My time with the M2 6iron - Part 2

As you may or may not have read in Part 1, I had the lovely fortune of getting a Taylormade M2 6 iron in the mail. I detailed it's specs there, which I will not go into again here, and came to the conclusion that something was up. Well... the problem is that NOTHING is up, except marketing budgets.

Before we begin, let me state some facts:  

The M2 is stock exactly as it came from Taylormade. I opened the box, examined it, and took it out to hit. 

Lofts of the irons are nearly identical. +/- about 1 degree.  Length varied with the M2 being 38" long, and the KE4 being 37" long physically. 

As previously stated in part 1, even though marked differently, the shafts in each club test the same flex, so regardless that the TM is labelled stiff and mine is a "regular" they are actually both the same flex.  See some of my other writings for why this happens and other things "They" don't want you to know.

I'm hitting the same types of balls with both clubs. I went through painstaking measures to sort through range balls and find the best balls, making sure they're all of the same type and removing all the non-range and/or any balls that don't seem right (a big "screw you" to all the people who bring their own garbage balls to hit at the range. Shame on you. Keep your top rocks to yourself nobody wants to hit your budget balls - even in practice. Do you understand the looks I got while sorting through all these range balls? DO YOU?!). Ok......

The weather has finally broken (again) here in Pennsylvania and I was absolutely itching to get out and play golf. Since there's no cream for that sort of itch, the only solution is to get out and chase a little white ball around in the sunshine.  As luck would have it, there was a scheduled demo day at Crossgates Golf Course in Millersville that I was due at with my Clubcrowns and Shaft wraps, and that means I would have some time (and free balls) to hit all the 6 irons my heart desired!! Well, it's time for the cold, hard truth.  Let me preface this and say that I was duly warm for this test. Having hit a bucket with each 6 iron before taking measurements. I wanted to be loose, and I wanted to make sure I had the feel of each club fresh before measuring shots. For each,  I took the best 8 shots - removing the worst and the best from the original 10 "pressure" shots.

I'll get right to it, then tell you why:
The M2 is not all it's cracked up to be. Not for me anyway. Funny I should have those choice in words because that's honestly what I felt like I was going to do to this 6 iron. Every shot felt like the club could shatter... and the sound. Oh god, the sound. I mean, I can't even describe it to do it justice. If you took about 5 of those cheap tupperware lids you find on Chinese take out now, stacked them up and hit a ball with them?  I think that would come close. It's a plastic "slap!" that does not instill confidence in me at all. I mean, I even absolutely MURDERED one - smash factor was almost up near my driver as far as energy transfer (which is a very good sign for this head mind you) and the thing still sounded and felt like the head was just going to fall apart. The grip being off-center didn't bug me as much as I thought it would but I could definitely feel it. Thing is, it SHOULD have helped me turn the ball over in a right to left draw, but it most certainly did not. The stiff shaft (which was actually regular) felt ok as far as flex and shock goes, but as we'll see in the flightscope data later, it was actually all over the place.

 I will concede that the longest shot of the M2 was longer than the longest shot of my own Maltby KE4. As stated previously in Part 1, this was fully expected considering that the shaft is a full inch longer than my current 6 iron. That being said, the SHORTEST of the M2 was Shorter than my KE4. If one is to believe the marketing, this should not be happening. So as things average out, the M2 still comes in longer than my current 6 by approximately 2 feet overall. Not exactly the gains promised by the manufacturer.  Something else I noticed, interestingly enough is that the M2 on average did NOT fly higher than my own 6 iron. Again, contrary to the marketing.

 Looking at the overall data, we can see a few things. First, the numbers for the M2 are slightly better in some areas. Total distance, is better by almost a yard, but strangely the carry distance is better on my original 6 iron by 1.1 yards. You can make your own inferences at what you want, but I'll mark this down as an original iron win. I want carry distance and stopping power in my irons. I could care less to hit my 6 iron 200 yards if 20 yards of that is roll. I want it to go high and come down soft. Isn't that what the M2 is supposed to do anyway?  The spin on the M2 did average higher- but you can see the minor outlier of 9080 RPM, and 8635 RPM of spin. That's high but since my metal on a stick got to nearly 7000 I didn't think it unfeasible that this new technology could achieve that. Hell, smash factor near my driver! Either way, since the Flightscope is on outdoor settings and tracks the ball to finish rather than calculating into a net, I kept them in for the overall data. All things considered, smash factor, spin, and ball speed were higher with the M2 - why didn't it fly farther though? I'm as stumped as you, but being there and seeing the ball flight and where the shots ended up, I can confirm the data.

