Mizuno JPX 923

[SagedCrusader]

6 hours ago, braincramp52 said:

I only play irons down to 30° so I'm gonna wait for the LH Forged to come out in January.

I'm getting 4 through gw and also buying the sandwedge, it will be a culture shock for me since I've only played pw and lob wedge at the bottom. end for the last 15 or so years

[62@Oakmont]

8 hours ago, Pmookie said:

They actually make the GW, it’s just not on the site for some reason… I just ordered one with my set.

 

A GW specific to the HMP line, or the one that crosses over from the standard HM, as Mizuno has been doing for the last several JPX release cycles?

[TRZ06]

4 hours ago, Tommy_Gufano said:

I'm guessing it has to do with Mizuno Pro 223 & 225 being released in the US earlier this year. Pro 225 & 223 are in the same category as Forged/Tour so they might look at that as a conflict for sales with 223 & 225 still being somewhat new to the market. This is 100% a guess but it's the only thing that makes sense to me. The HM line doesn't conflict with anything Mizuno has released in 2022.

Correct, Voshall says it's to give more sales time for 221 and 223, and points to supply chain as well.

[MikeGman]

3 hours ago, 62@Oakmont said:

 

A GW specific to the HMP line, or the one that crosses over from the standard HM, as Mizuno has been doing for the last several JPX release cycles?

It crosses over for both sets.  I have it with my HMPs and I'll say this about it.  The head shape and minimal offset are great, looks like a scoring club should... BUT they slap this cheap sticker on it to remind you its for the hot metal line.  It's the same club and I think they just slap on the appropriate sticker for whichever set you buy.  I'd rather see the sticker removed or not applied at all.  Otherwise I was very happy with it during a range session yesterday

[Pmookie]

3 hours ago, 62@Oakmont said:

 

A GW specific to the HMP line, or the one that crosses over from the standard HM, as Mizuno has been doing for the last several JPX release cycles?

Not positive, just repeating what the Mizuno rep told my fitter.

[Pmookie]

28 minutes ago, MikeGman said:

It crosses over for both sets.  I have it with my HMPs and I'll say this about it.  The head shape and minimal offset are great, looks like a scoring club should... BUT they slap this cheap sticker on it to remind you its for the hot metal line.  It's the same club and I think they just slap on the appropriate sticker for whichever set you buy.  I'd rather see the sticker removed or not applied at all.  Otherwise I was very happy with it during a range session yesterday

If it fills the “gap”, and has the minimal offset of the HMP I’m good with anything they put on it. Thanks!

[markigta]

Took these to the range yesterday to test them all before starting fittings with them. Used the Flightscope X3 to check numbers, I stuck my gamer Nippon Modus 3 115s in them and got to work.

 

First impressions were that they were mega heavy but my gamers are 223s. The HL does what it says on the tin, 4° higher launch and peak height was ca. 12ft higher than the other two. Normal HM was great but the star of the show was the HM Pro. Slightly less offset, smaller profile but decent feel for a "game improvement" iron. I'd definately check those out first if you need/want less "help" from a club. For me the HL was a 1/2 to 1 club shorter than the other two but was mega easy to get up into the air, this could be awesome for low swing speeds. Stick a ESX Recoil in them and they should be playable for most. 

 

The new JPX 923 wedges look nice as well. Less cavity than the 921, more like a Glide type design. Lofts are SW 54°, GW 48°, LW 60°.

 

Mizuno Europe are down to 1 week custom fit lead times now, which also makes a huge difference to the 8 weeks in summer. 225s sold out in April/May and didn't come back in stock until mid August.

 

Looking forward to eventually testing the Feb 23 release 923 forged and tours, which incidently will cost the same as the MP 221(230€) here in Europe, 35€ more per club than the HM Pros. Those and the new Driver when ever that decides to show itself.

