Titleist/Mizuno

[Mitchell]

It was my understanding that the purpose of creation of t100s was to give the ability to have lower lofts without significant changes in bounce, face progression/offset for players that were in need of reduction in peak height or slight increase in ball speed per club.

[bubbagump]

4 hours ago, Red4282 said:

Would you like to link your source? We know where center of gravity is because its provided to us with mpf data, and the t100s does not have a lower cg, so that is false. The t100s will have faster ball speeds but thats due to the stronger lofts not the face being thinner. Bend it 2 deg  week or bend the regular t100 2 strong and it will produce exactly the same ball speed, launch and spin, as was done in a TXG video.

 

https://www.golfdigest.com/story/titleist-t100s-irons-provide-a-distance-option-for-better-players

 

"“We wanted to keep the exact look of T100 while making some slight tweaks to the CG and the sole,” said Ines. So it looks like a T100 but plays like a T200 distance-wise.”

 

 

-Josh Talge, the company’s VP of golf club marketing.

 

Yes, the lofts are stronger by 2 degrees, but each iron in the set was redesigned with thinner faces

 

 

 

Edited February 22, 2021 by bubbagump

[Carolina Golfer 2]

17 minutes ago, bubbagump said:

 

https://www.golfdigest.com/story/titleist-t100s-irons-provide-a-distance-option-for-better-players

 

"“We wanted to keep the exact look of T100 while making some slight tweaks to the CG and the sole,” said Ines. So it looks like a T100 but plays like a T200 distance-wise.”

 

 

-Josh Talge, the company’s VP of golf club marketing.

 

Yes, the lofts are stronger by 2 degrees, but each iron in the set was redesigned with thinner faces

 

Same info i was told by Titleist as well. 
 

You know some dogs won’t let go of a bone though 😉

[Red4282]

13 minutes ago, bubbagump said:

 

https://www.golfdigest.com/story/titleist-t100s-irons-provide-a-distance-option-for-better-players

 

"“We wanted to keep the exact look of T100 while making some slight tweaks to the CG and the sole,” said Ines. So it looks like a T100 but plays like a T200 distance-wise.”

 

 

-Josh Talge, the company’s VP of golf club marketing.

 

Yes, the lofts are stronger by 2 degrees, but each iron in the set was redesigned with thinner faces

 

Thanks for the link. This is the first i have heard of the thinner faces, so that im unsure of that, but as for the rest, context matters... he says:

 

“As with the T100, a hefty amount of tungsten (an average of 66 grams) if co-forged into the heel and toe areas of the long and mid irons to boost forgiveness and foster a higher launch.”

 

note the “As with” part. He goes on with:

“Attention also was paid to the sole of the club with an enhanced camber for improved turf interaction. As you would expect in a players shape, the topline is on the thin side and offset is minimal. The set features progressive blade lengths, sole widths and hosel lengths with the goal of delivering the optimal center-of-gravity positioning for each iron.” 

 

All of which he said can be true with the t100 too. “As with”.

 

now to this:

 

“We wanted to keep the exact look of T100 while making some slight tweaks to the CG”

 

slight tweaks. Nothing about being lower... in fact, its been measured:

 

 

The t100s has a measured HIGHER cog, by a whopping .003”.

 

Its important to filter through all the marketing jargon.

[Red4282]

2 minutes ago, Carolina Golfer 2 said:

Same info i was told by Titleist as well. 
 

You know some dogs won’t let go of a bone though 😉

Manufacturers say all sorts of things. Interesting there isnt anything on their website about it. Also, an independent source says otherwise, with actual data...ill take that over some salesman anyday.

[bubbagump]

1 minute ago, Red4282 said:

Thanks for the link. This is the first i have heard of the thinner faces, so that im unsure of that, but as for the rest, context matters... he says:

 

“As with the T100, a hefty amount of tungsten (an average of 66 grams) if co-forged into the heel and toe areas of the long and mid irons to boost forgiveness and foster a higher launch.”

 

note the “As with” part. He goes on with:

“Attention also was paid to the sole of the club with an enhanced camber for improved turf interaction. As you would expect in a players shape, the topline is on the thin side and offset is minimal. The set features progressive blade lengths, sole widths and hosel lengths with the goal of delivering the optimal center-of-gravity positioning for each iron.” 

 

All of which he said can be true with the t100 too. “As with”.

 

now to this:

 

“We wanted to keep the exact look of T100 while making some slight tweaks to the CG”

 

slight tweaks. Nothing about being lower... in fact, its been measured:

 

 

The t100s has a measured HIGHER cog, by a whopping .003”.

