Head-to-Head Test: TaylorMade M1 and M2
Given the remarkable visual similarities between TaylorMade’s M1 and M2 drivers, I wanted to perform a head-to-head test of the clubs in their most neutral settings and see what the differences were.
To make it as fair of a test as possible, I hit 10 shots with each driver on Foresight’s GC2 launch monitor with HMT. Both drivers were set to lofts of 9.5 degrees, and were tested with the same shafts (Aldila’s Rogue Tour 70X) of the same length and tipping.
In my video, I monitored ball flight in a closed setting, comparing factors such as strike, club head speed, club path, angle of attack and much more. Watch it below to see me compare the averages, as well as my best hits with each of TaylorMade’s newest drivers.
As it turns out, the drivers are more alike than you may have thought.
Related
As the editor-in-chief of this website and an observer of the GolfWRX forums and other online golf equipment discourse for over a decade, I’m pretty well attuned to the grunts and grumbles of a significant portion of the golf equipment purchasing spectrum. And before you accuse me of lording above all in some digital ivory tower, I’d like to offer that I worked at golf courses (public and private) for years prior to picking up my pen, so I’m well-versed in the non-degenerate golf equipment consumers out there. I touched (green)grass (retail)!
Complaints about the ills of and related to the OEMs usually follow some version of: Product cycles are too short for real innovation, tour equipment isn’t the same as retail (which is largely not true, by the way), too much is invested in marketing and not enough in R&D, top staffer X hasn’t even put the new driver in play, so it’s obviously not superior to the previous generation, prices are too high, and on and on.
Without digging into the merits of any of these claims, which I believe are mostly red herrings, I’d like to bring into view of our rangefinder what I believe to be the two primary difficulties golf equipment companies face.
One: As Terry Koehler, back when he was the CEO of Ben Hogan, told me at the time of the Ft Worth irons launch, if you can’t regularly hit the golf ball in a coin-sized area in the middle of the face, there’s not a ton that iron technology can do for you. Now, this is less true now with respect to irons than when he said it, and is less and less true by degrees as the clubs get larger (utilities, fairways, hybrids, drivers), but there remains a great deal of golf equipment truth in that statement. Think about it — which is to say, in TL;DR fashion, get lessons from a qualified instructor who will teach you about the fundamentals of repeatable impact and how the golf swing works, not just offer band-aid fixes. If you can’t repeatably deliver the golf club to the golf ball in something resembling the manner it was designed for, how can you expect to be getting the most out of the club — put another way, the maximum value from your investment?
Similarly, game improvement equipment can only improve your game if you game it. In other words, get fit for the clubs you ought to be playing rather than filling the bag with the ones you wish you could hit or used to be able to hit. Of course, don’t do this if you don’t care about performance and just want to hit a forged blade while playing off an 18 handicap. That’s absolutely fine. There were plenty of members in clubs back in the day playing Hogan Apex or Mizuno MP-32 irons who had no business doing so from a ballstriking standpoint, but they enjoyed their look, feel, and complementary qualities to their Gatsby hats and cashmere sweaters. Do what brings you a measure of joy in this maddening game.
Now, the second issue. This is not a plea for non-conforming equipment; rather, it is a statement of fact. USGA/R&A limits on every facet of golf equipment are detrimental to golf equipment manufacturers. Sure, you know this, but do you think about it as it applies to almost every element of equipment? A 500cc driver would be inherently more forgiving than a 460cc, as one with a COR measurement in excess of 0.83. 50-inch shafts. Box grooves. And on and on.
Would fewer regulations be objectively bad for the game? Would this erode its soul? Fortunately, that’s beside the point of this exercise, which is merely to point out the facts. The fact, in this case, is that equipment restrictions and regulations are the slaughterbench of an abundance of innovation in the golf equipment space. Is this for the best? Well, now I’ve asked the question twice and might as well give a partial response, I guess my answer to that would be, “It depends on what type of golf you’re playing and who you’re playing it with.”
For my part, I don’t mind embarrassing myself with vintage blades and persimmons chasing after the quasi-spiritual elevation of a well-struck shot, but that’s just me. Plenty of folks don’t give a damn if their grooves are conforming. Plenty of folks think the folks in Liberty Corner ought to add a prison to the museum for such offences. And those are just a few of the considerations for the amateur game — which doesn’t get inside the gallery ropes of the pro game…
Different strokes in the game of golf, in my humble opinion.