[MikeGman]

9 hours ago, Pmookie said:

If it fills the “gap”, and has the minimal offset of the HMP I’m good with anything they put on it. Thanks!

That was my concern as well, but I was fortunate to see it before ordering. You'll be happy with it as it addresses both of your concerns.

[Lemonde]

Can anyone comment on the 923 HMP 4 iron at address? Specifically whether you can see the cavity? I have slowly migrated from 919 HMP to 921F to MP223 but never bothered to order the 4 iron.  I’m considering it for a driving iron type use but don’t like chunky driving iron designs. 

[cmatthews77]

On 10/6/2022 at 11:53 AM, Tommy_Gufano said:

He's playing the 923 Forged or did he switch to HM Pro? I have the 921 Forged right now and really like them, I'm curious to see how much of a difference I see on the 923 Forged if any. 

923 Forged

[eric61]

Had a chance to demo the 923 Hot Metal Pros on a GC2 at a PGA Superstore yesterday. These are very long and very forgiving. 

 

I demoed the 7 iron side-by-side with the Ping i525 7 iron. With the 923 HMPs, I had a Modus 115X. And with the i525, I had a Project X IO 6.0 and then later a DG S300. 

 

The most immediately noticeable difference was the sound. The 923 HMPs are a much more muted punch sound, whereas the i525s are a higher-pitched and louder crack. I'm not that picky on sound and didn't find either of them to be problematic, though I will say the i525 lets you know through both sound and feel when you miss the center in a way that the 923 HMP does not. 

 

The 923 was definitely longer -- though with a 28.5 degree 7 iron loft to the i525's 30.5, that's no surprise. I was getting an easy 185 carry out of the 923 HMP. The i525s with the PX IOs were really bad for me, but they came to life when I switched in the DG S300s, and I was getting about 175. The shaft was about 1/2" shorter on the i525 vs. the 923 HMP -- I'm not sure why; both were fitting shafts and neither was labeled as being longer or shorter than standard. That likely played a role in the carry distance difference, as well as the 2 degrees of loft. Both had pretty consistent carry distances. (I also hit my current ZX5 7 iron, which is at standard loft (31) with Modus 120X, and was hitting it 175 yesterday, for comparison.)

 

Spin on both was consistently in the 5200-5400 range. I didn't notice one spinning consistently more or less than the other; they were close enough that the differences were more attributable to my delivery than anything else. 

 

Forgiveness-wise, I'd say both are quite forgiving, but I'd give the edge to the 923 HMP. There was one with the 923 where I put a terrible swing on it and spun around and told the guy, "I nearly topped that one" ... then I looked up and it carried 180. I was shocked. 

 

There is really not much feedback from the 923 HMPs on where you strike them on the face. Pretty much every reasonable strike feels centered or awfully close to it. 

 

But they're so, so forgiving. And I was getting descent angles around 47-48 with both the i525s and the 923 HMPs, so I'm thinking that coming down at that angle with low-5000s spin, it ought to be possible to stop them on greens. 

 

I've been taking lessons and like the idea of being able to just go play golf and work on what my lessons are focused on at that point in time even if I don't have it fully down, without having to worry too much about poor strikes wrecking my scorecard. For that reason, both of these are pretty compelling sets of irons!

[gman1707]

8 hours ago, eric61 said:

Had a chance to demo the 923 Hot Metal Pros on a GC2 at a PGA Superstore yesterday. These are very long and very forgiving. 

 

I demoed the 7 iron side-by-side with the Ping i525 7 iron. With the 923 HMPs, I had a Modus 115X. And with the i525, I had a Project X IO 6.0 and then later a DG S300. 

 

The most immediately noticeable difference was the sound. The 923 HMPs are a much more muted punch sound, whereas the i525s are a higher-pitched and louder crack. I'm not that picky on sound and didn't find either of them to be problematic, though I will say the i525 lets you know through both sound and feel when you miss the center in a way that the 923 HMP does not. 

