Wilson Staff C200 Irons Review Thread

Girardcorp said:

Any thoughts on what percentage of those distance gains were the club vs getting properly fit for a shaft?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

Girardcorp said:

Any thoughts on what percentage of those distance gains were the club vs getting properly fit for a shaft?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

Robman7 said:

Absolutely. Now I imagine some seen a bigger gain than I did but it was just enough to allow me to get those farther distances with the 5 and 6 iron

Click to expand...

Robman7 said:

For me, I believe it was the club. I'm not a pro by any means, but the shaft in my C200 feel wise isn't much different than my Amp cells. You can actually feel the face flex and the ball compress off the face. You know something good is happening when you connect with the ball with these

Click to expand...

War Eagle said:

you've been known to hit the ball, well, kind of high...

Any issues with these ballooning?

Click to expand...

Robman7 said:

Honestly, more of a penetrating flight with these which surprises me. I thought with my sweeping swing I have and the flexing of the face that I would surely be ballooning all over. Not the case, still can make a 6 iron look like a 9 though! But not the clubs fault

Click to expand...

War Eagle said:

you've been known to hit the ball, well, kind of high...

Any issues with these ballooning?

Click to expand...

Rusty Casino said:

Glad some guys are getting out there to hit these and confirming what we saw since #staffproto. These things are a game changer. Long, forgiving and the perfect feel and sound.
As a matter of fact, I'm getting the same sound as the guys hitting their irons at the Sony Open today.

Click to expand...

lopsta5 said:

I seen these in hand today and they look better in person than pictures. I think i might have to go try them.

Click to expand...

deuce said:

The message coming out of Wilson Staff headquarters in 2015 was that they were committed to creating quality equipment – from the golf ball to the clubs – and re-establish the brand as the go-to company for player’s intent on utilizing the best equipment that could be designed. Not content to target one specific type of golfer, Wilson Staff has designed clubs that range the entire gamut. Their F-C-D system helps fit golfers to clubs they prefer, whether it be for Feel, Distance, or a Crossover of the two. This review will delve into discussing the latest addition to the Wilson Staff crossover line of clubs, the soon to be released C200.

Reviewer Note
The set I gamed prior to being fit into the C200’s (by no one other than Duffy himself) were the Cleveland 588 MT’s (steel shafts, regular flex, 85 grams, standard L/L/L heads). So all comparisons will be to that set of irons. Likewise, I am a high handicap (25 HDCP) who tends to hit a low ball with a driver swing speed of around 90-95 mph.

Setup
I was fitted into the C200’s with the lie set to 2° weak. Shaft is regular flex graphite, in the previously unreleased Aldila Rogue iron shafts, which are 75 grams. Grips are Golf Pride MCC New Decade Multicompound’s with an extra wrap at the bottom to mimic the MCC Plus4’s.

Looks
Naturally, the first thing that stands out with the C200’s is the FLX Face technology. These “Power Holes” encompass the entire 17-4 stainless steel face and are filled with a black TE031 urethane which provides a stark contrast to the remainder of the club head. The back of the cavity-designed irons have a silver badge which carries the C200 logo with a splash of red coloring. The badge is framed with a black polymer, possibly plastic, that sports the W/S shield, while advertising the FLX Face technology. A combination of polished metal on the toe and heel, and brushed metal/satin finish on the sole and the top back of the iron, maintain the C200’s sleek look while breaking up the monotony of a single finish - if the power holes don’t achieve that all on their own. Since the power holes wrap around the entire head they are visible at address, but the black color didn’t grab my eye like potentially another color (e.g., red) might have. Compared to my previous irons, the topline of the C200’s is considerably thinner (see picture comparing the two). Likewise the sole is slightly thinner than the 588 MT’s but lack the beveled edge towards the back that are found in the Cleveland irons, while the hosel in the C200’s is slightly longer.

I won’t spend too much time talking about the Aldila Rogue iron shafts in this review, other than to say a couple of things. First, Wilson Staff is the first company to come out with these new shafts in their irons (major coup!), and second they feel great! For more thoughts of mine on these shafts, check my comments in the Aldila Rogue iron shaft review thread.

