Connect with us

Published

on

A few months ago, GolfWRX Members voted for the three irons they most wanted to see tested head-to-head. The winners were: PXG 0311T, Mizuno MP-5 and Titleist 716 AP2. Today, the results of my test are in.

I do a lot of these head-to-head equipment test videos on my YouTube Channel, but for this video I stepped it up. Each of the three irons were tested with the same shafts of the exact same length, and all the clubs had the same grips, lofts, lies and swing weights, courtesy of Tour X Golf fitters.

Make sure to watch the video and vote for the three irons you want to see me test in my next video. As always, post your comments and questions below.

Your Reaction?
  • 278
  • LEGIT35
  • WOW14
  • LOL15
  • IDHT7
  • FLOP12
  • OB7
  • SHANK43

Rick Shiels has been a PGA Golf Professional for more than 10 years and started making YouTube videos on his channel four years ago. He loves creating golf-related content on his YouTube channel that is factual, informative, fun and entertaining. His videos includes golf tips, equipment reviews, on-course videos, news shows and golf lessons. Rick absolutely loves coaching golf, and he has setup his first golf academy in Lytham (UK). Quest Golf Studio is where he calls home, and it has the latest equipment that can help any golfer improve and better understand their golf games. You can book a lesson with Rick here. Rick is also very active on the social media account below, including SnapChat (rickshielspga).

103 Comments

103 Comments

  1. Tom

    Oct 22, 2016 at 1:05 pm

  2. Steve

    Oct 16, 2016 at 7:11 pm

    I know its a little off topic (or, out of bounds?), but I give you my impression of club testing… I walk in to a Golfsmith while killing some time. I jump in the demo booth and pick up a 7 iron (I dont recall the brand). The computer decides I am hitting the ball 195 yards and 5 yds off center. I am a 3+ hdcp that is well aware of my skills (or lack there of) and carry TM R7TPs in my bag and my 7 iron plays between 157 and 163 yds. therefore, I give little credence to reviews until I personally use a club off grass.

  3. Ani

    Oct 16, 2016 at 10:41 am

    The test shows that PXG is a big loser. 1 yard longer for being 3 times more expensive. Good luck!

    • Tom

      Oct 16, 2016 at 1:17 pm

      with one club, imagine what the other seven will do.

  4. Steven

    Oct 15, 2016 at 8:44 am

    What was the shot dispersion with each of the irons? That should be a major factor in helping decide which one is the best to put in your bag.

    • Uhit

      Oct 15, 2016 at 1:26 pm

      You can see the shot dispersion (in about the middle of the video) at 5:04 …
      …the smallest shot dispersion has the Mizuno MP-5.

      • Tom

        Oct 15, 2016 at 3:31 pm

        By site it appears to be furthest from the center.

        • Uhit

          Oct 15, 2016 at 6:42 pm

          By site he was hitting the Mizuno blade furthest from the center of the clubface…
          …however, shot shape is depending from strike.
          If you would flatten the lie angle around 1 degree, the draw he plays would straighten, and the shots would be dead center on line…
          …good quality forged irons can be bend a few degree without problems.

        • Uhit

          Oct 16, 2016 at 4:53 am

          B.t.W.:
          If you take into account, that he played the biggest draws with the Mizuno (whilst he had the least dispersion), the Mizuno shots would have been (at least) as long as the other two irons (if the draws would be as straight as with the other two irons)…
          …if all is said and done, you come to the conclusion, that in perfect conditions (robot testing), the Mizuno blade would win the test in probably all categories – don´t you think?

          • Tom

            Oct 16, 2016 at 1:43 pm

            I’m under the impression draw shots go further. According to the data provided 0311’s had the least deviation from center line.

            • Uhit

              Oct 16, 2016 at 6:40 pm

              A big draw becomes a hook…
              …a draw, that draws to the center line, is still a draw.
              Draw shots only get further, if you generate a considerable part of your clubhead speed with the closing speed of your club face through impact (flipping over)…
              …or deloft your club in a helpful degree.
              Draw shots are generated by the user – not by the golf club.
              With the same ball speed a draw is shorter than a straight shot along the intended line.
              You can play draws (and fades), to gap the distance between two golf Clubs.
              If you measure the lenght of the flight path, you get an idea, how far a draw (or fade) would have been (approx.) travelled as a straight shot.
              Do this in our case and you will find more than a yard distance gain, if you bend the draw from the Mizuno blade to a straight line and use the clubhead speed of the PXG shots.

