2014 Taylormade TP CB, MC & MB Pics (American release photos and spec sheets)

[Caesar Palache]

[quote name='Scott@84' timestamp='1384379259' post='8144780']
The "Tour Preferred" on the back of these irons is hideous, what are you thinking Taylormade?
[/quote]

they are making us all get low and down and then come release time





TP FLAG!

[TheMoneyShot]

[quote name='Caesar Palache' timestamp='1384379640' post='8144814']
[quote name='Scott@84' timestamp='1384379259' post='8144780']
The "Tour Preferred" on the back of these irons is hideous, what are you thinking Taylormade?
[/quote]

they are making us all get low and down and then come release time





TP FLAG!
[/quote]

That would be freaking money$$$$$$ if that happens!!!

[mr_divots]

[quote name='lawsonman' timestamp='1384379076' post='8144758']
I know very little about a lot of the Taylormade irons.Am I right in assuming they ( TP's) are for low handicappers?
[/quote]
They've had variations on themes with a lot of their "TP" sets. Some MB's, but some fairly large CB's as well. The CB's in these, if anything like the last Tour Preferred, should have a pretty good head size that lets the higher single digits to lower double digit cappers get into the "Tour Preferred." Not really different from past TP offerings (R7TP, R9TP were some of the "larger" headed sets that come to mind, for example.)

[MMB1500]

Damn, these look good. Clean, simple and without fuss. Top marks.

All that said, obviously the version with the 'Tour Preferred' wording on do looks drastically inferior. I'd love someone to set up a poll on this, just to see the results. Judging by this thread, looks like about 90% + of interested parties would want the TP logo on the toe.

[b]When will these companies learn that less is more?[/b]

[hogans71]

[quote name='CallawayLefty' timestamp='1384306108' post='8140268']
Two scenarios from here:

1) as others have mentioned, all the tour issue stuff has the badge. Heads will sell on Bst for $2500 with utterings about how they're forged by Miura himself

2) reissue of the badged version 3 months after writing version.
[/quote]

You think they'd actually release something that soon after initial offering?

[bph7]

[quote name='hogans71' timestamp='1384380756' post='8144904']
[quote name='CallawayLefty' timestamp='1384306108' post='8140268']
Two scenarios from here:

1) as others have mentioned, all the tour issue stuff has the badge. Heads will sell on Bst for $2500 with utterings about how they're forged by Miura himself

2) reissue of the badged version 3 months after writing version.
[/quote]

You think they'd actually release something that soon after initial offering?
[/quote]

He's probably exaggerating. With TMAG it would be AT LEAST 6 or 7 months before they released the new version (See R1 black/R1 v2).

[MCoz]

[quote name='bph7' timestamp='1384320560' post='8141532']

Not a single person in this thread has asked about the sales of tmag, achusnet, or callaway. Or about whether TMAG's marketing worked. As far as I knew, this thread was about the pics of the new tp line. Thanks to you two for the info though.
[/quote]
Well not exactly. The discussion on the logo medallion versus the Tour Preferred labelling has carried on for countless pages. A couple of people here have mentioned that TM doesn't know marketing. This is a response to that
.
CONSIDER THIS: Actually there are several things in play here. Personally I like the TP logo, but that has nothing to do with my comments. Using the words may have something to do with a more clear identity. First off there appears to be a more intense revival of Tour Preferred and while the logo (or seal) says that to those in the know it may not mean anything to the masses without the words themselves and in this case not wanting to clutter things up only one can be used on the clubhead so if the logo goes on the shaft it supports the words. This also ties the new clubs to the new golfballs which also have the "Tour Preferred" labeling. As long as there is no trademark problems or questions pending (which there maybe) I am sure once the re-establishing of the identity is more widely known (remember our little group is a clear minority) we will see more of the logo coming later. I would like to have seen the logo more prominent on the ball that would make it more distinguishable on TV and photos. But labeling is a tricky thing.
If one looks back over the history of TM iron labeling many or most had the words TaylorMade on the hosel (or neck) and not on the back of the clubhead. But once they started using the brand on the back of the clubhead they have taken over as number 1 in iron sales which they were not a few years ago. Plus with these being forged that is considered best used on the hosel. These are all marketing concerns.
But at the end of the day if one is a "player" the only look that is important is at address. Players are concerned about performance and the look at the "business" end of the club next to the ball. So all this giberish about the logo only matters if one is more concerned about how their bag looks on the cart or on the rack at the clubhouse. The back has no relevance to whether the club works at all. I prefer satin to chrome because at address it muffles any potential glare. I think everyone here needs to decide whether they Players or Posers!!
I have made no comments as to my desire to play any of these clubs because I have not seen them at address, I don't know yet what the offset or "effective" offset is and if they have a "hard heel" or not (as the previous MCs and CBs had) which affected the performance for me negatively. I was sent the MCs and played one round with them and then gave them to friend, (I tried the MBs also) preferring to stay with the R9 TP "Bs".
So I will wait and once I see them them in playing profile then make a choice. While the initial look is promising it isn't the answer (as it is with the Callaways and other new models).