​Introducing, the C200's

Specifications

C200	Loft
3	19°
4	22°
5	25°
6	28°
7	32°
8	36°
9	40°
PW	44°
GW	48°

The lofts on the C200’s are identical to their previous iteration in the C100’s. For this set, the longer irons are separated by 3° of loft while the scoring irons are separated by 4°. In comparison, lofts on the F5’s are weaker by 2 or 3° depending on the iron, and the D200’s are stronger by a degree at all lofts.

Comparison of C200 and 588 MT faces

Comparison of C200 and MT 588 toplines

Performance
When Wilson Staff first came out with their F-C-D classification system, the C stood for Control. While they’ve maintained the Feel and Distance categories, as previously mentioned they’ve rebranded the C as “Crossover”. One of the main reasons – I assume – for this is that these irons don’t lack in the “Distance” category. In other words, the FLX Face technology flat out works. Wilson Staff states that the technology allows the face to flex, maintaining contact with the ball longer, and allowing for the ball to launch off the face with more energy. In turn, one should see increased distances. I’m not a long hitter by any stretch of the imagination, with my 7i – on average – netting me around 132 to 135 yards. With the C200s that’s increased to 145 yards on average, so I’ve gained roughly around 10 yards. That distance gain has been maintained throughout the set, so even my GW now goes a consistent 10 or so yards longer. However, I do not consistently hit the sweet spot on my irons, so when I do put a pure stroke on the ball, the C200’s carry considerably further than my 588 MTs ever would. On obvious mishits, I do lose distance, but even those shots are not as bad as they used to be. In fact, it could probably be argued that most of my shots are mishits, so if my average has increased overall, then these irons can definitely be considered forgiving. I have flown more greens in the two months I have played with the C200’s than I did the entire time I played my other iron sets … on shots that were not bladed. So yeah, the C200’s are long. As I mentioned previously, I do not hit a high ball. I wish I did, but I typically don’t. With the C200’s I was fit into the Aldila Rogue graphite shafts, and according to Duffy these would give me a higher ball flight. This turns out to be the case, and while I still don’t hit my iron shots into the clouds, they are noticeably higher. This, in turn, has allowed me to stick more greens on approach shots than before, even with the two piece surlyn ball I typically employ.

Aldila Rogue iron shafts, W/S first to come to market with them

In hand, the C200s definitely feel lighter than my previous set of irons. This can, at least partially be attributed to the 10 gram difference in shafts, and not knowing the weight of the iron heads themselves, I can’t say anything other than there does appear to be a difference. Despite being lighter though, I don’t lose the club head at any point in my swing.

I don’t work the ball much so I can’t confirm/deny whether or not these irons really do perform well when it comes to workability. However I can confirm that I’ve hit many a high and straight ball with these irons. I tend to have a slight cut with my iron swing and this continues to be the case with these irons. One would think that with the urethane “insert” the sound of these irons would be somewhat muted, though I did not feel that this was the case. Perhaps I don’t have an ear for those sorts of things, but it had a typical sound off the face … at the very least, it wasn’t something that gave me pause or sounded out of the ordinary. And lastly, feel. The feedback on well struck shots was definitely present for me. I can’t exactly describe the sensation, a mix of sound and feel up the shaft into the hands, but it’s obvious the second you make contact. It’s a sensation I have experienced with the 588 MTs so I was very happy that this feedback was present in this set as well, and could have very well been the one major deal-breaker had it been absent.

One last point I want to mention in this review is the importance of fitting. In working with Duffy, we noticed my miss was often to the left. Wear patterns on the sole indicated that I tend to strike towards the heel. By weakening the lie two degrees, he was able to straighten out my ball flight immediately. I would never have imagined that such a simple tweak would have such a profound effect, but it did. Go get fit folks!

