TT Monaco - is this normal? Shaft codes/lengths mismatch

[joshfisher]

Think i just got "shafted" on mine. Heres what i received. 

3-p

 

[AdamMH]

1 hour ago, joshfisher said:

Think i just got "shafted" on mine. Heres what i received. 

3-p

 

 

Yeah, no good. Did you also purchase from a shop with initials "GBB"?

[joshfisher]

8 hours ago, AdamMH said:

 

Yeah, no good. Did you also purchase from a shop with initials "GBB"?

Yep

[Howard_Jones]

10 hours ago, joshfisher said:

Think i just got "shafted" on mine. Heres what i received. 

3-p

 

 

Did you read ALL on page 1?
True Temper say some sets was made with a mix of a ACTUAL prototype, vs the Monaco Production model. Then Shaft lenght can bump like that, but take ALL measurements, (tip to first step), and look as the numbers you find on the butt to make sure.)

They can be just like they should....it was a hand made series with only 333 sets of each, so it was not the same "standards" as it was on regular model.

[joshfisher]

Just now, Howard_Jones said:

 

Did you read ALL on page 1?
True Temper say some sets was made with a mix of a ACTUAL prototype, vs the Monaco Production model. Then Shaft lenght can bump like that, but take ALL measurements, (tip to first step), and look as the numbers you find on the butt to make sure.)

They can be just like they should....it was a hand made series with only 333 sets of each, so it was not the same "standards" as it was on regular model.

Shouldnt the uncut lengths be in .5 increments on butt of shafts. Those lengths above are what is on each shaft. Not measured lengths.

[Howard_Jones]

8 minutes ago, joshfisher said:

Shouldnt the uncut lengths be in .5 increments on butt of shafts. Those lengths above are what is on each shaft. Not measured lengths.

For your own sake, read whats on page 1

[Howard_Jones]

Just adding some Mocaco Tour Prototype relevant info.

The shaft set was played by the winner of The British Open in 2011, Darren Clarke
https://www.darrenclarke.golf/




Tour Prototype (Monaco-Flighted)
- MTIS - Monaco Tour Prototype Irons - S - Taper 122 Gr.
- MTIX - Monaco Tour Prototype Irons - X - Taper 127 Gr.
- MTITX - Monaco Tour Prototype irons - TX - Taper 135 Gr.

Standard set up was 3-PW with a 36.50 PW.
Optional #2 irons and extra PW shafts existed.

EXPECTED SHAFT WGT VS IDEAL AS GRAMS PR INCH


Shaft wgt / shaft lenght = Grams pr inch
Can be used to check both new uncut shafts and pulls, since that factor remains rather constant. 

ACTUAL FLEX AND WGT OF 1 SET
A set of raw uncut shafts -  S flex 3-PW 

ACTUAL FLEX AND WGT OF 1 SET
A set of raw uncut shafts -  TX flex 3-PW 
(the chart say X, but its TX)


A Direct compare to other TT Tour Issue models. (all #6 irons)
BE AWARE OF THAT THE CLAMP IS NOW ONLY 2.5" LONG
- NOW WITH A 255 GRAM #6 HEAD.

The CPM valued is now directly compatible with the RIFLE FCM chart for - compare of #6 irons at standard play length.

Tour Consept S = 296 = FCM 5.1
DG S400 Tour Issue = 307 = FCM 6.0
Monaco Tour Prototype S = 307 = FCM 6.0
DG X100 Tour issue = 314 = FCM 6.7
Monaco Tour Prototype X = 314 = FCM 6.7
Monaco Tour Prototype TX = 324 = FCM 7.7
DG X7 (Not todays X Seven) = 326 = FCM 7.9

PS! The flex slope vary from model to model (flex progression iron to iron shaft) and NON of the fits the RIFLE FCM chart, so we only use the #6 iron for compare to get a picture of where we are (typical fitting club)

The natural butt CPM flex slope of play ready MONACO is
- S Flex - 6.43 CPM pr club
- X Flex - 6.54 CPM pr club
- TX Flex - 6.64 CPM pr club
Values is averages of 3 sets measured, all using a 5.0" clamp.

So its ONLY the #6 iron that will fitt the FCM chart, lomnger becomes softer, shorter becomes stronger than the FCM slope of only 4.3 CPM from club to club 

BUTT CPM CHART FOR MONACO MODELS ONLY

 

Edited March 27, 2023 by Howard_Jones

[ignitewvu]

3 hours ago, Howard_Jones said:

Just adding some Mocaco Tour Prototype relevant info.

The shaft set was played by the winner of The British Open in 2011, Darren Clarke
https://www.darrenclarke.golf/




Tour Prototype (Monaco-Flighted)
- MTIS - Monaco Tour Prototype Irons - S - Taper 122 Gr.
- MTIX - Monaco Tour Prototype Irons - X - Taper 127 Gr.
- MTITX - Monaco Tour Prototype irons - TX - Taper 135 Gr.

Standard set up was 3-PW with a 36.50 PW.
Optional #2 irons and extra PW shafts existed.

A set of raw uncut shafts -  S flex 3-PW 


The TX flex version, (the chart say X, but its TX)


A Direct compare to other TT Tour Issue models. (all #6 irons)
BE AWARE OF THAT THE CLAMP IS NOW ONLY 2.5" LONG
- NOW WITH A 255 GRAM #6 HEAD.

The CPM valued is now directly compatible with the RIFLE FCM chart for - compare of #6 irons at standard play length.

Tour Consept S = 296 = FCM 5.1
DG S400 Tour Issue = 307 = FCM 6.0
Monaco Tour Prototype S = 307 = FCM 6.0
DG X100 Tour issue = 314 = FCM 6.7
Monaco Tour Prototype X = 314 = FCM 6.7
Monaco Tour Prototype TX = 324 = FCM 7.7
DG X7 (Not todays X Seven) = 326 = FCM 7.9

PS! The flex slope vary from model to model (flex progression iron to iron shaft) and NON of the fits the RIFLE FCM chart, so we only use the #6 iron for compare to get a picture of where we are (typical fitting club)

The natural butt CPM flex slope of play ready MONACO is
- S Flex - 6.43 CPM pr club
- X Flex - 6.54 CPM pr club
- TX Flex - 6.64 CPM pr club
Values is averages of 3 sets measured, all using a 5.0" clamp.

So its ONLY the #6 iron that will fitt the FCM chart, lomnger becomes softer, shorter becomes stronger than the FCM slope of only 4.3 CPM from club to club 

 

Howard if I'm correct the Monaco's later became/led directly into the DGPro line correct?

 

The uncut lengths & weights are nearly identical.

 

Edited March 27, 2023 by ignitewvu

[Howard_Jones]

4 minutes ago, ignitewvu said:

 

Howard if I'm correct the Monaco's later became/led directly into the DGPro line correct?

 

The uncut lengths & weights are nearly identical.

 

YES - "mass production model" became DG-PRO
A major difference is the Semi Descending WGT in DG-PRO
(Heavy long - Lighter short irons)

[AdamMH]

5 hours ago, joshfisher said:

Yep

I'm willing to bet that some of your tips have been trimmed, making them effectively unusable in a taper tip head. It took me the better part of 2 months for them to give me a return label and they did not refund my original shipping charge. The excuse I got was that they legitimately don't have blanks of the correct length and that the trimmed tips were "fine" according to their in-house fitter...

[Howard_Jones]

1 hour ago, AdamMH said:

I'm willing to bet that some of your tips have been trimmed, making them effectively unusable in a taper tip head. It took me the better part of 2 months for them to give me a return label and they did not refund my original shipping charge. The excuse I got was that they legitimately don't have blanks of the correct length and that the trimmed tips were "fine" according to their in-house fitter...

If they lets say, tip trim a  #4 iron to make it a #5, it will still have the weight (Grams per inch), as a #4 iron. In my example a X flex #4 is 3.22 grams per inch, vs #5 thats 3.26 grams per inch (ideal)

Uncut wgt will be equal to 0,5 inch of shaft weight down if its tip trimmed to fit a shorter slot. That shaft will stick out as average 1.7 grams below the others. (125.3 grams for X flex)

Edited March 27, 2023 by Howard_Jones

[MFBach]

12 hours ago, joshfisher said:

Shouldnt the uncut lengths be in .5 increments on butt of shafts. Those lengths above are what is on each shaft. Not measured lengths.