Anyway, I believe equipment company engineers are genuinely trying to build better equipment year over year. The marketing departments are trying to find ways to make this equipment appeal to the broadest segment of the golf market possible. All of this against (1) the backdrop of — at least for now — firm product cycles. And golfers who, with their ~15 average handicap (men), for the most part, are not striping the golf ball like Tiger in his prime and seem to have less and less time year over year to practice and improve. (2) Regulations that massively restrict what they’re able to do…
That’s the landscape as I see it and the real headwinds for golf equipment companies. No doubt, there’s more I haven’t considered, but I think the previous is a better — and better faith — point of departure when formulating any serious commentary on the golf equipment world than some of the more cynical and conspiratorial takes I hear.
Agree? Disagree? Think I’m worthy of an Adam Hadwin-esque security guard tackle? Let me know in the comments.
@golfoncbs The infamous Adam Hadwin tackle ? #golf #fyp #canada #pgatour #adamhadwin ? Ghibli-style nostalgic waltz – MaSssuguMusic
Episode #16 brings us Cliff McKinney. Cliff is the founder of Old Charlie Golf Club, a new club, and concept, to be built in the Florida panhandle. The model is quite interesting and aims to make great, private golf more affordable. We hope you enjoy the show!
Last week, I came across a reel from BBC Sport on Instagram featuring Scottie Scheffler speaking to the media ahead of The Open at Royal Portrush. In it, he shared that he often wonders what the point is of wanting to win tournaments so badly — especially when he knows, deep down, that it doesn’t lead to a truly fulfilling life.
View this post on Instagram
“Is it great to be able to win tournaments and to accomplish the things I have in the game of golf? Yeah, it brings tears to my eyes just to think about it because I’ve literally worked my entire life to be good at this sport,” Scheffler said. “To have that kind of sense of accomplishment, I think, is a pretty cool feeling. To get to live out your dreams is very special, but at the end of the day, I’m not out here to inspire the next generation of golfers. I’m not out here to inspire someone to be the best player in the world, because what’s the point?”
Ironically — or perhaps perfectly — he went on to win the claret jug.
That question — what’s the point of winning? — cuts straight to the heart of the human journey.
As someone who’s spent over two decades in the trenches of professional golf, and in deep study of the mental, emotional, and spiritual dimensions of the game, I see Scottie’s inner conflict as a sign of soul evolution in motion.
I came to golf late. I wasn’t a junior standout or college All-American. At 27, I left a steady corporate job to see if I could be on the PGA Tour starting as a 14-handicap, average-length hitter. Over the years, my journey has been defined less by trophies and more by the relentless effort to navigate the deeply inequitable and gated system of professional golf — an effort that ultimately turned inward and helped me evolve as both a golfer and a person.
One perspective that helped me make sense of this inner dissonance around competition and our culture’s tendency to overvalue winning is the idea of soul evolution.
The University of Virginia’s Division of Perceptual Studies has done extensive research on reincarnation, and Netflix’s Surviving Death (Episode 6) explores the topic, too. Whether you take it literally or metaphorically, the idea that we’re on a long arc of growth — from beginner to sage elder — offers a profound perspective.
If you accept the premise literally, then terms like “young soul” and “old soul” start to hold meaning. However, even if we set the word “soul” aside, it’s easy to see that different levels of life experience produce different worldviews.
Newer souls — or people in earlier stages of their development — may be curious and kind but still lack discernment or depth. There is a naivety, and they don’t yet question as deeply, tending to see things in black and white, partly because certainty feels safer than confronting the unknown.
As we gain more experience, we begin to experiment. We test limits. We chase extreme external goals — sometimes at the expense of health, relationships, or inner peace — still operating from hunger, ambition, and the fragility of the ego.
It’s a necessary stage, but often a turbulent and unfulfilling one.
David Duval fell off the map after reaching World No. 1. Bubba Watson had his own “Is this it?” moment with his caddie, Ted Scott, after winning the Masters.
In Aaron Rodgers: Enigma, reflecting on his 2011 Super Bowl win, Rodgers said:
“Now I’ve accomplished the only thing that I really, really wanted to do in my life. Now what? I was like, ‘Did I aim at the wrong thing? Did I spend too much time thinking about stuff that ultimately doesn’t give you true happiness?’”
