Our Mizuno JPX919 vs. MP-18 irons test took place at Rudding Park in North Yorkshire.

Data was gathered using a SkyTrak launch monitor and we used premium golf balls.

Mizuno JPX919 vs. MP-18: The methodology

So are you a JPX or an MP sort of golfer?

Traditionally, Mizuno always had their MP irons for ‘better players’ who want clean and classic, blade-like looks.

Mizuno JPX919 vs. MP-18

But with the introduction of the JPX900 Tour a couple of years ago there was then a JPX iron for the ‘better’ and tour players.

The JPX line and the MP line differ quite a bit. The former is more about cutting-edge technology, youthful and aggressive styling.

The MP line is all about that classic blade look and feel.

The JPX900 Tour were created with Brooks Koepka in mind – a young, athletic, aggressive player. He has since won three majors with them.

But some players will always gravitate towards the MP line. Paul Casey and Luke Donald are two who immediately spring to mind.

So how could we put the JPX and the MP head-to-head?

Mizuno JPX919 vs. MP-18

Well, it has to be the new JPX919 Tour up against one of the new models from the MP-18 range.

We felt the JPX919 Tour and the MP-18 SC were about as similar as it got from a size and proportion point of view.

Mizuno JPX919 vs. MP-18

Both have almost exactly the same heel-to-toe blade length, top line, offset and sole width.

Mizuno JPX919 vs. MP-18: The technology

Both these irons are forged using Mizuno’s HD grain flow forging process. What the heck is that?

It’s basically the same forging process they’ve used in previous models – using a single billet of 1025 E pure select mild carbon steel – but they’ve made a tweak to the construction of the moulds.

It allows them to concentrate a higher density of metallic grains to really amplify the feel.

Mizuno JPX919 vs. MP-18

The JPX919 Tour is a touch more compact than it’s 900 predecessor but has a new stability frame which makes it more forgiving.

The MP-18 SC offers a touch more forgiveness than the MP-18 blade thanks to it’s split-cavity design.

So that’s the lowdown – but how did they perform? Find out the results of the testing and James’s verdict on the next page…