Recreating original MP29

[bobbyclampett!!]

Calling all true gear nerds. What is the closest "modern" iron head (last 5-10 years) to the original MP29 circa 1999? I still have a set of these and I just pulled them out and I'm absolutely loving the looks, shape, feel, sole, turf interaction, balance, alignment, everything. I will probably just put these back in the bag, tbh, but the grooves have worn down quite a bit and if there is something out there that is strikingly similar but with slightly higher MOI or forgiveness, I'd be down for that.

 

Also, while we're at it, what's the closest "modern" shaft to the Rifle Precision FCM 5.5 shaft that's in these babies in terms of weight, flex, and bend profile? Loving them, too.

 

Also, what's the best way to revive these old grips? They are in astonishingly good shape for being from 1999, but they could use a little more tackiness. Sandpaper? Windex? Or, in the alternative, does anyone know how much these weigh? Do the current GP Tour Wrap 2G weigh the same? Those are my favorite and they are very similar in feel, but I don't want to go cutting the old grips off to find they are totally different weights and I've thrown the balance of the club off, because they feel so perfect right now.

 

Thank you!

 

 

[DeCuchi]

I’d send them in a for a refurb. Probably 1/3 of the cost of a new set of irons.

[bobbyclampett!!]

8 hours ago, DeCuchi said:

I’d send them in a for a refurb. Probably 1/3 of the cost of a new set of irons.

Not a bad idea. Been researching online and it looks like after about MP37 mizuno kind of went away from the sharp toe design into a more standard blade with MP68, 69, 4, 5, 18, 20. I feel like the 4, 5, 18, and 20 don’t really resemble the MP29 at all. I wonder if another company would actually be closer to MP29, like a titelist or Taylor made mb…

 

anyone know about the shaft and what is equivalent would be?

[Golfingfanatic]

If I remember correctly, the 29s have a reverse offset progression. That‘s going to be nearly impossible to find in a modern iron. 

[Drivingrangehero]

Some times these things just pop up online. 
 

I just bought a mint set of MP-37’s 3-PW on the ‘bay. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 

 

I haven’t had a chance to hit them due to my neck being screwed up, but sometimes you can find deals. 
 

I personally like the MP-37’s best, then MP-67’s. I’ve never hit the MP-29’s. 
 

I feel like everyone is a fan of the 32’s and 33’s, but I prefer the 37’s. 

48 minutes ago, Golfingfanatic said:

 

If I remember correctly, the 29s have a reverse offset progression.

 

 If this is true, then the MP-37 would be the closest match to the MP-29 that I’m aware of since I started playing Mizuno blades in 2002-3?

 

 

Edited October 8, 2021 by Drivingrangehero
Added pic

[cgasucks]

Probably the only iron that I've seen that is looks likes the closest to the MP29 not made by Mizuno is probably the 2014 TM MB.

 

[RobS]

The MP-29's are pretty unique in that they have a reverse progressive offset and headsize.  The heads get more offset and bigger as they move from the long irons to the short irons.  The soles are also very flat, not camber which is uncommon these days.  Those were characteristics of many Japanese designs for decades.  The MP-37 was probably the last Mizuno irons with such a design.  Of recent years or current, the MB 101 is probably the closest in sole, face progression and head size.  For the shaft, the KBS Tour in an R+ flex will give you similar flex and profile.  The big difference being the weight design.  The KBS is constant weight while the Rifle is descending weight (lighter in the short irons and heavier in the long).  You can still get the FCM Rifle shafts from PFC dealers though.

[bobbyclampett!!]

Oooh, that is a pretty iron. Definitely a similar shape from the back side.

 

I think you all have identified why I love the MP29, that being the 1) reverse progressive offset, 2) reverse progressive head size, and 3) the flat, thin soles. I also think I really like the sharp-edged toe as opposed to the rounded toe.  All of these things seem to have gone out of style and are no longer produced (as a side note, does anyone know why?). I also seem to like the descending weight of the shafts, because I love every iron in the set.

 

Sounds like I need to give up the ghost of recreating these babies and just love them for what they are and if I love them the most then to keep playing them.

 

Probably the best I could do is measure their length, loft, lie, static weight, and swing weight, and try to get something similar in those areas in a new set. As for the specific head to go with, sounds like I will just have to start from scratch there, as nothing seems to be even close within the last five years.

 

 

[14max]

I'm curious about the shaft question, too.  Would a modern Project X 5.5 equal the Royal Precision FCM Rifle 5.5?

[Fairway14]

2 hours ago, 14max said:

 Would a modern Project X 5.5 equal the Royal Precision FCM Rifle 5.5?

Yes.