  5. Greg

    Oct 14, 2016 at 8:52 pm

    Somewhere along the line I thought that a given shaft might not work optimally in different clubheads. For example the AP1 head may be engineered with different launch and spin characteristics than the mizuno. Therefore a player may get better performance out of a DG shaft in the titleist and a kbs might work better with a mizuno. Is this not true? And if so, would it not impact the comparison if the same shaft is used?

    • christian

      Oct 15, 2016 at 12:38 am

      Every brand offers multiple shaft choices. So your theory does not hold water.

    • Jim

      Oct 16, 2016 at 10:26 am

      Greg is right…although it’d be measured in microns…It’s more about the strength and technique of the human using the tool…

      Christian’s right too..Although they were dragged kicking and screaming into doing so. We used to routinely yank perfectly good un-hit DG’s from Mizuno’s & Titleist irons to install Rifle shafts on the customer’s request Once one big OEM started offering custom shaft selections, they all had to just to be competitive.

  6. Brian

    Oct 14, 2016 at 4:41 pm

    You’re right…Mizuno are works of art.

  7. Tom.

    Oct 14, 2016 at 4:39 pm

    push mower cut the Mizuno in two

  8. Dave r

    Oct 14, 2016 at 4:22 pm

    You know what a good golfer can hit any club they want and get the same results. Remember its not the arrow it’s the ……? . You get fitted right and it does not matter what you hit. All the top line clubs are the same the feel might be different but it’s what you prefer. The biggest issue for most is cost . What I would like to see is a pro explain why it’s important for thoese getting into golf to get fitted by someone who knows what their talking about. And explain why it’s best to spend the extra time and have this done.

  9. duffer888

    Oct 14, 2016 at 11:04 am

    Shots launch higher off a mat than grass. So yes, mat does influence numbers, but it should be the same across the 3.

    Most interesting thing I see is 3 different designs, pretty much same result.

    Clear winner? No. PGX is longer because it had the lowest dynamic loft. PGX probably has the thinnest face as well, so ball speed is not surprising.

    • Tom

      Oct 15, 2016 at 1:53 pm

      thin face & wider grooves

      • Uhit

        Oct 16, 2016 at 5:11 am

        He played the faintest draws with the PXG – if the shot shape with all three irons would be the same, the PXG wouldn´t be longer!

        If you take into account, that he played the biggest draws with the Mizuno (whilst he had the least dispersion), the Mizuno shots would have been (at least) as long as the other two irons (if the draws would be as straight as with the other two irons)…
        …if all is said and done, you come to the conclusion, that in perfect conditions (robot testing), the Mizuno blade would win the test in probably all categories – don´t you think?

        • Tom

          Oct 16, 2016 at 2:34 pm

          conditions for this test were as good as we’re gonna get. ( I have no problem with the results of the testing equipment used, benign indoor conditions,or Rick Shiels. What I think is, 1025 select Boron billet being softer that the others is a detriment.

          • Uhit

            Oct 16, 2016 at 8:30 pm

            I think Boron is not involved in this test (at least not in the Mizuno MP-5), but a human…
            Boron is AFAIK used in the JPX series – except in the 900 tour.
            Whether it is used in the PXG, or Titleist I don´t know, but you seem to like the idea of Boron in a 1025 steel, that is softer without it.
            The 900 tour has no Boron in it because the face is thick enough…
            …a blade (like the MP-5) wouldn´t benefit from Boron, because it has an even thicker face than the 900 tour on it´s thinnest spot.
            Don´t know, what your argument is…

            • Tom

              Oct 17, 2016 at 1:02 am

              I stand corrected.

              • Tom

                Oct 18, 2016 at 3:15 pm

                my thinking is that the steel used in the MP 5 is softer than the others that could be a detriment.

                • Uhit

                  Oct 20, 2016 at 12:01 pm

                  The data show no detriment in performance versus the others…
                  …so, why should a softer steel be a detriment?
                  As long as the steel has no remaining deformation after you hit a ball, you can be pretty sure, that there is no energy loss, that could cause a measurable detriment in ball speed etc…
                  The ball is that much softer than a soft steel and the blade is thick enough to be not deformed during a hit, that you don´t have to worry.

