The new Cleveland RTX ZipCore wedges have been getting rave reviews as of late on the THP Forum. With many golfers using this end of their bag as extensions to their irons, we got to thinking about forgiveness and how it impacts full swings. Here is Cleveland RTX ZipCore vs CBX2 wedges.
Our content is about answering your questions and this is the number one question we have received about wedges…Does Forgiveness Matter? This is a pretty eye opening video showing the swings and data from two VERY different styles and let you decide which would be right for you.
The goal was simple, to show two very different wedge styles and what impact that would have for those that use them for full swings. When we began shooting, we genuinely had no idea what the outcome would be. There is no denying how solid both of the lines from Cleveland Golf are, but outside of being from the same company, stark differences exist.
Important to note that there will be some sole and versatility differences between these two lines. As you get into flighting, workability and some areas around the green other aspects become apparent. For this comparison however, we wanted to focus on the question we get asked the most. Does forgiveness matter in wedges and using Cleveland RTX ZipCore vs CBX2 wedges to demonstrate.
After watching the video above, which one is right for you and what style of wedge do you play? You can find more information about both ZipCore and CBX2 at their website here.
Question. Seems like the CBX2 is made for full shots while the Zipcore would be for working the ball a bit more. Would you think a good option for people who are creative around the green would be to get the Zipcore in a higher loft for greenside shots, then the CBX2 in a lower loft to pair more for shots that require a full swing? I see most people wanting the same set of wedges throughout, but this data might suggest going that route could have some benefits.
Great video!
I think it will depend on the person and how much sole differences they play with around the green for versatility. The CBX2 is more versatile than people think as Cleveland did a pretty darn good job with the sole. With that said, the ZipCore definitely has some merit there.
This this this, not to mention, they added the CBX full face which offers a more versatile grind in those touch shot realms to increase the ability to still manipulate shots as needed.
I really like the Zipcore around the green. Have an RTX-3 CB that I enjoy on full shots, but not really anything less that 3/4 swing. I havent considered the CBX2 because of this experience with the RTX-3 CB, but sounds like I may need to rethink that position and give it a try.
This is a nice test, I too switched from a blade wedge (Vokey SM7) to a more forgiving wedge (Ping Glide 3.0).
The CBX2 was useless for me with full swings but pretty nice for chips and pitches. ????
Having reviewed the CBX and CBX2, they’re eye openers in what they do and just how they feel. Maybe not the most versatile, but for straight forward golfers that flight and spin, but more importantly the consistency, is a potential boon for their games.
Well done!
If you need added forgivness on chip and pitch shots then practice more. The loss of feel and control is not worth the trade-off that comes with any cavity back wedge.
The urethane ball might have increased spin a bit, but as you get further away from the green and are hitting full shots, the spin difference isn’t as high as some believe it to be. Compression would be similar to his regular ball.
I’m curious if you watched the video?
Because I don’t necessarily agree with this and it would be completely dependent based on the set of irons. A good example of that is the new JPX-921 lineup.
I’ll just have to do some testing haha. Truth be told, I dont use many full wedge shots, unless its PW, during a round. This was more observations I had while at the range or practicing in the backyard.
I struggled in the GW until I put the same shaft I played in my irons into it. That said, not everything fits everyone in this crazy game of ours haha
I think that’s an old path that with the advent of clubs like the CBX2 and even now Callaways CB wedge option is going away. These give the best of both worlds potentially and bridge a gap that needed bridging.
It’s always easy to say practice more, and it’s usually true, but why do we still refuse to believe that a club design can aid in that and make the game more enjoyable as well?
Such a different beast for sure.
Thanks, and add another to the ponder list now
Yes. You can watch it there now
.View attachment 8971542
I have had very good experiences with the “forgiving” wedges – I have CBX, HiToe, and HiToe Bigfoot in the bag. I think I will stay in that profile wedge for the foreseeable future.
