PING G Series Irons Review

In the last year PING has been on a serious tear of re-organizing and simplifying the naming of their lines and that trend is continuing with the G-Series. Much like the i-Series the numerical identifier is now gone and what we are left with are the new “G” Irons from PING. THP was able to get a set in hand for review (4-PW, AWT 2.0 shafts) and it’s safe to say that though they are very much G-Series irons that we have come to know, there is definitely still new performance tech being brought to the table.

1 (400x268)

PING on the new G Irons:

G irons are heat treated using a specialized process, creating a Hyper 17-4 alloy that is 40% stronger than traditional 17-4 SS. This allows the faces to be thinner and provide four times the face flexing with improved stability. The results are big distance gains and a higher peak trajectory for better stopping power so you can hit and hold the green.

COR-Eye Technology generates sizeable distance gains by simultaneously activating the sole, face and top rail in flexing for consistently faster ball speeds across the hotter face. In addition to four times the face flexing, the G head is more stable and forgiving.

Connecting the Custom Tuning Port to the sole creates a deeper CG that helps elevate the launch angle while increasing MOI for greater accuracy.

At address, the iron’s refined look is created by a thin top rail, satin-blast finish and appropriate offset. An enlarged multi-material damping badge joined to the cavity works with COR-Eye Technology to optimize sound and feel.

Contributing to improved performance in the G irons are PING’s proprietary AWT 2.0 Ascending Weight Technology shafts, an optimal combination of physics and feel. They get lighter as they progress from the short irons to the long irons. Lighter long-iron shafts help square the clubface to increase clubhead speed for distance and accuracy. Short iron/wedge shafts are heavier for improved trajectory control and feel.

Specifications:

Capture


Traditionally the G-Series irons have been, in a single word, large. While much of the design with the new G release is generally familiar with their wide soles, deep cavities, and overall offset numbers, PING has used a couple of different tricks to make them more appealing where it matters to most golfers, at address. The G irons have a much more beveled/rounded topline than with the past iterations which does a lot to make them appear much more subdued in overall footprint. Additionally, the way that the offset has been applied to the heads in terms of shape to the eye also helps a lot. 

Design and Aesthetics:

2 (800x535)

Rounding out the overall aesthetics PING has continued to use blue as its accent color and it’s a good move with nothing about it being overdone. There is definitely a lot going on in the cavity with the COR-Eye (circle depression) making its way from the GMAX and into this design and it is the first thing that the eye moves to. While it is definitely within the “visible technology”, it will likely be hit and miss for individuals and their specific preferences in a look. The badging though is, as usual, very well done by PING and the CTP remains a staple of their iron designs being both visible and hidden tech. All of this is rounded out with a classic looking PING satin finish and while the soles and main body did hold up well through testing, it is worth noting that the face definitely wants to show wear more than one might anticipate.

3 (800x535)

Performance:

THP received the PING G irons in 4-PW configuration paired with the AWT 2.0 shafts in stiff flex for this particular review. All testing and data collection was done outdoors, both on the range as well as course situations in order to get the best grasp of their overall performance and playability.

  • Sound/Feel

When reviewing a Game-Improvement/Super-Game-Improvement iron set there is a certain level of preconception with the overall sound/feel. This is one area that, for the most part, PING has always been very good at where it comes to their designs. With that said, the GMAX irons broke from what we expect from PING in such a significant manner it has created some concern that with the COR-Eye moving to this design, so too would the extremely hollow and springy nature of those irons, simply put, that trepidation can be put to rest. The sound/feel of the G irons offers a solid impact sound and sensation which is free of any clickiness thanks to PING’s dampening badges and CTP. There is a dense nature to impact that will please many looking for a GI/SGI offering this season.  No they won’t feel like a forged iron, but they do break from many of the ideas of what an iron of this size is supposed to feel like. With that said, the overall feedback of the irons where misses laterally and vertically are concerned is very blurred, meaning there isn’t a lot of audible or tactile differentiation. The user can still sense a miss, but the feedback/harshness of said miss is very much subdued. Not a bad thing and in the opinion of this reviewer something that should be expected of most irons in this class.

4 (800x535)

  • Launch/Flight

A great description of the launch/flight of the G irons in one word would be “high”. Seriously though, that is one of the main design goals of the G-Series irons so it really shouldn’t surprise anyone. Peak heights during launch monitor testing were among the highest that this reviewer has seen in an iron set in some time. To give a better idea, the peak height from the 4i averaged 34 yards and incrementally went up through the set finishing with a 44 yard average from the PW. Clearly, on a personal level fitting would be key to bringing flight down to a preferred range but what this shows is that the set does what it is designed to do for the masses, get the ball high and playable.

5 (800x535)

Within the actual set design, the CTP (Custom Tuning Port) allows PING to push the Center of Gravity (CG) lower to increase the overall launch angle while also altering the MOI keeping them extremely forgiving. Added into that you have the AWT 2.0 shaft which incrementally change in weight through the set to help increase and control launch. In the long irons you have a lighter shaft weight, and into the wedges they get heavier (sub 100g to just under 110g). Overall the combination of these two things really do make for a SGI/GI iron set that will really appeal to those looking for an increased ball-flight, which is a major struggle for most amateurs (not all, but most). With that said, PING does offer other shaft options which should accommodate natural high-ball hitters who are still seeking the forgiveness of the G irons.

