565MC Forged Irons

565MC-glam565MC Forged Irons

Forged Carbon Steel + CNC Machined Deep Back Cavity for the Highest MOI in a True Forged Iron Design.

Features:

  • Wishon Golf’s 2nd Generation 560 Series Forged Iron adds a more Solid On-Center Feel to the Best Off-Center Forgiveness in a Forged Carbon Steel Iron.
  • New Center Cavity Half-Moon Weighting Increases On-Center Impact Feel While Offering a Very Slight Increase in Shot Trajectory.
  • Low-Off set Design Also Features a Slightly Thinner Top Line than the Original 560MC.
  • Completely CNC Machined Back Cavity Ensures Precise CG Position for Each Head Number with a Beautiful Cosmetic Appearance.
  • Fully Radiused Tour Grind Type Sole Design – This is a Model for Scratch to Middle Handicap Players.
  • Double Nickel Chrome Pearl Plated Finish with Glass Bead Blast Highlights – CNC Machined Scorelines Within 2010 USGA Rule Guidelines.

 


Ratings and Reviews

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 3.6/5 (197 votes cast)
565MC Forged Irons, 3.6 out of 5 based on 197 ratings

85 Comments

  1. Hi Tom – I am undecided on 575 or 565. My club fitter in UK, Clive Crisell, has me trying a 575 #6iron. I love the looks, we have found a shaft specification that feels good, and we have got the grip size right.
    But I am finding a bit of a wide dispersion in shot length.
    Getting the shaft and grip right has minimised left and right dispersion but when I hit the 575 ‘pure’ is goes 170yd, with low spin, and when I dont quite get it as good I am down to 150-155yd, with more spin.
    I dont necessarily want huge yardage but I am looking for a tight dispersion. (Which I do have currently with my Yonex.)
    Would I be better off, in your humble opinion, trying to improve my swing or would/should I try the 565?
    Where do you think the yardage variation long and short is coming from?
    I love the simple clean looks and feel of the Wishon forged head but would speed slots, face cups, special gels, tungsten weights, edge rivets or flashy logos be something I should try?
    Cheers Kevin

    • Kevin
      The reason you see a bigger change in distance from good shot to poor shot with the 575MMC is because the 575 is a much smaller size head overall. This always is going to drop the level of off center hit forgiveness because all smaller size heads have a lower MOI. For a head to have a high MOI and resist twisting from off center hits, it really has to be a larger size head so that more of the mass of the head can be farther from the center of gravity of the head. 565 will have a noticeably higher MOI than the 575 because it is a good bit larger in head size and blade length. No add on weights will help much at all on the 575 because the point still is that the 575 is quite a bit smaller size head.

      THanks very much for your interest and when you see Clive, do please tell him HI from me – he and I go way back in this industry as friends and as fellow drummers too !!

      TOM

  2. Tom,

    I’m currently playing a set of 575CB 5-9 and 575mmc pw. I am having thoughsts of switching to the 565 for a set 5-AW. Life had gotten in the way and my range time has depleted. I LOVE the 575’s but just don’t have the time to practice the way I need to be able to hit them consitenly. Would a move towards the more forgiving 565 be a good move? I have a great club fitter, Tom Miller, here in the Raleigh, NC area. I know you’ve played both, so what’s your opinion? Thanks!

    • KEVIN

      There is no question that the 565 is going to be more forgiving for off center hits than the 575 because the 565 is larger and has a deeper cavity and thus has a higher MOI. But if your need for off center hit forgiveness is HUGE, then the move to the 771CSI would take the off center hit performance to a FAR grater level than what the 565 can do because of the variable thickness face of the 771. On the other hand, if you wish to keep playing a forged iron, then you would not want to have anything to do with the 771’s. Best thing to do is to listen to what Tom tells you in the form of club advice because he is VERY good and knows his stuff for sure.

      Thanks very much !!
      TOM

    • Thank you very much for the reply, it answers my question perfectly. I hit the 575’s very good when I’m swinging good. It’d be nice to have a little more forgiveness on those days where it’s not perfect. I love the feel of the 575’s and when they are on, they are deadly, but the edge in forgiveness (less practice time now) and the confidence over a slightly larger (ever so slightly) clubface gives the edge to the 565. Tom Miller is an AWESOME club builder and I would trust few others to build my clubs. Thanks again for the reply!

  3. Hi Tom,

    I am about to be fitted into a new set of irons by TC of Perfect Lies Golf in NY. We will be trying the 565’s/575′ and the Sterling Single Length irons. I have never hit a shot with your iron heads yet, but, I’m looking forward to the experience of doing so with TC.

    I currently game the Hogan Ft. Worth 15 irons and I love their feel, but, I have a few issues that I think may be remedied by getting custom fit.

    All the best,
    Vince

    • VINCE

      I am very pleased to hear that you plan to work with Fred Schaper at Perfect Lies for your fitting needs. You’ll be amazed at how thorough Fred is in his fitting work and how much he cares about getting everything set up as perfect as he can. He’s a really good man and you did right in choosing to work with him. Best wishes to you in this great game and have fun going through the fitting analysis with Fred. And say hello to him for me if you would please !

      TOM

  4. Hi Tom , I was wondering if you could give me some advice please , I’ve found a set of 560 s for sale but they our a inch shorter in length through the set , my wrist to floor is 32 1/2 inchs , hard question I know but would they still be ok for me …. kind regards jules

  5. Tom,
    I am a high handicapper golfer with a 21 handicap and currently have Nike Covert 2.0 in my bag. I am I looking to replace my set and would love to hear your thoughts.