 

The 923 was definitely longer -- though with a 28.5 degree 7 iron loft to the i525's 30.5, that's no surprise. I was getting an easy 185 carry out of the 923 HMP. The i525s with the PX IOs were really bad for me, but they came to life when I switched in the DG S300s, and I was getting about 175. The shaft was about 1/2" shorter on the i525 vs. the 923 HMP -- I'm not sure why; both were fitting shafts and neither was labeled as being longer or shorter than standard. That likely played a role in the carry distance difference, as well as the 2 degrees of loft. Both had pretty consistent carry distances. (I also hit my current ZX5 7 iron, which is at standard loft (31) with Modus 120X, and was hitting it 175 yesterday, for comparison.)

 

Spin on both was consistently in the 5200-5400 range. I didn't notice one spinning consistently more or less than the other; they were close enough that the differences were more attributable to my delivery than anything else. 

 

Forgiveness-wise, I'd say both are quite forgiving, but I'd give the edge to the 923 HMP. There was one with the 923 where I put a terrible swing on it and spun around and told the guy, "I nearly topped that one" ... then I looked up and it carried 180. I was shocked. 

 

There is really not much feedback from the 923 HMPs on where you strike them on the face. Pretty much every reasonable strike feels centered or awfully close to it. 

 

But they're so, so forgiving. And I was getting descent angles around 47-48 with both the i525s and the 923 HMPs, so I'm thinking that coming down at that angle with low-5000s spin, it ought to be possible to stop them on greens. 

 

I've been taking lessons and like the idea of being able to just go play golf and work on what my lessons are focused on at that point in time even if I don't have it fully down, without having to worry too much about poor strikes wrecking my scorecard. For that reason, both of these are pretty compelling sets of irons!

Thanks for the detail. I’ve hit the i525 was was shocked at the ball speeds. The HMP’s are on my list to try. 

[eric61]

3 hours ago, gman1707 said:

Thanks for the detail. I’ve hit the i525 was was shocked at the ball speeds. The HMP’s are on my list to try. 

Yeah the i525s are really, really fast, and one thing I liked about them was the feedback. Don't get me wrong, the i525s don't provide feedback like players' irons where you instantly know exactly where you struck it or anything. But they certainly provide a lot more compared to the 923 HMPs, which like I said pretty much all feel the same/middled as long as it's not like a horrible strike. That said, I'm not sure there are any other real downsides to the HMPs in my experience. I was definitely surprised to see the spin wind up being basically the same despite the loft difference. I'll be interested to see what you think once you get a chance to test them.

[WristySwing]

9 hours ago, eric61 said:

Yeah the i525s are really, really fast, and one thing I liked about them was the feedback. Don't get me wrong, the i525s don't provide feedback like players' irons where you instantly know exactly where you struck it or anything. But they certainly provide a lot more compared to the 923 HMPs, which like I said pretty much all feel the same/middled as long as it's not like a horrible strike. That said, I'm not sure there are any other real downsides to the HMPs in my experience. I was definitely surprised to see the spin wind up being basically the same despite the loft difference. I'll be interested to see what you think once you get a chance to test them.

 

I think the downsides to the HMP, unfortunately, is the lofts.  I think a lot of people would sort of accept a 44* PW like they have on the Pro 225 because, okay, you can bend it 1* weak and still retain a sort-of normal wedge setup.  With a 42.5* PW, that just isn't possible and it forces people to have to retool their wedge area with either the HM GW at 48* or their wedge of choice in the same loft.  You cannot have a more traditional 50/52* wedge here as the first wedge after the PW, the distance delta will be at least 20 yards.  I'm far from being a member of the Loft Police, Grumpy Division as many people are here but for many, that's too much.  I think for a Player's Distance iron the absolute worst they should do is 44*, then it starts to blur the line between being actual helpful tech masking mishits and creating ball speed to just the loft cranking.