[NRJyzr]

8 hours ago, 14max said:

I'm curious about the shaft question, too.  Would a modern Project X 5.5 equal the Royal Precision FCM Rifle 5.5?

 

I would say no.  PX has always played/felt stiffer to me than the same corresponding numeric Rifle flex.

 

When they were first produced, the rule of thumb was that PX played 0.5 stiffer, by that FCM rating.  Which is largely useless information.  LOL

 

[jomatty]

I’d keep my eyes on the bay and eventually what you are looking for will pop up.  Or send yours in to get refinished.

[BIG STU]

2 hours ago, NRJyzr said:

 

I would say no.  PX has always played/felt stiffer to me than the same corresponding numeric Rifle flex.

 

When they were first produced, the rule of thumb was that PX played 0.5 stiffer, by that FCM rating.  Which is largely useless information.  LOL

 

It also depends on how the shafts were tipped to begin with--- I have a set of KZG Teardrop CBs with the old 5.5 Rifles in them. They are as smooth as My Hogan Apexs in the Macs. One of the reasons I do not play the KZGs regularly is because I do not like the sole camber or bounce. 

[zip7111]

26 minutes ago, BIG STU said:

It also depends on how the shafts were tipped to begin with--- I have a set of KZG Teardrop CBs with the old 5.5 Rifles in them. They are as smooth as My Hogan Apexs in the Macs. One of the reasons I do not play the KZGs regularly is because I do not like the sole camber or bounce. 

The shafts shouldn't be tipped as they are .355 taper tip shafts.

[bobbyclampett!!]

So maybe we could say the FCM 5.5 is like a Project X 5.0? Someone else said KBS Tour R+, so that would make sense right?  It’s funny because I love these irons but didn’t know what “FCM Precision Rifle 5.5” meant in terms of weight or flex, which allowed me to get away from my ego thinking I need to swing the heaviest, stiffest shaft. I will definitely not turn my nose up at a lighter, softer shaft when testing in the future. And perhaps I will look for descending weight as well, as I seem to like that, too. 
 

Anyone know why reverse progressive offset and head size fell out of favor? I seem to quite like it.

[Howard_Jones]

16 hours ago, bobbyclampett!! said:

So maybe we could say the FCM 5.5 is like a Project X 5.0? Someone else said KBS Tour R+, so that would make sense right?  It’s funny because I love these irons but didn’t know what “FCM Precision Rifle 5.5” meant in terms of weight or flex, which allowed me to get away from my ego thinking I need to swing the heaviest, stiffest shaft. I will definitely not turn my nose up at a lighter, softer shaft when testing in the future. And perhaps I will look for descending weight as well, as I seem to like that, too. 
 

Anyone know why reverse progressive offset and head size fell out of favor? I seem to quite like it.

No, its 2 very different shafts, not only for flex, but weight system and profile

RIFLE FCM is Descending weight, butt stiff, tip stiff, and a weak lower mid,


Project X flex labels has noting to do with RIFLE FCM flex labels.
The shaft is Constant weight, Butt is soft, Mid is silly stiff, and a firm tip section
Its simply 2 very different shaft




RIFLE FCM is still made, but no longer available from OEMs, ONLY from True Temper Performance Fitting Centers

[bobbyclampett!!]

8 hours ago, Howard_Jones said:

No, its 2 very different shafts, not only for flex, but weight system and profile

 

Thanks, Howard. How about the KBS Tour in R+ flex that someone mentioned? How about the static weight, how would that compare to this FCM?
 

have there been any major changes to the FCM over the last twenty years that would be worth upgrading for? Or could I pull these FCMs and put a different head on?

 

 Speaking of heads, have heads weights changed over last twenty years, or would the MP29 head be a similar weight to what is produced today by most OEMs?

 

 Thank you!

[No_Catchy_Nickname]

Don't think anyone has replied to your question about the grips, but try warm water, dish soap, and a scrubbing brush. They might need a good scrub.

 

If necessary, a light sanding is also good, but to be honest, if you want to play them a lot, just put new grips on them.

 

New grips can make an old club feel brand new.

[bobbyclampett!!]

Thanks, NCN. I’m definitely not opposed to regripping. I love a good regrip. I just don’t want to throw off the precious balance of these babies! I bet the modern mid-size GP Tour Wrap 2G weighs something very similar to the old school misdize tour wrap and it won’t be a problem. I was just going to try a way to keep this same grip on them to avoid tinkering with weight. So I will probably try what you suggest and see what kind of mileage I can get out of it! 

[Howard_Jones]

20 hours ago, bobbyclampett!! said:

Thanks, Howard. How about the KBS Tour in R+ flex that someone mentioned? How about the static weight, how would that compare to this FCM?
 

have there been any major changes to the FCM over the last twenty years that would be worth upgrading for? Or could I pull these FCMs and put a different head on?