    Thank you in advance

    Tom

  6. I had a set of 565MC built by Barry Bolner of Bogey Free Golf in Morgan City, La. After a few shaft changes and fittings, we settled on Nippon NS Pro 950 reg flex. My dispersion has narrowed to around 10 yds now and these are the best feeling irons I have hit. I have played Titleist AP1 for the last 2 years or so. I am looking forward to adding the 919 driver and 365 fairway woods soon.

    • KENNY

      Wow, how nice is that for me to be able to hear this from you about the new 565MC irons !! Thanks so much for taking your time to let us know, and thanks even more for having been interested in what we do to have sought out a clubmaker to work with for your clubs !!! Thanks again and the very best to you in this great game !
      TOM

  7. I notice the 4 iron loft is only 3 degrees stronger than the 5 iron. Would the expected distance still be 10 yards more than the 5 iron?

    Would bending the 4 iron to 22 degrees allow me to drop my seldom used 21 degree hybrid?

    • BRIAN

      That 3* gap at the upper end of iron sets has become more of the norm in the golf equipment industry because pushing the loft down more just makes it that much harder to elevate the shot to get proper carry distance. For most players, no, that will compress the distance gap a tad smaller. But then too, if the clubmaker is doing his job he would never let anyone with average clubhead speed hit a 3 or 4 iron. These lofts today really do need a higher than average clubhead speed with better golf athletic ability to even merit being in a player’s bag. Your question on loft depends on the length of your hybrid. Most hybrids will hit the ball longer than an iron of the same loft because the hybrid has a lower and more rear located center of gravity. That causes the ball to fly higher and carry farther. If the hybrid is longer than the iron of the same loft, it then can fly even farther because the longer length usually means a few mph more clubhead speed. But yes, you can bend the 4 iron to 22 and if you have a clubhead speed with the iron over 85mph you will be fine with the distance and distance gap.

      TOM

  8. Hi Tom,

    I’ve been a Mizuno blade guy for the last 3 or 4 years because I loved how buttery the feel was on solid hits. But I’m playing and practicing a little less now and wanted more consistency. Keith Chatham recommended the new 565s. I was thinking about trying out the 565 on 5-8 irons and maybe mixing your muscle backs on the A-9. Suggestions?

    • JOHN:

      First of all, put your needs in Keith’s hands, listen to what he has to say. He is without question, one of the very best clubfitters and clubmakers on the planet. I kid you not on that. Second, as a player with definite traditional preferences in your irons, you have to like the LOOK of the head sitting down there behind the ball or else you can’t play with the clubs, no matter how well the fit is done. So the ONLY solution to that is to go to Keith’s shop and address a ball with a 565 and then a 575MB and just look long and hard at it to ask yourself if you like the look or not. Performance wise the mix of the models would work fine. But this is going to be a looks thing for you to consider and think about before you pull any triggers. That’s something no one but you can tell yourself.

      TOM

  9. Any chance these 565’s will be done in a black finish? I think they would be stunning in black!

    • CAL:
      Doubtful. With us having two other forged carbon steel models in the line (575-CB and 575-MB) to go with a different cosmetic finish on a version of the 565 would mean splitting the forged iron demand between 4 models, which from an inventory control standpoint would not be good or easy to do. Thanks for your interest though.
      TOM

  10. No chance of doing a black finish on this model?

    • CAL
      Doubtful. With us having two other forged carbon steel models in the line (575-CB and 575-MB) to go with a different cosmetic finish on a version of the 565 would mean splitting the forged iron demand between 4 models, which from an inventory control standpoint would not be good or easy to do. Thanks for your interest though.
      TOM

  11. Tom,

    I have been playing AP2’s for 7 years. I am 62 and play to a 5 handicap. I would like a club that gives me a higher ball flight and more distance. I am moving to a regular flex shaft as well.
    Is there one head you would recommend…? Thanks, Kevin

    • KEVIN
      I hear you loud and clear. I’m 65 now, clubhead speed is deteriorating a little thanks to Father Time, and I made the switch from stiff steel and traditional head model to graphite regular and game improvement myself. Two recommendations for you to think about. If you are definitely tied to a conventional incremental length set of irons, it would be the 771CSI. The high COR face is going to give you more distance for the same loft as a traditional iron like the AP2. The variable thickness face is nothing short of amazing if I do say so myself for off center hit performance.

      But if you are interested in a little different direction on this, you might consider the single length Sterlings. With all irons at 8 iron length, the shot consistency opportunity is definitely there. Distance is there as well since most who are using the Sterling are reporting hitting the ball about a half club longer through the set. The Sterling is what I switched to this year from our 560MC forging and I must say it is fun to play with.

      Thanks,
      TOM

  12. i have been playing the 560’s for 4 years. Still hit them really well, very consistent in the set across 5-PW.

    If I wanted to buy a new set of irons, just for the heck of it, would I notice anything very different about the 565 – less forgiving on off center, anything like that. they are a sharp looking iron.

    • MIKE
      Thanks very much, when we finished the 565’s we were hoping the players would see it as a very sharp looking head. I really like the milling look over the medallion which is why I went this route in the design. People playing the 560 and 565 have pretty much commented on differences being, 1) a more solid feeling of impact with the 565 which is because of the raised weight section behind the face where 560 had nothing like that; 2) maybe 1-2 yds less off center hit forgiveness in the 565 because here again, putting that weight into the back middle area of the cavity takes away very very slightly from the MOI.

      Thanks again,
      TOM

  13. Hi Tom,

    Would you be releasing a traditional looking muscle back to compliment the 565s in the near future? Would love a combo set. Something like what you did with the 555s

    Thanks

    • Dean:

      Probably not. Because the cost of forging dies for a new forged iron model runs around $50,000 for a full set, we need very much to get more years of sales out of the 575’s before we can think about going on to a new design. But in case you missed them, the 575MMC are done in a cavity back and blade style just the same exact way I did the 555s. So you can do the same mix and match between the two versions of 575. Some have done a mix and match between 565 and 575, but that is just a little bit more of a contrast since the 565 are noticeably larger in overall profile size than are the 575. But the 575 cavity and 575 blade are the same profile so like the 555, the mix and match between the two versions is very seamless.

