Z-Forged vs. 620 MB which one is most forgiving?

[rwhitlock]

I’m looking to buy new irons this fall and would like to buy one of these.  I’ve hit them both in the simulators, but not on a course.

 

Looking for feedback / advice from anyone that hit them both.  Is one more forgiving than the other?  

 

I like the feel and look of the Titleist, just concerned that the Titleist will be a lot less forgiving between the two.

 

Thanks in advance for any feedback.

 

Rod

[OnTheBag]

Don't take this the wrong way, but if you're looking for forgiveness, these aren't the models to look at.  Both are intended for only the highest level ballstrikers.  The answer to your question is neither.  I played Titleist MBs for decades and never consider forgiveness an enduring quality with any of them.

[mister2cool]

If you are looking at these two, I assume you are a decent player and can strike the ball fairly well. As @OnTheBagpointed out, these are really not the models you would be looking for forgiveness with.  I assume you are just trying to see which one might be a touch more demanding on every shot. 

 

It's been a couple of decades since I last played Titleist MB but I did go through Z945, 965 and then Z Forged. All of the Z mb line have wider sole than traditional MB's.. however the V-sole on Z's make them play more like regular width. What that translates to is a touch more forgiveness with a beefier muscle and turf interaction. 

[Davethegolfer]

I play the z forged and I would say it isn't even close. As long as you like the sole of the Srixon it is a very manageable iron

[rwhitlock]

Thanks for the info.  I realize they are not the most forgiving 🙂 compared to other irons. I currently game the 2019 T100 irons and like them.  I’ve hit my buddys Z-Forged a few times and like them too, just never hit the MBs.  My misses are thin shots with irons, if that helps.

[BCULAW]

The 620s have a much thinner sole and, overall, a much smaller profile than the Z forged. In fact, to my eye, the Z forged is larger than some of the current player CB offerings.  
 

I have experience with both, and can say without reservation that the 620, though a lovely club, makes you earn the shot about as much as any offering available at the moment. It’s very fun to play, but you better have your game on. 

[MelloYello]

The Z-forged is the winner hands down. 

 

It's noticeably larger than most conventional MBs like the 620 and as a result it's much more stable on imperfect strikes. I switched to the Z-Forged because I found it no less forgiving than the z785 I had played for a couple years prior. 

 

In fact, the z785 was one of the most stable CBs I'd ever come across. So, if the Z-forged is on par with that, that's saying something!

 

The Z-forged is no joke. It's the best MB on the market today IMHO. Smaller blades offer no advantage in my mind and yet you give up a significant amount of playability shrinking down a club. The Z-forged is the best of all worlds. It offers the look and feel of a MB while providing most of the stability of a CB. 

 

So go with the Z-forged. 

Edited October 15, 2022 by MelloYello

[Gronny]

Here are some pics of my Z-Forged next to my 716 MB. I just switched into Srixon this fall as an experiment and can echo what most have already said, Z-Forged has been more stable and forgiving than my 716’s. I love my mb’s but I feel like my misses have been less punished by the Z-Forged.

[MelloYello]

I for one was shocked when I first tried these Z-Forged. As I said, I was accustomed to the z785 which were already somewhat oversized. When I tried the Z-forged, I naturally hit them with the same swing & strike as I had been applying to the 785. I was highly impressed with the results, even with the Z-forged blade. Just as the z785 led the pack of CBs, so too the Z-forged rose above other blades in terms of practical playability. 

 

The Z-forged is not just a blade for your best days. It's a club you can use year-round, regardless of whether your swinging your best or not. You can take days off from practice and come back without any worry. 

 

I'm now think the #1 thing we consumers should pay attention to is just size. I've played several CBs that were super tiny and which as a result offered little to no benefit over their blade siblings. 

 

Now I think finding the right iron is mostly about size. There's a spectrum out there and these Srixon irons like the 785 / Zx7 as well as the Z-forged sit nicely where most good ball-strikers live. We want something relatively compact but not something excessively so. 

 

.

Edited October 15, 2022 by MelloYello

[NPSpar4]

ZForged is much less demanding...and it's not even close.   The Z Forged is long from heel to toe and the top line isnt all that thin either.    

My T100s are smaller than the ZF, honestly.

you also need to take into account the sole differences.   If you tend to be more of a sweeper, then you should probably test the zforged before laying out the $$$.    Out of all the Blades i have or have played, the ZF were my least favorite in terms of turf interaction.   but if you are a srixon guy, then you will enjoy the sole and will get a forgiving blade.   

the 620s are the real deal, and are certainly demanding but they feel amazing and look even better......even a 620 combo set is sweet

 

 

[rwhitlock]

I am more of a sweeper, especially in the mid and long irons.  Assuming the sole on the ZF is designed more for the divot takers (diggers) ?

[NPSpar4]

Just now, rwhitlock said:

I am more of a sweeper, especially in the mid and long irons.  Assuming the sole on the ZF is designed more for the divot takers (diggers) ?

i would say that more diggers enjoy that srixon sole, than do the sweepers...but that's obviously player dependent...plenty of guys that are more on the picker/sweeper side, still get along great with it.    if your miss tends to be a groove low, like myself,  the 620 might be better for ya...  