  10. Jim

    Oct 14, 2016 at 10:44 am

    Ya can’t change lofts to compare the clubs. 7irA is designed & ground to play with Xloft, and 7irB is designed & grounf to play with Yloft.

    It doesn’t matter how “strong” anyone makes the loft of a given iron as long as they’ve been able to maintain a low center of gravity, keep it playable for the intended user(s) so that it produces the appropriate launch angle for the iron in question…

    Why would anyone want 4-5 yds roll out with a 7? Using super-ultra-straight-titanium double dozen pack Slazengers from Dick’s? That’s either a bad shaft fitting, OR simply the wrong head for that player! Maybe bumping the loft changed COG too much – whatever…that’s not how irons should be “death match” – head to head tested..

    GET THE ROBOT. Same shaft & length, same lie with the factory designated loft…ADJUST the robot for 1, 2 & 3 degree off center hits – both heel & toe side, alter path same way – alter clubhead release angles & do all tests with at least 3 speeds (70, 80 & 90mph)
    yeah, it will take all day…but it’s the only way to “PROVE” which is best for each catagory of strike

    • Jim

      Oct 14, 2016 at 12:11 pm

      Isn’t building a “better mousetrap” the whole idea? I don’t care if an iron’s loft is 10° “strong” – as long as they were smart enough to compensate elsewhere to maintain appropriate launch & playabilty… it”s governed by rules, size limits and frankly consumer esthetics….
      – anyone remember the first gen ALL TITANIUM IRONS? Yeah, they hit the crap out of the ball, but were so big n clumsy they failed… Build it as best ya can! Who cares what the loft/head numbers are

  11. PO

    Oct 14, 2016 at 10:41 am

    No mention of golf ball, using a matt and NO mention of proximity to the hole ? I thought it was about golf…….. The point of the game is shooting lower scores…..

    • MP-4

      Oct 14, 2016 at 11:30 am

      Exactly.
      Where’s the workability test.
      Where the heck is the distance to the hole data?
      No mention of accuracy. lol
      The game is all about how far you hit it…hah.

      • Glen

        Oct 15, 2016 at 7:03 am

        I guess you didn’t see the offline stas he showed for each club?

    • Dormie

      Oct 14, 2016 at 3:10 pm

      If you add a little human factor, he is human after all, and take out the best and worst shot of each, you see what is seen time and time again. The closer you are to a true blade on a precise strike, the closer you are to the hole, distance+line. The further you are from a precise strike with that same club, the further you will be vs. a more perimeter weighted club. And vice versa. Great test nonetheless. Data data data.

    • Tom

      Oct 15, 2016 at 1:58 pm

      Incredible…absolutety incredible! Did ya watch the video on ur cell phone watch in line at a liquor store? PRO V1 !

  12. Blue

    Oct 14, 2016 at 10:15 am

    Very Interesting. Thank you for performing the test and I think you did a nice job.

    I am curious if anyone knows the C.O.R. for the three clubs? The MP5s and AP2 had a S.D. of 1.8 on ball speed however the PXGs had a S.D. of 2.7 on ball speed. The sample size is much too small and impact of human error is too great to draw any real conclusions but these S.D. numbers jumped out at me. The MP5s are the only true forged single piece of steel head. The others are multi-piece clubs and I think there is a possibility of some spring-like effect –albeit small.

    I’ve play the MP5s since last fall and love them. Played the AP2 (great club too!) before and really have seen no difference in performance. I just like the Mizuno look better. Actually hit the PXG 0311ts a few times a couple days ago and didn’t see any noticeable improvement in performance –although I thought they felt softer at impact.

    My simple take away is there is no discernible difference between the clubs when a good swing is put on them. Which is what I would expect in a players club. If you’re in the market, any of these are great –although the PXGs come with a hefty price. So pick what you like to look at and what sounds best to you at impact.

  13. ButchT

    Oct 14, 2016 at 9:17 am

    With these results, how could anyone justify the increased cost of the PXGs?

    • Charlie

      Oct 14, 2016 at 9:37 am

      When you are trying to impress family, friends, clients, etc.

    • Jim

      Oct 14, 2016 at 5:08 pm

      Do robot tests and have it hit off center, thin, little fat… stuff that happens to humans – especially on uneven turf etc…

      • Mark Moser

        Oct 16, 2016 at 12:46 pm

        That would make more sense with a game improvement iron and not a players club as the player who will play this club is a mid to low single digit and a good consistent ball striker so miss hits will be a lot less than a 10 or 20 hdcp. If a 20 is playing these then every miss will be exaggerated.