      TOM

  14. Tom,

    How do these new 565MC Forged Irons compare to the new Sterling Single Length Irons, as far as the C.O.R. and M.O.I go? I was just curious if we could make up a set for same length irons with the 565MC Forged Irons. Actually, the head weights are slightly different. How are the sales going for the Sterling sets? I saw some excellent reviews on Youtube, especially one from Mark Crossfield! He really likes them and gave them a very favorable review. You can see on the video that he just keeps liking them more and more as the video plays on, and it has almost 68,000 views to date. Mark states, “Wishon is a master club maker and knows everything about custom fitting clubs!”
    When he hit the PW, he said it feels as solid as any iron he has ever hit. He states near the end of the video that he hasn’t been this excited about a new set of clubs in a long, long time! And finally, he states, “They intrigue me!” When do you think that you will make a forged iron set in the single length? Thank you, Craig

    • CRAIG

      You do NOT want to try to turn any set of irons made for incremental lengths into a single length set. That’s WAY too convoluted and it’s just not practical to even think about trying to do that. Normal iron models like the 565 start at a head weight on the #3 iron at 239g and graduate up by 7g increments to the PW, and in lie starting at 58* and moving up in 1* increments per head to 64* in the 9 and PW.

      Single length sets are designed so all heads have the same weight and lie angle. Using our Sterling single length as a guide with its 274g weight and 63*, that means you would have to figure out some way to add 35g to the 3 iron, 28g to the 4 iron, 21g to the 5 iron, 14g to the 6 iron, 7g to the 7 iron and then figure out how to remove 7g from the 9 iron, and 10g from the PW. Not to mention bending all the lies to the same lie angle.

      In the end, the set would look an utter mess and would be a waste of good money spent on the 565 heads. If you want to hit the single length set, you need to hit the single length set – not try to convert a normal set into a single length set.

      Yes, I knew the Crossfield video was coming because he kept bugging us to get a set to hit test. In the beginning, I was a little nervous about things like this, but now that the Sterlings have been out for 3+ months with not even one naysayer, I am pretty confident that if the fit is done right, any golfer is going to like the way the Sterling irons play.

      Time will tell whether I do an all forged single length set. that’s a very limited market out there for a model that is just barely beginning to gain the first bits of acceptance in the minds of a few golfers. TONS more golfers need to overcome their “traditionalist trepidation” about single length before we could ever think about a $60,000 investment in forging dies to do something like that.

      TOM

  15. Hi Tom,

    I am a former 560 owner and a current 575 CB owner (AW to 6).

    I have seen that this 565 have the same loft that my loved 575 CB. I struggle a little bit with my 6 iron and I carry a 5 hybrid.

    I am considering if it would make sense to have combo:

    AW, PW, 9, 8 and 7: 575 CB
    6 and 5: 565
    In both cases with a Rifle shaft.

    The thing is that even if a have a 20 handicap, I cannot stand big head irons. They disturb me so much. I am very happy with the 575 CB and up to the 7 I can play well with them.

    If I can add some forgiveness with the 565 to the 6 and 5 irons, it could be great.

    I am fine with my 5 hybrid, but in my pursue to become a better player, I really want to be able to play a 5 iron.

    Does it make sense?

    Thanks a lot in advance and best regards,

    Luis

    • LUIS

      You could use the model 565MC #5 and 6 irons and it would improve the off center hit forgiveness for those iron numbers compared to the 575 model because the MOI of the 565 irons is higher than the MOI of the 575 irons. But in all honesty, because the 5 and 6 iron lofts are 26,30 degrees and their length is probably around 38 and 37.5″, you still probably will struggle with consistency with these irons compared to the #7 iron. it is just a fact of clubfitting that “the longer the length and the lower the loft, the more difficult the club will be to hit consistently well.”

      TOM

  16. I was fitted for a Wishon 919 Driver and 929 3 metal a couple years ago and I’ve hit them so much better and consistent than my prior clubs that I made the decision to go back and get these new 565 MC’s along with 2 and 3 775 hybrid’s – so my whole bag is Wishon now. I rip these 565’s really well and I just feel like I’m going to hit a good shot with one of them in my hand. Also, I drove 6 hours each way to have Keith Chatham in Kerrville, TX do my fitting. It was more than worth it because he is a true pro and detailed to the nth degree. I’d recommend anyone in Texas looking to get fitted go visit him. You will learn a lot.

    • J
      I am not sure which news is better – the fact that you love the 565’s and they complete your set, or that you have been working with Keith for your fitting needs !! Think of it this way. . . in creating the designs, I am the farmer who makes the best crops he can. Keith is the Michelin 5-star chef that makes what I contribute really work for the golfer. Thanks so much for sharing your experience and the VERY best to you in this great game,

      TOM

  17. I’ve been playing the 560’s for a couple years and Love them. I was wondering if a combo of 4-7 with the 771’s and 8-gap with the 565’s would be beneficial. Would the distance gap be too much between 7-8? I’m a 10 handicap and a little above average length. I work with Shane out of Naples and he has been excellent. Thanks!

    • TROY

      Anytime a golfer combines high COR face irons with normal non-high COR irons in the same set makeup, it is likely that after 4, 5 ball striking sessions they might have to do some little tweak of the lofts for the two irons that are where the separation happens in the set, and very likely a tiny tweak for the lofts of the two irons on both sides of those irons which are the transition between high COR face and not. It’s different for different golfers because of the effect of different clubhead speeds with different angles of attack into the ball. So that’s why we can’t just say to bend X degrees on these two irons where the split in model type occurs. Differences in golfer clubhead speed and angle of attack dictate that this is a personal individual thing that can only be determined once you build the set and then go out to hit it over several different days to note distances.

