Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
newtogolf

FootJoy Releases M Project

Note: This thread is 2510 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!

13 posts / 9044 viewsLast Reply

Recommended Posts

FootJoy has jumped into the minimalist golf shoe market with their new M Project shoes.  It looks like they are going after True and Ecco with this line that includes both spike and spikeless options.

Share this post


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

Register for free today and you won't see this ad spot again!

I would like FootJoy to come out with a traditional looking shoe with the molded spikes. I'm not too crazy about the shoes that look like sneakers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FootJoy has the Professional spikeless which have the molded spikes in a traditional golf shoe look.  They aren't minimalist but I think they fit what you're looking for.

Originally Posted by caniac6

I would like FootJoy to come out with a traditional looking shoe with the molded spikes. I'm not too crazy about the shoes that look like sneakers.

Share this post


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

Count me in!  I run in minimalist shoes and have become a fan.  I'll be sporting these as soon as they are available for purchase .  In black... and  brown... and???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very excited to see this. I am very happy that shoe companies are responding to the desire of golfers to have light shoes with little to no heel drop.  Excellent.

Share this post


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

It's not a zero drop, only references I could find claim they reduced the typical height by 42%.

Originally Posted by tristanhilton85

Those look pretty cool... Any ideas on what the heel drop is?

Share this post


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

Originally Posted by tristanhilton85

Those look pretty cool... Any ideas on what the heel drop is?

Originally Posted by newtogolf

It's not a zero drop, only references I could find claim they reduced the typical height by 42%.

Hey guys, I know this is probably a dumb question, but I just want to confirm, as I am almost in the market for a new pair of shoes and am seriously considering the Trues.  When you say "heel drop," is that simply the distance from you heel to the ground while you are wearing them?

What is a typical shoes heel drop vs. say, the True's?  (For comparisons sake)

It sounds like Foot Joys these would fall in between those two.

Lastly, are the lower heels better for your feet, or is it simply a matter of preference?

Thanks!

Share this post


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

Originally Posted by Golfingdad

Hey guys, I know this is probably a dumb question, but I just want to confirm, as I am almost in the market for a new pair of shoes and am seriously considering the Trues.  When you say "heel drop," is that simply the distance from you heel to the ground while you are wearing them?

What is a typical shoes heel drop vs. say, the True's?  (For comparisons sake)

It sounds like Foot Joys these would fall in between those two.

Lastly, are the lower heels better for your feet, or is it simply a matter of preference?

Thanks!

FWIW I bought a pair of Trues at the end of the season for $40!!!! and they are awesome. If you can find a deal like that on an older model I recommend grabbing them and trying them out. My guess is that the FJ will cost considerably more but you'll be paying for the marketing.

Share this post


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

Not a stupid question, until I got into running I had no idea about it either.  Zero drop is basically a level platform from forefoot to heel.  Most shoes tend to build up the heel, where as minimalist shoes are similar to walking or running barefoot in that the sole and padding are equal thickness along the entire shoe.

The M Projects would be in between the standard shoes and a minimalist shoe.  I think it's preference.  The running shoe industry has gone back and forth on this.

If your feet aren't flat or very high arches and you don't severely over pronate or under pronate while running then you'd be a good candidate for minimalist shoes.

Originally Posted by Golfingdad

Hey guys, I know this is probably a dumb question, but I just want to confirm, as I am almost in the market for a new pair of shoes and am seriously considering the Trues.  When you say "heel drop," is that simply the distance from you heel to the ground while you are wearing them?

What is a typical shoes heel drop vs. say, the True's?  (For comparisons sake)

It sounds like Foot Joys these would fall in between those two.

Lastly, are the lower heels better for your feet, or is it simply a matter of preference?

Thanks!

Share this post


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

Originally Posted by newtogolf

Not a stupid question, until I got into running I had no idea about it either.  Zero drop is basically a level platform from forefoot to heel.  Most shoes tend to build up the heel, where as minimalist shoes are similar to walking or running barefoot in that the sole and padding are equal thickness along the entire shoe.

The M Projects would be in between the standard shoes and a minimalist shoe.  I think it's preference.  The running shoe industry has gone back and forth on this.

If your feet aren't flat or very high arches and you don't severely over pronate or under pronate while running then you'd be a good candidate for minimalist shoes.

Oh thanks!  I'm glad I asked, because I had it wrong. :)

I have pretty "standard issue" feet as far as I know (not too archy, not flat) so it's good to know that these types might be good for me!

Share this post


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

Tried a few pairs on at Dick's Sporting Goods the other day and I immediately fell in love with these shoes. Ordered a pair in white and black. Can't wait for them to come in. I was afraid they might make me too close to the ground but I didn't get that feel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've got 4 rounds and 3-4 range/practice green sessions on a pair of the gray mesh spikeless Project M shoes.  First couple rounds were on cold (50's* F), dewy mornings, last few have been hot (low 90's* F), dry afternoons.  I'll qualify my opinion by saying I'm a big fan of minimalist shoes in general and they're almost the only shoes I wear - I own (and love) several pairs of Vibram Five Fingers (VFF) and a pair of Merrell Barefoots.  A big part of my purchase decision for the M Projects was to find a golf shoe that gave me a similar minimalist feel.

First off, while the M Project does have very minimal heel drop and gives you the 'close to the ground' feeling, the sole doesn't feel like a barefoot shoe in the sense of VFFs - it's definitely not as thin, soft or pliable.  The toe box isn't as wide as my Merrell Barefoots (and doesn't have the accompanying "clown shoe" look either), but it does feel roomy (but not sloppy) in the toes and ball of the foot.  While traditionalists may hate the look, the shoe looks sleeker/thinner than it feels, even on my size 13 feet.  The comments I've gotten about the looks of the shoe from friends I've golfed with have all been favorable.  I'd say the most different/non-traditional thing about the looks is the stitching pattern, but I don't find it objectionable.