 

Its important to filter through all the marketing jargon.

 

The same TXG video you quoted also detailed the slightly lower CG on the T100S.  

[Red4282]

3 minutes ago, bubbagump said:

 

The same TXG video you quoted also detailed the slightly lower CG on the T100S.  

They actually did two videos. The first one they made that claim, and people called them out... yea i was one of them. Its easy for them to spit out what the oems tell them. Its up to them to show us its actually true...right? They then did a second test/video with them bent to same loft and it was identical. They were kinda speechless as almost that myth was flat busted. Lol

Edited February 22, 2021 by Red4282

[bubbagump]

7 minutes ago, Red4282 said:

They actually did two videos. The first one they made that claim, and people called them out... yea i was one of them. Its easy for them to spit out what the oems tell them. Its up to them to show us its actually true...right? They then did a second test/video with them bent to same loft and it was identical. They were kinda speechless as almost that myth was flat busted. Lol

 

You seem fun.  I didn't see the second TXG review on them, only the one.  Marketing speak or not its all good, I really have no way of telling exactly myself, but after testing I ended up with some T100S the other week, so looking forward to getting out with them.  

 

Edited February 22, 2021 by bubbagump

[ILove2Golf123]

I'd love to see Mizuno offer the new iteration of both the MP-20 and MMC in a 3-PW straight blade option for left handers. That way we have the option of whether we want to combo or not! However, If that's not possible then at least update the MP-20 SEL set so that the 3 & 4 irons are the MMC's instead of the HMB's!

[Red4282]

5 minutes ago, bubbagump said:

 

You seem fun.  I didn't see the second TXG review on them, only the one.  Marketing speak or not its all good, I really have no way of telling exactly myself, but after testing I ended up with some T100S the other week, so looking forward to getting out with them.  

 

Im very fun, i just dont like misinformation being spread. Its not a knock on either irons both are great. I just see it as a gapping option for people. But you can have you have your opinion and thats fine. I put my info and opinion out there and people can make up their own minds. Didnt mean to hijack the thread, so carry on.

[noodle3872]

1 hour ago, Red4282 said:

Im very fun, i just dont like misinformation being spread. Its not a knock on either irons both are great. I just see it as a gapping option for people. But you can have you have your opinion and thats fine. I put my info and opinion out there and people can make up their own minds. Didnt mean to hijack the thread, so carry on.

It’s hard to believe you’re fun. Your opinions are being provided in a very aggressive, almost hostile fashion and you’ve coming off as a know-it-all in several threads lately. This is a golf forum; it may feel like it’s life or death but it’s really not. 
 

This is just my opinion, I could be wrong....

[Red4282]

9 minutes ago, noodle3872 said:

It’s hard to believe you’re fun. Your opinions are being provided in a very aggressive, almost hostile fashion and you’ve coming off as a know-it-all in several threads lately. This is a golf forum; it may feel like it’s life or death but it’s really not. 
 

This is just my opinion, I could be wrong....

Well ya know sometimes truth isnt fun. How has anything i said in this thread aggressive or hostile? I presented data to back my claims, said id prefer hard data over an oem rep, and said you are entitled to your opinion and to make up your own mind... jeese what a jerk i am...

[Chads9815]

14 minutes ago, Red4282 said:

Well ya know sometimes truth isnt fun. How has anything i said in this thread aggressive or hostile? I presented data to back my claims, said id prefer hard data over an oem rep, and said you are entitled to your opinion and to make up your own mind... jeese what a jerk i am...

I guess they missed the context of you smiling as you typed...😂😂..always interesting that people can tell context from a text or email...lol

[Red4282]

44 minutes ago, Chads9815 said:

I guess they missed the context of you smiling as you typed...😂😂..always interesting that people can tell context from a text or email...lol

Well people have deep connections with golf and golf equipment. I get it, they feel like what they have been sold on is being attacked.  i feel 😍😍 over my SIM driver and my 620cb irons... but i just dont buy all the oem marketing stuff, like the “inertia generator” in the SIM. Love it but come on lol.

[bladehunter]

Regardless of someone from titleist saying “ thinner face “ or not.  It cannot be true on a spring type level.    If you made a solid clubs face thinner. You’d reduce ballspeed. Not increase it.  Less mass behind the ball.
 

Id say this  is a case of meaning “ more ballspeed “ and saying “ thinner face “. The ballspeed will come from lower loft.  
 

 

Besides. We can bust  this myth too.  All we need is a top bottom and middle measurement of at100s. And compare to measurement of t100.  Easy enough to make happen.  

