Support our Mission. We independently test each product we recommend. When you buy through our links, we may earn a commission.
After a decade of putter testing, we have a new, more technologically advanced approach all thanks to PuttView. With their help, we can provide the best independent putter testing and results to golfers everywhere.
This is the most extensive, unbiased putter review anywhere based on cold hard data. No BS. No marketing. Pure performance-based testing and results.
For 2025, we tested 36 mallet putters. Big names such as Odyssey, Scotty Cameron, PING and TaylorMade came to play. But smaller, less popular brands say “hold my beer” and play spoiler. You’ll see surprises at the top of the leaderboard.
Times are changing in the putter space. The ubiquitous big names still own the major market share but the little guys are making their presence felt. Brands you may not have heard of are poised to break through. There is a piece of the pie primed for the taking and it is happening.
More than 180 testing hours and 23,040 putts later, we have our first official Most Wanted Mallet Putter results powered by PuttView.
These are the best mallet putters of 2025.
Ultimately, the best mallet putters are the ones with the best PuttView Handicap. Some crush the field at a specific distance, while others offer a more balanced performance from short, medium and long range putts. Regardless of how they get to the podium, each offers exceptional performance benefits versus the field.
These are the best mallet putters overall.
PuttView HCP Overall
PuttView HCP Short
PuttView HCP Medium
PuttView HCP Long
Price
Performance should be your number one reason to play a specific golf club. For our 2025 Most Wanted Mallet test, Wilson Infinite Buckingham is one of, if not the mallet putter you should consider going forward. It excels on medium and short range putts. It is the second best mallet for mid range putts. This is the distance where we the most separation in performance and excelling at this range holds tremendous value.
Putters are the one golf club where subjectivity plays a huge role in a golfer's buying habits. If there is one knock against Wilson Infinite Buckingham, it is its subjective appeal. Even in the past, it has never been a highly rated putter from our testers' perspective.
Previous generations of Wilson’s Infinite Buckingham have performed well in our putter tests. Once again, Infinite Buckingham shines in testing. It claims the title of 2025 Most Wanted Mallet Putter. Quite an accomplishment in our first mallet result utilizing PuttView. Medium and short putts are Buckingham’s specialty relative to the field. Its a damn good putter at an excellent price point.tes
“Performs well. Made putts. Horrible sound.”
“The ball went in the hole. Not the most subjectively appealing putter, but it performs.”
“Missed a few putts that I shouldn’t have, but felt extremely comfortable with the putter. It produces a consistent roll.”
“Rolls well. Better Wilson putter than others I’ve tested.”
“It performed exceptionally well and I’d buy it in a pinch. But I hate the subjective.”
Throw the subjective opinion out the window. Wilson Infinite Buckingham performs, especially at the range that matters most – medium range putts. Don’t take our word for it. Most testers acknowledged the lack of subjective appeal, but praise it for performance.
PuttView HCP Overall
PuttView HCP Short
PuttView HCP Medium
PuttView HCP Long
Price
If our blade putter test wasn't example enough, the mallet test results will have more people believing that Runner Golf might be on to something. There is a level of consistency with the Runner Mallet. It performs. Short to medium putts are where it excels. Even for long putts, it finishes in an above average position. This mallet is worth checking out.
After our first putter test of the year, calling Runner Golf a no name brand might be a stretch. However, they're still new to the masses and that alone may steer you away from trying their putters. If you go based on performance alone, they're definitely making a name for themself.
Well, this is quite the introduction to Most Wanted Testing. Runner Mallet is the second best mallet putter overall and narrowly finishes behind the first place, Wilson Infinite Buckingham. Despite an identical PuttView Handicap overall, Runner Mallet falls just short in the medium putt range. But, don’t let this slight hiccup fool you, it is one of the best mallet putters on the market. It offers great performance in all three phases of our putter testing.
“Feel is unbelievably good. Might be the best feeling putter I’ve ever used.”
“Putts better than it looks.”
“I was deadly accurate with good speed control. Aesthetically, it isn’t great, but it is simple. Made 50% of the putts and was close to making several others.”
“Worked well for me, easy to line up, good roll, but ugly.”
We have a new brand making a name for itself in Most Wanted Testing. With a runner up finish in both blade and mallet putter testing, Runner Mallet is creating waves of opportunity. Across the board, it is a consistent performer relative to the field. If you go through a fitting for this putter, you can dial it in even more.