 

To reiterate, I will happily play a 44* PW all day (my irons are bent weak), but I absolutely refuse to play anything stronger than that and call it a pro.  Same argument for the T200 and Rogue ST Pro, the PW is way too strong and causes too much loft crunch in the top end of the bag.  Further, it makes it really difficult to blend properly with other sets.  It's all well and good to say okay you use the HMP 5i and then play other sets 5i down, but then you are dealing with heavier heads (5i weigh more than 4i), hurts resale value as you either have to sell a one-off club or a set with two 5i, etc.  I am happy at least the JPX923 Forged is off a 44* PW.  Ping, Callaway, Taylormade, Srixon, and PXG have all demonstrated you can make a ball speed machine that is massively forgiving that is longer than most clubs out there off a 44/45* PW with 4* gaps.  No reason for Mizuno to do this.

 

End of my mini rant.

Edited October 11, 2022 by WristySwing

[eric61]

1 hour ago, WristySwing said:

 

I think the downsides to the HMP, unfortunately, is the lofts.  I think a lot of people would sort of accept a 44* PW like they have on the Pro 225 because, okay, you can bend it 1* weak and still retain a sort-of normal wedge setup.  With a 42.5* PW, that just isn't possible and it forces people to have to retool their wedge area with either the HM GW at 48* or their wedge of choice in the same loft.  You cannot have a more traditional 50/52* wedge here as the first wedge after the PW, the distance delta will be at least 20 yards.  I'm far from being a member of the Loft Police, Grumpy Division as many people are here but for many, that's too much.  I think for a Player's Distance iron the absolute worst they should do is 44*, then it starts to blur the line between being actual helpful tech masking mishits and creating ball speed to just the loft cranking.

 

To reiterate, I will happily play a 44* PW all day (my irons are bent weak), but I absolutely refuse to play anything stronger than that and call it a pro.  Same argument for the T200 and Rogue ST Pro, the PW is way too strong and causes too much loft crunch in the top end of the bag.  Further, it makes it really difficult to blend properly with other sets.  It's all well and good to say okay you use the HMP 5i and then play other sets 5i down, but then you are dealing with heavier heads (5i weigh more than 4i), hurts resale value as you either have to sell a one-off club or a set with two 5i, etc.  I am happy at least the JPX923 Forged is off a 44* PW.  Ping, Callaway, Taylormade, Srixon, and PXG have all demonstrated you can make a ball speed machine that is massively forgiving that is longer than most clubs out there off a 44/45* PW with 4* gaps.  No reason for Mizuno to do this.

 

End of my mini rant.

Yeah, I completely agree with everything you've said here. 

 

My thought, if I went with the 923 HMPs, is that I would get the 923 gap wedge at 48 degrees and ditch my current 50 degree gap wedge. From 48, I could stick with my 54 degree sand wedge and 60 degree lob wedge. 

 

If companies are going to jack lofts to this extreme, I almost rather they'd do what Ping seems to have done with the G430 irons and basically admit, like, "yeah, you're gonna have to build your bag as if your 7 iron is a 6 iron, etc., and add a fifth wedge." They're going with a 41 degree pitching wedge followed by wedges labeled 45, 50, 54, 58 (or whatever; somebody might want to check me on the SW and Lw lofts). 

[yellolab]

23 minutes ago, eric61 said:

Yeah, I completely agree with everything you've said here. 

 

My thought, if I went with the 923 HMPs, is that I would get the 923 gap wedge at 48 degrees and ditch my current 50 degree gap wedge. From 48, I could stick with my 54 degree sand wedge and 60 degree lob wedge. 

 

If companies are going to jack lofts to this extreme, I almost rather they'd do what Ping seems to have done with the G430 irons and basically admit, like, "yeah, you're gonna have to build your bag as if your 7 iron is a 6 iron, etc., and add a fifth wedge." They're going with a 41 degree pitching wedge followed by wedges labeled 45, 50, 54, 58 (or whatever; somebody might want to check me on the SW and Lw lofts). 

