Connect with us

Iron Reviews

Review: TaylorMade PSi irons



Pros: Exceptionally long and forgiving players irons. They have thinner top lines, less offset and shorter blade lengths than TaylorMade’s RSi 2 irons, and feel noticeably softer at impact.

Cons: Performance is about the same as TaylorMade’s RSi 2 irons.

Who they’re for: The PSi irons target golfers with handicaps from 0-13 who want more distance and forgiveness from their irons.

The Review

Performance is a relative term in iron design, particularly for the amalgamous category of clubs called “players irons” that TaylorMade’s new PSi irons occupy. Some players irons promise better performance in the way of more distance and forgiveness, while others boost the ability of golfers to manipulate trajectory.


The PSi long irons (3-7) are cast from 431 stainless steel. The short irons (8-PW) use 1025 carbon steel forged club hosels/faces, which are welded to 431 stainless steel bodies.

TaylorMade’s PSi irons seek to bridge the gap between those two types of irons, with a revamped construction that maintains the performance that made TaylorMade’s RSi 2 irons a leading performer in our 2015 Gear Trials: Best Players Irons list, while addressing the look, feel and size concerns that led golfers to consider offerings from other companies.

To test the PSi irons, we took them to the Launch Pad at Carl’s Golfland, where its team of Trackman Master Club Fitters hit them against TaylorMade’s RSi 2 irons. Both irons were tested in their stock configurations, with standard lofts, lie angles, and S-Flex shafts. For the PSi irons, the stock shaft is KBS’ C-Taper 105, while the RSi 2 irons used KBS’ 105 shafts.


Trackman tested outdoors. Results were normalized.

If you don’t speak launch monitor lingo, know that the results above are quite similar. So chances are, if you’re playing a set of RSi 2 irons and decide to purchase the PSi irons, you’ll see similar results as well. But there’s a lot to the PSi irons that won’t show up in launch monitor testing.

First of all, the PSi irons look different than the RSi 2 irons — not radically different, but different. The top lines are thinner throughout the set, and the composition is more progressive. What that means is that the long irons are comparatively larger than the rest of the PSi irons.

If you’re coming from a set of RSi 2 irons, you’ll notice that the size of the 3 and 4 irons is about the same, but the PSi mid irons and short irons have progressively shorter blade lengths and less offset. These changes will fit the eye of better golfers, especially those who want top-level distance and forgiveness from their long irons, but don’t need as much help with their scoring clubs. The change should help golfers hit the specialty shots they need from short range to setup more birdie chances.


A material called hybrar is mechanically lodged against the faces of the PSi irons to remove the undesirable vibrations that are typical of irons with extremely thin club faces.

Maybe the most important difference between the two sets of irons is the sound of the PSi irons at impact. They use a new multi-material Dynamic Feel System as part of their construction that creates a softer, quieter sound at impact that golfers tend to equate with better feel and more control.

TM15IRN0013 Spectre HPS Kit_Booklet_pg25_HI_DIGITAL

Something particularly interesting for golfers torn between TaylorMade’s PSi and PSi Tour irons is a new TaylorMade design initiative, which was aided by a new Speed Pocket — a handle bar-shaped slot in the sole of the irons. The Speed Pocket was moved farther forward on the sole PSi irons, and cuts into the cavity of the irons. It creates a launch angle that’s roughly the same as the smaller, fully forged PSi Tour irons, which will be the irons of choice for many of TaylorMade’s PGA Tour staff players.

TM15IRN0013 Spectre HPS Kit_Booklet_pg23_HI_DIGITAL

TaylorMade uses Speed Pockets (3-7 irons) and Face Slots (3-8 irons) to improve the flexibility of the club faces, which create more consistent ball speeds on shots contacted across the face.

For the first time in recent memory, however, the combination of the more forward Speed Pocket and the desire to match the launch angles of the PSi and PSi Tour irons resulted in a set of irons that uses weaker lofts than its predecessor. While the PSi 7 iron is 2.5 degrees stronger than the PSi Tour irons, it’s 0.5 degrees weaker than the same RSi 2 club.


TaylorMade uses 10-gram tungsten toe weights in the PSi 3, 4 and 5 irons to lower CG and improve MOI, leading to higher-launching, straighter-flying shots.