PuttView HCP Overall
PuttView HCP Short
PuttView HCP Medium
PuttView HCP Long
Price
Excelling on mid to long range will completely revamp and benefit your performance on the green. PING Scottsdale Prime Tyne 4 shines in both of these putting categories. It is also one of the highest rated putters in terms of sound, feel, and looks. It's been a while since PING putters have been this consistent in our testing, but the Scottsdale lineup is showing up.
PING Scottsdale Prime Tyne 4 is a heel shafted putter, which favors a strong arc according to PING. They also offer a variation in a center shafted option. A heel shafted putter may not fit your putting stroke or your eye. So, if you're a buyer who doesn't prioritize these options, you will want to look elsewhere.
PING Scottsdale Prime Tyne 4 is the third best mallet putter for 2025. This is due to its performance on medium putts. It ranks third for this scoring category. Furthermore, it has the sixth best PuttView Handicap on long putts. If you are looking for an increase in performance on medium to long putts, PING Scottsdale Prime Tyne 4 is an excellent option.
“Phenomenal, made a ton of putts.”
“Shaping and profile size are very appealing. Very pleased with this putter.”
“Attractive profile, phenomenal feel.”
“Great setup at address and rolls the ball well. It is a good putter.”
PING Scottsdale Prime Tyne 4 is one of the best mallet putters in this test. It narrowly misses out on second or first place. With above average placement in all three scoring categories, it is a mallet putter you can have confidence in.
The mallet putters that make the most short putts are going to be top performers. At a short distance, you don’t want to be the putter that limits golfers’ ability to make putts. Missing short putts has a greater impact on PuttView Handicap relative to other distances.
These are the best mallet putters for short putts.
PuttView HCP Short
PuttView HCP Medium
PuttView HCP Long
PuttView HCP Overall
Price
Whether you are putting for birdie, par, bogey or an ugly "other", making a putt from 4-feet or closer is critical for putting performance. Missing these putts can implode your round of golf immediately. Toura Proto P5 makes these putts less frightening.
Toura Proto P5 has an obvious weakness – medium putting. It ranks toward the bottom for the most important putting range in testing. Remember this is relative to the field, however, it is still a poor showing given how well it performs on shorter putts.
Toura Proto P5 is the best mallet putter for short putts. It finishes a full point better than the second place mallet for short putts. If you want consistency on short putts, Toura Proto P5 might be the crown jewel. On short putts, making putts is extremely important. Missing putts will be detrimental to an overall score. This is true for our testing parameters and on the golf course.
“I like it. Rolls the ball well.”
“Really clean, good looking putter.”
“Good feel/roll. Solid across the board.”
“Surprised by this putter, insert is ugly but great roll.”
If you struggle on shorter putts, Toura Proto P5 is an incredible option. Toura offers alternative face inserts, which can impact weighting and overall feel. Its performance on mid to long putts is fairly poor. Our testing pool noted that distance control was difficult with the putter. If you are considering it, be sure to view the face insert options that may help with better distance control.
PuttView HCP Short
PuttView HCP Medium
PuttView HCP Long
PuttView HCP Overall
Price
Bettinardi INOVAI 6.0 is the second best mallet putter on short putts. This is an accomplishment alone, but overall, INOVAI 6.0 produces a balanced PuttView Handicap result. It ranks fifth overall because of its all around performance.
Relative to the field, Bettinardi INOVAI 6.0 ranks towards the bottom for PuttView Handicap on long putts. Ranking wise, it is a poor performance, especially since the best mallet on longer putts was 5.2 points better.
It is a new day and age for our Most Wanted Putter testing. Bettinardi INOVAI 6.0 is our Most Wanted Mallet of 2024. It withstands the trial of the integration of PuttView and ranks second overall in testing on short putts. Overall, it places in a tie for fifth and offers tremendous balance across all three scoring ranges. It goes to show that it is still one of the best mallet putters on the market.
“Love the sound and feel, rolls the ball well, but the looks really turn me off.”
“Great look. Like it.”
“Solid, performs well.”
“Little better looking than the Queen B. I was able to start the ball on line with good speed.”
Bettinardi INOVAI 6.0 straight up performs. Aesthetically, it isn’t the most pleasing, but it places fifth overall in mallet testing. It is a former Most Wanted winner and produces well balanced results for short, medium and long putt performance. Do not overlook this mallet putter.