      Hope this helps,
      TOM

  18. Good evening Tom.

    Many thanks for the response and explanation. It is much appreciated. Please be rest assured I have become a convert to these irons and regularly challenge my playing partners to some fair sport. Needless to say so far they are speechless with what these irons can do. I hope a few of them do decide to give your irons a proper tryout.

    Best regards

    Rob

    • ROB

      Please be assured there was a wry smile on my face when I read the part of your comment when you said “they are speechless with what these irons can do.” But I need to correct you there – “they are speechless at what YOU can do with these irons!!” because without you putting decent swings on the ball, they can’t do what you are finding they can do !!!

      Thanks and for sure, the very best to you in this great game,
      TOM ;>)

  19. Good afternoon Tom.

    It’s Rob again from the UK. Just following up on my previous comment about the 565MC which I had fitted to me. They are working really well. So well done again on these clubs. I am getting just over 200 to 210 yards with the 4 iron. This has really helped on long Par 4s

    I do however have one negative comment to make and that concerns your lack of response to my original post. I see you are able to reply to other people’s comments but have not had the decency to at least acknowledge mine. I find this disappointing and rude I am afraid.

    Anyway great irons. I hope they last me the distance. I look forward to seeing what the future holds in terms of new designs.

    • ROB:

      I am sorry that you jumped to the conclusion that I somehow singled you out to not respond and be rude. We’ve had some changes with regard to our website and the things they call “plug ins” that is way beyond my area of expertise. Long story short, they tell me that these things have caused some emails and comment posts to “disappear” – or at the least to not show up on the daily notifications I am supposed to get which prompt me to come here to respond. Problem is, we don’t know of the posts we don’t see. I am sorry about that. But I am very pleased you like the new 565MC irons. Some people think the most fun I have in my work is the actual creation and design process. Truly, that’s fun for sure, but it’s more fun for me to get the chance to hear or read an experience such as you report with the new irons !!

      Thanks much and sorry for the glitch on the original message,
      TOM

  20. I just received my new 565’s today after been expertly fit at Southy Golf in Bradenton, Florida. I anxiously took them directly to the course. All I can say is WOW… I love the look and the exceptional feel….and the PERFORMANCE. I played OEM forged for many years and never thought I’d find an equal in terms of feel or performance. I’m happy to admit I was wrong. Your clubs are a sensory delight…they look great, feel great, and (did I mention?), they perform great. I’d heard of Wishon a number of years ago but never gave them much thought until I decided I needed a little help with new technology. Glenn the fitter, had me try a variety of heads/shafts, including some by that ultra expensive “legendary” Japanese forging house. I kept coming back to the Wishon 565’s (which looked just as nice and felt just as good). I’m very glad I did. I hit the ball longer, straighter, with a smaller dispersion….and all with that incomparable forged feel. I came away with several thoughts after going through the process and using the clubs: 1. Fitting REALY matters and your commitment to it speaks volumes about how you feel about getting golfers into the right clubs; 2. Wishon makes an exceptional, quality product, on par with (no pun intended) and even exceeding the “big boy” OEMs. 3. Don’t buy into the mass market advertising of the OEM’s…it doesn’t necessarily translate into a better game but it will decrease your bank account on a regular basis. I’m very pleased that my fitter turned me on to the Wishons and I’m sure I’ll be purchasing other Wishon’s in the future. Thank you very much for you continued efforts to educate golfers and to put them into the right clubs that add to their enjoyment of the game.
    Keep up the good work.

    • SCOTT

      WOW !! How nice is that for me as a designer to have the privilege and thrill to read your comment relating your experience from your fitting with Glenn !! Tons of golfers think the most fun I get in my career is designing the heads and shafts and doing the research I do that fuels the books and articles I write. No question that has always been a ton of fun. BUt it really does pale in comparison to my being able to hear or read what you have to say about YOUR experience and perception. It truly does – because it is so nice to know my work with Glenn’s stellar fitting work is allowing you to enjoy this great game a little more !! Thanks for that !!

      TOM

  21. May 2016

    I have had these new irons in the bag for a little over a month and WOW! Love the look and feel of these irons. Had the 560’s, but the 565’s are excellent in all areas. Great job Tom!

    • MIke:

      Ahhhhh, that is indeed “music to my ears” to be able to hear you say that about the new 565’s !!! Thanks for sharing that !!

      TOM

  22. I am currently in the market and looking for a new iron set. I am working on my game and working towards breaking 90 more consistently. I’m curious when you say these clubs are for single digits to mid handicappers, what you consider the top handicap number suitable to game these clubs. Cause while I’m working on my game and may have more work to be a true mid handicapper, these are a thing of beauty. And my ego would love to think I could game these. Thanks! Alex

    • ALEX

      Thanks very much for your interest. We’re always happy to help. It isn’t really a handicap number that we’d like to put on the 565MC irons to dictate use because you can have golfers of all sorts of different combinations of clubhead speed and ball striking ability end up with the same handicap. I would put the guideline out there by talking about clubhead speed and frequency of hitting the ball off center as the decision making factors. it works like this – the lower the clubhead speed AND the more the golfer hits the ball off center, the better it would be to move the golfer into a set like the 771CSI than the 565 because the high COR face of the 771 will add distance to make up for the lower speed AND the variable thickness face of the 771 will offer a little bit higher level of off center hit distance than can the 565.

      Now we all hit shots off center and we don;t count what our percentage in doing that might be. So I’d put it like this – if your normal average 5 or 6 iron clubhead speed is over 75mph, you can be fine with the 565’s as long as you get the lengths, lies, shaft, swingweight, grip all fit properly to you. But if you were under 75mph, I would recommend going with the 771’s.

      Hope this helps,
      TOM

    • Thanks Tom,

      Looking forward to setting up a fitting with Bob Williams in Pasadena, CA and hearing what he suggests. I’m sure we all could benefit from the distance and high COR of the 771 CSI, but will perhaps buy a set of 565’s to hang up above my fireplace.

      Thanks again for the info and response.

      Alex

    • Alex, we’re VERY GLAD to hear you will be working with Bob. He’s very, VERY good and he’s a super nice guy who cares completely about the quality of work he can do for you in your fitting analysis. Put your trust in him and his recommendations and you won’t be disappointed in the outcome.

      Thanks much and have fun when you work with Bob. And be sure to say HI to him from me !
      TOM

    • Thanks Tom,

      Very Excited. Will certainly tell Bob you say hello.

      Thanks again,

      Alex

  23. Hi Tom,
    That is ok. Things have to change – move forward – improve. I had a chance to compare the two heads side by side in Arnaud’s workshop in Arpaillargues-et-Aureilhac last week (he was happily unboxing one of your shipments). I admire (and yes, covet a little) the intriguing weight “button” in the cavity back of the 565, and the fact that the 565 seems sleeker and a minutiae slimmer in the sole, still, honestly,I have zero I mean zero regrets over becoming an owner of the 560 series just on the cusp of your upgrade. The 560mc heads are so precise and balanced. I haven’t had so much fun playing golf since I was a kid with my old button-back Wilson 70s blades. Add in Arnaud’s brilliant work and those aerotech steelfibers i95 and frankly I’ve been making some accurate approaches. Dropped my handicap back down to 8 or so – after having seen it fly up to about 14 since I turned 50. Can’t even imagine playing with my old Misuno set anymore! Thank you Tom, and to everyone with you there in Durango. I’ll get in touch with Arnaud over that 3 iron. And moving to one of your dedicated wedge sets is no real hardship, eh? /brad

    • BRAD

      Arnaud is good and I am pleased to hear that you worked with him for your fitting needs. And very glad you like the 560’s even after seeing the new 565’s!!

      Thanks much and the VERY best to you in this great game !!

      TOM

  24. Good evening Tom

    My name is Rob. I have just been fitted by my local coach with your new 565MC. I believe I am probably the first person in the UK to be hitting these new irons. After a lot of research and trying many different irons I was persuaded to try these. I have always been a fan of Titliest and Wilson irons. However after just one hit on the range tonight these irons blew me and my coach away. My shot shape and distance were incredible. The control, sound and feel are like nothing I have ever hit before. I have my first full round tomorrow with them, but am quietly confident I will produce some amazing golf. I will post some comments post my round. But so far just want to congratulate you on a perfectly forged iron. I am sure there was a touch of magic touch put into formula for these clubs.

  25. Hi Tom, I tried to add a 5 and 6 iron 560 MC to my set but unfortunately there are none available. I’m a 7 handicap and wondering if the 565’s would work for me. I put the aerotect 70 gram Steel fibre in the 560’s on your suggestion and am very pleased. Still would love to add a 5 or 6 iron 560 so if you know of any let me know. Also, aerotect 50 gram powercoil shaft works fantastic in your 919 high launch. I use your 331 utility clubs instead of a 5 and 6 iron 560.

    Tks
    Bob

    • BOB

      Sorry that the timing of discontinuing the 560MC has hit you like this. We did have the 560’s in our product line for 7 yrs which is a lot longer than 98% of all golf companies keep any models in their product lines. We do not have any of the 560-5 or 6 iron heads in the warehouse. They all were sold when we closed out the model. If you do want an actual 5 and 6 iron to match as close as possible to the 560’s, you could use the new 565. I did design it to be a 2nd generation model to follow on the 560MC. it looks a little different than the 560, but it is essentially very close such that it can work to allow you to have a 5 and 6 iron. And as a 7 hdcp, you are very definitely good enough to play this model, not a problem at all.

      TOM

  26. Hi Tom,
    I have just completed (1 month ago) a new set of 560MC irons (4-PW) and I have only just become aware that you have revamped the model.
    I’ve been on the fence about getting a 3 iron (I’m old-ish), and about getting a gap wedge. Can you offer your opinion on the mix-ability of those two MC series, if I were to delay too long and no longer be able to find them in the 560MC model? Would the 565MC 3 iron and gap wedge fit in a 560MC set comfortably? Given, of course, that it would be Arnaud Smaugh who would do the club-building and therefore any tweaking to fit would be expertly done. Thanks! /brad

    • BRAD:

      Among the left over heads from closing out the 560MC, we do have some of the 3 iron heads left in our warehouse. If you really wanted to have a 3 iron, the next time Arnaud orders products from us for his clubmaking work, he can ask us to include one of the leftover 3 iron heads and we would be glad to send it over to him so he could build it to match into your set. Unfortunately there are none of the AW heads left over. So for a gap wedge, you’d be advised to think about either the PCF Micro Tour or HM series gap wedges which of course can be adjusted to have the 50* loft that was the spec for the 560MC AW head.

      Thanks !
      TOM

  27. Hi Tom, i started playing golf around 6 years ago, and joined a club here. In the UK just over a year ago (playing off 27)My first set of fitted clubs was the 979ss made for me by Jamie Frith when I was on holiday in Florida 4 years ago. In the last year I have managed to get my handicap down to a more respectable 17, and a couple of months ago I went back to Jamie and he measured me up for the 565MC with step less stiff shaft. They arrived 2 days ago, I went out for the first time the day they arrived and could not believe how these clubs felt and how the ball responded. Went out last night to play a match against my club pro (part of the coaching programme I am on). After 4 holes he asked if I had been taking extra lessons as he has never seen me hit the ball so well. I showed him the clubs and he hit them, he was blown away, he uses AP1’s and said that these felt more responsive to him. The upshot – I shot a 78…….! These clubs are unbelievable and aesthetically stunning as well. I am a massive fan of your equipment and will be telling everyone about the TW range…. Goal for the year – handicap of 10. In order to get there I need to be nett 24 under in the 9 qualifying competitions. Achievable? Definitely with the irons in the bag.

    Totally amazing set of irons.

    • SEAN

      THANK YOU !! That’s really nice that you took the time to head to our site to share your experience with the new 565MC’s. You know, most people think that the best part of my “job” is the actual design and testing side of creating the new models. And sure, that is fun, but in reality, it’s more enjoyable when I get the chance to read a comment like yours here. For as much as I have loved this game and the equipment side, it’s really an honor when I get to hear that a golfer made the decision to get my clubs and then they liked them a lot so the game became more fun! That’s something special for me to hear and think about !

      Thanks again and the very best to you in this great game !!

      TOM

  28. Just got my 560s last year and now this?????? Actually, I thought the only thing that would improve that club was putting some beef behind the hitting area. This now does that. Some MacGregor 685 influence here? Now, back to Hintze for a set.

  29. Tom,
    Thanks for your response. I have Frank from FS Golf putting a 565 4 iron together as we “speak”. Excited to give it a try! And eager to try some of your wood designs in the next couple of months as well. Additionally, Thank you for all your videos. As a carpenter/framer/home builder it is evident from one tradesman to another that not only do you know your trade, but are in love with it as well.
    Sincerely,
    Jarrod

    • Thanks Jarrod, you are in good hands, very good hands indeed, working with Frank Stranick for sure !!!
      TOM

  30. Mr. Wishon:
    I have been working with my local club fitter in Neenah, WI and couldn’t be more pleased. I will be ordering 14 new clubs, the irons will be the new 565’s, from your company through him when the fitting process is completed and cannot wait for this latest snow storm to pass through and melt so we can all get back at it here in ‘Sconnie. My question is one more out of curiosity than anything. I have no disillusions of ever becoming a pro or even a super low handicapper, I’m 33 and really only developed a passion for the game over the last 5 years. So my question is this: Is there such a thing as an IDEAL 12 key club fitting specs that, THROUGH SCIENCE, would maximize distance, trajectory, flight path, etc. that a professional golfer would be able to tailor their swing to? I realize this is kind of backwards to the club fitting philosophy, and with so many, many variables, possibly impossible, but you would know better than I! Again, I am being fitted to MY SPECS and have no interest in trying to play golf beyond my means. My question is simply one of curiosity and intrigue, now that I have been obsessing over your clubs, fitting process, and technology for the past month as I have been meeting with my club fitter. Thank you in advance for your insight into this probably impossible hypothetical. Cheers from the Badger State!

    • Thanks very much for your message and your interest for sure ! I’m glad to hear that you are happy with the fitting work done by your clubmaker! Your question is very interesting – sort of a different thought about the effect of equipment on the swing and vice versa. The golfer’s own individual swing characteristics are what dictates what the best fitting specs are going to be to maximize distance, accuracy, shot consistency, shot trajectory and the feel of the clubs. For each different golfer, there is a combination of the 12 key fitting specs that will optimize everything from a performance standpoint. Now there is some wiggle room – depending on the player, the fitting specs can vary a little bit and still be good for the golfer. But not by a large amount as it is so true that the swing characteristics dictate what the 12 fitting specs need to be for each golfer. is it possible to change the clubs so it forces the golfer to use different swing characteristics to play with, and which might be better swing characteristics for the golfer? I don’t really believe in that – I think it best for a golfer who wishes to make substantial improvement to first find a competent swing coach with whom he can work to find what swing characteristics are best for him to try to learn. We are all different as humans in terms of our neuro muscular and anatomical make up. Not all of us can perform the same types of motions with our bodies. That’s becoming a VERY important part of swing coaching these days for the best fitters to learn bio mechanics of humans so they can predict before they start teaching a golfer, what motions can this player perform and do, and what motions can’t they do. I do believe in using training aids to groove a new swing motion, when monitored by the coach. But I tend to not think it wise to build golf clubs to force a golfer into a specific different swing motion – that’s expensive to do for one thing, and for the other, who’s going to determine what club specs are right to force a golfer into a different swing motion?

      TOM

  31. Tom,

    I am looking for a replacement for my Miura CB202 iron heads. I will be 50 this year and am just starting to see the loss of distance through age I now typically carry my 7 iron 145yds. I like the look of the new 565MC but wondered if the 771CSI would be better for me now. My HCP is 9 but I practice 4/5 times a week in the season and managed my first ever round to SCR last year. What would the difference in Offset on the 771CSI make I think the gap is about 3degs per club to my current set up.

    • GARY

      What you might want to consider right now since you say you are just starting to see a loss of distance from age/clubhead speed is to bend the lofts on the Miura set lower by 1 to 2 degs. Their sole design should allow that without causing any sole bounce/dig problems and it would buy you some time before you have to spring for a new set, if you really like the Miuras. A 1-2* bend would increase the offset but not by enough to really matter and I have to believe not enough to cause a visual distraction. The change in millimeters of offset per degree of loft lowering is very small.

      There is a slight bit of offset on the 771CSI irons. I personally don;t like big offset on any iron so I don’t ever do offset more than 5-6mm and I always do offset as a progression so it gets gradually less down to the wedges. So the 771’s actual offset goes from 6mm on the 4 iron to 5mm on the 5, and then drops down to 3mm on the wedges. Most non offset termed designs have a measured offset from 3mm to 2mm. So it’s only on the 4 and 5 that you might see it to be more than what you are used to.