[Rebel420]

[quote name='bph7' timestamp='1384376353' post='8144528']


In fairness, it is worth noting that Rose played the "F" rocketbladez head, which is smaller than retail. I don't mean to start another one of these tour issue debates, but I don't think it's fair to say that the looks of the retail RBT's were good enough for him. If they were, I assume he just would've played them instead of getting a tour issue head which is smaller.

I do agree with the general sentiment that looks are not as important as people are making them out to be FOR MOST PEOPLE. I do care a lot about looks, but realize it's because I try so much stuff, and I know I am not a "typical" golf shopper.
[/quote]
Not arguing, but this was taken out of context. The comments about JR were the fact that he had the CAST speed slot clubs at the top of his bag, the forged "scoring clubs" and cast wedges. Nothing to do with the looks. So the fact he played XYZ version is irrelevant here.

As for loks, I said within a range. If the club didn't look too clunky at address, and felt and performed perfectly, what it looks like sitting in the bag is not quite as important. I did also say within a range, and for me, something like the old Rocketballz irons would have been hard for me to get used to. The Tour Preferred MB from 2011 looked great at address, but not so hot in the bag with the weight port. But I don't look at the weight port at address. But that is MY opinion. Mine is no more right than yours

[MCoz]

[quote name='H4CK' timestamp='1384366093' post='8143578']

I'll admit it's better looking in that new photo. I think if they had released decent photos to begin with, there'd have been less backlash. The only thing I don't like about the badge would be the implementation. I can see how the badge might end up making the iron look a little cheap with an indentation and insertion of a flimsy badge.

I think I'm okay with the script so long as the sizing is right. It looked way too large and dominating on the original photo, but much more subdued here.

---

Oh yea, once we get over the cosmetics...how does the damn thing actually feel, and look from address?
[/quote]

Hello!! ++2 . . . Yes lets get to your last comment. Maybe the throngs will read that, that's what I have been saying in threads about new clubs continuously! but the message doesn't seem to get thru . . .

[mike johnston]

Guess the big QUESTION is price?

[bph7]

[quote name='MCoz' timestamp='1384381564' post='8144986']
Well not exactly. The discussion on the logo medallion versus the Tour Preferred labelling has carried on for countless pages. A couple of people here have mentioned that [b]TM doesn't know marketing[/b]. This is a response to that
.
CONSIDER THIS: Actually there are several things in play here. Personally I like the TP logo, but that has nothing to do with my comments. Using the words may have something to do with a more clear identity. First off there appears to be a more intense revival of Tour Preferred and while the logo (or seal) says that to those in the know it may not mean anything to the masses without the words themselves and in this case not wanting to clutter things up only one can be used on the clubhead so if the logo goes on the shaft it supports the words. This also ties the new clubs to the new golfballs which also have the "Tour Preferred" labeling. As long as there is no trademark problems or questions pending (which there maybe) I am sure once the re-establishing of the identity is more widely known (remember our little group is a clear minority) we will see more of the logo coming later. I would like to have seen the logo more prominent on the ball that would make it more distinguishable on TV and photos. But labeling is a tricky thing.
If one looks back over the history of TM iron labeling many or most had the words TaylorMade on the hosel (or neck) and not on the back of the clubhead. But once they started using the brand on the back of the clubhead they have taken over as number 1 in iron sales which they were not a few years ago. Plus with these being forged that is considered best used on the hosel. These are all marketing concerns.
But at the end of the day if one is a "player" the only look that is important is at address. Players are concerned about performance and the look at the "business" end of the club next to the ball. So all this giberish about the logo only matters if one is more concerned about how their bag looks on the cart or on the rack at the clubhouse. The back has no relevance to whether the club works at all. I prefer satin to chrome because at address it muffles any potential glare. I think everyone here needs to decide whether they Players or Posers!!
I have made no comments as to my desire to play any of these clubs because I have not seen them at address, I don't know yet what the offset or "effective" offset is and if they have a "hard heel" or not (as the previous MCs and CBs had) which affected the performance for me negatively. I was sent the MCs and played one round with them and then gave them to friend, (I tried the MBs also) preferring to stay with the R9 TP "Bs".
So I will wait and once I see them them in playing profile then make a choice. While the initial look is promising it isn't the answer (as it is with the Callaways and other new models).
[/quote]