Jim Carrey once said, “I think everybody should get rich and famous and do everything they ever dreamed of so they can see that it’s not the answer.”
Eventually, though, something shifts.
We begin to see in shades of gray. Winning, dominating, accumulating—these pursuits lose their shine. The rewards feel more fleeting. Living in a constant state of fight-or-flight makes us feel alive, yes, but not happy and joyful.
Compassion begins to replace ambition. Love, presence, and gratitude become more fulfilling than status, profits, or trophies. We crave balance over burnout. Collaboration over competition. Meaning over metrics.
Interestingly, if we zoom out, we can apply this same model to nations and cultures. Countries, like people, have a collective “soul stage” made up of the individuals within them.
Take the United States, for example. I’d place it as a mid-level soul: highly competitive and deeply driven, but still learning emotional maturity. Still uncomfortable with nuance. Still believing that more is always better. Despite its global wins, the U.S. currently ranks just 23rd in happiness (as of 2025). You might liken it to a gifted teenager—bold, eager, and ambitious, but angsty and still figuring out how to live well and in balance. As much as a parent wants to protect their child, sometimes the child has to make their own mistakes to truly grow.
So when Scottie Scheffler wonders what the point of winning is, I don’t see someone losing strength.
I see someone evolving.
He’s beginning to look beyond the leaderboard. Beyond metrics of success that carry a lower vibration. And yet, in a poetic twist, Scheffler did go on to win The Open. But that only reinforces the point: even at the pinnacle, the question remains. And if more of us in the golf and sports world — and in U.S. culture at large — started asking similar questions, we might discover that the more meaningful trophy isn’t about accumulating or beating others at all costs.
It’s about awakening and evolving to something more than winning could ever promise.
-
Equipment3 weeks agoCallaway launches all-new Opus SP wedges
-
Equipment3 weeks agoGolfWRX Members Choice presented by 2nd Swing: Best driver of 2025
-
Whats in the Bag3 weeks agoPeter Malnati WITB 2025 (August)
-
Equipment3 weeks agoBK’s Breakdowns: Cameron Young’s winning WITB, 2025 Wyndham Championship
gary
Mar 24, 2016 at 2:18 pm
Great video Rick! You’re the man!!
dwc
Mar 21, 2016 at 4:41 pm
Rick – really enjoy your videos. I have a question for you though since I watched not only this video but also your review of the M2 by itself and the review of the M1 versus the Cobra King driver. In that review, the M1 beat the Cobra because your average spin numbers were under 2,000 for the M1 versus about 2,500 for the Cobra. But when you reviewed the M1 versus M2, they were both over 2,000. How does that work? Were you using a different shaft in the M1 versus Cobra video?
Mike Barnett
Mar 21, 2016 at 12:51 pm
Excellent comparison, well done sir!
299yards
Mar 20, 2016 at 5:26 pm
Always supplying great videos! Looks like some people on replies are looking for an online club fitting from rick through his “reviews and tests” rather than seeing an indepth glimpse of how these clubs perform.
Joe Golfer
Mar 19, 2016 at 9:51 pm
I must say, I really enjoyed the video.
Afterwards, I even subscribed to Rick Shiels YouTube video channel.
It was interesting to see those results.
just plain bill
Mar 19, 2016 at 10:19 am
you know what i find amazing? the internet power i can feel by nitpicking the tiniest thing in a video…ooh, the power of endorphins generated by my negative opinions coursing thru my veins…lol
meanwhile, the vid was informative and gave me another reason to go back to golfsmith and compare the m2 to what i currently swing, and not in a cage with monitors attached to my b@lls, but on the range where i can see the actual flight and distance and dispersion cuz ive hit a million balls there and know where i hit it, and where id like to hit it…
id love to play a round with some of the jokers around here…bet they’d shoot 90 and claim they were just having an off day…
moses
Mar 19, 2016 at 8:54 am
Great to see RS on here. I watch most of his video reviews. They’re very informative. Great review sir and looking forward to more.