Let's talk about clusters and accuracy. The M2 boasts more forgiveness than standard clubs. There's a speed pocket at the bottom and all manner of carbon plastic do-dads in the back and up the face that are supposed to help create more speed and forgiveness across the entire face. Remember before when I said that the longest was longer than my 6iron, but the shortest was shorter? Well, here's how it looks on the chart:


Looking at this chart, it maps out the shots as they landed and calculates standard deviations. The forward and back for the M2 are not to my liking, especially for all the promises made on keeping ball speed up with the pocket on low hits.  This basically means that I could hit a dead solid shot and and have it settle on the green, then drop another ball and have it come up with a difference of 15 yards. That's a club and a half!!! You'll have to take my word for it when I say this, but in all honesty these shots were not all that far apart on the face. It's not like one was 1/2 inch out on the toe and one was 1/2 inch on the heel. My ball striking is pretty good.  Talk about being in between clubs. The right to left deviation is another concern. It seemed like the iron didn't know which way it wanted to correct. Remember when I said I was being fair between the two clubs? Well, sorry KE4, I was on the side of the M2 for a lot of this....

Height and direction:

After hitting balls and warming up to get the feel for each club, I knew the M2 was not getting in the air for me. I watched as ball after ball was a line drive and just was not getting off the ground. I actually teed one up in the test below to make sure I would catch the ball perfectly on the club face and get the ball up (didn't do that with my 6 iron). Nope not at all - although it did give me a 184 yard bullet which was nice.  Both screens below are the best shot, distance wise, in the group. The M2 rolled out about 2 yards farther than the KE4 and definitely did not get as high. You can see also, that the correction of the M2 kind of left me with  two way miss. I'm a slight fade ball hitter. I can work the ball both ways if I want to (let me stop here and say that the M2 IS predictably workable when hit well) but my go-to is a little fade. Bad back and shoulders make that an easy shot. So why all the left on the M2?  Correction in that "forgiveness" category. It is workable, as I said, when you hit it well, but if you catch a little toe or a little heel, it tends to over correct for the shot, which left a few of the balls to the left, and one WAY out to the right. It's meant to hit the ball straight on off-center hits, but for it to correct and do that you have to deliver the club mostly square anyway. If you're an 18 handicap that has an open club face, it's not going to really do you much good -- then again, no club will. Sorry it's just the way it is. Lessons, folks.



Talking materials:
I think one of the last things we need to talk about here is quality of components. There are good metals and bad metals. Good graphite and bad graphite. Good build quality and bad build quality. If you take the time to know your product and put in the time to assemble it correctly it will treat you well.  Here's where the M2 gets some love. It COULD BE a good club. It really could. OMG could it be good. There's things that need to be addressed, however. First:  Lose the FST ultralight shaft. If you want light, use an MCI 80 graphite composite shaft. This stock shaft is not doing it for me, or most likely for anybody.  The two charts below show flex action for the two clubs. The orange line is the flex acceleration for the longest shot on each. The gray line are all the other shots. You'll notice that both of the longest and best shots came with a downward sloping profile. It's just what fits me the best as a golfer. The head actually isn't accelerating through the ball (even with my relatively low swing speed, I'm still a high-spin player) and it's allowing me to hit flush and keep the flight where it's optimal with my swing. Now, notice how the shaft on the left (incidentally, a Fujikura 95i Sflex graphite shaft, soft stepped) is relatively consistent in it's flexing along the swing. With both clubs I have a few crap shoots in there, but for the most part it is a very consistent grouping.  Now look at the FST in the M2. Not for me at all. Some times it kicks hard at the bottom, sometimes not. I'm not sure if this has anything to do with the hosel design, with the crazy air foils, or if it's just due to the shaft combo and length. I do know that it's not something I'm down with for anyone. Even with the most inconsistent swings, I want the shaft to perform predictably if not optimally.  That grouping at the top should be tighter as well as all the way through the middle of the swing.