These are all very good, well-thought out points. The only thing I really disagree with is the connection between sales and marketing. Now, marketing obviously generally increases sales, but, in a total vacuum, I just think its very hard to say one way or the other if the marketing is "working" for TMAG in 2013. The bottom line is, TMAG are still number one but apparently sales dropped 17% or something. Now, they have reasons for why this is the case (weather etc), and they all could be valid, but who is to say that better marketing wouldn't have INCREASED sales? Obviously, TMAG is going to have other reasons for sales drop offs, and there is no way of knowing what the real answer is. What I am saying is, TMAG is number one by far and will continue to be HOWEVER they market the next few years. I think that's fair to say, right? They are just far and away the tops. So, I just don't think that it's as easy as saying, "they are tops in sales so therefore the marketing must be working." How are we to know whether better marketing wouldn't have increased sales (or worse marketing decrease them?).

Finally, although I obviously disagree with the marketing, I am not posting this to put it down at all. All I am saying is that I don't think the logic "As long as TMAG remains number one, then the marketing has to be working and all must be forgiven" applies as strictly as others may. it's much more complicated than that and I hope we can all agree.

[505]

[quote name='Exactice808' timestamp='1384368279' post='8143780']Anyone can feel the difference with lets say the Rbladze vs the TM MCs? Havent had a chance to hit both recently.[/quote]

Yes. I game the MC's and got paired up with a guy on Monday that had the RB's. Hit both 7 irons back to back on a par 3 to check out the differences. MC's feel much better, RB's are almost a full club longer.

[SatelliteGuy]

Good question a couple comments back... What's the price point gonna be...

[KCCO]

I did not know the MC's were a mix of cast and forged?!? Huge turnoff for me, kinda forces me to reconsider these irons which I am as my mp-64's have been great, and thought these may push them outta the bag....but 14 pages deep and this is the biggest letdown for ME yet. Forget a badge/logo....I wanted forged to be honest, and thought considering last tour preffered offerings were forged throughout lineup, these would be as well. They still look very nice, but just my opinion, and will still give a chance.

[MCoz]

[quote name='bph7' timestamp='1384383435' post='8145100']


These are all very good, well-thought out points. The only thing I really disagree with is the connection between sales and marketing. Now, marketing obviously generally increases sales, but, in a total vacuum, I just think its very hard to say one way or the other if the marketing is "working" for TMAG in 2013. The bottom line is, TMAG are still number one but apparently sales dropped 17% or something. Now, they have reasons for why this is the case (weather etc), and they all could be valid, but who is to say that better marketing wouldn't have INCREASED sales? Obviously, TMAG is going to have other reasons for sales drop offs, and there is no way of knowing what the real answer is. What I am saying is, TMAG is number one by far and will continue to be HOWEVER they market the next few years. I think that's fair to say, right? They are just far and away the tops. So, I just don't think that it's as easy as saying, "they are tops in sales so therefore the marketing must be working." How are we to know whether better marketing wouldn't have increased sales (or worse marketing decrease them?).