Edited February 22, 2021 by bladehunter

[MattyO1984]

I am not sure that there is that much of an issue with the T100 and T100s. Now obviously, we didn't have GolfWRX back when they had the 962 and 926B's or the 990 and 990B's but I cannot remember it ever being too much of an issue back then with them. If Titleist released both at the same time, I am not sure if there would be a problem.

[bladehunter]

3 minutes ago, MattyO1984 said:

I am not sure that there is that much of an issue with the T100 and T100s. Now obviously, we didn't have GolfWRX back when they had the 962 and 926B's or the 990 and 990B's but I cannot remember it ever being too much of an issue back then with them. If Titleist released both at the same time, I am not sure if there would be a problem.

Right. I’ve had this discussion in the wild too.  So it’s not just here. I don’t know why titleist didn’t do a bettter job at just saying “ the t100s is designed stronger to keep the offset and bounce within the designed spec and give the player who needs extra ballspeed some help “.     So many think it’s two different irons it’s nuts.   It’s just in response to pings “ power spec and retro lofts “.  That’s all. 

[bubbagump]

2 minutes ago, bladehunter said:

Right. I’ve had this discussion in the wild too.  So it’s not just here. I don’t know why titleist didn’t do a bettter job at just saying “ the t100s is designed stronger to keep the offset and bounce within the designed spec and give the player who needs extra ballspeed some help “.     So many think it’s two different irons it’s nuts.   It’s just in response to pings “ power spec and retro lofts “.  That’s all. 

 

Literally every article/review about them says this.  

[bladehunter]

Just now, bubbagump said:

 

Literally every article/review about them says this.  

So what’s the argument about ? 

[bubbagump]

3 minutes ago, bladehunter said:

So what’s the argument about ? 

 

There was none, until you and the other guy came in.  I was responding to what you suggested Titleist should have done, saying that it was done in about every article/review on the clubs.  

 

I think must understand the T100 / T100S differences, to include what Titleist says about them.  Most can't cut clubs in half to go and disprove any manufacturers claims, but also most don't seem to care as much if the clubs work for them, and they liked them anyway. 

Edited February 22, 2021 by bubbagump

[bladehunter]

Just now, bubbagump said:

 

There was none, until you and the other guy came in.  I was responding to what you suggested Titleist should have done, saying that it was done in about every article/review on the clubs.  

Lol.   Right. Cant bring reason into it.  It’s offensive.  
 

maltby measured them.  They aren’t different irons. Same same with built in stronger lofts and sole angles to match the non s version.     

 

while you’re correct. They do say this. They also added in “ face thickness “  to muddy the water instead of saying ballspeed.  Cog only moves because they are stronger.   Think of the hosel as the fulcrum point. Bend the face around that.  The cog moves up or down for strong and weak respectively.  Maltby also shows this minute change.  
 

it’s crazy to me how people will latch onto things and go nuts.  I hate that this exists because i like these irons. But twice I’ve had to hear “ man you should have got the S .... they are so much better. I’m a full club longer “.    No crap Sherlock.  🤦‍♂️Now those same guys are defending the disturbia as if the loft isn’t the reason for that.  
 

 

[Oaks]

On 2/20/2021 at 11:17 PM, QuigleyDU said:

That can for sure improve. How? I have no idea. I am not that smart..

Love my MMCs.   
 

I am set til at least MP-24 (I think 🤔)

[bubbagump]

6 minutes ago, bladehunter said:

Lol.   Right. Cant bring reason into it.  It’s offensive.  
 

maltby measured them.  They aren’t different irons. Same same with built in stronger lofts and sole angles to match the non s version.     

 

while you’re correct. They do say this. They also added in “ face thickness “  to muddy the water instead of saying ballspeed.  Cog only moves because they are stronger.   Think of the hosel as the fulcrum point. Bend the face around that.  The cog moves up or down for strong and weak respectively.  Maltby also shows this minute change.  
 

it’s crazy to me how people will latch onto things and go nuts.  I hate that this exists because i like these irons. But twice I’ve had to hear “ man you should have got the S .... they are so much better. I’m a full club longer “.    No crap Sherlock.  🤦‍♂️Now those same guys are defending the disturbia as if the loft isn’t the reason for that.  
 

 

 

Great.

 

Anyway, I just really liked the black finish and the S felt good and worked well for me in hitting them prior to purchase.  I've never played with either people you seem to interact with who are so concerned over distance, or being right over debunking manufacturer claims, so Im not really worried about that.  Great irons S or no S, whatever ones work for whoever, have at it.    