We can’t stress this enough – making putts at medium range is game-changing. In the past, we had 10’ putts. At this distance, we saw the great separation in performance between the best and worst putters. This remains true despite the integration of PuttView and changing some internal parameters. If a putter excels at mid-range, it will likely make its way to the top of the leaderboard, and in the case of this year, propel a putter to victory. Wilson Infinite Buckingham outperforms Runner Mallet in this space to break a first place tie.
These are the best mallet putters for medium putts.
PuttView HCP Medium
PuttView HCP Short
PuttView HCP Long
PuttView HCP Overall
Price
Draining putts from medium range can completely transform a round of golf. Generally, at this putting range, performance boils down to makes and misses. Much like long putts, narrowly missing won't hurt you in the long run. However, making putts at this range will greatly improve your score. You see that in the positive PuttView Handicap score for Makefield Defiant. It is an example of a mallet putter making putts consistently and narrow misses when they aren't dropping to the bottom of the cup.
Performance across the board matters and despite being the best on medium putts, Makefield Defiant misses the standard by being poor on short putts. It finishes towards the bottom for short putt PuttView Handicap. So, take this into consideration before you buy. At the very least, you should go get fit for this mallet putter.
Makefield Defiant claims the top spot for medium putting performance. If you had to choose a putting range to excel at, medium putts would be it. This is where the rubber meets the road in performance. Even though we have new testing procedures and protocols, medium putt performance is where there is the greatest separation in performance. Makefield Defiant excels in this range and is definitely worth considering if you are trying to enhance your game on medium length putts.
“I like the alignment design, heavier, but it grew on me.”
“I like the feel, ball comes off the face nicely.”
“Positively surprising. Very pleasing.”
“Sound/feel are quiet. Produces a smooth roll. Mishits maintain speed. Easy to align.”
Aesthetically, Makefield Defiant is ginormous. Some loved it, some hated it. But, the undeniable aspect is its performance on mid range putts. Except for the second place finisher on medium putts, Makefield Defiant is a full point better than the next mallet. It is 10.6 points better than the worst mallet putter for medium putts.
PuttView HCP Medium
PuttView HCP Short
PuttView HCP Long
PuttView HCP Overall
Price
Performance should be your number one reason to play a specific golf club. For our 2025 Most Wanted Mallet test, Wilson Infinite Buckingham is one of, if not the mallet putter you should consider going forward. It excels on medium and short range putts. It is the second best mallet for mid range putts. This is the distance where we the most separation in performance and excelling at this range holds tremendous value.
Putters are the one golf club where subjectivity plays a huge role in a golfer's buying habits. If there is one knock against Wilson Infinite Buckingham, it is its subjective appeal. Even in the past, it has never been a highly rated putter from our testers' perspective.
Previous generations of Wilson’s Infinite Buckingham have performed well in our putter tests. Once again, Infinite Buckingham shines in testing. It claims the title of 2025 Most Wanted Mallet Putter. Quite an accomplishment in our first mallet result utilizing PuttView. Medium and short putts are Buckingham’s specialty relative to the field. Its a damn good putter at an excellent price point.
“Performs well. Made putts. Horrible sound.”
“The ball went in the hole. Not the most subjectively appealing putter, but it performs.”
“Missed a few putts that I shouldn’t have, but felt extremely comfortable with the putter. It produces a consistent roll.”
“Rolls well. Better Wilson putter than others I’ve tested.”
“It performed exceptionally well and I’d buy it in a pinch. But I hate the subjective.”
Throw the subjective opinion out the window. Wilson Infinite Buckingham performs, especially at the range that matters most – medium range putts. Don’t take our word for it. Most testers acknowledged the lack of subjective appeal, but praise it for performance.
Being consistent with longer putts is a key ingredient for performance. Making putts helps, but also maintaining speed control and closer proximity to the hole are critical factors. The putters that achieve these three performance traits rise to the top.
These are the best mallet putters for long putts.
PuttView HCP Long
PuttView HCP Medium
PuttView HCP Short
PuttView HCP Overall
Price
With an exceptional PuttView Handicap of -12.2 on long putts, Stix Golf Compete Mallet is the best mallet in this scoring category. Making a large percentage of putts doesn't tell the entire performance story. Having putts stop close to the hole will immensely help putting long term. It is a compounding effect. If you can achieve a close proximity to the hole, the long term impact will be beneficial and this is exactly what Stix Golf Compete Mallet suggests with its performance.