Sizing, at least for me, runs right in line with all my other shoes - the 13 fits like a 13 in any other shoe I wear.  Comfort-wise, they're very comfortable right out of the box with no break-in.  My other golf shoes are an old pair of FootJoy saddle shoes and a pair of Oakley Ripcords, and the M Project is more comfortable than either of them.  It's not a feather-light shoe (around 14 oz. IIRC), but it certainly doesn't feel heavy on the feet either.

I've had no issues with grip, even on the wet/dewy mornings.  They claim to be waterproof and while I haven't gone pond wading, my feet stayed completely dry while tromping through tall, wet  grass/weeds tracking down errant shots.  I experienced no slippage walking up/down hills or during golf shots.  The spiked (nubbed, actually) sole wraps partway up the side of the shoe on the inside toe edge of the right foot and the outside toe edge of the left foot, presumably mimicking weight shift during the swing.  It wraps partially up both the inside and the outside in the heel area.  The soles offer very good traction and while they don't transfer the same amount of feel as a conventional minimalist/barefoot shoe, they do offer more tactile feedback than a traditional thick-soled golf shoe.  As far as stability goes, I feel like I can use my feet more ('feeling' weight transfer, pronation/supination) than a traditional golf shoe, but they don't feel like they sacrifice any stability as a tradeoff.  Personally I'd like the sole to be even thinner/more pliable, but FootJoy's design rationale was apparently that they didn't think it would transfer over as well to golf as it does for running/training shoes (judging from what I read in one of the intro/preview articles).

The mesh upper breathes well.  My feet didn't feel unduly cold during the cold morning rounds, but I've definitely noticed a difference the last couple days in our 90*+ desert temps...the airflow is very welcome in helping keep my feet cool.

Overall - if you're looking for a comfortable minimalist-type golf shoe and you can get past the non-traditional look, the M Project is worth considering.  I haven't tried the offerings from Ecco, True Linkswear, etc., so I can't offer a direct comparison to any of them.  I'm currently debating whether I want to pick up a second pair of M Projects in white or try the True Linkswear Sensei, which looks like another good minimalist-type shoe (I'll be interested to see the user reviews after a few people have tried them out).  Just in case this comes off as a "pimp" review, I'll add the disclaimer that I don't work for, or hold any interest whatsoever, in FootJoy - just a satisfied customer.

Share this post


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

Note: This thread is 2510 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!

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  



  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • 2020 TST Partners

    PING Golf
    FlightScope Mevo
  • Posts

    • isnt the idea that the club runs from the bottom of the index finger on an angle so that it's on the top of the palm by the pinky.  (sorry if that made no sense as im not sure of the correct terms).  it looks as though in that first picture that maybe youre gripping it completely in the fingers.
    • I was fortunate to grow up at the club with "no tee times" and it worked basically like @vonbonds described at his place. Where I was in San Diego and now in Vegas, you have to make tee times. I get the frustration of having to make times but the private club has changed in the last decade or so with more ClubCorp/TPC/Troon clubs and fewer equity options. The higher end (less members) should strive and maintain a "no tee time" policy but for most private clubs it's going to be tough because they have to accommodate more than 30 rounds a day. Not really sure the point of Rymer's tweet.
    • As a resident of Southern California, I am required to have an acting resume.  Paramount on it is when I sink a putt outside of 10', I act like I'm not surprised.  Not very convincingly though, but I've had very few chances to practice it. But... 8 strokes gained putting.  Granted, it's over 54 holes.  For contrast, my most recent round, I had 8.5 strokes lost putting (in my defense, I suck at putting and didn't warm up, and my practice leading into the round was primarily long game -- I still shot close to my handicap, in part thanks to only 0.51 strokes lost approach).  Even more amazing, my round before that was 0.23 strokes gained putting, so you never know with me (and those are small sample sizes). Still, super amazing of Marc Leishman. 
    • Day 19, January 27 2020.  Putting drill at home after work.  Aluminium ruler, real balls, over carpet.  Only missed two (one left one right).  Focused on setup, including hand position. 
    • There have been other holes pointed out. The first four that spring to mind: You've not defined "approach" You're not treating like situations alike. That's at the core of "equity." You're punishing a player because of the actions of the wind? Another careless player? You're not "playing the course as you found it" and accepting good and bad breaks that occur as a result. It's not an opinion. The spirit of the game is defined, and it means: act with integrity (including following the Rules) show consideration for others take care of the course That's it. That's the "spirit of the game." There's no "spirit of the rules." When people say things like that, it's usually - as is the case with you - what people "feel" like things should be. That's not how the Rules work. If the rock is large enough that a smaller player cannot move it, should every player in the field be precluded from moving it? No. That's a ridiculous position to take, if you understand the Rules. No, it's not. Go ahead and tell me which of the three bullet points it violates. The answer? None. You'd have a better case if you just pointed out that would be against the ACTUAL rules of golf. No, it doesn't. Your alternative is lousy. The OP's question has been answered. So, move on. This is not the place for you to learn about the Rules of Golf, the concept of equity, or otherwise for a huge discussion on "rules theory" or anything else. Someone had a rules question, it's been answered, and anything additional is both off-topic and muddies the waters.
  • TST Blog Entries

  • Blog Entries

  • Today's Birthdays

    1. 99prblms
      99prblms
      (37 years old)
    2. CalcuttaLive
      CalcuttaLive
      (34 years old)
    3. Chipster
      Chipster
      (50 years old)
    4. CollinsJordan
      CollinsJordan
      (40 years old)
    5. joed1
      joed1
      (57 years old)

×
×
  • 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.

The popup will be closed in 10 seconds...