[PostandGhost]

This Fall would be a good time for Titleist to bifurcate their product lines, similar to Mizuno, and have iron/driver releases every year while keeping with their two year product cycle.  Release new T series irons in late August, don't release the 622 series yet, make the T100s the new T100 model, give the old T100 a new name and move it to the 622 series with the MB and CB.  Then they could release the 622 series in the Spring of 2022 or Fall of 2022 with the new drivers.  Keep that cycle for each product line every two years.  They could even do the same with the drivers, similar to what they're already doing.

 

That would clear up a lot of the mess and hopefully keep everyone from bickering. Plus, it would be great from a retail stand point because it would constantly have Titleist releasing product, staying relevant in the news, without over-saturating the market with a 1 year product cycle.  

[bladehunter]

10 minutes ago, bubbagump said:

 

Great.

 

Anyway, I just really liked the black finish and the S felt good and worked well for me in hitting them prior to purchase.  I've never played with either people you seem to interact with who are so concerned over distance, or being right over debunking manufacturer claims, so Im not really worried about that.  Great irons S or no S, whatever ones work for whoever, have at it.    

And that’s really it right ?    I completely agree. 
 

Maybe I’m just surrounded by gear heads ? I don’t know. But I can’t pull up with a new club and not have it turn into a conversation.  And this one seems to be a popular one now since these irons are so popular.   
 

i don’t think it’s about being right.  It’s about common sense.  The face on this isn’t a separate piece.  There’s no weld on these. And it’s my experience that management level folks at any company usually have the worst product knowledge of anyone there.  If one of their engineers said “ thinner face “ id ask him or  her to show me.  And if they could , cool.  But VP of marketing ?  Lol. I think that explains where the misuse of terms comes from.  
 

to get back on topic. Titleist should pare down these options.  Make the t100 the t200 or make the t100 the cb. In my opinion. 

Edited February 22, 2021 by bladehunter

[Red4282]

30 minutes ago, bladehunter said:

And that’s really it right ?    I completely agree. 
 

Maybe I’m just surrounded by gear heads ? I don’t know. But I can’t pull up with a new club and not have it turn into a conversation.  And this one seems to be a popular one now since these irons are so popular.   
 

i don’t think it’s about being right.  It’s about common sense.  The face on this isn’t a separate piece.  There’s no weld on these. And it’s my experience that management level folks at any company usually have the worst product knowledge of anyone there.  If one of their engineers said “ thinner face “ id ask him or  her to show me.  And if they could , cool.  But VP of marketing ?  Lol. I think that explains where the misuse of terms comes from.  
 

to get back on topic. Titleist should pare down these options.  Make the t100 the t200 or make the t100 the cb. In my opinion. 

Indeed it isnt about being right but it amazes me is i was responding to these same claims months and months ago, right after the t100s was released and they always seem to pop up somewhere on wrx, even though every literature titleist has put out doesnt say anything like what is being claimed. Its like one guy started a wildfire that cant seem to be put out lol. I think there are too many t-irons. Keep the mb/cb. Then maybe t100, t300 and call it good. Maybe the power spec because its popular.

[bladehunter]

8 minutes ago, Red4282 said:

Indeed it isnt about being right but it amazes me is i was responding to these same claims months and months ago, right after the t100s was released and they always seem to pop up somewhere on wrx, even though every literature titleist has put out doesnt say anything like what is being claimed. Its like one guy started a wildfire that cant seem to be put out lol. I think there are too many t-irons. Keep the mb/cb. Then maybe t100, t300 and call it good. Maybe the power spec because its popular.

100 %.  Doesn’t need to be that many.  

[JJBonyai]

I'm just here hoping they "retro" the 962 or 962b irons. Maybe call them 662's and make them a forged cavity inspired by the 962s. 

 

There are about 36 reasons why they wouldn't do this but one can always dream. 

[TLUBulldogGolf]

Already pulled the trigger on MP-20s but I'm interested to see what Mizuno comes out with. I went full MB but if they improve the look of the HMB I'll definitely consider a 3 iron in that. 

[brew4eagle]

21 hours ago, Carolina Golfer 2 said:

FYI 
 

There is a small difference between the T100 and T100S. The T100S irons are 2-degrees stronger than the T100 irons. The T100S also have a thinner club face for more ball speed. The weight placement was adjusted to decrease the center of gravity to ensure enough height on iron shots.

I thought I also read the sole/bounce was modified so that the 2 degrees less loft didn't provide less bounce (ie, it wasn't identical to bending a T100 2* strong).  Basically, this approach of different head designs to accommodate the loft change seems a way to set Titleist apart from the "Power Spec" approach of PING where the heads are not tweaked at all to account for the loft changes.