Despite its long putt performance, Stix Compete Mallet is below average for short putt performance. Missing short putts is not a good putting attribute. So, if your knees shake on putts four feet and in, you may not like this putter.
Stix Golf Compete Mallet ranks first overall for long putts in our 2025 Most Wanted Mallet test. The Compete Mallet is nearly one point better than the second place finisher for PuttView Handicap. It also establishes the highest PuttView Handicap at a certain range to date. For $149.99, you can get a great performer on longer putts. However, it does have weaknesses relative to others. Short to mid range putting are not its strengths.
“Felt like it rolled really well.”
“Head heavy which gave me more confidence. Missed a lot on the toe.”
“Feel is surprisingly good.”
“Too heavy overall. Grip is way too big. Head and grip don’t balance well.”
Stix Golf Compete Mallet is a rockstar on long putts. It sets a new PuttView Handicap score in this scoring category. However, it does miss the mark on short and medium range putts. Most of the testing pool did not care for the larger grip on the putter.
PuttView HCP Long
PuttView HCP Medium
PuttView HCP Short
PuttView HCP Overall
Price
Excelling at long putts is a good performance trait. Yes, you aren't going to be making every putt. However, if you are rolling the ball consistently on line, with good distance control, you are bound to make a few here and there. Worst case, you have relatively easy second putts. Never Compromise Model 3 produces this type of consistency on long putts as it ranks second overall in PuttView Handicap on long putts.
ompared to the field, Never Compromise Model 3 is below average when it comes to short to medium range putts. Although it is great to have good lag putting, missing short to intermediate putts will not benefit you long term on the putting green. So, if you already struggle in this area, use caution when considering Never Compromise Model 3.
Never Compromise Model 3 is the second best mallet putter on long putts. This is another impressive performance in 2025 for Never Compromise. Its performance on long putts exceeds the best blade putter for long putts in 2025. If you love a classic, more square mallet profile, this is one worth considering. Even more so if you struggle from distance on the putting green. Be cautious though, it is a below average performer on short putts. Furthermore, it struggles on medium putts.
“Feel is good. Like the setup. Surprising.”
“Smooth and balanced, shaping is appealing to my eye too.”
“Easy to use, I don’t like the profile, but it rolls the ball well.”
Putting from distance is always stressful. Never Compromise Model 3 helps reduce stress on longer putts. It excels at both making these putts and having good distance control. Now, it lacks performance the closer you get to the hole, which isn’t great.
All of our testing is predicated on data. Without it, our testing is irrelevant. With PuttView, our putter testing as a whole is enhanced forever. It goes from the best in the industry to, well, the definitive best in the industry.
In addition to the data implications, PuttView makes our putter tests significantly more dynamic. On the golf course, every putt is different: distance, slope, break, speed. While we’ve always tested putters from multiple distances, we weren’t able to integrate other aspects of putting that golfers experience on the golf course.
With our custom-developed randomized testing protocol, we’re able to replicate on-course putting more accurately. Every putter is tested under identical conditions. Every tester hits the same number of putts from uphill, downhill, left- and right-breaking and straight—but the exact locations are randomized. The hope is to prevent golfers from getting grooved in from one location, making the results more reflective of actual putting performance.
But the biggest leap forward is data and there is plenty of data.
As we become more familiar with the gold mine that is PuttView, our goal is to mine data, evaluate, and repurpose our findings into subsequent putter content.
In past putter tests, we’ve relied purely on strokes gained and total putts holed to determine our Most Wanted winners. Although these metrics provide a clear picture of which putters perform well throughout the testing process, they don’t give additional insights and they make results confusing.
We partnered with PuttView to create a more understandable result. Something that most golfers can relate to – a handicap.
PuttView Handicap is defined as:
“A measure of a player’s putting ability representing the number of strokes above or below par. The PuttView Handicap is calculated based on the Stokes Gained, i.e. compares the current performances with an average tour player for the given putt distances”
The PuttView Handicap scores dictate the overall results. They are broken down in three ranges:
The overall winner has the best PuttView Handicap average.
Keep in mind that the results are based on an average tour player’s performance for the given putt distances.
Most Wanted Mallet Putter testing took 180 hours and included 36 mallet models. 20 avid golfers took part in the test.