      But here’s the deal. I full well know that some players cannot stand to look at even 5mm of offset on an iron. if that’s you, then I would try to work on the distance loss through a combination of lowering the loft 1-2* over what it is now on these irons you own, AND ALSO to start looking for an 80g graphite shaft that you like the feel of, stiffness wise – so you can drop the total weight lower from what I assume is a steel shaft now in the irons. Drop the total weight by 25 grams or more, which can be done with an 80g graphite shaft, and you can gain 1-2mph more clubhead speed just from the shaft weight change. You will have to experiment with the head weight to get the swingweight where you want it for YOUR sense of head feel and timing on the downswing, but that’s just a test club process of hitting shots, adding weight to the head, hitting shots, add weight, until you get to the point you FEEL the weight in the head is not too light nor too heavy for your tempo and sense of timing.

      If you considered the move to graphite, then do it with ONE IRON TO START so you can experiment with the shaft and the head weight before you pull the trigger on the set.

      Or, if the slight offset of the 771 is not a problem for you, then I would recommend you do consider hitting this iron. There is no question the high COR variable thickness face is extremely good and will bring back some lost distance without lowering loft.

      Hope this helps,
      TOM

  32. Tom,
    This is in addition to my last email. I play the titleist ap2 with dg s300 shaft. I just recently hit the titelist 716mb with dg X100 shaft. Honestly, this mb was pure and on center hits are pure joy. Noticeable off center hits, are rough compared to ap2, but definitely the mbs are awesome to feel and butter soft with certainly more of the tour feel. So how do these new 565s rate between the two. Would they lean closer to the ap2 or the mb, and would they be a club to fall in between the two or are they more like the ap1s?
    Thanks in advance.
    Jarrod

    • JArrod
      First off, my sincere apology for the big delay in responding. The notification feature for posts and comments was not working so we haven’t seen the posts being made here for us to respond. That’s a big Ooops. Sorry about that.

      The new 565’s are what I might describe as part one part the other. No way you can duplicate the on center hit feel of a thick, solid back muscleback because that’s just a lot thicker steel cross section behind the impact point than you get with any cavity back. But there is no possible way any muscleback can even hold a candle to the off center hit forgiveness of the 565. Not even close there.

      My recommendation to you since you indicate that you really have a refined sense of impact feel would be to try our 575MMC Cavity back iron. It’s compact like a muscleback, the cavity depth is not as deep as the 565, so the section thickness of metal behind the impact point is thicker than that of the 565. The off center hit forgiveness won’t be as good with a 575 Cavity Back as with a 565 because of the difference in cavity depth between the two, but the 575 CB off center hits will be a lot better than any muscleback.

      Hope this helps,
      TOM

  33. Hi Tom, love the products. Checked with one of your authorized fitters and it sounds like the 565s are going to be late March which may be bit longer than I want to wait. If so, are the 560s still available? Thanks.

    • CHUCK
      First of all, please accept my apology for the long delay in responding to your question and post, The auto notification feature of the blog that is supposed to tell me/us that posts are waiting for response was “broken” or messed up such that none of us knew that posts were here and waiting. VERY sorry for the Oops on that.

      Since I am late in responding, I can tell you that the 565’s began to ship this week. We do have them in stock now. And we did close out the 560s last month to make room for the arrival of the new 565’s. So I hope you get a chance to see and hit this new model.

      TOM

  34. Tom… if you’re thinking of changing irons I think you’ll love the 771’s. Keith Chatham built me a set back in Aug. 14 and they are awesome. I expect to play these irons for many years still. Oh by the way… they were designed by a guy named Wishon? Check him out sometime.

  35. Tom,

    Will these launch higher or lower than the 560MC’s or is that negligible? I hit my 560’s pretty high, so just curious. These look great. May have to build me a new set of these!

    • JOE
      Hit testing with the 565MC’s showed a very, very slightly lower launch angle for the same loft as on the 560’s. but not more than a 1* change in launch angle which is really for all intents and purposes, insignificant. Thanks so much for your kind comment on them !
      TOM

  36. Hi Tom,

    I enjoy reading your comments on Golfwrx. You do a great job of explaining the difference between fact and fiction.

    The 565 irons look very impressive.

    My swing is very steep and i seem to get better results with irons with ample bounce.{Ping i25 Srixon Z745 etc}

    Just wondering how the 565 MC irons would compare bounce wise. Are there bounce options?

    Would custom sole grinding ever be something that a company could offer at a fair price? Some of the other companies offering that service charged so hard they had a very limited customer base.

    What are your thoughts on 3D printing and would that ever work on golf clubs?

    Thanks in advance.

    Stonewalljim.

    • JIM
      Thanks very much for your kind words about my efforts to separate fact from fiction in the equipment side of the game. I have always disliked when golfers are misled by errant information or over hyped claims about golf clubs. I do my best in this field because I know how I feel when I am interested in a product in other fields in which I have zero product experience and worry about who’s telling me the truth.

      The 565MC are designed with a substantial radius from face to back across the sole in addition to their normal actual degrees of bounce for the sole angle. I also progress the bounce a little more as loft increases because golfers tend to become a little more steep with the higher number irons due to moving the ball back progressively in their stance. The increased face to back sole radius does in essence increase the bounce at the front half of the sole due to the greater radius. So I would think this is enough for your steeper Angle of Attack, but if you had any worry, then the thing to do would be to visit a clubfitter in your area to test hit an iron of the 565’s to see for yourself if the sole design is enough for your needs. No company would offer different bounce versions of an iron model as it is just not a wise inventory thing to do.

