Cleveland RTX ZipCore vs CBX2 Wedges

I think it’s important to showcase the contact created by many shots with both heads. You may be able to detective your way into knowing which head is which, but I don’t think it’s necessary. They are both being struck exactly where they need to be.

8740483A-EE7B-412E-9CD5-8C6489A608DA.jpeg

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.
 
Great video and awesome content. The CBX2 looks like a great overall wedge for the majority of golfers.
 
I think it’s important to showcase the contact created by many shots with both heads. You may be able to detective your way into knowing which head is which, but I don’t think it’s necessary. They are both being struck exactly where they need to be.

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.:)
 
Yeah, all of this checks out with my testing too but I’ve never seen anything so clear between the two options that show what they bring to the table. I’ma huge ZipCore fan and just outfitted the whole bag with them but the CBX2 may end up making a comeback at the 50*. Great, great video
 
Great video Canadan.

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!

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.
 
Nice information and very well produced. I have not played Cleveland in years but plan to potentially try out next Spring and would consider both or more likely a combination. Likely the ZipCore for around the green areas as from the video prefer look, but could see putting the other into the bag as well as the numbers given are very good on the other model.
 
Those numbers look to be heavily influenced by strike quality. I wonder if you and the spinner shaft do not really get along...
 
Those numbers look to be heavily influenced by strike quality. I wonder if you and the spinner shaft do not really get along...

The impact location shown by @Canadan a few posts up are pretty indicative of good strikes overall.
 
Lower launch, more spin, little extra distance. Good work @Canadan and an interesting video.
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.
 
I think it’s important to showcase the contact created by many shots with both heads. You may be able to detective your way into knowing which head is which, but I don’t think it’s necessary. They are both being struck exactly where they need to be.

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.
But but but all clubs are the same nowadays Dan. ;)
 
Those numbers look to be heavily influenced by strike quality. I wonder if you and the spinner shaft do not really get along...
I would hope that's not the case. I've used spinner shafts in my wedges for years.
 
The impact location shown by @Canadan a few posts up are pretty indicative of good strikes overall.

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.
 
I carry both in my bag, the CBX2 in 50* and 55*, which I hit a lot of full shots with, but are also my primary clubs around the greens, forgiveness and versatility, great wedges! I went with the RTX4 for my 60*, it's my specialty club, low bounce for the hard bunkers at most of the courses around here, and occasional shots around the green when more loft is a better option than opening the face of one of the other wedges, I rarely hit a full swing with this 60*. I've also been testing the ZipCore Tour Rack wedge, 60* Full, and it is working great for me. With the higher bounce, and the custom S-Shaped sole, I am way more comfortable hitting full shots with it, especially from tight lies, than I am with my low-bounce 60*, but I know it won't work as well from the hard bunkers.

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.
 
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.
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
 
I carry both in my bag, the CBX2 in 50* and 55*, which I hit a lot of full shots with, but are also my primary clubs around the greens, forgiveness and versatility, great wedges! I went with the RTX4 for my 60*, it's my specialty club, low bounce for the hard bunkers at most of the courses around here, and occasional shots around the green when more loft is a better option than opening the face of one of the other wedges, I rarely hit a full swing with this 60*. I've also been testing the ZipCore Tour Rack wedge, 60* Full, and it is working great for me. With the higher bounce, and the custom S-Shaped sole, I am way more comfortable hitting full shots with it, especially from tight lies, than I am with my low-bounce 60*, but I know it won't work as well from the hard bunkers.

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.
Have you looked at the CBX full face?
 
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.

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.
 
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.
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?
 
I would hope that's not the case. I've used spinner shafts in my wedges for years.

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.
 
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.

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...
 
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?

great point that is very player dependent on how each uses their wedges.
 
Have you looked at the CBX full face?
They weren't released yet when I got my wedges, but I have looked, and the 60* is still not low-bounce at 10*.
 
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.

 
Really enjoyed that comparrison @Canadan ! I haven't tried the CBX2, but really liked the CBX1 and when it comes time for new wedges (which could be soon) they will be in the mix for sure.
 
That was impressive and surprised me a bit. I was expecting more spin from the zipcore than the cbx2. I liked the CBX wedge and look forward to trying out a more forgiving wedge. I've played a set wedge in my AW and PW spots and thought this would be a great place to try a wedge like the Cbx2 to have forgiveness but more grind options to benefit my pitching and chipping. After seeing this I think the SW & LW slots are in consideration too!
 
Last edited:
They weren't released yet when I got my wedges, but I have looked, and the 60* is still not low-bounce at 10*.
No, but the sole grind is super versatile. And I say that as one who loves low bounce in his LW (y)
 
Back
Top