I’ve always thought it strange that so many golfers play GI or SGI irons and automatically go to a traditional muscle back design for their wedges. Obviously something like the CBX2 would leave many of us closer to the hole after our approach. If these have tighter dispersion for a plus index like @Canadan, it stands to reason they could help a bogey golfer even more.
I gamed a CBX SW for a few years and cavity back Taylomade ATV LW & SW when my index was at it’s lowest point in decades about 7 years ago. After watching the video I may have to revisit my thinking and add a couple of CBX2 wedges to my bag. I’ll throw my old CBX GW in my bag for my rounds this weekend and see how I hit it.
@Canadan: if you had to put one of those in your bag right now, which would it be?
What if you play a set of cavity back irons that doesn’t have a set GW? Also, if it’s a player CB, what makes it more forgiving than the CBX2 wedge? Painting a rather broad stroke there, no?
What if you don’t need forgiveness, you need straight line distance to fill a gap? I am happy to show my dispersion on the face representing a fairly similar area of contact – and the CBX2 was pretty much unanimously better in both feel and control.
View attachment 8971546
what is crazy to me here is how the dispersion here is nearly the same yet the numbers on the monitor seem to tell a totally different story.
Very solid contact pattern. As they say, You can lead a horse to water but you can’t make them drink.
How did the perform solely as a pitching and chipping option? I never full swing a wedge. Just don’t hit far enough to need that.
The impact location shown by @Canadan a few posts up are pretty indicative of good strikes overall.
Only because he was swinging it faster on average. Perhaps the difference in stock shafts is the cause of that.
Otherwise, the CBX, in this test, was no more forgiving, no more consistent, and not as close to the hole on average. Plus you give up some versatility around the green at minimum due to a lack of sole/grind options.
But but but all clubs are the same nowadays Dan.
I would hope that’s not the case. I’ve used spinner shafts in my wedges for years.
Sure. I was not saying there where "bad" swings or strikes. He is too consistent for that. Just good and better. Which leads me to believe there is a potential fitting difference on top of a design difference. Just a thought.
If the CBX2 had a low-bounce option in a 60* I would have gone with it, but I have no problem with my mixed set. Now with two 60* wedges, I’ll have to decide which to carry based on the conditions at whatever course I’m playing.
I can’t disagree with the forgiveness comments enough.
Also, having played both and put the same shafts in each, TI S400, I saw the exact flight and spin characteristics @Canadan did
Have you looked at the CBX full face?
Could be. I think there is something to the minor misses that we all tend to have. If a balance point of a head is tiny, which it is, where weight is placed naturally will have an impact vs where the ball makes contact.
Of course breaking it all down on a monitor where we examine things by the yard is very different than real world play where the difference between 8 yards and 9 yards isn’t really shown.
The standard deviation (read: variance) in dispersion, while small, was doubled with ZipCore over CBX2. My impression was that CBX2 was incredibly consistent, and the data stands to confirm that.
Also, does the conversation have to be about the full wedge spectrum? Considering I use my 58 exclusively around the green, why would I care that my 54 or 50 didn’t have the same grind versatility?
This spinner is not that spinner. This shaft is basically a s400 8 iron shaft soft stepped down to a wedge shaft. The OG hour glass spinner shafts were an entirely different animal.
I also loved that shaft.. But not many did… haha.
What surprised me most was the difference in launch. The zipcore wedges being higher was a bit of a shocker. But, with golf not everything always out how it is marketed. Low spin heads for some people spin more, low launch shafts launch higher etc…
great point that is very player dependent on how each uses their wedges.
They weren’t released yet when I got my wedges, but I have looked, and the 60* is still not low-bounce at 10*.
While true, it is important to note that bounce is only one dynamic of versatility and with modern sole design, the number can actually be a little misleading. Misleading is probably the wrong word, but maybe not as telling about the product as other aspects. Here is @vgolfman explaining it better than I think anybody ever has.
No, but the sole grind is super versatile. And I say that as one who loves low bounce in his LW