Cleveland CBX 2 Wedges
- Staff
- #202
JMB3;n8888006 said:
I figure the biggest knock on these by people is always automatically the versatility argument, so what better way to test the three new sole designs than to play them all for a decent span of time?
- Staff
- #205
M2Giles;n8889409 said:
It’s so true, at address, other than being SLIGHTLY bigger maybe, you’d be hard pressed to ever guess what was going on, on the other side of the club.
I went and played around with these at GG today (and note: I gamed the CBX 52, 56 & 60) last year.
Make no mistake, these are SGI wedges designed for SGI players. That's not a criticism. I played Ping G15 irons for 7 years and I'm currently playing Ping G400 irons. And I play to a 6 handicap. The thick, wide soles of the CBX 2 are a lot like the G400's, including the massive toe with a ton of weight out there. Provides maximum forgiveness, MOI and high-high ball flight.
I do think a lot more players should be in these. Not only the cavity back argument but the shaft weight and lighter overall club piece of the equation. It's real. They'll blend into many iron sets much better.
I love the Glide stealths (54 & 60) that replaced the CBX's last year and don't think I'll be changing back. And honestly, after looking at the upgrades Ping made to their Glide 3.0, I might add a 3.0 gap. The 3.0 looks slightly bigger to my eye than the 2.0 (looks like a deeper cavity back too). No denying looking at a vokey, a glide 3.0 and a CBX 2 there is a step change in size between each model (like small, medium and large). Ping seems to be trying to offer the same thing as Cleveland by going lighter shaft, more perimeter weighting, slightly bigger head and a smidge of offset... in a head more svelte than the CBX. Both are great options. I think it's an exciting time for wedges. First real change in quite some time.
Make no mistake, these are SGI wedges designed for SGI players. That's not a criticism. I played Ping G15 irons for 7 years and I'm currently playing Ping G400 irons. And I play to a 6 handicap. The thick, wide soles of the CBX 2 are a lot like the G400's, including the massive toe with a ton of weight out there. Provides maximum forgiveness, MOI and high-high ball flight.
I do think a lot more players should be in these. Not only the cavity back argument but the shaft weight and lighter overall club piece of the equation. It's real. They'll blend into many iron sets much better.
I love the Glide stealths (54 & 60) that replaced the CBX's last year and don't think I'll be changing back. And honestly, after looking at the upgrades Ping made to their Glide 3.0, I might add a 3.0 gap. The 3.0 looks slightly bigger to my eye than the 2.0 (looks like a deeper cavity back too). No denying looking at a vokey, a glide 3.0 and a CBX 2 there is a step change in size between each model (like small, medium and large). Ping seems to be trying to offer the same thing as Cleveland by going lighter shaft, more perimeter weighting, slightly bigger head and a smidge of offset... in a head more svelte than the CBX. Both are great options. I think it's an exciting time for wedges. First real change in quite some time.
Shot my second sub-80 round in as many weeks, mainly because of how great these wedges are. So much control and forgiveness.
- Staff
- #209
I asked it in the RTX4 thread and will here as well, when my set is built and I begin working on my article, should I update in that and this thread, or a
new one specific to the discussion on versatility vs forgiveness of the two designs?
new one specific to the discussion on versatility vs forgiveness of the two designs?
- Thread starter
- Admin
- #210
golfunfiltered;n8889610 said:
Well that is solid.
Danimal;n8889445 said:
Guilty. I didn’t see the release date, just the 3-5 days for custom. And sent the feeler email after a week.
Jman;n8889649 said:
New thread, then link that in top of each line thread.
Jman;n8891049 said:So it begins.
One in, two to come.
really looking forward to your real world feedback. This could be a decision maker for me on getting a 58.
- Staff
- #219
Im pretty impressed with the C grind on the 60, in hand, it’s pretty pronounced and honestly should give a little more versatility than one might expect.
I love the look of this wedge. I bought a Ping glide 3.0 in the Eye 2 Grind but I am gonna pick one of these up too. See which wins a spot in my bag. I need a great bunker club and the Cleveland CBX2 checks all the boxes
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2015
- Messages
- 7,872
- Reaction score
- 5,455
Jman;n8891049 said:So it begins.
One in, two to come.
How is it out of the sand? What about full swings. I know you probably don’t do it often, but the 58 CBX1 was awesome on both fronts.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
- Staff
- #223
JourdanInMich;n8891377 said:
LITERALLY just came in, hahaha
Going to put up a new thread when all three are in and built to match my RTX4's.
Full swing in a LW has been banished from my game, too much trouble for me, just because I can hit a 60* 105Y doesn't mean I NEED to, haha
- Staff
- #224
DG TI S400's came in yesterday. Will be built to the same length, SW, everything as my RTX4's, including exact loft and lie.Sooner21;n8891272 said:
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2015
- Messages
- 7,872
- Reaction score
- 5,455
Jman;n8891414 said:
It looks so pretty.
The 58 easy swing for me was about 85 and I’m having trouble hitting my 54 that distance right now, that’s why I asked.
Will be a fun follow!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk