By: Matt Saternus
How many times have you let some preconceived idea or bias get in the way of playing the best equipment for your game? I think for many of us club-crazy golfers, the answer is “more times than I’d like to admit.”
Personally, I will admit to a bit of a bias against Project X. Despite being fit into them on a couple of occasions, I’ve never loved the feel of their iron shafts. Because of this, I’ve never given too much thought to their graphite offerings. As you’ll see in this review, that would have been a HUGE mistake: the Project X graphite shafts are some of the most accurate and consistent I’ve ever tested.
Notes, Feel, Price, and Miscellaneous
I came into this review with very low expectations for the feel of Project X graphite. I will happily report that I was wrong to expect so little. To me, the Project X feels most similar to the Nunchuk: a solid, “one-piece” feel with very little kick or torque. While not as smooth as a Matrix or Diamana, there’s nothing harsh about the Project X whatsoever. I found this feel was very similar from 6.0 to 7.0. Players with more swing speed or more aggressive tempos may disagree and could find more difference from one flex to the next.
With regard to looks, the Project X plays it safe with a solid blue color and minimal graphics.
When considering the standard and tour issue lines, weights of the Project X graphite shafts range from 60 to over 100 grams. Flex ranges from 5.0 to 7.0 on the Rifle scale
Project X graphite shafts carry an MSRP of $275 but can be found for around $150. The Tour Issue profiles can be found through select fitters and club builders or through some OEM custom order programs.
For the Performance testing, I hit each of the shafts in a Callaway RAZR Fit 10.5 head on a FlightScope X2 launch monitor. I hit 20 “good” shots with each shaft, changing frequently so that fatigue was not an issue, nor did I get grooved with one shaft to the detriment of fairness.
Testing was done at Golf Nation in Palatine, IL, one of the best indoor golf facilities in the country.
*NOTE: Testing was done inside. Uur FlightScope seems to be producing somewhat different numbers indoors compared to outdoors. To greater or lesser extents, ball speed, and spin are all coming in lower than they did outdoors, hence the carry number is smaller. That said, it’s still an apples-to-apples comparison, so no attempt has been made to “normalize” the numbers: we’re publishing the numbers straight off the FlightScope, as always.
The Project X shafts produced very consistent numbers for me across the board. The launch was medium-high, and the spin was very manageable, especially when you consider I was hitting exclusively fades (with the exception of a couple pulls).
The big story to me is the accuracy. In my opinion, the “Off Line” number doesn’t really do justice to the Project X in this case. While the shots may have been consistently off of the center line, they were very tightly grouped. The dispersion numbers in the FlightScope graphic are some of the smallest I’ve ever achieved. In fact, were it not for two pulled shots, I think each shaft would have posted a dispersion number under 40, which is outstanding for me.
As I said in the intro, the Project X graphite shafts are some of the most consistent and accurate that I’ve ever tested. While there are not a lot of different options in the standard line, the Tour Issue line offers enough different weights and profiles to suit a wide variety of different players. Though there are newer, “hotter” models out, aggressive-swinging players who want to tighten up their dispersion would do well to consider putting a Project X graphite shaft in their driver.
VISIT WEBSITE: HERE
FOLLOW ON TWITTER: HERE
FOLLOW ON FACEBOOK: HERE