Gary Barber
Mar 19, 2016 at 12:48 am
I always enjoy your very informed reviews . You will always get trolls picking holes in your
findings ..don’t feed them . Cheers from Canada mate you have to get over here to enjoy our some of the beautiful courses we to offer. gb
Chuck D
Mar 18, 2016 at 10:28 pm
Great point Adam! I’ve hit both and the M2 just sounds better and the sweet spot is larger as well. Less loss of speed on off center hits. Went with the Kuro stiff shaft at standard length and I’m not
looking back. I have FINALLY found a driver after all these 23 years of ball striking! Rick, I’m a
new fan and enjoy your reviews and information tremendously! Keep smashing those drives!!!
Dylan
Mar 18, 2016 at 9:45 pm
I’m thinking new vs old. Get ahold of an r510 tp, swap in the rogue and put it up against the M1 430. Make it a real head-to-head test to see not only how much of a difference there is in distance but also in forgiveness and ball speed.
Ryan
Mar 18, 2016 at 8:51 pm
I like Ricks reviews. Don’t feed the trolls Rick ! Keep up the good work !
Branson
Mar 18, 2016 at 3:40 pm
I can’t recall if I’ve hit both with the same shaft, but i’ve found that i hit the M2 better. It seems like it has a bigger sweet spot and doesn’t lose much distance on just off of center hits. Any data on that?
thomas murphy
Mar 18, 2016 at 1:57 pm
Watched this last night. I think it is a great compare, the only question (besides the what about he 430cc head) is if the M1 is so adjustable…was in just “middle adjusted” (yes) or was it adjusted for Rick’s “optimum” output…and that amount of adjustment may be greater in other golfers. IE all our results may vary but it is a great view that adjustability can be a great tool for a fitter and for a marketing vehicle…but it doesn’t mean more will be better. Going back to GolfWRX shootout..the M2 performed as well as the M1 but was rated down because it lacked adjustability…so bravo for going to Rick to once again show it is results that matter and M1 == M2
cmyktaylor
Mar 18, 2016 at 1:12 pm
Request: Same review but with adding the 430 in.
Rick Shiels
Mar 18, 2016 at 1:26 pm
Nice idea! I’ll look into that. thanks
299yards
Mar 20, 2016 at 5:28 pm
+1
Stefan T.
Mar 18, 2016 at 11:01 am
Rick is the best! Glad to see my favorite golf YouTuber teamed with my favorite golf website. Great stuff Rick. Cheers
Rick Shiels
Mar 18, 2016 at 1:27 pm
Thanks very much Stefan! Plenty more to come!
tony
Mar 18, 2016 at 10:44 am
so they are virtually identical in terms of launch, carry, etc but why not also evaluate dispersion???? Wouldn’t the average consumer want to take that into account just as much as launch data???
Rick Shiels
Mar 18, 2016 at 1:28 pm
Hi Tony. Dispersion is always hard to factor into account. That can often be the players adjustment rather than the clubs. Front to back can be measured and I’ll mention that next time
SW
Mar 18, 2016 at 8:22 pm
Great excuse. Why bother playing golf if it’s not important to hit the target
Weight
Mar 18, 2016 at 9:23 am
M1 head is 198 grams
M2 head is 194 grams
that might be enough difference to cause the dynamic loft to change
His swing is inefficient. If he knew how to sling the heavier weight, he should get more out of the M1 with some adjustments.
cmyktaylor
Mar 18, 2016 at 1:15 pm
If Rick, a PGA pro who swings clubs all the time, can’t make the efficiency adjustment, do you really think any of us can? His video was extremely helpful in getting me to think again about the M2. Your comment, not so much.
Rick Shiels
Mar 18, 2016 at 1:31 pm
Thanks very much @cmyktaylor!
Rick Shiels
Mar 18, 2016 at 1:30 pm
Very little difference
SW
Mar 18, 2016 at 8:21 pm
Enough of a difference to cause a 2 swingweight difference!
Mark Moser
Mar 19, 2016 at 12:58 am
Swing weight does not equal more distance.
Innit
Mar 19, 2016 at 2:50 am
But it can cause some people to feel that the head is too heavy for them to control it well enough to hit it where they want it and how, which, was the problem that people complained about with the SLDR, innit?
Jim
Mar 18, 2016 at 7:38 am
Glad to see Rick S making it to golfWRX. His videos are all pretty informative and he certainly is referenced enough on this site already, along with Mark Crossfield (who should also be added here).
Rick Shiels
Mar 18, 2016 at 1:31 pm
Thanks very much Jim! I’m glad to be here!