Each tester hit 32 putts with each putter throughout the entirety of the test. The test scenario is completely randomized in order to create a more realistic putting experience. There are four distances during the test scenario:
Straight and flat putts are prioritized. Yet, with PuttView, we are able to implement uphill, downhill, left to right, and right to left braking putts. This further enhances the testing scenario and creates more realistic putting conditions. However, we approach it with balance as our goal is to test putter performance – not a golfer’s ability to read a green. Too many variations in the environment can water down the actual evaluation of putter performance.
| Putter Name | Avg. Putt View Handicap | Avg. Putt View Short Handicap | Avg. Putt View Medium Handicap | Avg. Putt View Long Handicap | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wilson Infinite Buckingham | -7.6 | -6.1 | -9.2 | -9 | |||||
| Runner Mallet | -7.6 | -6.7 | -7.8 | -9.4 | |||||
| PING Scottsdale Prime Tyne 4 | -7.5 | -5.3 | -8.7 | -10.5 | |||||
| SeeMore Mini Giant HTx | -7.3 | -5.9 | -8.6 | -8.5 | |||||
| Stix Golf Compete Tech Mallet | -6.8 | -5.7 | -6.1 | -9.6 | |||||
| Cleveland HB Soft 2 Model 10.5 | -6.8 | -5.7 | -7 | -8.9 | -7.7 | ||||
| Bettinardi INOVAI 6.0 | -6.8 | -6.8 | -6.4 | -7 | -7.7 | ||||
| TaylorMade Spider Tour X | -6.7 | -6.4 | -4.2 | -9.8 | -9.4 | ||||
| Odyssey Ai-One #7 | -6.7 | -6.1 | -6.7 | -8 | -8.3 | ||||
| Makefield VS F | -6.6 | -5.2 | -6.5 | -9.7 | -7 | ||||
| Wilson Infinite Bucktown | -6.2 | -6.2 | -2.9 | -9.7 | -6.9 | ||||
| Swag Golf The Boss 2.0 | -6.2 | -4.5 | -6.2 | -9.6 | -9.6 | ||||
| Cleveland HB Soft 2 Model 11 | -6.2 | -6.6 | -2.2 | -9.5 | -8.1 | ||||
| Astral Mallet | -6.2 | -5.6 | -4.5 | -9.2 | -9.4 | ||||
| Makefield Defiant | -6.2 | -3.3 | -9.7 | -8.5 | -7.4 | ||||
| Mizuno M.Craft X B6 | -6.2 | -5 | -6.9 | -8.2 | -8.6 | ||||
| Meridian Key West | -6.1 | -5 | -5.7 | -8.5 | -8 | ||||
| T Squared TS-1106+ | -6 | -5.2 | -4.4 | -9.4 | -8.5 | ||||
| Sub 70 Sycamore 010 | -5.9 | -5.3 | -3.5 | -9.8 | -5.9 | ||||
| Stix Golf Compete Mallet | -5.8 | -3.6 | -3.7 | -12.2 | -7.6 | ||||
| Scotty Cameron Phantom 7 | -5.8 | -4.9 | -2.3 | -11 | -6.7 | ||||
| PING Scottsdale CRAZ-E | -5.8 | -4.3 | -5.5 | -9.1 | -6.9 | ||||
| PXG Battle Ready II Bat Attack | -5.7 | -3.3 | -5.5 | -10.6 | -3.4 | ||||
| Vice Golf VGP02 | -5.6 | -4.3 | -5.1 | -8.6 | -7.4 | ||||
| Toura Proto P5 | -5.6 | -7.8 | -1.3 | -5.6 | -8.4 | ||||
| Evnroll V5.1 | -5.5 | -3.5 | -5.3 | -10 | -7.8 | ||||
| Piretti Savona FN | -5.2 | -5.4 | 0.9 | -10.7 | -6.8 | ||||
| Mizuno M.Craft X P5 | -5.2 | -4 | -6.9 | -5.9 | -7.8 | ||||
| Tommy Armour No.3 | -5.1 | -4.2 | -2.8 | -9 | -7 | ||||
| Odyssey Ai-One Milled Seven T | -5.1 | -4.6 | -2.9 | -8.3 | -7.5 | ||||
| Bettinardi Queen B 7 | -4.9 | -3.8 | -2.1 | -9.9 | -8.9 | ||||
| Never Compromise Model 4 | -4.8 | -4.8 | -0.6 | -9.3 | -6.6 | ||||
| TaylorMade Spider Tour | -4.6 | -2.9 | -3.9 | -8.5 | -7.7 | ||||
| SeeMore Mini Giant MDx | -4.5 | -3.4 | -2 | -9.1 | -6.6 | ||||
| Never Compromise Model 3 | -4.4 | -3.1 | 0.1 | -11.3 | -5.7 | ||||
| Evnroll V5.2 | -4.3 | -3.6 | -1.4 | -8.6 | -8.6 |
Performance is key. It always has been and always will be. Based on the current evaluation parameters, there is a 3.3 point difference in PuttView Handicap between the best and worst-performing mallet putters overall. This is a tighter differential than what we saw in blade putter testing.