PSi Specs


Another important upgrade for PSi is TaylorMade’s expanded custom shaft options, which allows golfers to upgrade to many of the most popular, taper-tip steel shafts at no extra cost. This is made possible because of TaylorMade’s decision to produce both taper-tip and parallel-tip versions of the PSi iron heads, which makes it easy for golfers to order combination sets of PSi long irons and PSi Tour short irons.

Keep in mind, however, that the tech-laden PSi irons will fly considerably farther than the PSi Tour irons, and loft adjustments could be needed to either the shortest PSi iron or the longest PSi Tour iron to create consistent gapping.

Read more about the technology in TaylorMade’s PSi and PSi Tour irons. 

The Takeaway


Eight-piece sets of PSi irons sell for $1099 with steel shafts, $1199 with graphite shafts.

The PSi irons create outstanding distance and forgiveness, in line with TaylorMade’s award-winning RSi 2 irons, but offer better looks, feel and expanded custom options. For that reason, they’re a top choice in the players iron category for golfers who want more yards, as well as better players who want to explore the possibilities that TaylorMade’s most advanced irons to date can bring to their games.

[wrx_retail_links productid=”30″]


Your Reaction?
  • 233
  • LEGIT32
  • WOW23
  • LOL10
  • IDHT4
  • FLOP12
  • OB9
  • SHANK128



  1. Jim Jennings

    Sep 11, 2017 at 11:38 am

    I am looking for a set of 8 replacements stickers for the back of my Taylormade Psi Irons. Some of mine came off the rest look bad because the lost the print. I will pay for them.

  2. RBR Man

    Apr 3, 2017 at 12:00 pm

    Best set of irons I have hit in a long time. Nice fit between players and GI. I play off an 11 and these fit me perfectly. I should get a backup set just to have once I wear these out.

  3. John Krug

    Nov 11, 2015 at 6:35 pm

    Irons should be described by lofts, not by numbers.

    • G

      Nov 14, 2015 at 1:43 am

      So flight, feel and performance is irrelevant? That is actually what you’re saying…

    • Mike Ryan

      Mar 28, 2017 at 10:00 am

      I see the OEM’s have taken your suggestion to heart!

  4. Robin

    Nov 11, 2015 at 2:16 pm

    Golf is not like what your daddy played, just like the world not the same when your daddy played.

    • Ray

      Oct 27, 2019 at 1:24 pm

      Thats not what your mommy said about your daddy! LMAO

  5. Tony Robeets

    Nov 11, 2015 at 12:33 pm

    So everyone is gripping about a review on a “players club” not having enough average golfers to test them. These clubs aren’t fur average golfers they are for low handicap golfers. 4 and below. Sure go ahead and get these based on not having data for an average golfer and not having a high enough swing speed. Never hit the center of the club face twice with the same club in the same round. Then gripe about not being able to hit a green with them and needing 5 wedges. But you’ll have the same clubs in your bag as Jason Day so that’ll count a lot when your paying off to everyone in the 19th hole.

  6. alexdub

    Nov 9, 2015 at 10:58 am

    It seems like TM is always searching for that iron that will be a game changer. I just don’t see it happening. In the “players irons” category, IMO TM has been passed by Cobra now, let alone Titleist and Ping.

  7. Prut

    Nov 7, 2015 at 6:46 am

    They look like Wal-Mart clubs. Can you get them at Wal-Mart?

  8. g

    Nov 6, 2015 at 8:06 pm

    $1299 for Graphite

  9. J Evans

    Nov 6, 2015 at 8:03 pm

    I hit them, great performance. They are just too ugly though, very Plain Jane cheap looking decals on the back…..looks like a proto-type waiting for a real design.

    Again, they perform well though.

  10. Billy

    Nov 6, 2015 at 12:06 pm

    133 ball speed @ 13.1 launch @ 4339 spin with stock shaft seems low. I would much earner see the landing angle in the 50’s.

    • Zak Kozuchowski

      Nov 6, 2015 at 8:50 pm

      Thanks for the comment, Billy. Our testing results are simply meant for head-to-head comparison purposes. We’re not saying that these are optimal numbers, and in this case these testers were not fit for these clubs before hitting them.