  14. Joe

    Oct 14, 2016 at 9:11 am

    Why do so few people understand the concept of statistical significance? If you really want to prove that one club is longer than another, you need to hit more than 10 shots with each. (And probably use a robot – a human is just not consistent enough.)

    I also take issue with the conclusion that any of these clubs “won” this test. This data is a real mixed bag. The PXG was the “longest”, but it also had a greater variance of distance. A player of the quality of the guy who did this test doesn’t care about 2 yards with his 7 iron. He wants to control his distance. If you care about maximizing your distance with your 7 iron, you don’t want this style of club anyway.

    • Jordan

      Oct 14, 2016 at 10:19 am

      These results are so close you’d need a crap ton of repetitions to gain anything statistically significant. The issue with that is you’ll probably get something statistically significant, but insignificant in terms of real world impact. No one cares about a club that’s 1-2 yards longer. I think the idea of this article is to show that there’s little difference between any of these clubs and you can sufficiently do that with just 10 iterations.

    • Blue

      Oct 14, 2016 at 10:19 am

      Agree. Although I don’t think he’s claiming any stat sig. My take away is there is no difference between the clubs and that is what I would expect w/a players club. Players clubs should provided consistent performance with a consistent swing. All of these clubs provide this.

  15. Mr Muira.

    Oct 14, 2016 at 8:56 am

    Some guys like their girls fat, some like em skinny…pick your ball buster.

  16. Blade Junkie

    Oct 14, 2016 at 8:03 am

    So basically there is no real-world difference between any of these clubs LOL. So do I buy the AP2s for £700 .. or the MP5s for £750 … or the PXGs for £2,500 … ?

  17. Mark Donaghy

    Oct 14, 2016 at 6:49 am

    I think this was a great head to head test. I’ve watched Rick do many of these and he is usually very honest / balanced in his findings. He was not pushing any of these clubs. What it show me was that there is very little between all three, which is what I would have thought from the start. Some of you purists out there will quibble about the details ad infinitum, but to me a lot of this will come down to an individual’s preference for visual looks, feel and brand loyalty. The Mizzy guy will always pick Mizzy. I think if a club is fit properly to the player, the margin of difference is very little in terms of distance, flight and dispersion.

  18. erkr

    Oct 14, 2016 at 12:17 am

    Pretty similar data I must say.
    He didn’t hit so many shots so, just hitting the PXG slightly harder/better can explain the difference in club and ballspeed.
    I’d like to hear more about the differences in how they feel and how they play (high/low trajectory, perfor on Mishima etc)

  19. Gary

    Oct 13, 2016 at 11:10 pm

    To be fair the Mizuno chosen to be run against those other two should have been the JPX 900 forged

    • Jason Schneider

      Oct 14, 2016 at 9:48 am

      Why? The mp5s are a better iron

    • Tom.

      Oct 14, 2016 at 1:49 pm

      “A few months ago, GolfWRX Members voted for the three irons they most wanted to see tested head-to-head. The winners were: PXG 0311T, Mizuno MP-5 and Titleist 716 AP2. Today, the results of my test are in”

    • Brian

      Oct 14, 2016 at 4:45 pm

      I thin the JPX 900 Tour would be more appropriate than the forged.

  20. lhex

    Oct 13, 2016 at 10:44 pm

    robotic testing will justified everything!
    its good to see a dual cavity irons can produce a very close number with a muscles back design iron
    nice head to head test men,

  21. Philip

    Oct 13, 2016 at 9:23 pm

    Since club lofts are tweaked to maximize the characteristics of the club design bending the AP2 and MP-5 7i from 34 to 32 degrees in order to match the PXG club will definitely have an effect on the results. In addition after the lofts were adjusted, the bounce for the PXG stayed at 7 degrees, whereas the bounce for the MP-5 was just 1 degree and the AP2 would have been 3 degrees (if same bounce as prior model since the website not longer lists bounce). I wouldn’t call them identical clubs and the sample size is just oo small for any meaningful conversation – but that it just me.

    • Dave S

      Oct 13, 2016 at 11:04 pm

      Always club test truthers.