 

 Speaking of heads, have heads weights changed over last twenty years, or would the MP29 head be a similar weight to what is produced today by most OEMs?

 

 Thank you!

Ive been on travel for 2 days, so sorry for a late reply here.
Measured as butt CPM only, KBS Tour R+ (115 grams constant wgt) is like RIFLE FCM 5.5 but the profile of KBS is not identical. KBS has a STRONGER upper mid section, and the weak point closer to the tip, but the tip section is NOT as strong as RIFLE. However, KBS Tour is a shaft model many RIFLE FCM players has found to be good for them, and not far off the feel RIFLE FCM had for them, but since there is 2 models here, a Constant wight and a Descending wgt model, we should look at WEIGHT since that comes before we look at profiles and flex.

The "old" model RIFLE FCM 5.5 (pre 2012) you are used to playing, has a weight of 3.05 grams pr inch. The model AFTER 2012 has 3.05 grams pr inch as 4.5 and 5.0 flex, so the latest model RIFLE FCM has gone UP in weight, where the NEW 5.5 would be 3.27 grams pr inch.

KBS Tour R+ is 115 grams / 37.50" = 3.06 grams for the PW, so compared to RIFLE FCM, its a LIGHTER option since we get a #3 iron of 115/ 40.50" or 2.94 grams pr inch, while RIFLE FCM 5.5 is still 3.05 as old model, and 3.27 grams pr inch in the new model no matter club.

For the Parallel version of KBS Tour, we have to go all the way to X flex to get 3.06 grams pr inch (133 grams / 43.50" uncut = 3.057 grams pr inch)

So they are close on butt CPM, some say feel is in the same street, but weight is lower for KBS Tour.

Depending on the condition of the shafts you have, and what heads you want to play, i would have pulled and moved the RIFLE 5.5 if you really like them. 


 

[bobbyclampett!!]

10 hours ago, Howard_Jones said:Depending on the condition of the shafts you have, and what heads you want to play, i would have pulled and moved the RIFLE 5.5 if you really like them. 


 

That is awesome info, Howard. Thank you so much!

 

Just a couple more questions then I’ll leave you alone. 😊 Is KBS Tour the closest shaft you can think of bend profile wise? And do you know how head weights of MP29s compare to other modern day heads? I suppose I could just pull the shafts and weight the heads, but if you know or anyone else knows I could maybe keep the MP29s as is and just build a new set. Finally, do you know if these FCMs will fit in new heads and if hosel not depth will be the same??

 

 Thanks again, this is amazing!

[Nessism]

Does anyone have the specs they can either link or post?  I've never seen a set of irons with "reverse offset" before.  In Japan it's at least somewhat common to list "face progression" instead of "offset" in the specs, and the progression comparison of those two specs is opposite so it may fool you if you are not careful.  

 

For example, check out this info for the JPX 921 Tour irons.  FP = Face Progression

 

[RobS]

1 hour ago, Nessism said:

Does anyone have the specs they can either link or post?  I've never seen a set of irons with "reverse offset" before.  In Japan it's at least somewhat common to list "face progression" instead of "offset" in the specs, and the progression comparison of those two specs is opposite so it may fool you if you are not careful.  

 

For example, check out this info for the JPX 921 Tour irons.  FP = Face Progression

 

Not sure if I'm interpreting your post correctly but when I refer to reverse offset I'm talking about the set progression (reverse progressive offset) where the offset/face progression increases as you move from the long irons to the short irons.  This is/was common in many Japanese designs (Mizuno, Miura, Bridgestone, etc).  I believe the concept is based on the ball position changes from long to short irons.  As the irons get shorter and the ball moves closer to the center of your stance, the offset allows for a more natural set up with the hands more forward of the ball than you would have with a longer iron positioned further forward in your stance.  Face progression and offset aren't an opposite measurement.  Offset is measured from the leading side of the hosel  to the leading edge where face progression is measured from the centerline of the hosel/shaft to the leading edge.  Some designers prefer the face progression measurement as the offset measurement doesn't account for the potential difference in hosel thickness from one design to another.

[Pepperturbo]

On 10/8/2021 at 5:47 PM, 14max said:

Would a modern Project X 5.5 equal the Royal Precision FCM Rifle 5.5?

Similar but not equal.  One is weight sorted with .5 number designations, while the other is cpm frequency matched.  IME with both, PX 5.5 will play stiffer than Rifle 5.5, and bend profile and trajectory are different. 

 

I have PX 6.0, 5.5 and flighted 6.0 and 5.5 sets.  Sold the 735cm with Rifle 6.5 cause it just wasn't my cup of tea. 