Mat
Mar 18, 2016 at 6:41 am
I stopped at “…fair as possible, I hit …”
Rick Shiels
Mar 18, 2016 at 1:32 pm
It really was a fair test. Do watch again to the end. Thanks
Mark Bainbridge
Mar 18, 2016 at 2:32 am
One way to make this test more professional would be to use two clubs with the same measured loft. To state that because both are set at 9.5 degrees the lofts are thus identical is to ignore manufacturing tolerances; which, in the case of stated loft, can range from +2 to -2 degrees. If the total weight of each club was also given, and they were identical, this would also enhance the credibility of this head-to-head test. Rick Shiels (like Mark Crossfield) is, in my opinion, very typical of UK PGA professionals in that their knowledge of club performance dynamics is somewhat shallow.
Rick Shiels
Mar 18, 2016 at 1:33 pm
Noted mark.
Mark Bainbridge
Mar 18, 2016 at 10:11 pm
Thank you for reading my comment.
Lee
Mar 18, 2016 at 3:46 pm
Mr Bainbridge how dare you suggest the tolerance of these American (sorry Chinese) heads can be + or – 2 degrees! Being honest I’m British and Rick is a really good guy, personally I think TM would have supplied pretty accurately measured heads (ala from the tour van) sadly I don’t given any credence to the states as Rick hits it better than us mere mortals.
Ryberg
Mar 18, 2016 at 6:29 pm
How do you know the tolorences?
And whats up with the “UK PGA…” Comment. Just try to think before you act!
Mark Bainbridge
Mar 18, 2016 at 10:10 pm
I know the tolerances (check your spelling) because I have friends in Taiwan who own golf club manufacturing facilities. I live in the UK and have extensive experience of interacting with UK qualified golf professionals. I have also spent time at the PGA headquarters at the Belfry in Sutton Coldfield. I never offer comment unless I know that about which I speak.
Mark Moser
Mar 19, 2016 at 12:57 am
As a guy who ran a golf shop in downtown SF and was certified by all the manufactures as their top tier fitters the tolerances are not +\-2 degrees. That’s an outrageous and factless statement stated by a competitor. I can state for a fact that at MOST the difference may be 1* at most as we checked the heads in our fitting process. 95% of the heads we tested for our fittings and customer were spot on and the U.K. Comment was completely disrespectful. You don’t know nearly as much as you’d like to believe!!
That’s a fact.
Great article and it would be great to test the older 580 series against today’s equipment and compare to see how much the new technology has helped/hindered our games. I have an old Wilson Staff Tour persimmon driver in a dynamic stiff steel shaft that I plyed in high school that I still hit on the driving range when my contact gets a little screwy to help fix my contact. I can say that when you hit it on the screws it is 10-15yds shorter than my XR and 913D3 drivers. I find it does run out more than today’s drivers. Still enjoy throws and my old Nicklaus Golden Bear blades w leather wrap grips I got for my 12th birthday. Oh the great memories. 🙂
SirBigSpur
Mar 29, 2016 at 9:11 am
Dude, you’re a hack. I’m sure Rick has forgotten more about “club performance dynamics” than you’ll ever know. And why is it you believe UK PGA Professionals are less qualified and less knowledgeable than those in the US? I’m from the US and I still find this statement ridiculous!
Chuck D
Mar 18, 2016 at 1:36 am
And to think the step brother M2 got no respect in the Golfwrx driver test! How could that be? The M2 is a beast!
Adam
Mar 18, 2016 at 7:59 am
They said it was because most times the M2 performed as well as the M1, but the M1 got the vote due to adjustability. I bet if you did the same driver test, showed the testers the results and asked which one they’d pay for out of pocket then the M2 would have got a ton of Gold medals and may have even edged out the M1
Willy
Mar 17, 2016 at 9:57 pm
+1
lol
The OG of YouTube reviews!!!!!
cocheese
Mar 17, 2016 at 9:33 pm
Great to see Rick on here! He and Pete are my faves on Youtube!
Rick Shiels
Mar 18, 2016 at 1:34 pm
Thanks very much! I am happy to be here!
Chris
Mar 17, 2016 at 9:11 pm
This video is old. Just has a WRX logo put in it.