Building on our first insight, short and medium putts tell the performance story, especially medium putts. We’ve always known medium putts create separation in performance. But now, we have a clearer understanding of how impactful poor putting on shorter to medium range putts can be. For example, the two best mallet putters on long range putts are among the poorest results for short and medium putts. Crushing their overall performances.
Comparatively to blade putter results, mallets produce a 1.7 PuttView Handicap on average higher. So, maybe this does begin the conversation, “which is better – a mallet or a blade?”.
For short putts, there is a 4.9 PuttView Handicap differential from best to worst. This is actually the tightest differential of the three putting ranges. Below, you’ll see the PuttView Handicap examples of best vs worst for the Toura Proto P5 and TaylorMade Spider Tour. These were the best and worst performers on short putts.
For medium putts, there is a 10.6 PuttView Handicap differential from best to worst. This speaks for itself. It is an absurd performance differential and shows how important it is to putt well on mid-range putts. Makefield Defiant and Piretti Savona II are the best and worst mallet putters on medium putts.
This is the range where we see the largest separation in performance from best to worst. Additionally, it is where we see the best mallet of 2025 shine. Wilson Infinite Buckingham is the second best mallet putter on medium range putts.
There are several mallets that excel at long range putts. As we said earlier, the average PuttView handicap on long putts is slightly higher than the blade category. Those at the top set the pace. Stix Golf Compete Mallet and Toura Proto P5 are the best and worst mallet putters on long putts.
Odyssey, Scotty Cameron, and PING wipe the floor from a subjective appeal standpoint. TaylorMade, Evnroll, Mizuno, and Never Compromise also receive high praise. This shouldn’t surprise anyone. On the flip side, we have Runner Mallet and Wilson Infinite Buckingham, which both rate lack overwhelming subjective appeal according to our testers.The latter two are the two top performers in this year’s test.
Sure, subjective appeal might give you confidence and make you feel all giddy inside. But, when push comes to shove, it won’t always lead to better performance.
Putting performance will obviously be influenced by making putts. However, you can still be effective and efficient without making a high percentage of putts. Proximity to the hole plays a huge role in overall performance, especially in the calculation of PuttView Handicap. You can make 50% of your putts, but depending on where you miss and how you miss can greatly affect performance.
During the 32-putt test scenario, testers hit a single putt from each starting location. PuttView registers where the ball comes to rest and applies a calculation. If you miss a 4’ putt severely and more than once, it’ll cripple a PuttView Handicap in a heartbeat. Whereas, missing an 18’ putt minimally might have less of an impact.
Stability, forgiveness, consistency, distance control, and the correct shaft and grip are all important pieces of this puzzle. Go for a fitting to match your putter to the stroke type and even the typical golf course green speed to the putter you choose. It doesn’t always take a premium price point putter to get the golf ball in the hole. Sometimes it’s as simple as finding the match for your game.
World-class testing requires world-class equipment. This is the gear we trust to help us fulfill our Most Wanted testing.
Cancer Survivor. Amputee Golfer. Essentially, a OneLeggedBoss. When he isn't facilitating testing or analyzing data, Phillip enjoys his family time, practicing and playing golf, unwinding with video games, capturing photos of nature, or devouring pretzels.
| Driver Titleist TSR3 | 3 Wood Titleist TSR3 |
| Driving Iron Titleist U505 | Irons (5-6) Titleist T200 |
| Irons (7-PW) Titleist T150 | Wedges (50, 56, 60) Titleist Vokey SM10 |
| Putter L.A.B. Mezz.1 Max | Ball Titleist Pro V1x |
1 month ago
Looks like I’m buying 3 putters, 1 for short, 1 for mid and 1 for long :-)
1 month ago
Odyssey #7 is the best for me.