 

When I switched to Mizuno blades, MP29 were still popular on tour.  IMO, they were the first strong lofted irons.  They were 1-2' stronger than MP14 blades, and longer heel to toe with a low butter knife like profile. 

 

I agree with @Nessism Companies like Japanese OEM companies like Miura use "Face Progression" instead of offset.  FP was a better identifier for designers, offset was more for consumers.

Edited October 11, 2021 by Pepperturbo

[Nessism]

58 minutes ago, RobS said:

Not sure if I'm interpreting your post correctly but when I refer to reverse offset I'm talking about the set progression (reverse progressive offset) where the offset/face progression increases as you move from the long irons to the short irons.  This is/was common in many Japanese designs (Mizuno, Miura, Bridgestone, etc).  I believe the concept is based on the ball position changes from long to short irons.  As the irons get shorter and the ball moves closer to the center of your stance, the offset allows for a more natural set up with the hands more forward of the ball than you would have with a longer iron positioned further forward in your stance.  Face progression and offset aren't an opposite measurement.  Offset is measured from the leading side of the hosel  to the leading edge where face progression is measured from the centerline of the hosel/shaft to the leading edge.  Some designers prefer the face progression measurement as the offset measurement doesn't account for the potential difference in hosel thickness from one design to another.

 

Again, if you have the offset specs please post them.  I've never seen a set of irons with "reverse progressive offset."

 

What I do know is that a set of irons with progressively less offset from long irons to short, will have INCREASED face progression from the same long irons to short. 

 

It's quite common for people to see the FP numbers and mistakenly think the irons have "reverse offset."  I'm not saying you are making this mistake but again, I'd love to see those specs...

 

 

 

 

 

Edited October 11, 2021 by Nessism

[Howard_Jones]

3 hours ago, bobbyclampett!! said:

That is awesome info, Howard. Thank you so much!

 

Just a couple more questions then I’ll leave you alone. 😊 Is KBS Tour the closest shaft you can think of bend profile wise? And do you know how head weights of MP29s compare to other modern day heads? I suppose I could just pull the shafts and weight the heads, but if you know or anyone else knows I could maybe keep the MP29s as is and just build a new set. Finally, do you know if these FCMs will fit in new heads and if hosel not depth will be the same??

 

 Thanks again, this is amazing!

Its many years ago since most irons (and woods) was designed with 1.25" as insert, so i expect that to be the case with most heads today too. Head weights has been plus minus the same for the same time, so no issues with that either.

Im not even close to be updated about shaft profiles the latest 5-6 year, so i dont have any suggestions for what you should try.

You will still find RIFLE FCM if you want them

[Nessism]

Back when I was young and strong Rifle 5.5 shafts were my favorite.  They have amazing feel and a medium active tip.  I greatly preferred them over DG which felt too heavy to me.  Fast forward a few decades and now Rifles feel too heavy for me.  Getting old sucks.

[NRJyzr]

53 minutes ago, Pepperturbo said:

When I switched to Mizuno blades, MP29 were still popular on tour.  IMO, they were the first strong lofted irons. 

 

Mildly related side note...   🙂

 

The MP29s predecessors, MS-11s and MS-9s, both had the same lofts as the 29s.  

 

There was another set before the MS-9s that also had those stronger lofts, but I don't remember which.  MS-5 maybe?

 

Now back to MP29 chat.  🙂

 

Edited October 11, 2021 by NRJyzr

[bobbyclampett!!]

21 minutes ago, Nessism said:

 

 

 

 

 

 

I don’t have the numbers, but it does appear from looking at the MP29 from address that the the 2 iron has the least amount of offset, while the PW has the most amount of offset, which would be opposite of the JPX921s (and my Ping i200s), which have the most amount of offset in the longer irons and the least amount of offset in the shorter irons. It seems like that is the case with almost every current set of irons. I guess maybe the idea is that, with the modern sets, that long irons are harder to hit and square up so the offset helps to square the club? I don’t know, but I do seem to like the “reverse progressive offset” of the MP29s better than what seems standard today. 

[bobbyclampett!!]

19 minutes ago, Howard_Jones said:

Its many years ago since most irons (and woods) was designed with 1.25" as insert, so i expect that to be the case with most heads today too. Head weights has been plus minus the same for the same time, so no issues with that either.

Im not even close to be updated about shaft profiles the latest 5-6 year, so i dont have any suggestions for what you should try.

You will still find RIFLE FCM if you want them

Thanks so much, Howard. It seems like, from everything you’ve said, that I should be able to pull these FCMs and put them directly into a new, current-day head, and have relatively the same overall weight, balance, feel, and swing weight as this set of MP29s. Let me know if that’s not correct. If so, I guess the question would be to find the next set of heads I love and someone who can swap the shafts out for me.