    • Craven

      Oct 14, 2016 at 10:24 am

      I agree about strengthening the lofts. To be fair, he should have repeated the test with the PXG weakened to 34 degrees. Would it have suffered in performance? Then again, looking at the numbers, the differences are far too small to deem the test statistically significant. In essence, they are all the same. Choose whichever one suits your eye or wallet.

    • Dan

      Oct 14, 2016 at 11:39 am

      This makes sense to me. Also can explain why the Mizuno was hit a touch higher on the face. impact conditions with 7° bounce versus 1° biunce can definitely change.

  22. dan

    Oct 13, 2016 at 9:15 pm

    Decent “attempt” at a controlled experiment.
    Either way it only shows that it just doesn’t really matter which clubs you use.
    So you’re telling us that a true blade is slightly (and I mean very marginally slightly) less forgiving than a hollow iron and a CB with tungsten?
    Is anyone actually surprised by this??

    Find a shaft that fits you and a head that suits your eye and flail away.

    • Uhit

      Oct 15, 2016 at 2:02 pm

      Where does your conclusion come from?
      In the video at 5:04 you see, that the Mizuno MP-5 blade has the smallest dispersion circle, which corresponds (at least in my book) with most forgiving.
      In this test, the Mizuno blade wasn´t struck as well as the others (3-4 mm higher above center than the other two – on average) – and (despite this) it had the smallest dispersion!
      In my opinion it also shows, that you should grab the golf club, that looks and feels the best and get fitted – forget the bells an whistles and what the majority tells you.

  23. John

    Oct 13, 2016 at 9:04 pm

    When your 7 iron launches like a 6 iron it is time to go to a weaker shaft. Playing a c taper 130x with those numbers is a joke.

    • KK

      Oct 13, 2016 at 9:25 pm

      3 to 5 yards of roll-out with a 7 iron is pretty good.

      • Someone

        Oct 13, 2016 at 11:00 pm

        Why are you getting roll out with your 7i? That’s an approach shot that shot come down relatively close to steep and settle. If I’m hitting a 7i into a green, the last thing I’m looking for is roll out. If I’m hitting a 7i as hard as I can to eke out some extra distance with a rollout, I’d rather play the 6i.

    • Charlie

      Oct 14, 2016 at 8:28 am

      Agreed. But with a push draw, it’s difficult to go softer without hooking the ball. My swing is a lot like his. I can understand why he plays that shaft.

  24. Dylan

    Oct 13, 2016 at 8:47 pm

    I’d say Mizuno gets the win here, a straight up blade against two players cavity back irons? And it performed only slightly worse off of mis-hits? Very impressive Mizuno, you should be proud.

    • gwillis7

      Oct 13, 2016 at 9:55 pm

      agree, Mizuno did fantastic and I would imagine it would be the least forgiving. seems pretty dang forgiving for a blade.

      I wish the ping i-blades would have been in the competition!

    • Jack

      Oct 13, 2016 at 11:41 pm

      I would agree. His clubhead speed was actually lower for the MP5. I don’t think clubs affect clubhead speed really? That’s really the golfer. The dynamic loft was also higher on the MP5 as well. With it being the same loft, that is really not a consistent strike. I don’t believe that if the Mp5 was swung the same way there would be really much difference at all.

      And this is because Rick is a pretty good golfer. I would imagine that the MP5 would perform worse on off center hits compared to the other two. Making this test not as useful as it could have been. Rick should probably try delofting the Mp5 more when he was testing then it would have been fairer. What made him deloft and swing the other two clubs 1 mile slower than the PXG we don’t know. And apparently neither does he. But really this tells me once you rule out the loft differences the three clubs are really quite similar.

    • Tom

      Oct 16, 2016 at 2:42 pm

      From Mizuno Corp. Traditionally irons have fallen into blade or cavity type categories but Mizuno insist the MP-5’s are neither, but rather a revolutionary “Channel Back”… end that quote!

  25. R

    Oct 13, 2016 at 8:11 pm

    Rigged to the moon

  26. Matt

    Oct 13, 2016 at 6:54 pm

    Hardly seems fair that the PXGs were hit on the screws and the Mizzies were all bonked. Delivering half a club extra of dynamic loft with MP-5s as well, probably the high hits causing deflection (also explains the low spin). NEW TEST! Account for strike this time.