1 month ago
No L.A.B. mallets? Very surprising. My Oz1i sure looks like a mallet putter to me.
1 month ago
My only complaint is that with so many great Odyssey designs (and Scotty’s), they only test 2 models total. I know that some of it comes down to what Odyssey sends and with SO MANY different Odyssey models to choose from, it could get unwieldy really quickly. It doesn’t help the customers to have such a limited field and get a “most wanted” badge awarded.
1 month ago
no EVNROLL=no valid test
1 month ago
There are two Evnrolls in the test. 5.1 and 5.2.
1 month ago
No LAB = no test. All mallets should be compare to each other. IMO. If I’m choosing between an Odyssey 7 and a LAB Oz 1 your tests don’t help if MGS puts them in separate categories.
4 weeks ago
I realize you’re looking for confirmation bias to justify your ridiculous $650 putter but be patient, sweetie. There’s another test coming for zero torque.
1 month ago
The ridiculous anti-Taylormade bias on these supposedly unbiased tests is so apparent. The Spider products are universally considered as some of the best mallets out there, both by professional and amateur alike.
These tests are a joke and so hard to take with any seriousness.
4 weeks ago
I was at a BBQ/Bar just down the road from MGS HQ several years ago off Jefferson Blvd in Newport News, there was a guy at the bar who was apparently a MGS tester. I overheard him telling his buddies he hits the Taylormade drivers bad on purpose, because he hate’s them. He said he’s a Callaway guy. I sent an email to HQ about it, but not sure if they figured out who it was. Doubt they have the time to dig through the data to see who is significantly worst with TM products. Because of this, player bias means robot testing matters.
1 month ago
The vice being so low is a crime. The only top putter I can really agree with based on reviews would be the Runner.
1 month ago
Are the majority of zero torque putters not considered mallets? Really curious as to why they were left out of testing.
1 month ago
Hi Matt – with so many low torque to no torque putters on the market this year, we’re adding a 3rd putter test specifically for these models.
1 month ago
Tony- I am thankful that MGS has decided to create a separate category for Zero Torque/Lie Angle Balance putters and will evaluate them stand-alone. With so many different approaches to get to the same objective, your testing will hopefully clarify which putter(s) are best of the best in the category. That said, my hope is that the results get published sooner than later.
1 month ago
Thanks for the reply, Tony. Thought that might be the case. Any chance you’ll do another test putting the top blades, mallets and zero torques against each other? Would be fascinating.
1 month ago
No LAB putters? Or zero torque at least? With all the buzz over zero torque putters and all the options available, it would have been nice to see if the tech rose to the top of the mallet testing.
1 month ago
Totally agree!!
1 month ago
I agree. Most zero torque putters are mallets. Are you going to test them separately? I believe the PXG might be considered zero torque and it did poorly.
1 month ago
You encourage us to not let subjective appeal guide our decisions, yet you separate putters into mallet vs blade (vs zero torque presumably since none were included in this test). Wouldn’t the prudent approach to support that direction be to test all putters against each other regardless of subjective design category? Would love to see that test.
1 month ago
100% agree! Fat blades and mid mallets are starting to blur the categories. MGS believes I shouldn’t pick irons based on feel because whether the iron is cast or forged, all that matters is the data. Do a single putter test and anyone who prefers blades can choose the first blade on the list even if it finished behind a dozen mallets.
1 month ago
But this is MGS – the most biased review site on the web!!! What did you expect??? LMAO
4 weeks ago
Brian, i totally agree! Well said !
1 month ago
I have the Buckingham. Great putter and performs well. I’m not really bothered by the sound or looks. I think it has a good feel.
1 month ago
I have the Bucktown. I think it looks amazing and get compliments on it. Never had an issue with sound. The feel is great. The only looks issue I can think of is that the grip can be polarizing because its not a name brand grip.
Kevin
3 weeks ago
The Wilson Infinite Buckingham was first released in 2021. An updated model was released in Jan 2024. I don’t see anything about a 2025 update so must assume MGS’s 2025 test used the 2024 model. In MGS’s 2024 Most Wanted Mallet Putter the Wilson Infinite Buckingham finished 15th. MGS, how do you account for the jump in year-to-year performance?