Finally, although I obviously disagree with the marketing, I am not posting this to put it down at all. All I am saying is that I don't think the logic "As long as TMAG remains number one, then the marketing has to be working and all must be forgiven" applies as strictly as others may. it's much more complicated than that and I hope we can all agree.
[/quote]
Well have you ever produced, marketed and sold a product? There is a strong correlation and success needs all three. But a consideration is whether the product is a consumable, soft goods or hard goods. A great product will usually fail due to poor or no marketing. There is a history of inferior products that are great successes because of excellent marketing. But great marketing is no guarantee of of great success especially in consumables (golfballs as a golf example) if the product is not good. In any product cycle either the product or the marketing can have some flaws and still maintain reasonable or good success once identity is established. As an example Titleist golf balls haven't been the singularly best golf ball for many years. but their identity has been mostly maintained by a decent product and fair (albeit confusing) marketing somewhat like Budweiser or Charmin TP (no pun intended). Their market share has some erosion each year but it is small to them although it can be considered large to those gaining, ie. Bridgestone which has had a good product but without their "ball-fitting" marketing would be no where. Their program had other companies changing their marketing of balls, even Titleist embarked on a "fitting" thing and then figured out that they were only helping the others so then they moved onto "our ball works for everyone, choose between the two models" It is much harder to de-throne the king when it comes to hard goods especially when the company is relentles (read: TMAG). But they have to maintain the marketing push one-upping themselves to fight off the competition from trying to one-uping them. TMAG is the "400 lb gorilla" whether people like it or not now and their R&D and Marketing depts are substantial so that a flaw somewhere in one area won't help the competition to make major moves on them. Not every product works and nor every marketing plan works (see Titleist balls above) but one must follow with with an improvement. Consecutive failures in both areas can be troublesome especially if the competition hits a Homerun in both areas at the same time.
So great sales does not always com from a great marketing plan but a great marketing plan can also overcome a somewhat weaker product on occasion. But hard goods can live on reputation to a point if failure isn't complete and continuous.
Also when a company has huge success one year in one area of hard goods (which is not necessarily replaced annually or bi-annually) such as Fairway woods, there is often a rebound effect in that kind of a product the next year or two because that (fairway woods) is not typically the prime reason for overall volume results. Thus 2013 would have been smaller regardless of the whether for them in that area. Callaway had great success this year in that same area which provided them with a big jump in a down year. They will likely have a loss in 2014 in fairway woods but should pick it up in other areas. I see both Callaway and TMAG has having up years in '14 because of the relentless approaches the past few months. That doesn't bode well for the other major OEMs. No doubt Acushnet will be down again in '14 unless they make a major stand and push in some area. They cannot survive in the club business being status quo despite all on the site that love them for their sameness.
(I hope this makes some sense, I can't proof read this as I have to run to an appointment)

[KCCO]

[quote name='MCoz' timestamp='1384387233' post='8145444']

Well have you ever produced, marketed and sold a product? There is a strong correlation and success needs all three. But a consideration is whether the product is a consumable, soft goods or hard goods. A great product will usually fail due to poor or no marketing. There is a history of inferior products that are great successes because of excellent marketing. But great marketing is no guarantee of of great success especially in consumables (golfballs as a golf example) if the product is not good. In any product cycle either the product or the marketing can have some flaws and still maintain reasonable or good success once identity is established. As an example Titleist golf balls haven't been the singularly best golf ball for many years. but their identity has been mostly maintained by a decent product and fair (albeit confusing) marketing somewhat like Budweiser or Charmin TP (no pun intended). Their market share has some erosion each year but it is small to them although it can be considered large to those gaining, ie. Bridgestone which has had a good product but without their "ball-fitting" marketing would be no where. Their program had other companies changing their marketing of balls, even Titleist embarked on a "fitting" thing and then figured out that they were only helping the others so then they moved onto "our ball works for everyone, choose between the two models" It is much harder to de-throne the king when it comes to hard goods especially when the company is relentles (read: TMAG). But they have to maintain the marketing push one-upping themselves to fight off the competition from trying to one-uping them. TMAG is the "400 lb gorilla" whether people like it or not now and their R&D and Marketing depts are substantial so that a flaw somewhere in one area won't help the competition to make major moves on them. Not every product works and nor every marketing plan works (see Titleist balls above) but one must follow with with an improvement. Consecutive failures in both areas can be troublesome especially if the competition hits a Homerun in both areas at the same time.
So great sales does not always com from a great marketing plan but a great marketing plan can also overcome a somewhat weaker product on occasion. But hard goods can live on reputation to a point if failure isn't complete and continuous.
Also when a company has huge success one year in one area of hard goods (which is not necessarily replaced annually or bi-annually) such as Fairway woods, there is often a rebound effect in that kind of a product the next year or two because that (fairway woods) is not typically the prime reason for overall volume results. Thus 2013 would have been smaller regardless of the whether for them in that area. Callaway had great success this year in that same area which provided them with a big jump in a down year. They will likely have a loss in 2014 in fairway woods but should pick it up in other areas. I see both Callaway and TMAG has having up years in '14 because of the relentless approaches the past few months. That doesn't bode well for the other major OEMs. No doubt Acushnet will be down again in '14 unless they make a major stand and push in some area. They cannot survive in the club business being status quo despite all on the site that love them for their sameness.
(I hope this makes some sense, I can't proof read this as I have to run to an appointment)
[/quote]

Titleist will always be fine as you must forget their ball sales, wedges, and putters. Same product with little overhead in R & D that will continue to sell, and they have broadened their wedge line-up anyhow. Did you also forget they have for new irons in '14? Acushnet will be fine.