    • Tom

      Oct 15, 2016 at 2:38 pm

      250+ think it’s fair compared to the 53 hat don’t.

  27. Uhit

    Oct 13, 2016 at 6:25 pm

    Interestingly the Mizuno blade had the least dispersion and the other numbers were very close, despite the Mizuno blade was hit on average on the least favourable position on the club head (within the tested bunch of three golf clubs).

    3 to 4 mm higher hit point on average on the clubface of the Mizuno blade in comparison to the others, which could indicate that the mat could have been hit (slowing the golf club down) and / or explaining the higher average launch angle.

    • Tom

      Oct 13, 2016 at 8:13 pm

      so now the “mat” comes into question on testing?

      • J

        Oct 13, 2016 at 8:50 pm

        Ball contact does come into question, which is what he’s implying. Contact higher on the face=higher launch with less spin and lower ball speed. No need to be pejorative, it’s an astute observation that could affect the results.

        • Uhit

          Oct 14, 2016 at 6:05 am

          Thank you. You are spot on!

        • Tom

          Oct 15, 2016 at 4:09 pm

          look at and compare AoA data provided for more info.

          • Uhit

            Oct 16, 2016 at 4:49 am

            Think about it…
            …you can hit off center strikes independent of the AoA…

        • Tom

          Oct 19, 2016 at 8:32 pm

          I’m thinkin if the if the sole of the club came into contact with the mat, the club would have skipped and contact would be lower on the face. Why didn’t it happen on the other two? Does Rick Shiels that poor of a swing?

      • Someone

        Oct 13, 2016 at 11:03 pm

        He’s saying that the mat comes into play if it is hit, whilst the others were cleaner strokes on the ball with mat interaction after hitting the ball. Hitting the mat first could cause the ball to bounce up a tad and hit higher on the club face.

        • Uhit

          Oct 14, 2016 at 6:14 am

          In any case, I wouldn´t have expected that the pure Mizuno blade would have the least dispersion AND the other numbers in the same ball park.

          My conlusion is – according to the provided data – that the simple blade in this test has no obvious disadvantage in comparison to the high-tech irons…
          …which really surprises me (as a gear head), but not really as a Golfer, who loves look and feel.

        • Tom

          Oct 14, 2016 at 9:09 am

          SOOooo user error?

          • Uhit

            Oct 14, 2016 at 3:20 pm

            The given data show 3 to 4 mm higher (on average and above center) golf ball strike positions on the club face of the Mizuno blade in comparison to the other two tested golf clubs…
            …what could it be?
            Have you an argument against the given data, or what do you want?

  28. Golfy Golferton

    Oct 13, 2016 at 6:06 pm

    Anyone getting redirected to pipview for some stupid gift card or is it just me,
    Read it was a problem with this site

    • Someone

      Oct 13, 2016 at 11:04 pm

      I’m having the same problem. It only happens on golfwrx…their site must be generating hits or one of their ads has an embedded code.

  29. TitleistJunky

    Oct 13, 2016 at 5:37 pm

    I think the better test would be the distance and accuracy on off center hits. Pure shot for pure shot there really shouldn’t be a difference with any club considering all these equal factors.

  30. CashMoney

    Oct 13, 2016 at 5:06 pm

    How much did Parsons pay you for this, Rick? Man have you sold out to fame, or what, now that you have found yourself on videotube.

    • JThunder

      Oct 13, 2016 at 10:20 pm

      Maybe I don’t get your comment; are you suggesting PXG “won” this shootout? 1 yard more distance at 170 yards is 0.5%. Another 10 balls and that averages to 0 most likely.

      Bob Parsons wouldn’t pay anyone a penny to prove his irons fly 0.5% further than irons 1/3 the price.

    • J Zilla

      Oct 14, 2016 at 1:45 am

      Pay for what? At best, PXG barely outperformed clubs that cost a third less. Based on cost vs performance ratio, PXG got slaughtered in this head to head.

  31. MIZUNOnumeroUNO

    Oct 13, 2016 at 5:04 pm

    MY WHOLE LIFE IS A LIE

  32. Hippocamp

    Oct 13, 2016 at 4:58 pm

    There is no way that, with 10 strikes per club, any of those differences lie outside the margin of error. To say that PXG *won* is going way beyond what the data can support. In fact, the performance of the three clubs seems to be incredibly similar.

