Mitsubishi Tensei CK Pro Orange Golf Shaft Review

Mitsubishi Tensei CK Pro Orange Shaft Review

By Russ Ryden, Fit2Score, A Dallas Fort Worth Club Fitter & Club Maker
The Golf Center at the Highlands, Carrollton Texas

MRC-TEN-CK PRO OrangeAt this moment, all eyes are on this shaft as it is in the bags of Tiger and Rory at the Masters. Mitsubishi is sold out in the US until around May 1. The Pro Orange is the third shaft in the Tensei product line. As noted on the Mitsubishi Chemical website “this is the first of it’s kind bend profile for MCA GOLF.”  Many of Mitsubishi’s designs are variations of previous themes. The Tensei Pro Orange is unique. I keep inserting the word Pro in my description of this shaft. The Tensei Orange, a shaft sold to the club companies is not the same. The difference between the two can be seen on the Mitsubishi website. The torque and the bend profiles are quite different.

The Tensei Pro Blue and The Tensei Pro White have been reviewed earlier. The three shafts are an evolution in multi material construction from Mitsubishi. Most interesting is the Carbon Fiber Dupont Kevlar “CK” material woven into the butt section of the shaft. You can plainly see it’s effect on hoop strength in the following chart.

I just listened to a PodCast where a tour fitter described the main advantage of this shaft as it being counterweighted. I never cease to be amazed at some of this banter. The tip structure of this shaft is far more likely to make it a good fit for hard swinging tour pros than counterweighting. I can counterweight with a bit of lead tape under the grip if what I am after is a swing weight change. But an elementary lesson taught when I first started club building many years ago was this is not the proper way to build. Tricking a swing weigh instrument with butt weight is not how one should achieve club balance. Counterweighting does deliver benefits for some players, but in drivers that it typically accomplished with a 20g or 30g plug in the butt of the shaft. If the small balance change created by counterweighting a shaft works, they why not just use a heavier grip.

To read this review, you must register . 

If you want to truly understand golf shafts, register for an annual subscription of $10. Ten dollars is less than the cost of a sleeve of premium golf balls or a bucket of range balls. Your support will keep Golf Shaft Reviews going and growing. This website is the only comprehensive information source about golf shafts available to the public. I do not receive compensation from the shaft companies nor clutter the site with ads.

The technical section of the site is open to all. In it you can learn about the terms and concepts discussed in the reviews.

Information provided at registration will NEVER be shared with ANYONE. To be notified of new reviews, follow DevotedGolfer on facebook.

Enjoy and Good Golf,

  • Philip D. Hoff

    Has anyone measured the CPM of the Tensei Pro Orange 70TX?

    • I measure CPM of all shafts on the hard and soft planes. The comparison of the two is seen in radial consistency. Beyond that there is little to be known about a shaft given a CPM number. CPM is affected by beam length, weigh used and clamp pressure. There is no agreement on any of these. Therefore, without knowing exactly how a CPM number is measured the number itself as a comparison can only apply to shafts measured in exactly the same way.
      That said, there is the larger issue of what exactly is measured with CPM. Generally it indicates the stiffness of the shaft just beyond the clamp. That is not a good indicator of shaft stiffness. I have written several articles on this. Area under the EI curve is a much better way to compare overall shaft stiffness.

      • Ernesto Ferrer

        Hi sir. I play now with an nv 2KVX 65 s
        Wich i like. Do you think tensei pro orange version has a similiar profile?


  • Richard Jollon

    How would you compare this shaft to the Fujikura Pro Speeder ( Green Shaft). They seem very similar as far as tip stiffness and balance point. The bend profile looks to be the main difference. Is that a fair statement?