Cut Muscle on MP-67's

[villa]

What's it for?

O.K, played yesterday with a guy who had a set of MP-67's. Great looking clubs and as always, beautiful Mizuno feel.

As always with a good muscle back or 'blade', they allow you to work the ball both ways and alter the trajectory if required. They seemed to play very similar to MP-33's which are in my opinion, one of the best blades ever made.

So, what's the cut muscle for? I don't quite understand it. If I want a blade, i'll buy a blade. Not that i'm looking for a change at the moment anyway but if I was, it'd put me off. I understand the principle with the 32's and the 60's but not with the 67's.

Is it a gimmick? Is it for forgiveness? I'm not hating on them guys, just intrigued that's all.

[diablojoe]

I don't think it's a gimmick -- I think that it's perhaps the most elegant design element ever put on a golf club. It's just downright beautiful, and belongs in any self-respecting industrial design collection.

 

Does it help/improve/alter the way the iron hits? I dunno. But I doubt it does anything more than any other way of moving metal around on the head.

[villa]

I don't think it's a gimmick -- I think that it's perhaps the most elegant design element ever put on a golf club. It's just downright beautiful, and belongs in any self-respecting industrial design collection.

 

Does it help/improve/alter the way the iron hits? I dunno. But I doubt it does anything more than any other way of moving metal around on the head.

Agreed mate, i've got no hesitation in saying that these are one beautiful set of sticks.

 

I'm just curious about it's purpose.

[mr_divots]

Mizuno claims more mass out toward the toe of the blade to put the sweet spot more in the center of the clubface. MP-33's sweet spot would be closer to the heel in comparison.

[Parmaster]

The channel basically gives the engineers a couple of grams of weight to redistribute elsewhere on the head to either move the center of gravity or build in a touch of forgiveness...

[villa]

Mizuno claims more mass out toward the toe of the blade to put the sweet spot more in the center of the clubface. MP-33's sweet spot would be closer to the heel in comparison.

That's what the guy said yesterday but i've owned 33's and i'm convinced the sweet spot was central. I could be wrong though.

 

The channel basically gives the engineers a couple of grams of weight to redistribute elsewhere on the head to either move the center of gravity or build in a touch of forgiveness...

Yes, but how forgiving do you want/need a blade to be? I suppose that was really what I meant in my original question.

 

Moving the COG is an interesting point!

[imsocrabby]

i don't care what it does.

 

 

lurv mine......deep love. i pulled the 3 i out for a hybrid.....so it sits in the kitchen.

 

i look at it everyday....a beauty.

 

 

 

 

 

but i should explain. i custom ordered mine through golfsmith. they farked up the order and Mizuno sent me all 67's when i ordered 60's in 3-5. So Mizuno sent me the 60's and let me keep the 67's in 3-5. so i game the 4 and 5 in the 60...sometimes switch them for the 67.

 

but the 3....pristine.

[villa]

i don't care what it does.

 

 

lurv mine......deep love. i pulled the 3 i out for a hybrid.....so it sits in the kitchen.

 

i look at it everyday....a beauty.

Again, in no way am I doubting that these are a gorgeous set of clubs and they certainly perform.

[Parmaster]

With the sparse number of PGA tour professionals using muscle backed blades these days, I would think it would be an engineer's mission to design a set as forgiving and playable as possible....I have to think as well, that having a cavity, no matter how slight, in a set of blades would capture a portion of the market of guys teetering between blades and cavities.....

 

And what OEM wouldn't want to have a set of forged muscle backed irons touted as being the "most forgiving blades on the market?"....

[noodle3872]

http://www.cutmuscle.com

 

Mike

[DavidR]

I just wish I was good enough to play these irons. The cut muscle really looks great!

[golfjam]

I've owned both MP-33 and MP-67. I didn't notice any big difference between them and to be honest the 67's are shorter. MP-33 set the bar for me and every time I get a new set I compare to them.

[gentles]

I read on the mizuno website that the cut muscle on the mp-67 allows the muscle on the back to be bigger, meaning a higher centre of gravity. This in turn will give a more penetrating ball flight.

[seriousperformance]

O.K, played yesterday with a guy who had a set of MP-67's. Great looking clubs and as always, beautiful Mizuno feel.

 

As always with a good muscle back or 'blade', they allow you to work the ball both ways and alter the trajectory if required. They seemed to play very similar to MP-33's which are in my opinion, one of the best blades ever made.

 

So, what's the cut muscle for? I don't quite understand it. If I want a blade, i'll buy a blade. Not that i'm looking for a change at the moment anyway but if I was, it'd put me off. I understand the principle with the 32's and the 60's but not with the 67's.

 

Is it a gimmick? Is it for forgiveness? I'm not hating on them guys, just intrigued that's all.

The Cut-muscle tech was designed to alow Mizuno to put the sweat spot height in the same place on every iron to give the clubs a true flighted effect. It also alows Mizuno to postion the COG in relationship to the shaft axis to make the Mp67's the most workable iron they have every made. A nice side effect of the Cut-Muscle is that it does help with forgivness.

[MBA-J]

^^^^^^^^^

 

...is the right answer.

 

Titleist used this theory for their 695 series, as the Z achieves similar results of the Cut Muscle, which borrowed from an old Wilson design.

[projamie]

Ok i understand what everyone is saying, and it all makes sense what everyones saying, concept wise atleast. What im struggling to get my head around however is blades dont have alot of weight positioned at the back of the club as it is, so by removing the weight using the cut muscle, isnt that just making the irons harder to get airbourne through loss of weight distributed behind the club?

[Milo]

I've owned both MP-33 and MP-67. I didn't notice any big difference between them and to be honest the 67's are shorter. MP-33 set the bar for me and every time I get a new set I compare to them.

 

 

Me too. 33s are still king. More meaty than the 67s. I liked the 67s; just not as much as the 33.

 

As a side issue, excepting perhaps the Ping S58, I have yet to hit a club that sends the ball further than the 33s. And they do it so nicely!

[villa]

I've owned both MP-33 and MP-67. I didn't notice any big difference between them and to be honest the 67's are shorter. MP-33 set the bar for me and every time I get a new set I compare to them.

See, that was the reason for my question. I couldn't see a massive difference either (didn't hit enough balls to see any difference in distance though). That's what made me ask, why don't they just make a blade?

 

The Cut-muscle tech was designed to alow Mizuno to put the sweat spot height in the same place on every iron to give the clubs a true flighted effect. It also alows Mizuno to postion the COG in relationship to the shaft axis to make the Mp67's the most workable iron they have every made. A nice side effect of the Cut-Muscle is that it does help with forgivness.

That seems to sum it up though. Thanks for the info mate!

[imsocrabby]

the distance difference is most likely because the lofts on the 67's is weaker.

 

 

don't quote me though.

[villa]

the distance difference is most likely because the lofts on the 67's is weaker.

 

 

don't quote me though.

They're the same mate.

 

That was my first thought when I read it as well though.