    • JThunder

      Oct 13, 2016 at 10:11 pm

      I would go so far as to say the data is “identical”, if 30 balls were hit with each, that slight variation would likely shrink more.

      Also, I’d say the clubhead speed and attack angle of the PXG suggest it was being hit with more confidence/aggression – and while that would be interesting to note, it does suggest the results would be even closer (as if the Mizuno were being “swept” but the PXG “driven” … even so, only the slightest difference.)

      I’d be interested to see any 1 of these heads hit with 12 different shafts – weights, flexes, etc.

  33. JD

    Oct 13, 2016 at 4:57 pm

    Walls closing in on all the Mizuno folks out there…

  34. Tom.

    Oct 13, 2016 at 4:55 pm

    I see we already have a Mizuno players vote….roflmao

  35. MakeTigerGoodAgain

    Oct 13, 2016 at 4:54 pm

    The only true blade in this comparison is the Mizuno. Thought the golfwrx readers would vote for some better matching irons to be compared. So not your fault Mr. Shields. In that respect the Mizzy did surprisingly well! Seems like perfect strikes all the way so not much in between those clubs. Would therefore be interesting to see the difference in length on off center hits.

    • Matt

      Oct 13, 2016 at 6:56 pm

      Dude, check out the strike average again. PXG was way closer to center than Mizuno. If he was nutting those MP-5s I guarantee they’d spin more than those hollow pieces of junk.

      • Tom

        Oct 15, 2016 at 2:35 pm

        Don’t think so; PXG has wider grooves. Good thing MP 5’s have a large sweet spot…..coulda been really disastrous.

    • JThunder

      Oct 13, 2016 at 10:17 pm

      I would think the whole point was to compare a more-or-less “true” muscleback (not blade) to irons with more “tech”, but unlike OTR, making all the specs identical. OTR, most MBs are weaker lofted, sometimes shorter shafts, and often heavier and stiffer shafts that their GI/SGI counterparts.

      I’d have liked to see MB/CB/GI/SGI, all spec’d the same. That would be way more interesting, but all such comparisons not likely to win much favor from advertisers and sponsors… These “differences” in numbers are so small as to be considered nothing; another 10 balls with each and that 1 yard difference between the AP2 and PXG might disappear. And that 1 yard difference on 170 yard shot is less than 1%…

  36. Tom.

    Oct 13, 2016 at 4:36 pm

    Ewww this is gonna be good

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.

Opinion & Analysis

The Wedge Guy: Is lighter always longer?

Published

on

One of the continuing trends in golf clubs – particularly drivers – is the pursuit of increasingly lighter shafts; this obsessive goal has given us the premise that the lighter the club, the faster you can swing it. And that idea is driven by the relentless pursuit of distance at all levels, and for all golfers.

But as long as he is, for example, Dustin Johnson ran away with the Masters because he was exactly that – a “master” at ball control and precision. DJ outperformed almost everyone in the field in terms of fairways and greens. That gave him more birdie putts, better looks because of his precise approach shots, and many fewer tough par saves.

But my topic today is to pose the question: “Is lighter really the key to being longer for all of us “recreational” golfers?”
Let me begin by saying that “recreational” doesn’t mean any lack of seriousness or dedication to the game. Hitting better shots and shooting lower scores is the goal for all of us who care about our golf games, right? What I mean is that we do not make our living playing the game. We do not practice incessantly. We do not spend hours at the gym every day specifically preparing our bodies to optimize our golf skills.

Today I’m going to put on my “contrarian” cap and challenge this assumption of “lighter is longer” on a couple of bases.
First, if you watch every accomplished player, you will see that the body core rotation is fast enough to “beat” the hands and clubhead to the ball. All instructors agree that the big muscles of the legs and body core are the key to power and repeatability in the golf swing. The faster you can rotate your body through impact, the more power you generate, which flows down the arms, through the hands and shaft and to the clubhead. This is a basic law of “golf swing physics”.

The simple fact is, the speed at which you can fire these big muscles is not going to be measurably impacted by removing another half ounce or less of weight from your driver. But what that removal of weight can do is to possibly allow for your hands to be faster, which would aggravate the problem I see in most mid- to high-handicap players. That problem is that their body core is not leading the swing, but rather it is following the arms and hands through impact.