Durability
I’ve been able to play these irons pretty regularly for the past couple of months and they’ve held up really well. The major concern for me was the durability of the urethane, but if you’re thinking golf ball cover, the insert doesn’t have that soft urethane feel to it. It’s definitely a more solid/strong/tough material, but isn’t rock hard like plastic. For instance, if you push a thumbnail into the urethane, it doesn’t leave an impression. The holes are also filled entirely so they won’t fill with dirt, grass, or any other detritus you might encounter on the golf course. There also isn’t a pocket in the cavity area so you don’t have to worry about cleaning out any debris after a particularly chunky shot, or a wet, muddy day of golf. The satin finish on the sole does seem to mask smaller nicks and scratches that accumulate from the sandy soils of the Carolina’s so my irons look pretty close to newish save on the face. I must admit however that I use head covers on my irons so I can’t comment on bag chatter.

Conclusion
Before being accepted into the W/S #StaffProto event, I was perfectly happy with the 588 MT’s. They were the first set that I felt provided me with sufficient feedback, but were forgiving enough for my high handicap game. Going into the event I knew that the C200’s would really have to shine in several categories to make me swap out the Cleveland’s for them. In the end however, it wasn’t much of a contest. In every category the C200’s provided me with a better option which is why they are now the foundation of my bag, and will continue to be so for the foreseeable future. From the confidence-building look at address, to the FLX Face technology that places me deeper into parts of the course I have never hit into before, the C200’s are going to find high praise in many corners of the golfing world in 2016. This is a line that will find its way into many a bag, from the hackers to the players. So if you’re looking for more distance, but want to retain the ability to work the ball and receive feedback from your swings, the C200 deserves a look.

Click to expand...

RJS622 said:

Duece or the Other THP Testers,
I have a question. Your handicap is similar to mine (I'm a 20) and I noticed you were fitted for the Rogue REGULAR flex shaft at 75 grams. I'm very close to pulling the trigger on a set of the C200's and I'm considering the A flex. If the S flex is 85 grams and the R flex is 75 grams, do you think I'm safe to assume that the A senior flex is 65 grams?

I currently game the D200's with the EC Regular flex which is 59 grams I believe. I don't see anything on the Wilson web site that shows the specs on these yet.

Thanks.
RJS622

Click to expand...

JB said:

If you are planning to go to the THP Event in your area this year you are welcome to try my set out on the course.

Click to expand...

RJS622 said:

Thanks JB.

I will definitely plan on doing that. I'm curious, I think I read in a previous part of this thread that these C200's have YOUR interest as well.
Are you considering the Adila Rogue shafts and what flex are you comfortable with?

Thanks,
RJS622

Click to expand...

JB said:

I ordered my set with Adila Rogue shafts in stuff, but the THP Tour Van will have both stiff and regular on it.

Check out the event thread, as signups are coming soon. THP Regional Rivalry Carolinas can DMV

Click to expand...

RJS622 said:

Thanks JB.

I will definitely plan on doing that. I'm curious, I think I read in a previous part of this thread that these C200's have YOUR interest as well.
Are you considering the Adila Rogue shafts and what flex are you comfortable with?

Thanks,
RJS622

Click to expand...

CMedina84 said:

I have seen ballooning appear a little more than I'd like.

I'd see an 8 iron go from hitting 148-152 yards and just drop to 132-135 yards. Although not often enough it still always lurked in my mind when I had these on course "was it going to happen now? Should I club up to be safe?" So that could cause me to over swing.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

CMedina84 said:

I have seen ballooning appear a little more than I'd like.

I'd see an 8 iron go from hitting 148-152 yards and just drop to 132-135 yards. Although not often enough it still always lurked in my mind when I had these on course "was it going to happen now? Should I club up to be safe?" So that could cause me to over swing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

mikedean441 said:

Ill bet you can handle the R flex with ease. They are by no means stout

Click to expand...

CMedina84 said:

I have seen ballooning appear a little more than I'd like.

I'd see an 8 iron go from hitting 148-152 yards and just drop to 132-135 yards. Although not often enough it still always lurked in my mind when I had these on course "was it going to happen now? Should I club up to be safe?" So that could cause me to over swing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Click to expand...