The 900 series medium and high speed are mounted with N.S. PRO 850GH R and 1050GH S steel shafts, which give complete satisfaction. The problem is that the combined steel and transportation crises have left Nippon Shaft unable to keep up with the growing worldwide demand.
The market is less strained with UST Mamiya, our partner for the Recoil graphite shafts. So we contacted them to see if the graphite shafts could replace the unavailable steel shafts. It was an interesting idea: graphite is more comfortable than steel because it efficiently dampens vibrations and can be more lightweight than steel of equal rigidity. Then we just had to watch how it performed and see if advanced golfers (<15 handicap) were ready to play with graphite.
We tested 4 shafts: the Recoil 80F3, 95F3, 95F4 and 110F4. Inesis test engineer Clément carried out an initial test which allowed us to rule two out. The Recoil 80F3 graphite shaft is too supple to replace the N.S. PRO 850GH steel shaft, even if on paper their weights are quite similar. As for the Recoil 110F4 graphite shaft, which has a similar weight to the N.S PRO 1050GH steel shaft, it’s significantly stiffer while in use, which makes it pretty difficult to play with.
We continued with the testing of the Recoil 95F3 and 95F4. Even though they weigh the same, they differ in terms of rigidity. The F3 is a regular shaft and would replace the N.S. PRO 850GH R (mid speed), while the F4 is a stiff shaft to replace the N.S. PRO 1050GH S (high speed).
The challenge of the second test was to check whether the chosen graphite shafts perform the same as the steel models. We paid particular attention to two priority criteria: distance (carry and total) and dispersion, but all other parameters were assessed too.
The testers all played with 900 iron clubs. The protocol was simple. After warming up, they hit 6 balls (Tour 900) with the steel shaft and 6 balls with the graphite shaft with the 3 types of irons that make up the 900 series: the forged blade pitching wedge, the hollow body 7 iron and the utility 4 iron. They alternated between the graphite and the steel to avoid introducing any bias. They then removed the worst ball of each series to limit the impact of swing errors.
The results were conclusive, both for the mid speeds and the high speeds. The point clusters (here in high speed) revealed that the choice of graphite shafts was absolutely the right call.
The testers particularly appreciated the 4 iron with the graphite shaft, which is easier to play with, and noticed no loss of feel or precision with the pitching wedge.
The 95F3 graphite shaft passed the test for the mid speeds, and the 95F4 for the high speeds.
It remains the case that enacting this change on an industrial scale isn’t easy. For Inesis club products engineer Thibaut, it hasn’t been smooth sailing.
The main focus was how to deal with the “tip” of the shaft, i.e. the part that’s inserted into the hosel at the clubhead. The head of the 900 irons was designed for parallel tips while the 95FR and 95F4 shafts are conical. So UST Mamiya produced a unique version of the shafts with parallel tips. Everything was fine up to that point. The problem was that the “tip weights” – those little flyweights you insert into the tip of the shaft to achieve the target swing weight – were too big to be inserted into the shaft. No big deal, we’ll develop special tip weights!
Orders for the 900 series will open again in late May/early June with the 3 graphite Recoil shafts:
Pre-order opening date: 1/06/2022
And then? Two options. If golfers give the thumbs up to the new shafts for the mid and high speeds, the 95F3 and 95F4 may well be offered alongside the N.S. Pro 850GH and 1050GH. One to watch!
© 2026 Inesis
.jpeg?auto=webp)
.jpeg?auto=webp)
.jpeg?auto=webp)
.jpeg?auto=webp)
.jpeg?auto=webp)
.jpeg?auto=webp)
.jpeg?auto=webp)
/1x.jpeg?auto=webp)
/1x.jpeg?auto=webp)
/1x.jpeg?auto=webp)
/1x.jpeg?auto=webp)
/1x.jpeg?auto=webp)
/1x.jpeg?auto=webp)