 

Loving this topic, as I'm kinda stick also. Def getting the HMP, with it's 42.5PW. Then what, the set GW at 48? that 5.5* difference, too much? If not then, go 54, and 58? Or 52 then 56?

Also, I have the 921Forged GW still in the plastic. It's 50*. I could have Miz weaken the 923 42.5* HMP PW to 43.5, and then stengthen my 921forged GW to 49. Then just go 54 and 58.

 

thoughts?

[MikeGman]

2 hours ago, WristySwing said:

 

I think the downsides to the HMP, unfortunately, is the lofts.  I think a lot of people would sort of accept a 44* PW like they have on the Pro 225 because, okay, you can bend it 1* weak and still retain a sort-of normal wedge setup.  With a 42.5* PW, that just isn't possible and it forces people to have to retool their wedge area with either the HM GW at 48* or their wedge of choice in the same loft.  You cannot have a more traditional 50/52* wedge here as the first wedge after the PW, the distance delta will be at least 20 yards.  I'm far from being a member of the Loft Police, Grumpy Division as many people are here but for many, that's too much.  I think for a Player's Distance iron the absolute worst they should do is 44*, then it starts to blur the line between being actual helpful tech masking mishits and creating ball speed to just the loft cranking.

 

To reiterate, I will happily play a 44* PW all day (my irons are bent weak), but I absolutely refuse to play anything stronger than that and call it a pro.  Same argument for the T200 and Rogue ST Pro, the PW is way too strong and causes too much loft crunch in the top end of the bag.  Further, it makes it really difficult to blend properly with other sets.  It's all well and good to say okay you use the HMP 5i and then play other sets 5i down, but then you are dealing with heavier heads (5i weigh more than 4i), hurts resale value as you either have to sell a one-off club or a set with two 5i, etc.  I am happy at least the JPX923 Forged is off a 44* PW.  Ping, Callaway, Taylormade, Srixon, and PXG have all demonstrated you can make a ball speed machine that is massively forgiving that is longer than most clubs out there off a 44/45* PW with 4* gaps.  No reason for Mizuno to do this.

 

End of my mini rant.

Maybe I'm in the minority here that people are getting hung up on the lofts compared to what number/letter is on the bottom of their club.  If you went with more traditional lofts and carried a 4-PW, with the PW being 48 degrees and 9i being 44 degrees, who cares if the new set says GW 48 and PW 44? My 52degree gap wedge is still in the bag, whether I call it a gap or a 52 degree. And my SW is still a 56 degree.  You'll have clubs at those lofts in your bag regardless of the number on the bottom.  The place where it might cause issues is in the longer irons/hybrids.

 

My old bag with 2008 Titleist AP2

4 Iron 24°

5 Iron 27°

6 Iron 31°

7 Iron 35°

8 Iron 39°

9 Iron 43°

PW 47°

GW 52deg

SW 56deg

Lob 60deg

 

New Set HMPro

5 Iron 22°

6 Iron 25°

7 Iron 28.5°

8 Iron 33°

9 Iron 37.5°

PW 42.5°

GW 48deg

GW2 52deg

SW 56deg

Lob 60deg

 

So where with the jacked lofts did I lose any space in my bag? I'm still covering the same distances, just the number on the bottom of the club has changed.  The benefit for me is that added forgiveness, since my game isn't good enough to play the AP2's.  The only real argument I have read is the possible distance gap between  42.5PW and 48GW of the hot metal

 

[WristySwing]

3 minutes ago, MikeGman said:

Maybe I'm in the minority here that people are getting hung up on the lofts compared to what number/letter is on the bottom of their club.  If you went with more traditional lofts and carried a 4-PW, with the PW being 48 degrees and 9i being 44 degrees, who cares if the new set says GW 48 and PW 44? My 52degree gap wedge is still in the bag, whether I call it a gap or a 52 degree. And my SW is still a 56 degree.  You'll have clubs at those lofts in your bag regardless of the number on the bottom.  The place where it might cause issues is in the longer irons/hybrids.

