Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Aaronsrix17

Mizuno Vs Srixon

21 posts in this topic

Hey everyone just wondering what everyone thought what a better company. Since they are both Japanese companies with forged irons could you give your input on which is better in terms irons, woods,, etc..
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Want to get rid of this advertisement? Sign up (or log in) today! It's free!

I would give Mizuno the nod on just about everything over Srixon as far as clubs go.

But Srixon does make great balls.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would give Mizuno the nod on just about everything over Srixon as far as clubs go.

Why would you say that? I assume you have hit both brands and have formulated your own opinion based on your own criteria, correct? Seems like Mizuno would be the popular choice because very few people play Srixon equipment. The I701's are some of the sweetest irons I have ever hit (and I have pretty much hit them all). Too bad the masses can't get past the stigma that is attached to many of the "off" brands because there is some wonderful equipment out there that can be had for very little cost.

I can only compare the I701 Tour irons though as I have not hit any other Srixon irons. I played a round with our pro's 701's with X100 shafts. Like I said, they are fantastic clubs that perform well in every category. As well as Mizuno's? Yes, even better for me. The new Z-TX's look awesome, can't wait to get my hands on them. Can't speak on either companies woods.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yes and i think you dont lose distance with srixons forged irons like you do with mizunos
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why would you say that? I assume you have hit both brands and have formulated your own opinion based on your own criteria, correct? Seems like Mizuno would be the popular choice because very few people play Srixon equipment. The I701's are some of the sweetest irons I have ever hit (and I have pretty much hit them all). Too bad the masses can't get past the stigma that is attached to many of the "off" brands because there is some wonderful equipment out there that can be had for very little cost.

Correct. I tried both brands at a local Foxy Golf store about a week ago since I'm looking for a new set of irons for next season.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love both brands. Actually I don't think I will ever be playing with any irons in the future except for my beloved 3 brands: Mizuno, Srixon and Bridgestone. Yes, they two things in common: Japan and forged.

Not to diss any other brands, but I just love these guys.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Correct. I tried both brands at a local Foxy Golf store about a week ago since I'm looking for a new set of irons for next season.

You said:

I would give Mizuno the nod on just about everything over Srixon as far as clubs go.

Which would leave me to believe that you have experience with the two companies woods as well as with their irons. So what about the woods?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You said:Which would leave me to believe that you have experience with the two companies woods as well as with their irons. So what about the woods?

I only tested the Mizuno woods...

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yes and i think you dont lose distance with srixons forged irons like you do with mizunos

It's not so much that you're losing distance with Mizuno, so much as that Srixon has stronger lofts in comparable irons.

To answer the original question, I wasn't able to compare them - I didn't even see a Srixon iron I could swing (literally; no demo days, no clubs in stock) until after I had purchased my current set.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Srixon is one of the better golf companies - (Yes, up there with TM, Titleist, Cleveland.....) You just dont hear about them alot. there balls and clubs are very good.

Srixon >slightly> Mizuno
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry to resurrect an old thread, but wanted to weigh in on Srixon irons. I was able to pick up a used set of Srixon i-302 irons with Rifle FCM 5.0 the other day for $90, on a whim. Frankly, after a few days on the range with them, I am stunned at how good they are. Most of the pub I could find on them was generally positive, but it's a whole different thing to actually hit them. To me, they are very much in line, if not better, than the Mizuno irons I've hit like the MP-62 (which I dearly love). Very soft feel, with that trademark forged "swoosh" sound when hit flush. I almost feel guilty for getting them so cheap now.

I was playing Nicklaus N-1 "The Bear" irons, and these seem to have a touch less distance. I can also see the cavity in the 3-iron at address but I'll get over it. These clubs are marvelous.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To me the Mizzies don't have a lot of feel.

wow. to each his own i guess. most of the people who have hit mizunos here would argue they have the most feel .

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Srixon is one of the better golf companies - (Yes, up there with TM, Titleist, Cleveland.....) You just dont hear about them alot. there balls and clubs are very good.

Give is a break!!

You don't hear about them very much? Robert Allenby Tim Clark Jim Furyk for starters. Hardly minor players, especially this year.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just got a hold of Mizuno's mx-25...best set of irons I have hit with...
i find i dont hafta over swing and i get enough distance...
If you guys say srixon is as good or better, maybe i need to try them out hehe
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just got a hold of Mizuno's mx-25...best set of irons I have hit with...

Good luck finding them in Edmonton. Srixon doesn't have as many iron lines (choices) in general, and they're not overly popular in Alberta . . . yet.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd say of the two brands, Srixon is a touch ahead.

Srixon takes the woods category. Srixon's Cleveland brand makes very good woods, notably the HiBore and Launcher. Mizuno's woods (including their titanium fairways) are more expensive, are not nearly as well regarded.

Neither brand is known for their hybrids, but a slight edge goes to Mizuno for its Fli-Hi hybrid irons, which are very nice.

Irons is a wash. Both brands make fantastic forged irons. Mizuno has a slight edge in variety, but both brands make forged game improvement, players, and blade type irons, although Srixon's blades are very rare.

Wedges goes to Srixon, their Cleveland brand's 588 and CG-12 are among the most popular wedges ever made. Mizuno's wedges are good, but not as highly regarded as Cleveland's wedges.

Putters are more or less evenly split, with Srixon's Cleveland and Never Compromise line both producing great putters, and Mizuno's Bettinardi producing equally fine putters.

Balls goes to Srixon, as Mizuno doesn't make them. Even considering that, Srixon balls are second to none.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0



  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • 2016 TST Partners

    GAME Golf
    PING Golf
    Lowest Score Wins
  • Posts

    • My Swing (b101)
      It's just feeling a little bit more natural than it used to and I'm not stepping on the course with 5 or more swing thoughts, which is nice! I don't think it'll take much work getting back to making progress and I'm definitely seeing that some of the changes I've made have stuck - ball flight is really high compared to what I'm used to and the ball turns right to left about 50% of the time and stays straight for 30%. It's the 20% of rubbish, either duck hooks or generally wayward tee shots that I want to clear up, which is going to be this morning's target on the range. I didn't end up hitting the range yesterday - a mate texted to ask to play a round, so I went for that. What was obvious is that the little 9 hole course, where I don't need anything above a 4 iron, has been great for my iron play, but that the 3 wood, driver and course management need a bit of a refresher course. Shot an 86 with a ridiculous 7 penalty strokes (4 on one tough par 3), which says it all really as I don't normally take any! It is a tight track though and there is OB all over the place, but no excuse for the few 'head off' moments which prevented me scoring well. It was match play as well so I guess that's part of it... In short summary: Driving/3 wood - pretty poor and I'm just not comfortable over the ball with those clubs. On a longer course, I'd have struggled. Long irons - good, bar that atrocity of a par 3, where I think I'll just aim way left next time and take the safe miss. Both of those were actually really nice strikes, but went dead straight rather than drawing like I had expected. Still, my fault entirely for aiming towards the trouble  Mid-short irons - mostly pretty good actually. Put 6/14 approaches from outside 100 yards to (3/4 from within 100) inside 15 yards and bar two long bunker shots, the rest were manageable. Putting - really pleased again; I probably only made one that I wouldn't have expected (birdie on 13), but there's a lot of break on the greens and I thought it was pretty decent for a first time out in a while. http://www.gamegolf.com/player/benpage101/round/930037 Overall, pretty close to where I'd want it to be, but a better decision on 6, some better drives and a bit more luck on odd holes (like 16) and it'd have been a great round. I'd take that for the first time in ages. Should be able to post some video this afternoon.
    • What would a PGA Tour player shoot at your home course?
      And also, "speculation" is what the thread is all about! Sure, I'm placing the Tour guys on a pedestal but they DESERVE it. Yes "Golf is Hard", but those guys are GOOD. Low 60s are very much a possibility in any tournament they tee it up in, let alone on a public course that was designed with the average golfer in mind. Let's give credit where credit is due! If all the players from 75-125 on the money list decided to go out and play a new course (of "moderate difficulty" for amateurs) every week for the next 2 months, course records would be getting smashed all over the place. They might shoot the odd 70 or 72, but you darn well bet there would be a lot of 63's and 64's in there too. Regardless of poor course conditions, lack of course knowledge or anything like that, they are gonna make birdies in droves and they are going to go low!
    • The this math does not compute thread
      I was at a garage sale with my son who was like 10 years old at the time. The seller had a box full of cheap toys with a handwritten sign on the box that read "$1 each, or 2 for $3".  I nudged my son and pointed to the sign with my eyes (because the seller was standing right there). He glanced down at the sign and immediately grinned and shook his head in disbelief. And don't get me going on auctions. People will pay more for used crap than they know they would if purchased brand new, simply because they get caught up in a bidding war. The best part is listening to them try and justify it afterwards.
    • What would a PGA Tour player shoot at your home course?
      The odds of him shooting -32 would be slim, but not impossible. Those guys absolutely demolish a handful of the easier courses (ie. Kapalua, the old rotation for the Las Vegas Invitational, the old rotation for the Bob Hope, TPC Scottsdale before they toughened it up,  North Course at Torrey, etc.) and scores of ~ -30 haven't been terribly uncommon at some events. But I think the PGA Tour and the Web.Com Tour seem to be trying to get away from insanely low numbers and are moving tournaments away from some of the old venues that can't keep up with how far  they hit the ball now, and renovating other courses to beef them up. I recall the Tour players voted to eliminate the TPC Stadium course at PGA West in the late 80's from tournanent play because they thought it was "too hard" and this year when they used it again it seemed to be quite playable for them. In fact, they seemed to have no issues making their way around the course at all. That speaks to the quality and depth of the fields nowadays.  That being said - no, I wouldn't expect a -32 total. But it definitely wouldn't shock me either.  On a side note, I would be really interested to see this type of experiment revisited. This thread has fuelled some great speculation and debate, so thank you guys for playing along!
  • TST Blog Entries

  • Images

  • Today's Birthdays

  • Blog Entries