 

I think the short answer here is, yes, the screened butt codes should still read 0.5” increments between shafts.
 

The shaft codes on the original set I have contained some unusual serial numbers, but it was related to the “proto” vs “production”/MTIX vs ZRDK ID portion of the sequence, not the shaft length identifier. It’s the same measurements I posted on the first page, but you’ll notice that even though there’s a break in the shaft ID sequence, the length ID sequence in each shaft’s SN kept true to the original lengths and measurements.  

 

If you got a set that contained one or more shafts with the same length in the screened butt code, it’s not a “full” set, and the seller used trimmed blanks from the next shaft to complete the set. 

 

 

I don’t know how that would affect playability/performance, but it’s certainly disingenuous. Howard knows far more about TT products than I ever will, so he can probably speak to (and already has - to an extent) the differences between a 5i blank tipped 0.5” vs the original 6i shaft. My primary concern would be insertion depth, but if that’s not a problem, you could be ok. It sounds like the weight change would be negligible, and it does solve the tip to first step measurement issue. Based on everything I’ve been able to gather and verify with research and my set, if the first step is in sequence, the others should be as well. 
 

The main problem I have with this entire situation is the eBay sellers knowingly selling “altered” products as original, and doing it for a premium. They’re intentionally misrepresenting their products, which is BS. 

[joshfisher]

18 minutes ago, MFBach said:

 

I think the short answer here is, yes, the screened butt codes should still read 0.5” increments between shafts.
 

The shaft codes on the original set I have contained some unusual serial numbers, but it was related to the “proto” vs “production”/MTIX vs ZRDK ID portion of the sequence, not the shaft length identifier. It’s the same measurements I posted on the first page, but you’ll notice that even though there’s a break in the shaft ID sequence, the length ID sequence in each shaft’s SN kept true to the original lengths and measurements.  

 

If you got a set that contained one or more shafts with the same length in the screened butt code, it’s not a “full” set, and the seller used trimmed blanks from the next shaft to complete the set. 

 

 

I don’t know how that would affect playability/performance, but it’s certainly disingenuous. Howard knows far more about TT products than I ever will, so he can probably speak to (and already has - to an extent) the differences between a 5i blank tipped 0.5” vs the original 6i shaft. My primary concern would be insertion depth, but if that’s not a problem, you could be ok. It sounds like the weight change would be negligible, and it does solve the tip to first step measurement issue. Based on everything I’ve been able to gather and verify with research and my set, if the first step is in sequence, the others should be as well. 
 

The main problem I have with this entire situation is the eBay sellers knowingly selling “altered” products as original, and doing it for a premium. They’re intentionally misrepresenting their products, which is BS. 

Yep, appearently I am not the only one. Told me "batch of bad shafts" 

[joshfisher]

Half the shafts are tip trimmed and butt cut

[MFBach]

1 hour ago, joshfisher said:

Half the shafts are tip trimmed and butt cut

 

Honestly, it’s pretty difficult to find a full set in decent condition anymore, much less NOS. I’d be weary of any eBay stores or non-domestic sellers as well, but I moved away from eBay purchases for those reasons a long time ago. 
 

I was luckier than I realized when I picked these up here for a great price. They were a little tarnished when I received them, but cleaned up nicely. The finish is super durable and still looks great, so maybe keep an eye out for a used set of pulls? I’m not sure you will see many on that market either, but they do pop up occasionally. 
 

Performance wise. I don’t think they offer any gigantic benefit over a standard X100 for me, but they do look and feel great. Really enjoy the contrast when paired with the original, chrome T100s as well. 
 

Edited March 28, 2023 by MFBach

[AdamMH]

1 hour ago, joshfisher said:

Half the shafts are tip trimmed and butt cut

 

This is exactly what mine were like. It's not a "bad batch of shafts" it's "none of our sets are legit sets and we won't admit it". Bad business.

[Howard_Jones]

I took a seach and found the add on the bay from GBB
Here is what the say about the sets



 

[AdamMH]

7 hours ago, Howard_Jones said:

I took a seach and found the add on the bay from GBB
Here is what the say about the sets



 

A post higher up on this page reveals that that's not how they were advertised when either of us purchased them. The descriptions have been changed on both their website and their eBay page, and the prices dropped as well. Seems like they're learning.