 

My old bag with 2008 Titleist AP2

4 Iron 24°

5 Iron 27°

6 Iron 31°

7 Iron 35°

8 Iron 39°

9 Iron 43°

PW 47°

GW 52deg

SW 56deg

Lob 60deg

 

New Set HMPro

5 Iron 22°

6 Iron 25°

7 Iron 28.5°

8 Iron 33°

9 Iron 37.5°

PW 42.5°

GW 48deg

GW2 52deg

SW 56deg

Lob 60deg

 

So where with the jacked lofts did I lose any space in my bag? I'm still covering the same distances, just the number on the bottom of the club has changed.  The benefit for me is that added forgiveness, since my game isn't good enough to play the AP2's.  The only real argument I have read is the possible distance gap between  42.5PW and 48GW of the hot metal

 

 

All fair points and I generally agree with you.  Where it becomes an issue is as I stated before.  What if you play a "normal" PW off 45* with a 50* GW?  This is were it forces you to either buy a new GW or bend your other wedges, potentially making them ill fitting due to the change in bounce.  If you are a person who changes wedges when they get a new set, it doesn't make a difference at all.  It comes down to the player.  Generally though, I agree with you wholeheartedly that loft is loft is loft, it doesn't matter much.  Ball speed tech helps somewhat but if you have a 35* 7i vs. a 35* 8i, one being an older model CB and the other being a flex-faced distance iron, its two halves of the same coin.

[ksteezyy]

hit the 923 recently and ill be sticking with my 921

[Tommy_Gufano]

54 minutes ago, ksteezyy said:

hit the 923 recently and ill be sticking with my 921

Can you specify which 923 model you hit and explain why you like the 921 version better? Just looking for honest feedback

[callofthewild]

2 hours ago, MikeGman said:

Maybe I'm in the minority here that people are getting hung up on the lofts compared to what number/letter is on the bottom of their club.  If you went with more traditional lofts and carried a 4-PW, with the PW being 48 degrees and 9i being 44 degrees, who cares if the new set says GW 48 and PW 44? My 52degree gap wedge is still in the bag, whether I call it a gap or a 52 degree. And my SW is still a 56 degree.  You'll have clubs at those lofts in your bag regardless of the number on the bottom.  The place where it might cause issues is in the longer irons/hybrids.

 

My old bag with 2008 Titleist AP2

4 Iron 24°

5 Iron 27°

6 Iron 31°

7 Iron 35°

8 Iron 39°

9 Iron 43°

PW 47°

GW 52deg

SW 56deg

Lob 60deg

 

New Set HMPro

5 Iron 22°

6 Iron 25°

7 Iron 28.5°

8 Iron 33°

9 Iron 37.5°

PW 42.5°

GW 48deg

GW2 52deg

SW 56deg

Lob 60deg

 

So where with the jacked lofts did I lose any space in my bag? I'm still covering the same distances, just the number on the bottom of the club has changed.  The benefit for me is that added forgiveness, since my game isn't good enough to play the AP2's.  The only real argument I have read is the possible distance gap between  42.5PW and 48GW of the hot metal

 

If I end up getting these (923 HMPs), I think I would have the whole set bent 1* weak. That would solve nearly all of my problems and allow me to keep my 54/58 combo that I really like. I really liked how they felt when I hit them and was planning to order them until I looked at the loft progressions. Not a dealbreaker, just requires more thought. 

 

The other set I am thinking about is the new Srixon ZX5 (I obviously haven't seen it or hit it)...will be very interested in what lofts they use for those irons.  