FST makes some great shafts - The KBS Ctaper is phenominal, as well as the Tour90. Even the FST 115 and similar models can be great on a budget.... IF they're installed properly. This, in my opinion, could benefit from a FLO run. Very much like assembly lines though, this was more than likely pulled out of a pile and assembled, checking for length and weight, not much else.

So what have we learned from all this.... If you haven't fallen asleep or had your head explode looking at the photos and reading my terrible font, then you've probably come to the same conclusion I have.  The M2 is not a good stock club. It's just not. Off the rack, it won't really help you gain yards or accuracy unless you fit it perfectly as is.  The M2 head is subjective when it comes to sound and feel. If you're at all into the "THWACK" of a good hit, then the M2's is not for you. At best, a pure shot will leave you with an unsatisfying "click" sound and sort of a plastic resonance feel up the shaft. It can accurately be described as a toy sound and feel, not premium golf club feedback. It looks fancy, but doesn't deliver on the promises - even when the deck is stacked in it's favor with a longer shaft and slightly jacked lofts.  Still, it's a smart looking club. It really has a different back cavity look and even though the top line is thick, I don't really mind it in comparison to the thinner players clubs. it really instills confidence at address if not in performance.

.... and I thought Xfinity's appointment windows were bad...

After all this, I would urge you to give one a hit and see if you can tolerate it.  See what other shaft options they have as upgrades. With all of this technology that doesn't really seem to do much, I have to wonder if the upgrade would be worth it, though. You're paying more to get what the stock option should have delivered. With a pricetag of $800 average per set, it's not something that I would ever recommend to run out and buy sight unseen. A qualified builder could make you a set of component irons that out duel this badboy for less - plus they'll be everything you want and more as far as options. Example, Put a ProjectX 5.5 with new decade grips on these bad boys and you're looking at almost $1000.00. Oh, and apparently it'll ship between 2 days from now and next September?  Go out, look around and pay attention. Always ask "why" when you're getting fit and when someone wants to sell you something. Why do you need this? Why is it better? Why will it do what you say it will? Most importantly of all - is the investment worth the payoff? Is 5 yards worth $499?  Is a marginal improvement worth $1000? For me, no. This is just my experience though. You may crank these guys and if you do, I say drop that money and get them. It's about what works for you, and if you've read anything else I've written, you know that's the only thing you should worry about. Not name, not what flex you hit, and certainly not what some guy on the internet has to say. Get out there and get swinging!

Thanks for stopping by! Hope to see you again on the next post!

How often do we fall for marketing over performance? Do you really want to know? DEMO DAY!

Let's talk marketing. Every cent paid to pros to play equipment, every ad, every paint job, every cardboard standup, and every little Google ad to the right or left of the page you're surfing on.  Marketing is what sells clubs. Why is that? Are we as golfers so inept at knowing what we want, or recognizing performance that we need other people to tell us how to spend our money? Certainly not. Are we tiny striped varmints that must have the shiniest new toy and keep up with the (Bobby) Joneses? Unfortunately that might be it.

When talking about technology - things don't leap forward at the pace manufacturers would have you believe - with one exception but I'll get to that later. Thing is, MOI, Trampoline effect, CC head size, Groove depth -- it's all CAPPED.  The USGA says "hey, that's enough. NO more".  There's an entire section in the rule book about what a club can and can't look like, all the way down to the amount of bend you can have in your plumber's neck putter. Not kidding at all. It's all carefully worded, carefully measured, and ham-fistedly capped by the USGA.  So why are there new clubs coming out every 6 months saying they're increasing this or that? Because it's 2016 and +1 micron is an increase. No joke, that's about what's happening too. Think of it this way:

Club A 2015 says it's average dispersion is 10 yards (just keeping round numbers here, kids) offline due to XYZ technology.  Club A 2016 promises a 10% improvement in dispersion over the previous model!  Sounds big, but that 10% improvement is 1 yard in this case. Actually it's half-a-yard on each side of the dispersion chart (right and left).  So, is 1/2 a yard closer to the center line really worth $500?  If you say yes, you have too much money and not enough grey matter....  The thing is, manufacturers have found the "buzz words" that golfers think they want to hear. They brought the tech side out and if they say it enough times, we'll just have to buy. Talk about turning a 50 cent word into a million bucks!