      It’s also not really possible to take the 565’s or any of our models to re grind the sole angle. The heads could end up too light after additional material would be removed from the forward 2/3 of the sole to increase the bounce, plus doing that would also increase the offset a little bit which would change the look of the head in the address position. It’s just not practical to do that, I am sorry.

      From all my experience with CAD and 3d printing which used to be called rapid prototyping which goes all the way back to the mid 90s when the very first rapid prototyping machines were made by Univ of Texas researchers when I was in Austin, for clubheads it is something that is great for creating test prototypes to make decisions before going into a final production model, but it will never be viable for producing clubheads for sale to golfers. It could never be viable for mass production because of the time and cost. And to think of it for a custom offering, that could be done theoretically, but in the practical sense the costs would be so much higher to the end user golfers that it just could never be anything more than a very high end, super custom, elite offering from a company.

      TOM

  37. Been playing the 575’s since they come out. Getting older and playing a bit less. Was thinking of ordering a set of the 560’s, but now I see I must wait. Great looking irons and I can’t wait to give them a try.

  38. Ah-ha! Now I see what you were talking about that evening in November at the AGCP Roundtable. VERY classy-looking iron design, Tom!

    I already have customers asking me about building them sets of these irons, so I am sure that you will be seeing some 565MC orders from me come March )I may even have to build a set for myself!)

    Doug

    • Sneaky of me, eh ???!!! Good to hear from you and thanks much ! That was fun having the chance to have that much time with you and the guys at the “hole in the wall” diner in Columbus in Nov !! I enjoyed that a lot.

      TOM

  39. I own the 771’s now and believe I’m ready for a less offset iron. Distance and forgivness is unbelievable with the 771’s and difenetly has me spoiled. How do these compare with the 771’s in the distance and forgiveness category…

    • RW
      the 565 MC in no way can compare distance wise or even forgiveness wise to the 771CSI. The 565 are a forged one piece carbon steel iron so their COR is conventional, traditional like all other forged carbon steel irons. The 771 with their high strength thin steel face have a higher COR so the distance for the same loft will be greater with the 771 than with the 565 or any other one piece iron. The 771 is also designed with a thin, variable thickness face so that brings a little bit higher level of off center hit distance and forgiveness than what is possible with the deep CNC machined cavity of the 565. The 565 forgiveness is better than any other forged carbon steel cavity back iron that I know of, but it won;t be quite as forgiving as what we can do with a high strength steel alloy welded face made with a variable thickness design as in the 771. 771 is really for players who want more distance overall no matter what, or have begun to lose distance due to a beginning of a drop in clubhead speed. That’s the first and foremost reason to play the 771. 565 is for the player who has always preferred a more traditional iron and who is not in need of extra distance to make up for any distance deficiency, but they know that they can’t hit as many on center hit shots as they may like so they know they also need decent off center hit forgiveness.

      Hope this helps,
      TOM

    • Thanks Tom, the 565’s sound perfect for me and I can’t wait to try them. Distance and off center hits are not my weakness. I’m hoping with the 565’s being less offset my draw and misses left will be a little less of an occurrence…

  40. This now one very classy club.

    • Thanks SO MUCH Geoff, that means a lot coming from you with your depth of experience in the field !!! (takes me a while, but I think I am still learning how to make good clubhead models !! HA!!)

      TOM

  41. That they feel even better than the 560s is certainly intriguing, Tom. I’ll have to try hitting them once Golf Science get some sent over. Have these finally got you to switch your personal set from the 560 prototypes?!?

    • In all honesty I am in a bit of a conundrum personally with my irons for 2016. Age has me now 1/2 club shorter thanks to a little drop in clubhead speed, so I am GREEDILY thinking of the 771’s to make that back up !! HA! There’s the final hitting tests I did on the 565’s which I really liked because of my long time favoritism toward a traditional totally non offset iron which have me thinking that direction. And then there is all this work we did and which I completed as the last final hitting test person with the new single lengths. I wanted to skip them from the standpoint of my own personal set because I am personally such a traditionalist. But as I kept hitting this single length 5 iron I found myself liking them more and more. So I don;t know what’s up for my bag for the year – maybe I will have three bags !!!!

  42. I love my 560s Tom, but these are definitely prettier. Damn!
    I see you’ve tweaked most of the lofts by a degree. Could always be bent back to older standards though.

    • DUNCAN

      Thanks very much and yes, I am very pleased with everything about the new 565 including the looks. These days if you have lofts based on a 27* or higher 5 iron, you get left in the dust. So yes, I felt I had to push the loft down one vs the old 560 but as you said, it can be tweaked back to whatever you want.

      TOM

    • Just beware that if you bend the lofts 1 degree weaker you’ll increase the bounce angle, which is fine (maybe even preferred) if you’re a digger, or have a very late release and/or deloft the club at impact. But if you’re a picker who has a shallow/flat swing, or if you have an early release or deloft the club at impact, then you need to be careful about adding more bounce because it increases the chances of hitting it thin.

    • JAMES

      A 1* increase in sole angle is really insignificant to any element of performance. it is just too small of a movement of the sole angle to matter in any way. You have to start getting the sole angle change to be 3* or more before a golfer could begin to notice any difference in how the club traveled through the turf or ground. So that means you can go right ahead and weaken a loft by 1, 2 degrees and not have any problems. Where the problem can more likely occur is when you bend loft lower on irons – in that case you are reducing bounce. If the iron has been designed with a zero bounce or 1* bounce sole angle to begin with, bending the loft 2* lower will turn that sole angle into a scoop sole which could promote more of a digger effect in the turf/ground. But there is really very little problem in bending lofts higher and having the bounce increase by 2 even 3*.

      TOM

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *