Jump to content
Check out the Spin Axis Podcast! ×
Note: This thread is 5994 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

Recommended Posts

Posted
hi all,
it's time to replace my presents irons. I'm thinking about the x-20 or the x-22, but I would like to know: which ones are the more forgiving btw the x20 and the x22?

bag:
hybdrid: XM1 24°
irons: XM1 (5-PW)
wedges: x-forged 56°
putter: Karsten B60balls: juice ix


Posted
I have never hit either but my guess would be the x22s because the technology would be newer and stuff.

15 yrs old



DriverBurner 10.5 degree stiff flexFairway Burner 15 degree proforce 75 gram regular flex Hybridrescue dual 19 degree stiff flexHybrid edge cft hybrid 24 degree stiff flex Irons progressive XC 5-PW regular HOPING FOR TOUR PREFERRED's!SW rac satin tp wedge 56 degreesLW spin milled...


Posted
I have hit both irons side by side with same configurations (albeit, only on simulator at Golf Galaxy and only about 10 shots each) and didn't really see a difference. I think the X-22 is supposed to be slightly more forgiving, but the X-20 will be more forgiving to your wallet. At this point I think the new models of almost all clubs (irons, hybrids, woods and drivers, as well as wedges and putters) are just marketing to try to get you to buy the 'latest and greatest' even though there really have not been any significant changes (increased volume in iron/wedge grooves being the biggest exception in the last few years).

Of course, for some people the newest model always plays better than the older models just because the brain starts thinking about what is different and the body manifests those insecurities in your swing. We are conditioned to always think the newest is the best so if we do not have the newest, then what we have is obviously inferior.

As I've told people before, if you can and are willing to afford the newest, then go with the newest. Personally, I usually go with something a year old (or more) for 2 reasons - first, I'm cheap; second, every bad shot with more expensive equipment makes me think I could have done just as well with something cheaper.
Driver: SQ DYMO STR8-Fit
4 Wood: SQ DYMO
2H (17*), 4H (23*) & 5H (26*): Fli-Hi CLK
Irons (5-6): MX-900; (7-PW): MP-60
Wedges (51/6*): MP-T Chrome; (56/13): MP-R ChromePutter: White Hot XG 2-Ball CSPreferred Ball: e5+/e7+/B330-RXGPS Unit: NEOPush Cart: 2.0

Posted
I have hit both irons side by side with same configurations (albeit, only on simulator at Golf Galaxy and only about 10 shots each) and didn't really see a difference. I think the X-22 is supposed to be slightly more forgiving, but the X-20 will be more forgiving to your wallet. At this point I think the new models of almost all clubs (irons, hybrids, woods and drivers, as well as wedges and putters) are just marketing to try to get you to buy the 'latest and greatest' even though there really have not been any significant changes (increased volume in iron/wedge grooves being the biggest exception in the last few years).

I couldn't have said it any better,good advertising,i had a set of callaway x16 pro series and switched to my tp r7's,i don't notice any difference at all,waste of money if you ask me.

aeroburner tp 10.5 stiff
superfast tp 2.0 3 wood stiff
Halo 25 and taylormade tp 19 degree hybrids
miura cb 202 and wedge
tp 52* wedge, tp 56* taylormade spider mallet putter


Posted

At least if you buy what is considered to be the most forgiving club...aka X22's...at least you can't blame it on the club!! Process of elimination. The Callaways sure are a pretty club and I hear that they hit beautifully. I tried a 6 iron at GolfSmith..and as little as you can actually feel the shot with a pair of foot flops on...and with a bunch of strangers staring at you...the iron felt nice, solid and looked good at address. At least if I'm satisfied with my clubs...I've got one obstacle out of my way. I say go for it. Don't get cheap now that you have made a commitment to buy a set of irons!!

Tools of my game:
Burner 09' Driver 10.5 Reg flex
5-pw G10's/ plus Taylormade R7 4 iron
Burner 08' 4 Hybrid
A70S 3 Hybrid Burner 09' 3 wood "Zing" SW 56 degree Fastback Laser range finder / plus Skycaddie SG5...also a great ball retriever!!


  • 2 months later...
Posted
Before I bought the x-20's, I hit the x-20 6 iron and x-22 6 iron side by side and i couldn't tell the difference. You can get a brand new 4-PW set of x-22's for $500 on ebay right now or you can do what i did and get a slightly used 4-PW set of x-20 on ebay for $320

Posted
Actually I think the x20's are more forgiving, they are slightly more of a GI, then a true players iron. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

Posted
I hit the x22 tour and hate them. It felt like i pured them every time. Then i come out today w/ my current clubs and have not EVER hit bigger toe balls(it felt like i was reverse shanking LOL) it was terrible. If you are a feel player stay away. That said they were forgiving just WAY TOO much. Good luck!!!

In My Hank Haney IJGA Bag
Driver: FT Tour 9.5 w/ Aldila Voodoo Stiff
3 Wood: i15 15.5 w/ avixcore red stiff
Hybrids: Rescue 09 19, 22 w/ fujikara fit on stiff
Irons: 4 & 5 MP-52, 6-PW MP-58 w/ KBS Tour Stiff Wedges: MP T-10 52*, 58* w/ KBS Tour StiifPutter: Fastback 1 34 inBall: : Pro...


Posted
Before I bought the x-20's, I hit the x-20 6 iron and x-22 6 iron side by side and i couldn't tell the difference. You can get a brand new 4-PW set of x-22's for $500 on ebay right now or you can do what i did and get a slightly used 4-PW set of x-20 on ebay for $320

I just purchased a new set (3-PW) of the 22's for $490 on eBay. I can't wait till they get here!


Posted
I hit the x22 tour and hate them.

There is a big difference between the X22's & the X22

Tours . I think the OP was looking for forgiveness, he won't find it in a tour iron.

Posted
There is a big difference between the X22's & the X22

Ya, I missed that aswell, I was referring to the x-20 tour vs. the x-22 tour.

To the OP, with regards to the non-tour irons, I believe the x-22 are more forgiving.

  • 5 months later...
Posted
I have the x-20 they are very forgiving I played around with some demo x 22 and I foundeh x 20 more forgiving. Haveing said that I am selling my x-20's as I been htting the ball well enough to move up to more of a players club. PM me if any one wants them.
Driver R7 Superquad NV 55 shaft or Bridgestone J33 460 NV 75 shaft
3 and 5 Wood X
Hybrid original Fli Hi 21* or FT 22*
Irons AP2
Wedges Vokey 52* - 8 , 56* 14, 60*-7Putter California CoranodoBall TP RedGPS NeoRange Finder- Bushnell Tour V2 When Chuck Norris puts spin on the ball, the ball does not...

Posted
I hit the X-20s and the X-22s at Golf Galaxy several times (in addition to many, many other models) before I made a decision. I felt that I hit the X-22s better, so that is what I went with.

I got a 4-PW set, brand new on EBAY for $430.

In my X-Series Bag:

Driver G10 10.5*
Woods V-Steel 3W, 5W
Hybrids Pinemeadow ZR1 19* 3HIrons MX-19 4-GWWedge MP-R Black Nickel 54/10Putter Rossa Sebring AGSI+


Posted
I hit the x22 tour and hate them. It felt like i pured them every time. Then i come out today w/ my current clubs and have not EVER hit bigger toe balls(it felt like i was reverse shanking LOL) it was terrible. If you are a feel player stay away. That said they were forgiving just WAY TOO much. Good luck!!!

Maybe that's why I felt like I was flushing every single shot in the hitting bay. It was even giving out an outrageous number of 200 yard carry for my 6-iron... That's why I was looking into the X-22 Tours.

« Keith »


  • 4 weeks later...
Posted
I hit the X20, X22, X20 Tours and X22 Tours this past winter (indoors, on a computer monitor).

X20, X22: only real difference was about 3 yards in distance (for X22). Feel, setup about the same.

X20 Tour and X22 Tour both felt about the same. For both the Tour versions, I could tell if I had hit an OK shot, or a really good shot, on impact.

Ralph Maltby rated both the above Tour clubs. RM gave the X20-T a higher MPI (Maltby Playability Index) rating of Super Game Improvement, over Game Improvement for the X22-T. That said, Golf Digest gave the X22 Tours a higher rating for workability than the X20 Tours.

As the Digest article said: "The X-20 Tour was a player's club for wannabes. This one (X 22 Tour) is the real deal."

To see entire writeup:
http://www.golfdigest.com/equipment/...tlist_irons_pi

I ended up buying a used set of X20s (3-PW) this spring. This was a combo of tight money, and the fact my swing isn't stable enough for Tour irons at this time. The X20s are a little "sticky" out of the rough, so I will probably shift to an X22 Tour next season.

As for feedback, X20s let you know if you hit a bad shot, but you need to check ball flight and grass on clubface to see if you hit an OK or a really good shot. As I said above, with X20 Tours and X22 Tours I know at impact what quality of shot I hit.

Focus, connect and follow through!

  • Completed KBS Education Seminar (online, 2015)
  • GolfWorks Clubmaking AcademyFitting, Assembly & Repair School (2012)

Driver:  :touredge: EXS 10.5°, weights neutral   ||  FWs:  :callaway: Rogue 4W + 7W
Hybrid:  :callaway: Big Bertha OS 4H at 22°  ||  Irons:  :callaway: Mavrik MAX 5i-PW
Wedges:  :callaway: MD3: 48°, 54°... MD4: 58° ||  Putter:image.png.b6c3447dddf0df25e482bf21abf775ae.pngInertial NM SL-583F, 34"  
Ball:  image.png.f0ca9194546a61407ba38502672e5ecf.png QStar Tour - Divide  ||  Bag: :sunmountain: Three 5 stand bag

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
Golfway,

I'll have to hit some Mizuno irons sometime. I see them more and more among male college players in our area.

Focus, connect and follow through!

  • Completed KBS Education Seminar (online, 2015)
  • GolfWorks Clubmaking AcademyFitting, Assembly & Repair School (2012)

Driver:  :touredge: EXS 10.5°, weights neutral   ||  FWs:  :callaway: Rogue 4W + 7W
Hybrid:  :callaway: Big Bertha OS 4H at 22°  ||  Irons:  :callaway: Mavrik MAX 5i-PW
Wedges:  :callaway: MD3: 48°, 54°... MD4: 58° ||  Putter:image.png.b6c3447dddf0df25e482bf21abf775ae.pngInertial NM SL-583F, 34"  
Ball:  image.png.f0ca9194546a61407ba38502672e5ecf.png QStar Tour - Divide  ||  Bag: :sunmountain: Three 5 stand bag

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Note: This thread is 5994 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

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


  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • TST Partners

    PlayBetter
    Golfer's Journal
    ShotScope
    The Stack System
    FitForGolf
    FlightScope Mevo
    Direct: Mevo, Mevo+, and Pro Package.

    Coupon Codes (save 10-20%): "IACAS" for Mevo/Stack/FitForGolf, "IACASPLUS" for Mevo+/Pro Package, and "THESANDTRAP" for ShotScope. 15% off TourStriker (no code).
  • Posts

    • Nah, man. People have been testing clubs like this for decades at this point. Even 35 years. @M2R, are you AskGolfNut? If you're not, you seem to have fully bought into the cult or something. So many links to so many videos… Here's an issue, too: - A drop of 0.06 is a drop with a 90 MPH 7I having a ball speed of 117 and dropping it to 111.6, which is going to be nearly 15 yards, which is far more than what a "3% distance loss" indicates (and is even more than a 4.6% distance loss). - You're okay using a percentage with small numbers and saying "they're close" and "1.3 to 1.24 is only 4.6%," but then you excuse the massive 53% difference that going from 3% to 4.6% represents. That's a hell of an error! - That guy in the Elite video is swinging his 7I at 70 MPH. C'mon. My 5' tall daughter swings hers faster than that.
    • Yea but that is sort of my quandary, I sometimes see posts where people causally say this club is more forgiving, a little more forgiving, less forgiving, ad nauseum. But what the heck are they really quantifying? The proclamation of something as fact is not authoritative, even less so as I don't know what the basis for that statement is. For my entire golfing experience, I thought of forgiveness as how much distance front to back is lost hitting the face in non-optimal locations. Anything right or left is on me and delivery issues. But I also have to clarify that my experience is only with irons, I never got to the point of having any confidence or consistency with anything longer. I feel that is rather the point, as much as possible, to quantify the losses by trying to eliminate all the variables except the one you want to investigate. Or, I feel like we agree. Compared to the variables introduced by a golfer's delivery and the variables introduced by lie conditions, the losses from missing the optimal strike location might be so small as to almost be noise over a larger area than a pea.  In which case it seems that your objection is that the 0-3% area is being depicted as too large. Which I will address below. For statements that is absurd and true 100% sweet spot is tiny for all clubs. You will need to provide some objective data to back that up and also define what true 100% sweet spot is. If you mean the area where there are 0 losses, then yes. While true, I do not feel like a not practical or useful definition for what I would like to know. For strikes on irons away from the optimal location "in measurable and quantifiable results how many yards, or feet, does that translate into?"   In my opinion it ok to be dubious but I feel like we need people attempting this sort of data driven investigation. Even if they are wrong in some things at least they are moving the discussion forward. And he has been changing the maps and the way data is interpreted along the way. So, he admits to some of the ideas he started with as being wrong. It is not like we all have not been in that situation 😄 And in any case to proceed forward I feel will require supporting or refuting data. To which as I stated above, I do not have any experience in drivers so I cannot comment on that. But I would like to comment on irons as far as these heat maps. In a video by Elite Performance Golf Studios - The TRUTH About Forgiveness! Game Improvement vs Blade vs Players Distance SLOW SWING SPEED! and going back to ~12:50 will show the reference data for the Pro 241. I can use that to check AskGolfNut's heat map for the Pro 241: a 16mm heel, 5mm low produced a loss of efficiency from 1.3 down to 1.24 or ~4.6%. Looking at AskGolfNut's heatmap it predicts a loss of 3%. Is that good or bad? I do not know but given the possible variations I am going to say it is ok. That location is very close to where the head map goes to 4%, these are very small numbers, and rounding could be playing some part. But for sure I am going to say it is not absurd. Looking at one data point is absurd, but I am not going to spend time on more because IME people who are interested will do their own research and those not interested cannot be persuaded by any amount of data. However, the overall conclusion that I got from that video was that between the three clubs there is a difference in distance forgiveness, but it is not very much. Without some robot testing or something similar the human element in the testing makes it difficult to say is it 1 yard, or 2, or 3?  
    • Wordle 1,668 3/6 🟨🟨🟩⬜⬜ ⬜🟨⬜⬜🟨 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
    • Wordle 1,668 3/6 🟨🟩🟨🟨⬜ 🟩🟩🟩🟩⬜ 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩 Should have got it in two, but I have music on my brain.
    • Wordle 1,668 2/6* 🟨🟨🟩⬛⬛ 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Welcome to TST! Signing up is free, and you'll see fewer ads and can talk with fellow golf enthusiasts! By using TST, you agree to our Terms of Use, our Privacy Policy, and our Guidelines.