Rick Shiels
Mar 18, 2016 at 1:34 pm
It was only filmed last week
john
Mar 17, 2016 at 9:10 pm
crossfields course vlogs are funny, but his club reviews are absolute crap, he’s so jaded – he proved the other day that shafts don’t change the performance FOR HIM, but was also shown that for some golfers it makes a huge difference. But he still believes shafts don’t change anything because FOR HIM they don’t. Rick on the otherhand seems to enjoy the new and shiney golf clubs that manufacturers give him for free and is excited for new gear – even if it always performs the same (as everyone knows, nobody makes bad gear anymore, it’s all the same)
Eric
Mar 18, 2016 at 3:43 pm
Agree, Mark has become a bitter cartoon, I just can’t even watch him any more!. Some other channels who shall go nameless have also lost the plot and seem to think the channel is about them personally. Rick seems to be doing a great job of keeping his channel fun and interesting, and unlike Toolfield he seems to actually like his viewers ????
Willy
Mar 19, 2016 at 6:14 pm
crossfield > shiels for me all the way, but I do like Rick’s reviews as well. But for me, crossfield gives me more of a review than Rick does, Rick loves to do the comparisons on distance which I don’t really care about (lofts are not always the same so what does the test prove?). I do like how he has a 13hcp review stuff, those two are great together in their videos.
Leon
Mar 17, 2016 at 8:46 pm
So glad to see you on WRX, Rick!
Rick Shiels
Mar 18, 2016 at 1:34 pm
Thanks very much Leon!
Mr B
Mar 17, 2016 at 8:13 pm
Maybe I missed it but nothing about dispersion?
KK
Mar 17, 2016 at 7:57 pm
Sorry, no time for a video. Please post the summary and graphs next time. Thank you.
Eric
Mar 18, 2016 at 3:45 pm
Lol, however apparently plenty of time to write and complain, lol
KK
Mar 18, 2016 at 9:17 pm
It took 15 sec to write and complain, another 30 sec to follow up and reply. I see the video is 8 min 30 sec. I win.
Other Paul
Mar 17, 2016 at 6:45 pm
Way to go Rick. If they take the best youtube person for golf club reviews and get them doing articles on here then we just need Kelvin Miyahira on here for golf instruction and this site will have the best of both worlds!
Rick Shiels
Mar 18, 2016 at 1:35 pm
Thanks very much other Paul
es
Mar 17, 2016 at 5:25 pm
Rick your contributing to golfwrx now? way to go!
Rick Shiels
Mar 18, 2016 at 1:35 pm
Yes I’m a featured writer! Very excited
HKO
Mar 17, 2016 at 5:07 pm
can’t wait to see the review of all M1 to M9 drivers side by side.
cody
Mar 17, 2016 at 4:13 pm
cool, i think you could do this test with 5 different drivers with the same shaft and the numbers would be that way. I think equipment has reached a point where they are all neck and neck.
BH
Mar 17, 2016 at 4:08 pm
Great stuff, Rick.
Rick Shiels
Mar 18, 2016 at 1:36 pm
Thanks very much
Adam
Mar 17, 2016 at 3:38 pm
Great video!
Here’s the big question though… Were you able to make any adjustments on the M1 that significantly increased your performance? Could you dial it in to outperform the M2, specifically by moving the front to back weight?
NT
Mar 17, 2016 at 5:15 pm
I reckon the M1 would have been dialed in for himself as that is the driver he plays. Only a guess but that is what I would expect from Rick.
duh
Mar 17, 2016 at 5:25 pm
if you look at the brief article above the video you see this test was done as neutral as possible.
NT
Mar 17, 2016 at 5:32 pm
I take that back. On second watch he said M1 was set in middle position. In one of his WITB videos he shows his M1 setting. He has fade/draw in middle and the other either all the way forward or all the way back.
Mike
Mar 18, 2016 at 6:17 am
he also uses an 8.5 degree model
cmyktaylor
Mar 18, 2016 at 1:20 pm
Agreed: That would be interesting. Also, note that the wear and tear for his M1 was with the setting all the way back. When he plays the club, he wants the weight in the back.
Rick Shiels
Mar 18, 2016 at 1:38 pm
I normally play this driver in 9.5° head weight in the back to high and weight in the middle for neutral.
Dan Lee
Mar 19, 2016 at 11:49 am
What are your numbers in this setup?
Mikec
Mar 17, 2016 at 3:24 pm
As always Rick, great job!!
Rick Shiels
Mar 18, 2016 at 1:36 pm
Thanks very much!