[bph7]

[quote name='MCoz' timestamp='1384387233' post='8145444']

Well have you ever produced, marketed and sold a product? There is a strong correlation and success needs all three. But a consideration is whether the product is a consumable, soft goods or hard goods. A great product will usually fail due to poor or no marketing. There is a history of inferior products that are great successes because of excellent marketing. But great marketing is no guarantee of of great success especially in consumables (golfballs as a golf example) if the product is not good. In any product cycle either the product or the marketing can have some flaws and still maintain reasonable or good success once identity is established. As an example Titleist golf balls haven't been the singularly best golf ball for many years. but their identity has been mostly maintained by a decent product and fair (albeit confusing) marketing somewhat like Budweiser or Charmin TP (no pun intended). Their market share has some erosion each year but it is small to them although it can be considered large to those gaining, ie. Bridgestone which has had a good product but without their "ball-fitting" marketing would be no where. Their program had other companies changing their marketing of balls, even Titleist embarked on a "fitting" thing and then figured out that they were only helping the others so then they moved onto "our ball works for everyone, choose between the two models" It is much harder to de-throne the king when it comes to hard goods especially when the company is relentles (read: TMAG). But they have to maintain the marketing push one-upping themselves to fight off the competition from trying to one-uping them. TMAG is the "400 lb gorilla" whether people like it or not now and their R&D and Marketing depts are substantial so that a flaw somewhere in one area won't help the competition to make major moves on them. Not every product works and nor every marketing plan works (see Titleist balls above) but one must follow with with an improvement. Consecutive failures in both areas can be troublesome especially if the competition hits a Homerun in both areas at the same time.
So great sales does not always com from a great marketing plan but a great marketing plan can also overcome a somewhat weaker product on occasion. But hard goods can live on reputation to a point if failure isn't complete and continuous.
Also when a company has huge success one year in one area of hard goods (which is not necessarily replaced annually or bi-annually) such as Fairway woods, there is often a rebound effect in that kind of a product the next year or two because that (fairway woods) is not typically the prime reason for overall volume results. Thus 2013 would have been smaller regardless of the whether for them in that area. Callaway had great success this year in that same area which provided them with a big jump in a down year. They will likely have a loss in 2014 in fairway woods but should pick it up in other areas. I see both Callaway and TMAG has having up years in '14 because of the relentless approaches the past few months. That doesn't bode well for the other major OEMs. No doubt Acushnet will be down again in '14 unless they make a major stand and push in some area. They cannot survive in the club business being status quo despite all on the site that love them for their sameness.
(I hope this makes some sense, I can't proof read this as I have to run to an appointment)
[/quote]

Hey man, very interesting stuff, and yes, it makes perfect sense. I don't really disagree with any of it, so I don't have any sort of response, but I just wanted to say that it's nice to have reasonable, intelligent debate about TMAG and their marketing. I actually learned a lot from these posts.

[MadGolfer76]

Badge'ier...

[scratchswinger]

WRX should consider a text limit per posts.

[Ed Settle]

[quote name='scratchswinger' timestamp='1384389859' post='8145698']
WRX should consider a text limit per posts.
[/quote]

He would just make multiple posts.....he is wicked smart!!

[Pure745]

[quote name='scratchswinger' timestamp='1384389859' post='8145698']
WRX should consider a text limit per posts.
[/quote]

And limit specific members from individually replying to almost every single post on here (and other threads TM related).

[Arafel]

[quote name='Pure745' timestamp='1384390790' post='8145780']
[quote name='scratchswinger' timestamp='1384389859' post='8145698']
WRX should consider a text limit per posts.
[/quote]

And limit specific members from individually replying to almost every single post on here (and other threads TM related).
[/quote]

That's a very Rebellious idea.

[robdynamite]

After seeing all of these beauties. I wonder what the wedges will look like now

[Konklifer]

While I am an unabashed TM basher ( I do love the Lethal), I was prepared to heap praise on these. But no TP logo is a major misstep.