Secondly, speed without precision is essentially worthless to you, and likely even counter-productive to your goal of playing better golf. Even with the big 460cc drivers, a miss of the sweet spot by just a half inch can cost you 8-12% of your optimum distance. You could never remove enough weight from the driver to increase your club speed by that amount. So, the key to consistently longer drives is to figure out how to make consistently more precise impact with the ball.

No golf adage is always true, but my experience and observation of thousands of golfers indicates to me that the fastest route to better driver distance is to get more precise with your impact and swing path, and not necessarily increasing your clubhead speed. And that may well be served by moving to a slightly heavier driver, not a lighter one.

I’ll end this by offering that this is not an experiment to conduct in a hitting bay with a launch monitor, but rather by playing a few rounds with a driver that is heavier than your current “gamer”.

Continuing with my “contrarian” outlook on many aspects of golf equipment, the typical driver “fitting” is built around an intense session on a launch monitor, where you might hit 30-40 or more drives in an hour or so. But the reality of golf is that your typical round of golf involves only 12-13 drives hit over a four-hour period, each one affected by a number of outside influences. But that’s an article for another time.

For this week, think about pulling an older, heavier driver from your closet or garage and giving it a go for a round or two and see what happens.

I would like to end today’s post by wishing you all a very Happy Thanksgiving. It’s been a helluva year for all of us, so let’s take some time this week to count our individual and collective blessings.

Your Reaction?
  • 19
  • LEGIT2
  • WOW0
  • LOL1
  • IDHT1
  • FLOP1
  • OB0
  • SHANK5

Continue Reading

Podcasts

TG2: Reviewing the first major OEM (Cobra) 3D-printed putter!

Published

on

The first major OEM with a 3D printed putter is Cobra Golf! I took the new Limited Edition King Supersport-35 putter out on the course and found it to be a great performer. Cobra partnered with HP and SIK Putters to create a 3D printed body mated to an aluminum face that features SIK’s Descending Loft technology.

 

Your Reaction?
  • 3
  • LEGIT0
  • WOW0
  • LOL0
  • IDHT0
  • FLOP1
  • OB0
  • SHANK1

Continue Reading

Opinion & Analysis

You went to play, now you want to stay: Homes near Cabot Links & Cliffs

Published

on

At some point, we’ve all had that moment during a vacation where we look around and think to ourselves, “Instead of visiting, why don’t we just move here?” It always sounds a little crazy in the moment, but really, what’s stopping you?

Like many, I have done this myself, and it leads me down a rabbit hole of golf destination real estate to places all over North America where you get world-class golf minutes from home.

So whether you’re a big spender or looking to downsize and find a cozy hideaway, these homes near Cabot Links & Cliffs have it all.

Homes near Cabot Links & Cliffs

Inverness, Nova Scotia

Steps away

$1,495,000 – 12 Mine Road Inverness MLS Number: 202011562

Location, location, location!

This is currently the most expensive house in Inverness NS, and for good reason. It’s steps away from Cabot Links and overlooks the resort. It’s over 2,600 square feet of beautiful open concept living, and with a local address, you get a discount on tee times at the course, although with its growing popularity, you aren’t guaranteed times like if you stay on the actual property.

Who wouldn’t want to wake up to this view every day? Listing: 12 Mine Road – Realtor

Just up the road

$980,000 – 30 Broad Cove Road Inverness, MLS Number: 202010717

If the first one seems a bit crazy, this next one might be right up your alley.

This 4,000 square foot home, is only minutes from Cabot Link and Cliffs and has amazing views that overlook the Gulf of St. Lawrence. It has everything you could want including a large chef’s kitchen and enough room to host friends and family.

Listing: 30 Broad Cove Road – Realtor

Just you and the ocean

$394,000 – 6 Bayberry Road, Port Hood, MLS Number: 202015994

If you like golf but want a little more separation from the Cabot golf resort, less than 20 miles down the road is Port Hood, another quiet seaside town filled with quaint shops and endless views of the ocean.

You can wake up every morning to the sounds of the ocean and the smell of sea air, and when you want to play golf at a top 50 course in the world, you just need to make a relaxing drive along the water to get there—heck, if you are so inclined, and happen to have a boat, you can go almost door to door that way too!

Listing: 6 Bayberry Road – Realtor

Your Reaction?
  • 11
  • LEGIT0
  • WOW1
  • LOL0
  • IDHT0
  • FLOP1
  • OB1
  • SHANK5

Continue Reading

Trending