Mizuno says that its new hollow bodied players distance iron the Pro 245, is the perfect combination of looks and forgiveness in a compact head. It also says that this iron is another step up in terms of ball speed and launch, compared to the middle of its range Pro 243 model, without sacrificing any of the precision forged aesthetics. Let’s find out if it has delivered one of the best golf irons of 2024.
In terms of the construction and technology, despite being Grain-Flow forged like the rest of the new Mizuno Pro range, these are hollow body irons equipped with a multi-thickness face for consistent ball speeds even on mishits. Furthermore, a laser welded stainless steel back has been added to help promote launch and also increase ball speeds, which Mizuno hopes will make it one of the most forgiving irons for the mid handicapper.
Despite being the only hollow body construction iron in the new range, the Pro 245 irons share many of the same features as the Pro 241 and Pro 243 irons. The whole range features a copper underlay which is designed to enhance the feel of these Grain Flow forged heads and Harmonic Impact Technology has been incorporated to match the vibration patterns, in an attempt to produce a solid sound, synonymous more with the best golf blade irons.
The looks are quite astounding. From the back, it is genuinely difficult to tell them apart from the bladed Pro 241 irons in the family. So much so, that I repeatedly mixed them up when photographing them for this review!
This is both a good and a bad thing to me. As a better player, the ability to have an iron that offers increased launch and forgiveness wrapped up in a blade like aesthetic is great. However, I wonder whether some shopping in this market, who maybe don’t fully understand the hidden performance, could be alienated and intimidated by this appearance?
When you put them down behind the ball, only a marginally longer blade length and thicker top line offer any more clues that you might be playing a more user-friendly club. They frame the ball beautifully and offer a very classic profile.
From a data perspective, against the other irons in the range there were some notable differences. I tested them using a Trackman 4 launch monitor and TaylorMade TP5 x golf balls. The Pro 245 iron has a stronger 7-iron loft of 30°, yet it launched a touch higher than the other two models but spun a little less, which is in line with what the designers were looking to achieve and with that comes a little more overall distance.
The smooth but lively feel off the face - that I very much enjoyed - did make me think that there would be more of a ball speed leap than was evident. They are quicker, I am not disputing that, it just felt that the carry numbers might be higher based on what I was feeling and the stock lofts. This is by no means a criticism, just an observation on my feels.
Flight was pretty strong based on the lower spin number, but the additional launch mitigated the idea that stopping power on the greens could be a problem.
As with the other two models in the family, the Pro 241 and Pro 243, the acoustic is absolutely spot on. A touch more higher pitched than the other two models but a lovely tone, and this contributes massively to the overall feel of the club.
The players' distance iron category is an interesting one with irons. The TaylorMade P790 has been a standout, as has the Titleist T150, but I feel like the Mizuno Pro 245 blows them both out of the water in regards to aesthetics. Whilst that topic is always subjective, for me it’s not even close.
In terms of the raw performance however, I think both of the aforementioned irons just have the edge from a distance perspective, which is a pretty vital parameter in this genre of club. The Mizuno iron fights back again however with a much better feel and acoustic than both the TaylorMade and Titleist offerings, so it really is like a game of top trumps!
You will just need to decide what your priorities lie, and if that’s in looks, sound and feel, well then there is only one winner in the Mizuno Pro 245.