No, not the G crossover - Hybrid irons
just like it have been on the market and
performing to high standards for YEARS.

To continue.... These new clubs ARE released with some genuine technology in them - things like adjustable weights and adjustable hosel sleeves are really nice to help dial in the specific launch conditions that a player might need (not to mention they save the manufacturers MILLIONS by not having to manufacture different lofts). Some of it is even old tech recycled for a new generation. I remember in my youth (not too long ago actually) there were carbon fiber crowns and sliding weights.  They went away and came back just the same and now it's the "hot shit" with people buying it up like mad.  It's all reference and marketing.   "BUT CHRIS!" you say "I gained 10 yards over my last club!".   I'm sure you did, and there's a few good reasons for that - one of which I said I would get back to above.

1st, not to beat a dead horse but clubs are getting physically longer. We've covered this before. 5 irons the length of 4 irons. Drivers to 45.5 inches or more. That will get you distance if you hit it well, but the real reason is something nobody really thinks about outside of one letter::

THE SHAFT!  I'm not talking about just the length though. Every single one of those new drivers out there has a brand spanking new, redesigned shaft. There are options where you can get an older variety -- oddly enough considered an "upgrade" but for the most part each one has a new or different shaft.  Why is that? Because shaft technology is the only thing in golf equipment that's not limited.  WHAT? -- -Yes. --- NO!--- yes.   The length limit and shape of shaft is defined in the rule book, but there's really no way to limit kick, material, and energetic response of something like a shaft. Steel or graphite, if they're straight and under 48" playing length, they're legal. This is good news for us.

Over the past couple of years, shaft tech has absolutely EXPLODED. You can customize not only your flex, but your torque, kick point, materials, and balance point. Fujikura has an entire line of shafts that are all completely different flex profiles and amount of torque. There are shafts with multi-material blends where metal and graphite co-exist to make a crazy powerful combo.  Some have more resin or higher thread counts in certain areas to stiffen them up.  All of this combined allows more energy to get to the ball and provide you with more distance and accuracy. Piles of data is analyzed from what goes on at takeaway through just before impact and even afterward to create shafts that more or less hit it for you!  They know how you swing and are engineered to do one thing - deliver whatever you put on the end of them as hard and fast as it can into the back of that unsuspecting white orb on the tee in front of you.   Last week, I literally put a brand new 2016 shaft in a driver head that is 5 years old and it out performed every new driver that the client tested it against. Even if it came in a close second, that's still an immense improvement for not a lot of buck.

Now, a great shaft will not help a mis-engineered head. That's not what is going on here.  What's true is that there are caps made by the USGA on the heads of golf clubs. Believe me when I say that they are all within a few points of that legal limit. Unnoticeable by human perception kind of points. Even the little no-name component companies.  Look into a good engine for your club - it's going to be cheaper, and a better fit than picking up something new off the rack and trying to make it be your old faithful. Going back to another post from months past - you have to like what you're looking down at. If you like it, give it a tune-up.  Ol' Betsy still has some yards to be had, trust me......


If you wanna see what it can do - We're having a demo meet and greet at Leisure Lanes Driving range in Lancaster, PA this wednesday April 6th, 6-8:30pm (ish).  Come see what a shaft tweak can do for your driver, get your numbers on our flightscope, or just hit one of our component heads against your current neutron stick. It'll be fun!

Your best golf on the cheap: Part 2

On Friday in Part 1, I wrote about my first impressions with the Maltby brand of clubs. More specifically the KE4 Tour Hybrid iron and the MMB-17 blade that I ordered to place up against my Titleist AP2 irons. Since then, I've taken them back to the range, and played two total rounds of golf with both clubs. Here are my findings:

KE4-Tour  4 hybrid-iron Results:

The KE4 will be permanently in my bag. While Saturday's round at Overlook Golf Course found it being used mostly for punching out from under trees and more "utility work" (which it performed smartly), my round on Sunday at Crossgates Golf Course focused on full shots from both the tee and the fairway. Don't get me wrong, this stick was a great utility club but I was more interested in the full-swing capabilities. That being said, the consistency of the club saved my butt more than once on Sunday. First, my second shot on number 9, a mid-length par 5 that presented a good layup occasion for the KE4. 180 yards to the end of the fairway, up hill (about a club) and into the teeth of a 20mph wind, the ball held it's line and trajectory better than anything I've got in the bag. It was a pure strike with absolutely no ballooning and no movement.  I had 58 yards into the green with my wedge afterward and was able to sink the putt for birdie. Money well spent already 