  11. killerbgolfer

    Nov 6, 2015 at 11:57 am

    These seem like great sticks. TMAG has been struggling this year it with layoffs coming agian. I hope these help.

  12. Sam

    Nov 6, 2015 at 11:36 am

    I’m being put-off by the club reviews on this site. They seem like ego-stroking wastes of time for the average golfer (even for the tour pros at times).

    Take for example the 7-iron hit here by golfer #1: A 204 yard carry with a ball speed of 133mph. The tour averages are 172y and 120mph, respectively, according to Trackman. That’s 32 yards or almost THREE CLUBS farther than the average tour pro. Now the 3* less of average loft might have something to with that but honestly how many golfers are averaging 130+ ball speeds and maintaining any sort of strike consistency.

    The only thing bringing these numbers down to earth is the 3000rpm less of average spin and ~20* of decent angle compared to the pros. The landing angle and spin numbers are on par with the pros average 5-WOOD! Good luck holding any sort of green.

    They should offer these clubs in a set of 3 clubs and give you the rest in a coupon toward the 5 wedges you’re going to have to carry.

    Until you get someone that isn’t besting TOUR AVERAGES across all clubs I’m voting shank on every review.

    • Alex

      Nov 6, 2015 at 9:24 pm

      Huh? You start off saying the test subject wasn’t fair. Then you start going on about too many wedges.

      1. The lofts are weaker than prior – that’s stated. So that reduces the loft causing the too many wedges problem.

      2. What does less ball speed mean to a review? It doesn’t impact anything, other than show you lower numbers. In fact – reviews like this are pointless other than pictures and stats about the physical measurements and maybe opinion on look and feel because everyone produces different numbers and you shouldn’t even reference those charts.

      3. It’s still useful if you’re intent on reading it because it gives a comparison between an older set.

      I’m really not sure what your beef is. It’s not 3 clubs better, it’s roughly 2 clubs, or 1.5 clubs than a tour pro. And remember that’s an average. Lots can hit a 6i further – but you said it right – the lofts change the club – and that’s nothing new.

      Even if the reviewer produced similar ball speed to you-it doesn’t mean he/she would produce the same spin rate, angle of decent and launch angle – so I don’t see why you care so much about one factor when even if it was in your wheelhouse, the data is still basically irrelevant.

    • Regis

      Nov 12, 2015 at 10:19 am

      Then don’t read. I grew up playing forged blades that most golfers nowadays couldn’t get airborne. I couldn’t come close at my current age and swing speed.Equally these PSI irons are no longer a fit for my game. But I like reading about the technology. I’m not a car buff but I’m willing to wager that most subscribers to Road and Track will never drive let alone own a Lamborghini. Lighten up.

  13. ShankN3Jack

    Nov 6, 2015 at 9:05 am

    What kind of guerrillas did you have testing these clubs? 204 yard 7-irons?!!! They must carry 6 wedges.

    • DatSliceDoe

      Nov 6, 2015 at 2:03 pm

      Well, its really a 6 iron. However, that is still a long way for a 6 by most people’s standards. Would be nice to have an 8-12 hdcp testing these clubs alongside a wrxer-pro.

  14. alan

    Nov 6, 2015 at 8:34 am

    i hit a 7i last night at golfsmith. the ball flew far…really far. consistently 15ish yards farther than may titleist 7i. then i started looking at the clubs and specs, shaft was 1 inch longer and loft was much stronger. so not really an apples to apples comparison. the ball felt really soft coming of the psi face almost weirdly soft and im not sure if i liked it or not. but these do as advertised, they are long. i didnt hit them enough to get a gauge on forgiveness.

  15. Large chris

    Nov 6, 2015 at 4:19 am

    As for other Trackman iron tests done in the past couple of months, really appreciate the effort to put actual comparison numbers up…. But same problem as before, tester one in particular has a very high swing speed but launches it very low and with far too little spin (6000rpm with a 9 iron, normal recommendation would be 9000).
    If there was any chance for one or two testers to be used who were more ‘regular / average’ type players the test results would be more indicative for more of us.

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