[Howard_Jones]

39 minutes ago, AdamMH said:

A post higher up on this page reveals that that's not how they were advertised when either of us purchased them. The descriptions have been changed on both their website and their eBay page, and the prices dropped as well. Seems like they're learning.

They should offer them as single shafts for replacement
167 / 8  = about 21 for each shaft....
they can take at least 50 as single shafts since they cant be found as "spare parts".

[LongBomber12]

So glad I found this thread. I was just about to buy 2 sets of the Monaco TX but now its not worth it.

 

Question for you...weren't the Black Gold shafts made for a similar outcome? Sure they were weight sorted and freq, but stepless and meant as like a " flighted" shaft if you will? 

 

I know Monaco weight gets lighter as you go to the longer club rather than BGs constant weight.

 

 

[Howard_Jones]

1 hour ago, LongBomber12 said:

So glad I found this thread. I was just about to buy 2 sets of the Monaco TX but now its not worth it.

 

Question for you...weren't the Black Gold shafts made for a similar outcome? Sure they were weight sorted and freq, but stepless and meant as like a " flighted" shaft if you will? 

 

I know Monaco weight gets lighter as you go to the longer club rather than BGs constant weight.

 

 

Monaco was Constant weight
Black Gold was Descending weight 

[LongBomber12]

5 hours ago, Howard_Jones said:

Monaco was Constant weight
Black Gold was Descending weight 

Ah sorry i flipped those on accident. But they essentially took different routes for the same outcome right? Werent they TT's answer to PX's flighted shaft offerings?

[MFBach]

On 3/28/2023 at 11:11 AM, Howard_Jones said:

They should offer them as single shafts for replacement
167 / 8  = about 21 for each shaft....
they can take at least 50 as single shafts since they cant be found as "spare parts".

That seems like a far better option than trying to recreate full sets when they don’t exist. 
 

I’d love to have a few extra wedge shafts. I wouldn’t be disappointed at all if I had a shaft for a gal and sand wedge.  
 

Or the illustrious 2i shaft. Not that I have anything to put it in at the moment, but I’m sure there’s DI out there that’s dying to be paired with a TPM 2i shaft. 

[tungstenplug]

I have a set in nice condition and stumbled upon this thread as I was planning a build. Here's what I have:

 

SCREENED BUTT CODE

L16718785-1 : MTIX 40-BC    
L14711479-1 : MTIX-39-BC
L14710211-2 : MTIX-385-BC
L14710211-2 : MTIX-385-BC
L14710210-2 : MTIX-38-BC
L14710208-2 : MTIX-37-BC
L99676373-1 : MTIX-365-BC

 

They were sold to me as 4-PW, but it looks like I have: 3, 5, 6, 6, 7, 9, PW ???

The distance from tip to first step is in 0.5" increments across the set as you would expect from a matching set

 

Was the verdict here that these are probably mismatched sets that were tip cut to appear to be a full set? Seems odd that it's happened to several of us on such a limited run shaft

[AdamMH]

10 hours ago, tungstenplug said:

I have a set in nice condition and stumbled upon this thread as I was planning a build. Here's what I have:

 

SCREENED BUTT CODE

L16718785-1 : MTIX 40-BC    
L14711479-1 : MTIX-39-BC
L14710211-2 : MTIX-385-BC
L14710211-2 : MTIX-385-BC
L14710210-2 : MTIX-38-BC
L14710208-2 : MTIX-37-BC
L99676373-1 : MTIX-365-BC

 

They were sold to me as 4-PW, but it looks like I have: 3, 5, 6, 6, 7, 9, PW ???

The distance from tip to first step is in 0.5" increments across the set as you would expect from a matching set

 

Was the verdict here that these are probably mismatched sets that were tip cut to appear to be a full set? Seems odd that it's happened to several of us on such a limited run shaft

 

Yes, that was the conclusion. I sent mine back for a refund.

[joshfisher]

Yep set is no good. Probably same retailer i had an issue with last yr. Amazing shafts....if they were not butchered