The second pressure use came with the tee shot on number 12.  Downhill Par 4 with tree trouble right and a ditch, trees, and water trouble left. If the tee ball is too far right, you'll be additionally blocked out by this big bastard of a tree right in front of the green. The ideal tee ball is about 215 yards off the tee box to the left of the fairway. From the elevated tee it seemed like the perfect distance for the new stick so I used it and once again it performed exactly as planned, even on a mis-hit. I came up and out of it a little bit and ended up hitting it a couple grooves low, feathering the ball to the right of my intended line. Still, It was long enough to get me to the tip of the fairway where I had a good look at the pin.

Yes, I put my 18th tee ball right in front of
the ladies tees on #10. Not Proud.

I think the biggest test between nerves and needs came on the par 5 18th hole. I stood on the tee needing a birdie for even par. Don't think that wasn't in my head just because of my back issues and club tests. I'm still out here to post a score, damnit. The 18th for me is a notoriously terrible driving hole with about 35% of my tee shots going OB left and 40% going into either the water or traps on the right. I'm 11% for fairways on this hole in the last 3 years! (stats tracked on oobgolf.com, thanks guys!) So yea, just a few nerves on this tee box. I did what any self respecting bail out artist would do, I took a club I could swing away with without reaching trouble and bunt-sliced it into the next county. After bailing out right with my tee ball (a miss I struggled with all day long), I found myself with a distance of 177 yards, into the now two club wind, through a tree, to a safe landing area where I could have a clear and reasonable third shot into the green. The lie was average in the rough, neither buried nor was it sitting up for me. I took the 4 and decided that the play was a fade starting to the left of the tree and let the wind kill the distance, hopefully allowing the ball to land in the fairway with about 170 into the pin. In theory.  That's the shot I set up with and that's the shot I got from the club.  I was pleasantly surprised that there was ZERO drag through the rough. I expected maybe a hitch where the face got caught or turned a little with the wider sole, but the head went cleanly through the grass and I had a mostly solid strike on the ball.  There's really something to be said for the confidence felt when looking down on this club.  For you completionists... I hit a choke 7 iron from 149 (the green  is about 25 feet above the fairway) to 7 feet, leaving myself a downhill right-to-left slider.  The greens were smooth and fast at Crossgates - quite different than the punched greens at Overlook or Four Seasons previously and I'd been struggling all day with getting the speed just right. I just barely lipped it out with a little too much pace. It rolled right around the cup and I made the 7 inch comeback to post 73. The two gentleman I had been playing with had no idea what it was for and still said it was a painful lip-out, haha! 

Overall, high marks in the looks department. It's tough to make a forgiving but playable hybrid club for better players without appearing like a marshmallow, but this hits it on the money. I think even high handicappers would like this club as well.  I gave a decent score in the feel department only because the graphite shaft deadened more off-center shots. While I could feel it, it was difficult to judge how far off center I hit it.  A steel shaft would provide better feel. Distance on par with the much higher end club.  Solid marks in workability. Straight goes straight. Not a lot of over-correction on off center hits. Budget conscious at 39.99 for the head. Excellent replacement for a hybrid or a long iron, in my player's opinion.

MMB-17  #8 iron Results:

Mentioned above, the 4 iron didn't really have much of a starring role in my round at Overlook on Saturday morning. It was helpful, but when all you can do is pitch out of trees sideways, it's not really what I would call a "stroke saver" or "Pin seeker".  The 8 iron did have a more prominent role in making a good shot, however. I still didn't use it much in this round, but for what I did get out of it, I say it's a damn good purchase. Of only note was the 2nd shot into #9 from rough right of the fairway. I had 160 into the pin, which is my average 8 iron distance. The lie was semi-buried, with some grass between the face and the ball for sure. I clipped it pretty well but  fell about 10 feet short, below the hole. Yes, I missed the putt. Still, it was a good shot to a blind target from a less-than-perfect lie in the rough.  Coupled with previous range evaluation as well as the 2 small buckets I had hit on the range on Friday (1 with my AP2 and the other with MMB), that one shot was enough to satisfy my curiosity surrounding this particular combination of shaft and head. Nothing tells it like it is as well as the actual course does.  It was a demanding shot under pressure to attack the pin and it didn't let me down despite my human imperfections. It is a consistent club. I will say one thing about it and stick to my guns: Even on the range, I didn't ever feel like I hit a good shot and been "robbed" or thought I had mis-clubbed. When the ball fell short of my intended target, I could feel exactly how many grooves low or high I had hit the ball, whereas with the more "forgiving" AP2 that I've been playing I felt like I hit a solid shot more often than not and would have inconsistent feedback on distance of mis-hits and inconsistent direction on solid hits without much feedback on high/low impact.  The MMB is going into my bag and I'm going to order a 9 and PW as well with the same specs by the end of this week. 

