Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
newtogolf

FootJoy Releases M Project

13 posts in this topic

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.

0

Share this post


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

Sign up (or log in) today! It's free (and you won't see this ad anymore)!

Sign up (or log in) today! It's free (and you won't see this ad anymore)!

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.

0

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.

0

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???

0

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.

0

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?

0

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!

0

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.

0

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!

0

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!

0

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.

0

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.

2

Share this post


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

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
  • 2017 TST Partners

    PING Golf
    Leupold Golf
    Snell Golf
    Talamore Golf Resort
    Lowest Score Wins
  • Posts

    • Right elbow in, swing is on plane, ball going straight.  That's what I'm looking for at this stage.  Next lesson is Thursday.  
    • Do not want to give his name out, but one of my clients is a former PGA tour player.  Easily the best player I have ever played with.  He was what you would call a journeyman on tour, but did win several millions of dollars and is not hurting these days.  The putter gave him issues or he would have done much better on tour because ball striking is definitely not an issue. Its interesting to watch someone at that level play the game.  Club selection, course management, shot making abilities, etc.  Its really cool to watch.    Makes me realize how much I do not know about the game, but I try and learn as much as I can when I have the chance to play with him.  
    • What's amazing is that this philosophy hasn't changed in more than 100 years. There are so many quick fix posts in every golf blog, it's amazing that the golf swing can seem so simple and yet is really difficult to do. Most people think how hard can it be to put a ball into a hole? The answer is "it's definitely not easy"  
    • a new number one from this event.  I think DJ could really stay at the top if he keeps his putter hot.
    • I think his distinction between swinging and hitting is quite blurry now. Dr Mann started with a definite no-go with regards mixing hitting and swinging but then he has slowly introduced options. Plus he has revised some of his original comments. example: 1. You must not cock your right wrist  Then  It is quite permissible to allow a natural cocking of  your right wrist,  especially if the arms are moving up a steeper plane than the shoulder plane. 2. You must keep your flying wedges intact. Then It is quite acceptable to palmer flex (bow)  your left wrist for stability purposes ( which breaks that intact flying wedge because it moves the clubshaft  to a shallower plane than if one hadn't palmer flexed) 3. The left arm is inert and is blasted away from the chest by the active pivot action Then I believe that the lead shoulder girdle muscles can be used to help release PA4 4. You must not use any hittting action with the right arm  Then The right arm can be used to synergistically assist the release of PA4  , PA2 and PA3  as long as it doesn't become a dominant factor which would be a 'Hitting' motion. So this means there can be some hit in the swinging motion but within limits (now that is quite a blurry definition). Its like experiment with your swing and find the right amount of swing and hit that doesn't cause timing problems with your swing ( so how does one figure this one out for each and every swing one does on the golf course- each swing will be slightly different depending on your intent?). 5. He talks about a pitch elbow position (in front of the right hip) for swinging while punch elbow  (more to the right side) for hitting but there is no mention about how this can be achieved with people who have different upper vs lower arm measurements and differing elbow movements. For example, I cannot pitch my elbow over my right hip by letting it lead in front of the hands , without having to do a major secondary tilt (head over my right foot). 6. Weight Shift - Apparently your COG position is retained up to impact but there are varying COP's depending on the individual golfer (ie. Bubba and others have less COP on their lead leg - rear foot golfers , while many others have significantly more COP on their front foot - front foot golfers). The theory behind this is using data from pressure plates that measure vertical forces but his explanation using ratios of body mass left or right of the COG line (from a face-one view) doesn't make sense. If your COG is in a constant position , then shouldn't there be equal body mass  ratios around the central vertical axis through that COG position?  When people talk about PRESSURE ,, then isn't that 'FORCE PER UNIT AREA' ? So a high COP doesn't necessarily mean there is more 'mass weight' over that area . It could actually mean the same 'mass weight' applied over a smaller area (ie. maybe on a smaller area of foot contacting the ground).  7. There is no mention of swing anchor positions and their relevant importance during address/setup.  For example, when I try and hit balls using the front 'one leg drill'  method - I cannot follow-through and fall backwards to keep balance. When I try and hit balls using the rear 'one leg drill'  method I am perfectly in balance. With feet together drill I can also just about keep in balance but I do feel more pressure on my rear leg into impact. This sort of proves that I my COG favours pivoting more towards my rear hip and I should set up at address to meet my biomechanical pattern. None of this has been mentioned my Dr Mann yet and I suspect he may have to revise all his papers and state a caveat saying that 'some' of his suggested swing instructions only applies to golfer that have specific biomechanical patterns. That if their elbows, 'hip joints' and wrist hinge movements are like 'this' or 'that' , then 'this' or 'that' specific instruction applies. That should take another 10 years to fully document and analyse by which time my knees, back and hips will be shot to pieces.
  • TST Blog Entries

  • Blog Entries

  • Today's Birthdays

    1. Danny The Pin Seeker
      Danny The Pin Seeker
      (19 years old)
    2. Rick_D
      Rick_D
      (67 years old)
    3. ScottHoganGolf
      ScottHoganGolf
      (31 years old)
  • Get Great Gear with Amazon