[yellolab]

5 hours ago, MikeGman said:

Maybe I'm in the minority here that people are getting hung up on the lofts compared to what number/letter is on the bottom of their club.  If you went with more traditional lofts and carried a 4-PW, with the PW being 48 degrees and 9i being 44 degrees, who cares if the new set says GW 48 and PW 44? My 52degree gap wedge is still in the bag, whether I call it a gap or a 52 degree. And my SW is still a 56 degree.  You'll have clubs at those lofts in your bag regardless of the number on the bottom.  The place where it might cause issues is in the longer irons/hybrids.

 

My old bag with 2008 Titleist AP2

4 Iron 24°

5 Iron 27°

6 Iron 31°

7 Iron 35°

8 Iron 39°

9 Iron 43°

PW 47°

GW 52deg

SW 56deg

Lob 60deg

 

New Set HMPro

5 Iron 22°

6 Iron 25°

7 Iron 28.5°

8 Iron 33°

9 Iron 37.5°

PW 42.5°

GW 48deg

GW2 52deg

SW 56deg

Lob 60deg

 

So where with the jacked lofts did I lose any space in my bag? I'm still covering the same distances, just the number on the bottom of the club has changed.  The benefit for me is that added forgiveness, since my game isn't good enough to play the AP2's.  The only real argument I have read is the possible distance gap between  42.5PW and 48GW of the hot metal

 

EXACTLY. And even more so with Mizuno, as their standard lengths are a little longer than others- so they really truly are just a different stamp.

[WristySwing]

1 hour ago, yellolab said:

EXACTLY. And even more so with Mizuno, as their standard lengths are a little longer than others- so they really truly are just a different stamp.

 

Unless I am looking in the wrong spot, I see 37.5" on a 6i, which is pretty well standard across the board the past decade.

Edited October 11, 2022 by WristySwing

[lordemsworth]

5 minutes ago, WristySwing said:

 

Unless I am looking in the wrong spot, I see 37.5" on a 6i, which is pretty well standard across the board the past decade.

It comes down to how they measure.

even though Mishnah and Titleist have the same lengths, the Mizuno is approximately .25” longer now.  It has changed in the last couple of releases.

 

I find the same with Srixon - they are a little longer than Titleist length for length.

 

 

[lefty1978]

Mizuno irons are 1/2" longer starting with the JPX919 and MP20 lines.

Edited October 12, 2022 by lefty1978

[hd.softail]

Pretty sure with the JPX919 and MP20 lines they went 1/4" longer than they were previously and only in the 9i and above.

 

Mizuno used to go 35.5" PW, 35.75" 9i, 36.25" 8i, and so on...

 

But they changed it to go 35.5" PW, 36" 9i thus making 9i and above 1/4" longer than all previous years.

 

I find it funny if you look at pro specs, for companies that go 35.5" PW, 36" 9i, they'll order 9i-3i 1/4" short to get back to old school specs.

[Brooks_Cupcake]

1 hour ago, lefty1978 said:

Mizuno irons are 1/2" longer starting with the JPX919 and MP20 lines.

This is wrong, Mizuno measures grip off which is why they come out 1/4” (grip depending) longer. 

Edited October 12, 2022 by Brooks_Cupcake

[lefty1978]

15 minutes ago, Brooks_Cupcake said:

This is wrong, Mizuno measures grip off which is why they come out 1/4” (grip depending) longer. 

Nope not wrong. If you take an older Mizuno Iron and a new iron, they are 1/2" longer. I am a Mizzy homer, own many sets.

 

Find a stock MP52,53,54 7 iron etc and compare to 921 or 923

Edited October 12, 2022 by lefty1978

[ewaldbeukes]

On 10/7/2022 at 12:55 PM, braincramp52 said:

Saw the LH 923 pros today in person. Pics don't do them any justice. Smaller than I thought and in my opinion the perfect sized iron.

923 Tours? 

[braincramp52]

42 minutes ago, ewaldbeukes said:

923 Tours? 

Pros