Again, high marks for looks. If you're a player who likes a minimal top-line and offset then this is the head for you. The satin chrome, rather than full polish is a welcome change on sunny days. Solid marks for feel. Higher than the 4 iron because of the increased feedback on mis-hits.     Distance is on-par with the higher end clubs, but nothing special that will catapult you to hitting tour-distance irons. 

Excellent workability and flight capability.Some clubs are "over workable" but to get a 9 the devil is in the details and small movements. Very consistent movements and no correction to get in the way of your shot.

 Value... well, I'm still looking for the cops outside because this kind of performance is a steal at $29.99 US for the head. 

Bottom line: 

8iron:   $29.99 head + $3.99 shaft + $10.99 grip + $0.35 ferrule + a little elbow grease =  $45.00 club on par with $125.00 premium club.

4iron:  $39.99 head + $11.00 shaft + $10.99 grip + $0.25 ferrule + a little more elbow grease + $55.00 club beats $125.00 premium club.

Maltby certifies that they are 2010 groove rule compliant and playable in high-level tournaments (or honestly, I wouldn't even be trying them).  For the price of a premium head with a run-of-the-mill shaft, you can build a custom beast with these heads. I chose the rout of least investment because I like a bargain. I could only imagine what would happen if you put a $75 shaft in some of these. Still if you told me they would out-perform my AP2 710 irons even with a premium shaft, I'd never have believed it if you beat it into my head every morning.  Happy swinging!

Your best golf... on the cheap: Part1

 Last month I blogged about a great cigar for not much money. They're around $2.50 each, depending on the size. I love cheap. Cheap is good. Cheaper is GREAT! The problem with cheap is that it's not very dependable. Quite often, it's inconsistent and in the end it's not really worth what I paid anyway. Thankfully those Casa de Garcias have broken that stereotype. Of course, thinking in these terms, in walks "Custom".  Custom tends to be the opposite of Cheap.  Custom is so nice and perfectly fit to whatever I need.  I paid big money (to me) for a set of custom golf clubs. Length, lie, shaft, grip, weighting and probably most of all -- NAME.

If you've ever bought a golf product, you're paying a lot for the name. A hand towel at Wal-mart is maybe 4 bucks(?) but if you put (insert mainstream golf company here)'s name on that it goes to $20 and sometimes $30.  So i thought "what if I took my specs and built my own clubs for cheap to mimic these big box brand name clubs".  Out comes my personal "Maltby" irons. When you hear the name you may think of Rodger the Golf Channel/ NBC on-course correspondent and, for you older chaps, multiple tournament winner on the PGA tour in the 70s and 80s.  When you READ the name Maltby, it may or may not bring to mind Ralph Maltby the club designer from golfworks.com. Sounds the same, but it's spelled different. (10 points to guess the movie).

Roger Maltbie (no relation)

Ralph Maltby

Ralph used to design clubs for Tommy Armour and is an all around fitting guru.  He developed the MPF or Maltby Playability Factor to rank clubs on how they will perform for different levels of players. With iron head price points at around $30 and shafts at about $10, I can build a set of custom golf clubs to my exact specifications for $300 or less, compared to the $1000 for the brand name clubs. I went ahead and ordered a Malby KE-4 hybrid iron and a Maltby MMB-17 8 iron to see if there was any confirmation to my thought process. Today I got them and decided to do a test against my current Titleist AP2 4 and 8 iron on the range for feel, playability, and general distance.

