[GolfSpy T]

Just in for review are the new Callaway RAZR XF Irons. As a whole, we've done a fairly suspect job of covering the game-improvement, and super game-improvement markets, and these, along with the Adams A12 OS are part of the steps we're taking to change that.

The RAZR XF are interesting to me for a couple of reasons. First, it's going to be impossible to ignore the $1299 sticker price. The RAZR XF basically signals Callaway's re-entry into the high end GI market. You may recall the FT Irons from 2008. Those were also $1000+, so clearly Callaway believes (and I tend to think they're probably right) that there is a legitimate market for high-end GI clubs.

What's also interesting, and indeed unique, is the fact that the irons in the RAZR XF set are forged. While it's not a a written in stone rule or anything, general practice has been to offer forgings in better players clubs (cavity-backs and blades), but leverage less expensive castings in most of the GI products, and pretty much every Super GI club I can think of. Callaway is going in an entirely new direction here, and while I'm sure some will scoff at the idea (and the price), I can tell you with certainty that there are a number of older golfers, and younger exec types just breaking into the game that will take a serious look at these irons.

To be sure these are Super Game Improvement in every respect. The heads are large (not the bulkiest we've seen), and even the hybrids feature an astonishing amount of offset. Top lines are thick, soles are broad, and the hybrids are, from top to bottom, extremely shallow. Even the stock grip (a proprietary Callaway Winn grip) appears careful chosen to appeal to the target market.

Photos are of the 4H, 7-iron, and PW. As I said, this is a very unusual offering in the Super Game Improvement space, and we're anxious to hear what you think.

Attached image(s)

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

[agray88]

I think I threw up in my mouth a little...

[GolfSpy T]

agray88, on 19 October 2011 - 12:37 PM, said:

I think I threw up in my mouth a little...

The thing I have to constantly remind myself (and sometimes our testers) is that different clubs are designed to appeal to different markets. As a 4-handicap, I can see why these might not appeal to you. Hell, my handicap is much higher than yours, and there probably not in my wheelhouse either, but...for the beginning (or aging) golfer, I can see where the RAZR XF would have some appeal.

[Xamilo]

These "thin top lines" make the Ping G10 showels look like Miura Blades in comparison

[skihippy]

WOW and I had such high hopes for these. I love the look of them but I hate seeing such a thick top line and sole. This is the same reason that I can not stand looking at Ping irons.

[agray88]

GolfSpy T, on 19 October 2011 - 04:40 PM, said:

The thing I have to constantly remind myself (and sometimes our testers) is that different clubs are designed to appeal to different markets. As a 4-handicap, I can see why these might not appeal to you. Hell, my handicap is much higher than yours, and there probably not in my wheelhouse either, but...for the beginning (or aging) golfer, I can see where the RAZR XF would have some appeal.

I know what you mean. I realize that game improvement irons aren't meant to appeal to everyone's eye. I know a thick topline, plenty of offset, and thick sole are part and parcel with game improvement irons. But to me the backs of the Rarz XFs look built up like a leggo set. Almost stuck on as an afterthought, if you will. If I were in the market for a game improvement iron, I'd go more along the lines of a Titleist AP1 or an Adams a7 or CB2. Just my $.02.

[GolfSpy Matt]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but my reading of the press release indicates that the RAZR XF iron may have a forged face, but it is not a completely forged club, it is multi-material.

Regardless of how much of this club is forged, the feel is very clicky/crisp, not soft at all.

[stevenhw8]

I'm a beginner and I definitely dislike the top line and sole width! Let me throw up in my mouth as well

[agray88]

stevenhw8, on 20 October 2011 - 06:25 AM, said:

Let me throw up in my mouth as well

By all means, have a go at it!

[wdgolf]

GolfSpy Matt, on 19 October 2011 - 11:34 PM, said:

Correct me if I'm wrong, but my reading of the press release indicates that the RAZR XF iron may have a forged face, but it is not a completely forged club, it is multi-material.

Regardless of how much of this club is forged, the feel is very clicky/crisp, not soft at all.

The Diablo forged was the same way for me. Worst feeling forged I've ever tried.

IMO, these XF clubs also have the looks of a $300 set.

[GolfSpy Dave]

These look like SGI clubs. Funny how people always gloss them "shovels" and discount how they help a high hcp/new golfer.
Then there are lots of threads on sites talking about the terrible player playing blades...

The soles are wide, like every G series iron, but that is to help the struggling player.
I bet these will test well.

All that being the case, I hope the black color wears better than the Burner 2.0.
Good iron, but the black started to come off immediately.

[Xamilo]

I'm sure the PW is legal to be played in a Cricket game!

And the grips look as "good" as the Nike Dymo line ones

Looks have nothing to do with the iron being "game improvement". Mizuno's MX-200/300 line targets the same market and the looks/thickness are just superb. Wilson Staff D Line is a good example of a decent looking SGI as well.

The line Calawwy has gone with irons bettles Nike and the new Clevelands (which MGS just showed in the FAcebook page) as the worst looking irons or all time. Yes, the VAS are having a relief these days...

[Sirslicealot]

Just recieved set of Callaway XF's yesterday. They look much better in person than the photos posted above. The topline is thinner looking at address than last years RAZR irons (I played those last season). The sole is wider than I would like to see but is invisible at address. My eye tends to be attracted to a more bladelike look (think Taylormade R11 Irons.....which has a thicker looking topline at address than the Callaway RAZR XF...BTW),but I found these irons to be very appealing. That is the the good news...the bad news is that I custom ordered a set from a golf retailer who I won't name but who's initials are TGW, and instead of the Callaway RAZR XF 3H, 4H, 5H, and 6I-PW, +1" graphite R Flex shafts, with a 2 degree more upright lie angle....what I recieved was a standard specs RAZR 3H and 5H (that is RAZR not RAZR XF, as in 2011 RAZR Hybrids), and standard specs RAZR XF 6I- SW. I was initially cheesed off about the set configuration screw up, then I realized they tried to give me last years hybrids, then I noticed that they felt a bit short and started measuring shaft length with my clubmakers ruler, and they are all exactly standard length. I don't have lie angle measuring device so I can't say they are not 2 degrees upright but most likely they are standard spec. So, either someone got lazy at the Callaway Custom Shop and just threw some sticks in a box and maied them off, or because I'm a Soldier stationed overseas, and hav to recieve my stuff via USPS, and the clubs had to be drop shipped to TGW then forwarded to me USPS.......someone at TGW took a shine to my new sticks and swiped them, and replaced them with the closest thing they could find and sent them to me. What makes me maddest is that someone thought I was too dumb to know the difference. TGW said they would fix it but for me the damage is done.

[evs987]

I just bought a set of these. I like the way they look and much more importantly, I play very well with them. I just wish I could buy a 56 degree sw with 10 degrees bounce that matches this set and an 18 degree hybrid.

[JohnBarry]

Not geared to me, but they do not appeal to me in any way, shape or form.