6 (800x535)

  • Distance/Forgiveness

As always, distance is a touchy topic since so many factors are based on fit. As discussed, the G irons launch had a very high ball flight for this reviewer and as such distance could undoubtedly be more maximized for this specific case. That said, the data recorded still painted a complete overall picture of the G irons where their distance generation and ball speed retention is concerned.

7 (800x535)

First and foremost, the COR-Eye technology might not be the most pleasant to look at, but time spent with this set shows that it does its job. Ball speeds generated were quite good and beyond that the spin produced from impact allowed for the overall distances seen on course to still be impressive even at the extremely high ball-flight that this reviewer saw. While they might not be the longest out there, there is actually a lot of potential that could be unlocked through proper fitting, something that PING has always emphasized anyway.

8 (800x535)

For the sake of reference, the new G irons were hit along with prior G-Series releases (G30, G25, and G15) in order to compare the overall data. The G launched higher than its predecessors and did produce slightly better ball-speeds than them on center strikes while producing lower spin numbers. Where the G’s really stood out though was on shots laterally (heel/toe) and in particular shots low on the face. In these areas the COR-Eye really flexed its muscles so-to-speak showing significantly increased ball speeds comparatively. On the course this translated into a much decreased tendency to see right movement on heel strikes and left movement on toe strikes. Basically, the ball wanted to go straight and maintain good height with a ball speed drop that was much less than anticipated entering the review. The bottom line is that the G irons are surprisingly playable on misses even by G-Series standards. Sure, in an iron of this stature one may sacrifice some measure of workability, but the point of these irons just like their ball-flight, is high and straight.

9 (800x535)

Parting Thoughts:

There is little doubt that the G-Series is PING’s flagship line and seeing it undergo a bit of an evolution both in name and design is a positive thing for golfers who often look its way seeking forgiveness and playability. The newly named “G” irons are a very good continuation of the performance golfers have come to expect with some solid improvements both aesthetically and technically along the way. The bottom line is that PING has achieved what they set out to do with the new G irons and they are definitely worth a look for those entertaining something in the Game-Improvement/Super-Game-Improvement range.

PING has priced the G irons at $110.00 per club with the set being available in 4-LW, more information on it and the entire G lineup can be found at www.PING.com.

Follow, Like & Share
Facebook
Facebook
Instagram
Twitter
Visit Us
YouTube
YouTube
LinkedIn

Related Posts

9 Comments

  • Great review James. Spot on based on my own observations with the irons

  • Great review – as someone who put these in play, I was looking forward to your thoughts on these. I’m a big fan so far, and in agreement with most, if not all of your feelings on these.

    These are a great GI offering, and worth a look, especially if you’re someone who’s avoided the G series based on looks in the past.

  • Great review here James.

    While it won’t stop me from purchasing, I do think this cavity is a little busy and not very “sleek” looking. Definitely think they should’ve done something with color in the depressed circle. I do like what they did with the topline to reduce the impression of overall footprint.

    With all that said, they sound like performers and a great offering in the SGI segment.

  • Nice review James. I like the looks and what Ping has done here.

  • Awesome review James. PING is always on my radar.

  • Nicely written review. After hitting thousands of balls with every iron available in my local GG and GS, I arranged for an extended fitting session pitting the G vs the Apex CF vs the Exotic CB. It quickly became a battle between the G and the Apex CF. The numbers were close. Alas, I did not go with my heart but went with the signicantly cheaper ( and similar testing numbers) G. ARGH! Two outdoor range sessions and two on course experiences latter I realize that I made a terrible mistake. The Gs are freaky straight. They will make many people extremely happy. They also are freaky high and frustratingly short. I hit one 7 iron so high I I was able to retrieve a cigar from my bag; cut the cigar; light the cigar and still have time to admire my very high short straight shot. I brought my Apex ’14 7 iron along for a ride and on 6 or so occasions I was able to compare shots with the Ping. My Apex was 5 to 12 yards longer than the G. Summary: G straight. G short. G insanely high. G being returned. Lesson learned: never ever base selection on indoor fitting and never forget to place prior year’s gamer into the new year’s competition.

  • Another solid review. And another solid iron set for me to ponder!

  • Great review, thanks! I spent the last couple of weeks trying G, 30, Max, and AP1 716. Played 9 holes with 4 balls and 4 different 7 irons, and swapping shafts. Indoor monitor a couple times to lock it down on the Ping side – G with stock steel shaft. Brought that to the Titleist demo day where I tried a few different shafts on the AP1. We were outdoors on the course with a trackman.

    Performance wise, they were pretty even. Similar height, spin, and distance. Hit the 7 iron about 165 carry with 85 mph swing speed. I normally am a high ball hitter, which has kept me away from Ping in the past. Didn’t really see anything in the numbers or on the course to believe they were ballooning.

    The AP1s are definitely more forgiving than prior model versions. I was surprised at how well I hit them. They also felt a little more solid as they are a heavier club. I could have easily put those in my bag.

    I have low back issues and was mainly looking at the Pings due to lighter weight, with a desire to drop my swing speed down to 80 or less to save on fatigue.

    There was one more factor for me, that considering all else, would have been tough to get past – the 43 deg pitching wedge the AP1 set. I carry a 50, 56 (bent to 55) and a 60 vokey and didn’t want to get refit for all my wedges to address that gap in the scoring clubs. The Ping lofts fit perfectly in my game.

  • It is actually a great and useful piece of info. I am happy that you just
    shared this useful information with us. Please keep us up to date like this.

    Thank you for sharing.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

There are no products in your cart.