them!

  7. Brian

    Jan 20, 2016 at 3:40 pm

    The MP25’s have been in my bag for a month now and if I could give 6 stars out of 5 I would, there is no shot you cant play with these irons. I dont have the Mizuno history that some of these other posters do, I’m not brand loyal like some, but these outperform anything I have tried over the past 5 years. Kudos to Mizuno, these will be in the bag for a long time.

  8. John

    Jan 11, 2016 at 4:20 pm

    I have the mp-25’s. So far I am not so sure I made the right choice. Out of the box they didn’t get any where near my mp 32’s! I have tweaked them a bit (bending) and we will see. I would like to buy a little more distance with out loosing my mp 32 feel.

  9. Sneader

    Dec 25, 2015 at 8:35 pm

    You need to re-write this review. The MP-5 CANNOT, and I have to doubly stress this point here, CANNOT be 5 out of 5 stars. I completely do not agree. I can only give it 3.5 out of 5.
    In the category of classic Mizuno blades of recent years, even comparing it to TN-87, 29, 33, 37, 68, 69, and 4 – the 5 is nowhere near the same as a true muscle-back blade as those others.
    I have tried and tried and tried to hit the 5 for the past month. All I can say is that it just does not feel the same, fly the same, nor be controlled the same. There is definitely a softer feel, yes, but it’s almost too mushy for it to give you any proper feedback. Mizuno has made a mistake here, by scooping out the mid section and by thickening up the top section, that may have increased the MOI to make it seem more forgiving for those who had been, perhaps, in the past unable to hit such pure muscle backs. But the problem for somebody like me who likes to use the feeling of the down blow hit knowing where the muscle is, is gone. The pure, artistic, atheistic design of a visually even design of the triangle and the scoop out at the back, has come at the expense of a much more toe-down, muscle-less feeling of a hit that the heads need to be bent at least 1 degree upright in order for you to get away from having to hit the toe area all the time. This is the first time I have experienced something like this happening, where the balance of the head doesn’t bode well for the 63 degree lie angle for the PW that Mizuno has always used. It needs to be brought up to 64, which is the US standard, in order for the heads to be hit in the center.
    The thicker, rounder top line in combination with the scoop out, changes the center-of-gravity of the heads that the same swing style with same grip you were employing before with thinner, more pure muscle that starts low and ends in the middle (instead of having this new thicker top-muscle area of the 5), forces you to press much more forwards at address (even though the off-set face angle is supposed to be the same as the 33), that it is very difficult to line up the face straight with an intention to move it from side to side which is does not allow you to do as much, because it is more like a cavity than a muscle back. Having said that, because of its cavity-like design, the long irons are easy to hit – the 3, 4, & 5 irons act like the forgiving cavity irons that they are, and fly longer than the MP-4 or 69, from my own observation.
    In conclusion, this 5 is a miss, in my opinion. Mizuno needs to stick to the design of the TN-87, 29, or 33 type MB and never deter from them. The 87 was so good, you even re-issued a special edition at exorbitant prices – why not just continue to release that iron with current shaft options? There has never been a need to change anything around, except to be “trendy” with the social media, but the fact remains that the “representative” pure MB from any manufacturer at the top of the list should never have to change. Why do they you to keep messing around with it?

    • Joe Conlin

      Mar 13, 2016 at 3:41 am

      WOW… that reply was to the point. I disagree, but sir you make a valid point. I have only been playing golf for a couple years and only recently went to the MP5 from a forgiving cavity back iron.

  10. tiger168

    Oct 25, 2015 at 1:20 am

    OMG, the MP25 looks exactly like my old Tourstage Z101 (2005). The Z101 had tunsten on the long irons to make it easier to launch high.

  11. birdie4adam

    Oct 23, 2015 at 12:05 pm

    I completely agree with the less is more statement.

  12. Jay

    Oct 22, 2015 at 3:00 pm

    Is this normal?? -The gap between the 7 and 9 iron, which has to be filled by 1 club is 29 yards in the MP25’s (185-156). The gap between the 4 and 7, filled by 2 clubs is only 32 yards??

    • Chris Nickel

      Oct 22, 2015 at 6:59 pm

      Fair question…I think it’s important to try and take the same type of swing with each club and then let the numbers be whatever they are – That said, once I’m really dialed in on a set, I like to try and keep the gaps somewhere around 12 yards/club.

  13. MP4me

    Oct 22, 2015 at 2:53 pm

    I would have thought you would hit the 25 much longer than the 5.

    • Chris Nickel

      Oct 22, 2015 at 7:02 pm

      You know, that was one of my biggest questions before I started testing the MP 25s – I know what the marketing says, but I didn’t really see a major impact based on just the boron alone –

      • Alien

        Oct 22, 2015 at 9:13 pm

        If that’s the case, Chris, then Mizuno would not be very happy with the results shown here, considering the hoopla around the Boron

      • Stan

        Oct 23, 2015 at 5:06 pm

        The Boron isn’t what makes you hit the ball farther, if you read into it more you would see the Boron allows then to cut a pocket behind the face that allows the face to be incredibly thin. This allows for more rebound and more distance. HOWEVER… there is no slot in the 7-pw therefore the distance isnt seen there. The 850 forged has the thinner face throughout the set allowing you to get more distance throughout the set. Also this guy seems to swing incredibly fast to carry a seven iron as far as he does. A thin face can only flex so much without reaching a point where it can’t flex anymore. Meaning someone who swings 92 and below will see more of an impact on distance than that of someone who swings 95. Boron is not the reason the ball goes farther but the reason they are able to construct the club in a way that allows for the face to flex in a way that promotes more distance.

      • Stan

        Oct 23, 2015 at 5:15 pm

        I would say 4 yards extra distance on an iron that doesn’t change the shaft and doesn’t just strengthen the lofts **cough cough…Taylor made /callaway…cough cough *** is pretty darn impressive.

  14. Shipwreck

    Oct 22, 2015 at 2:42 pm

    I’d love to see the reasoning behind the few people that gave this the “shank” or “OB” rating……

    • MAtto

      Oct 26, 2015 at 7:24 am

      They can’t hit Mizuno irons.

      • Sam H

        Aug 3, 2016 at 8:50 pm

        Now that is funny…. They should stick with the big, bulky hybrid set.

  15. Jafar

    Oct 22, 2015 at 1:04 pm

    I like the concept of the MP5’s and I am glad they exist. But I’d still prefer the MP4’s and 64’s.

  16. Justin

    Oct 22, 2015 at 11:32 am

    They need to get back to making true blades.

    • Jonzone

      Oct 22, 2015 at 12:20 pm

      Clearly the MP-4 aren’t “true blade” enough for you…move on friend…

  17. Matt

    Oct 22, 2015 at 11:24 am

    A combo set of these with C-Taper S+ shafts would be perfect for me.

Leave a Reply

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

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

Club Junkie

Club Junkie Review: Cobra’s new King Tour irons



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?
  • 11
  • LEGIT3
  • WOW2
  • LOL0
  • IDHT0
  • FLOP0
  • OB0
  • SHANK0

Continue Reading

Iron Reviews

Review: Honma TW737-Vs Forged Irons



Your Reaction?
  • 245
  • 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?
  • 29
  • LEGIT4
  • WOW1
  • LOL1
  • IDHT1
  • FLOP3
  • OB3
  • SHANK20

Continue Reading