[hoosierfan0012]

Pretty disappointing the public version of these irons will not have the TP badge. The badge will only be on tour players clubs

[Jsjones]

[quote name='Caesar Palache' timestamp='1384372866' post='8144266']
[quote name='Jsjones' timestamp='1384372232' post='8144212']
[quote name='Caesar Palache' timestamp='1384371477' post='8144154']
[quote name='Rebel420' timestamp='1384370999' post='8144084']
The lines all fit well together..[attachment=1947868:image.jpg]
[/quote]

i could see getting a speedblade 3 iron bent strong to be a driving iron and then 3-4 CB and 5-PW MC or even throw some MBs in there.

possibilites are endless!
[/quote]

The speedblade 3 iron is already at 17* i would venture to say that will be low enough to get the job done.
[/quote]

then you obviously havent hit it yet. goes unbelievably high. had to bend my rocketbladez non tour to 16* and it still went too high. my driving iron isnt supposed to go high.
[/quote]
Actually i hit the 19* tour iron and it is about as low as i can stand it. Sounds like a swing or shaft characteristic/problem.

[epacifist]

2014 is the year I retire my t-stamped, Miura forged '04 TM CBs (they served me so well, for so long). Before actual testing and based on looks alone, it was going to be between the '14 TM MBs or the recently released Miura MB-001. Without the TP logo on the TM MB, Miura just won round one. Based on my current irons, I just can't see the TM blade outperforming the MB-001, but I'm hoping that I'm surprised on both fronts and we see a TP badge and great performance from TM's offerings, this year.

/fingers_crossed

[Zach Heusser]

[quote name='Pure745' timestamp='1384390790' post='8145780']
[quote name='scratchswinger' timestamp='1384389859' post='8145698']
WRX should consider a text limit per posts.
[/quote]

And limit specific members from individually replying to almost every single post on here (and other threads TM related).
[/quote]
As a group we as Mods are really working hard to stop people from controlling the site and over posting. Please feel free to hit the the report button when you see this happening.
Thanks Zach

[Caesar Palache]

[quote name='Jsjones' timestamp='1384393577' post='8145990']
[quote name='Caesar Palache' timestamp='1384372866' post='8144266']
[quote name='Jsjones' timestamp='1384372232' post='8144212']
[quote name='Caesar Palache' timestamp='1384371477' post='8144154']
[quote name='Rebel420' timestamp='1384370999' post='8144084']
The lines all fit well together..[attachment=1947868:image.jpg]
[/quote]

i could see getting a speedblade 3 iron bent strong to be a driving iron and then 3-4 CB and 5-PW MC or even throw some MBs in there.

possibilites are endless!
[/quote]

The speedblade 3 iron is already at 17* i would venture to say that will be low enough to get the job done.
[/quote]

then you obviously havent hit it yet. goes unbelievably high. had to bend my rocketbladez non tour to 16* and it still went too high. my driving iron isnt supposed to go high.
[/quote]
Actually i hit the 19* tour iron and it is about as low as i can stand it. [b]Sounds like a swing or shaft characteristic/problem.[/b]
[/quote]

yeah maybe a problem on your end

again you havent hit the right iron
non tour is a completely different animal.

[Jsjones]

[quote name='Caesar Palache' timestamp='1384395146' post='8146114']
[quote name='Jsjones' timestamp='1384393577' post='8145990']
[quote name='Caesar Palache' timestamp='1384372866' post='8144266']
[quote name='Jsjones' timestamp='1384372232' post='8144212']
[quote name='Caesar Palache' timestamp='1384371477' post='8144154']
[quote name='Rebel420' timestamp='1384370999' post='8144084']
The lines all fit well together..[attachment=1947868:image.jpg]
[/quote]

i could see getting a speedblade 3 iron bent strong to be a driving iron and then 3-4 CB and 5-PW MC or even throw some MBs in there.

possibilites are endless!
[/quote]

The speedblade 3 iron is already at 17* i would venture to say that will be low enough to get the job done.
[/quote]

then you obviously havent hit it yet. goes unbelievably high. had to bend my rocketbladez non tour to 16* and it still went too high. my driving iron isnt supposed to go high.
[/quote]
Actually i hit the 19* tour iron and it is about as low as i can stand it. [b]Sounds like a swing or shaft characteristic/problem.[/b]
[/quote]

yeah maybe a problem on your end

again you havent hit the right iron
non tour is a completely different animal.
[/quote]
Ha oh man I better change my game then since you said so. But I do like the way you think with the Speedblade. Always preferred the driving iron over a hybrid.