[golfinbrad]

9 hours ago, MelloYello said:

I for one was shocked when I first tried these Z-Forged. As I said, I was accustomed to the z785 which were already somewhat oversized. When I tried the Z-forged, I naturally hit them with the same swing & strike as I had been applying to the 785. I was highly impressed with the results, even with the Z-forged blade. Just as the z785 led the pack of CBs, so too the Z-forged rose above other blades in terms of practical playability. 

 

The Z-forged is not just a blade for your best days. It's a club you can use year-round, regardless of whether your swinging your best or not. You can take days off from practice and come back without any worry. 

 

I'm now think the #1 thing we consumers should pay attention to is just size. I've played several CBs that were super tiny and which as a result offered little to no benefit over their blade siblings. 

 

Now I think finding the right iron is mostly about size. There's a spectrum out there and these Srixon irons like the 785 / Zx7 as well as the Z-forged sit nicely where most good ball-strikers live. We want something relatively compact but not something excessively so. 

 

.

I agree the Z Forged are an awesome blade.  Debating between these and the ZX7.  Both gave me equal numbers.  Just not sure how graphite shafts would be in the blades.  I was shocked at the numbers in the long irons.  Would not hesitate to game these if you are looking at a set of blades.  

[Kingcat990]

If your miss is thin, blades will eat you alive.

[MelloYello]

13 hours ago, rwhitlock said:

I am more of a sweeper, especially in the mid and long irons.  Assuming the sole on the ZF is designed more for the divot takers (diggers) ?

 

I'm pretty in the middle these days. On healthy, green turf I will sweep the top and sometimes barely disturb what's there, especially with a mid- or long-iron. When I feel I have to go down and get it, I can take a more obvious divot, especially with a shorter club in hand. I'm certainly not gouging the ball though. However, I don't think anyone in this category of player is a hack. 🙂

 

I wouldn't put much concern on the underside of the sole. I've played Mizuno MP-64, Titleist 716 MB & CB as well as Srixon 785 and Z-Forged and I would say they're all effectively the same. Honestly? All those soles were perfectly fine and imperceptibly different (to me).

 

The only thing I know I don't want in a sole is something super narrow with an insanely low bounce (i.e. pre-716 Titleist MBs which had flatter soles than today's models).

 

Again, it's really about size. If you can pull a Titleist 620 MB 6-iron out and honest-to-God have no worries in the world (even from an imperfect lie on your lesser days) then they're fine for you. I

 

f that's you, you're better than me. 

 

 

 

MARJOR THING TO KEEP IN MIND:

 

The Srixon irons (every model) feature new-school lofts. 

 

Srixon: 22* - 46* (7-clubs, 6 gaps)

 

Titleist: 21* - 47* (8-clubs, 7 gaps) 

 

You can see how the two sets cover essentially the same overall span but the Titleist is slightly denser in how it jams in 1 extra club. 

 

Me being someone that's not overwhelmingly powerful to begin with, I found it beneficial to space my irons farther apart with the new-school Srixon lofts. I'm 36yo and my 8-iron generally flies ~150-yds FWIW. Younger, more powerful players might prefer the traditional (weaker) lofts of the Titleist lineup if they already achieve a 12+ yard gap between clubs.

 

For me, the Titleist gaps too often shrunk to 10-yds which I found kind of annoying. I find my gaps with the Srixons are more like 12-yds which really helps:

 

6i - 178

7i - 162

8i - 150

9i - 138

Pw - 125 

 

NOTE:

 

Do not think of these new-school lofts as generating lower spin and lower trajectories. Instead, think of them as merely existing along the spectrum of lofts in between the traditional points.

 

.

Edited October 16, 2022 by MelloYello

[OnTheBag]

On 10/15/2022 at 11:24 PM, Kingcat990 said:

If your miss is thin, blades will eat you alive.

I disagree with this.  As someone who catches everything on the bottom.  My standard impact is on the 2nd-3rd groove.  MBs traditionally have the mass lower on the face and react better than irons designed to trap the ball.  Granted, I only play irons in the 7i-PW slot, but MBs have been the best fit for me through many, many iterations.  

[Kingcat990]

13 hours ago, OnTheBag said:

I disagree with this.  As someone who catches everything on the bottom.  My standard impact is on the 2nd-3rd groove.  MBs traditionally have the mass lower on the face and react better than irons designed to trap the ball.  Granted, I only play irons in the 7i-PW slot, but MBs have been the best fit for me through many, many iterations.  

Which irons are designed to trap the ball better than an MB?

Edited October 23, 2022 by Kingcat990

[OnTheBag]

3 hours ago, Kingcat990 said:

Which irons are designed to trap the ball better than an MB?

From my understanding and experience, anything with an Actual VCOG above 0.8.  i210, most players CBs, GI irons, etc...  Those of us that "pick the ball" struggle to make sweet spot contact if the VCOG is above the 3rd groove. 

[Kingcat990]

On 10/23/2022 at 11:32 AM, OnTheBag said:

From my understanding and experience, anything with an Actual VCOG above 0.8.  i210, most players CBs, GI irons, etc...  Those of us that "pick the ball" struggle to make sweet spot contact if the VCOG is above the 3rd groove. 

This makes sense. I misunderstood your "catching it on the bottom" statement. I'm also a bit of a picker and shy away from those types of irons for that reason.