MMB-17 - 8 iron - 39* - 36.5"
True Temper Command Stiff

Maltby MMB-17

The 8-iron has a really nice look about it. Very "players club" with a chrome nickel plating and satin face area. Thin topline, thin sole. Turf interaction was stellar and it didn't dig as much as I originally thought it would. at 3 degrees of bounce, it actually scooped through the grass nicely! The ball came off cleanly with a much more crisp "click" sound and feel than my AP2 which is more of a muffled "thwack" with a solid but soft feel. I think I like the MMB feedback a little better because I can really tell when I hit it cleanly and when i hit it nearer the toe or heel which for me translates into MORE confidence if I miss a shot. At least I know why I missed it.

The shaft, a True Temper Command R/S flex (trimmed for Stiff), did leave a little bit to be desired. The shaft is designed for control and lower trajectory - and control it did. My shot dispersion was much tighter than my AP2, even on solid hits. I could also work the ball much more easily in both directions as well as up and down. The feel was somewhat looser than the S300 on my current 8 iron.  The Dynamic gold series have the shock absorbing "sensicore" inside. Basically it's a wire with foam wound up it in a spiral pattern. It's placed in the shaft and deadens any vibration coming from the head. I noticed it was missing when I hit one thin, but it wasn't as jarring as some would have me believe. I hit about 2 dozen balls with each and came to the conclusion that the only thing that MAY be missing is the distance factor. I hit my AP2 8 iron about 160.  I don't think I was hitting that all the time with the MMB. Still, I attribute that to the muscle back design. Traditionally, the forgiving zone on the face is only about the size of a dime or nickel whereas the AP2 irons are more like a quarter or half dollar because of the technology. I wanted a muscle back though because of the accuracy and I definitely got that.  When I get it on the course for part 2 and I'm really able to see the distance for myself instead of guestimating based on landmarks, then I'll be able to make a good decision.

Maltby KE4-Tour

KE4-Tour 4 Iron/Hybrid - 23*- 38.5"
Graffaloy ProCustom Stiff flex

The 4 hybrid iron is a very nice club in itself. This configuration beat out my current 4 in terms of feel and playability again. The graphite shaft absorbed the shock much better than the steel shaft even with sensicore (no surprise there really), but what really impressed me is the way the ball catapaulted off the face! Holy cow were my first words after one strike.  The ball flew higher and landed more softly than my current 4 iron for sure yet both have the same characteristics as far as length and swingweight. Judging by the flight, I will go out on a limb and say that the spin rate on the KE4 is much higher than the AP2 - which is exactly what I was looking to get for my long approach shots.  The KE4 has a wider top line and sole but the head is about that of a standard blade with very little offset. It's made to be a cross between iron and hybrid. I'm normally not a fan of "fat irons" but it really worked for my eye in this case and I think the shallow face helped that a lot. Turf interaction from the wider sole was really nice, regardless of the width and I didn't feel it digging in like my 4 iron usually does. I felt like it was much easier to hit than even my current 3-hybrid - which just seems too big to use in the rough or sometimes even from the fairway - so why bother having it? As for the Graffaloy shaft - it performed exactly as spec'd. Very light, stiff flex and high launch. I couldn't ask for much more --- but I did.  I demanded the ball do things that I normally have

trouble doing with my current players clubs. In control, the KE4 with Graffaloy Pro Custom out-performed my AP2 w/ DG S300 smartly.  I was able to work the ball in both directions at will and had an easier time feathering the ball with the KE4 than the AP2. Normally my 4 iron is draw, un-willing fade and big slice as far as shot choices. The Maltby 4 iron actually flew straight and accurate and when I wanted to move the ball, I was able to do so in small increments. 5 yards, 15 yards, feather it just a couple... the shots were there when I wanted them and I didn't feel like it was a "lucky strike" when I pulled them off.  Once again, when I get it on the course for part 2 then I can really say if it's all over better.  One thing I think I definitely dislike about this club is the anodized black finish. I have the same finish on my Taylormade R11, but that's a driver. I don't hit sandy balls that much with it.  With this being a utility iron, it's going to have a lot of turf interaction and that's going to take a toll on the finish, wearing out a hit groove.  After hitting only a few damp range balls it picked up a few marks on the face already. Love that sweetspot though!

Click here to check out Part 2!