Ping I500 ferrules

[Nessism]

Update: I've received the ferrules and my ebay 410 irons...

 

The Billy Bob's ferrules OD is .524. They claim they fit the G410 irons but those have a hosel OD of .535 (measured by me). I'm sure a lot of people won't care if the ferrules are undersize, but I'm not thrilled.

 

Grail Golf on ebay has some collared ferrules that are .560 so they can be trimmed down for a nice fit. The collar is a little short but that shouldn't matter. The photo suggests the collar may be a little fat but that's easily trimmed to fit. I'm going to pick up some for $hits and giggles. No way I'm paying $3 each for Golfworks "glider" ferrules.

 

Ness, how do the 410's compare to the G? I was comparing them side by side last not at a local shop and the actual head size, sole and top line were very similar. The finish is obviously different and I'm not sure on the offset but the overall size and shape is very similar.

 

I realize the 410's have the toe screw so any ides of they are more forgiving on a toe miss as that's my normal miss with my over the top swing.

 

Don't want to derail this ferrule thread too much but my observations are similar to yours. Some people claim the 410 is "smaller" but I don't see it. In fact, I'm going to measure and post up the data in the 410 thread so stay tuned. The offset is clearly lower, and compared to my old G25's I think the blade shape is nicer, but that's subjective.

[GreCra83]

I have the grail golf collared ones and they are the only thing that would work for my I500s. A bit longer than what comes stock with the i500 but work well.

[Oknows]

Just found these on Golfworks

https://www.golfworks.com/ping-anser-i-20-355-iron-ferrules/p/bb9047/

[Nessism]

Okay, so I reshafted some i200's with Billy Bob ferrules and it went fine. The ferrule fit is good. No issues.

I also reshafted some G410's and this time used the [Grail Golf ferules purchased off ebay](https://www.ebay.com/itm/NEW-PREMIUM-BLACK-GOLF-FERRULES-355-COLLARED-TAPER-TIP-IRON-87-560OD-LOT/362117924322?hash=item544fe905e2:m:mA46Zdarm3y7NmSHUr-jRdg:sc:USPSFirstClass!90503!US!-1&frcectupt=true "Grail Golf ferules purchased off ebay"). These have a shorter collar and the collar is a smig fat but they worked fine. The diameter of these is a pretty good match for the fatter hosel on the 410's. The 410's don't have that necked down area at the bottom of the ferrule like the older Ping's and there is a plastic plug at the bottom of the hosel too. Shaft insertion depth is quite short and the shaft swims in the hosel which sucks because the shaft tip can move side to side which will change the loft and lie. I wrapped the shaft tip with a thin strip of fiberglass drywall tape, two wraps, to eliminate the shaft tilt. Ping just doesn't make it easy. Anyway, the Grail ferrules are $9 for 25 so they get the thumbs up. They are basically the same as the "glider" ferrules Golfworks sells except the collar is a little shorter.

[Qwiklap]

 

> @Nessism said:

> Okay, so I reshafted some i200's with Billy Bob ferrules and it went fine. The ferrule fit is good. No issues.

> I also reshafted some G410's and this time used the [Grail Golf ferules purchased off ebay](https://www.ebay.com/itm/NEW-PREMIUM-BLACK-GOLF-FERRULES-355-COLLARED-TAPER-TIP-IRON-87-560OD-LOT/362117924322?hash=item544fe905e2:m:mA46Zdarm3y7NmSHUr-jRdg:sc:USPSFirstClass!90503!US!-1&frcectupt=true "Grail Golf ferules purchased off ebay"). These have a shorter collar and the collar is a smig fat but they worked fine. The diameter of these is a pretty good match for the fatter hosel on the 410's. The 410's don't have that necked down area at the bottom of the ferrule like the older Ping's and there is a plastic plug at the bottom of the hosel too. Shaft insertion depth is quite short and the shaft swims in the hosel which sucks because the shaft tip can move side to side which will change the loft and lie. I wrapped the shaft tip with a thin strip of fiberglass drywall tape, two wraps, to eliminate the shaft tilt. Ping just doesn't make it easy. Anyway, the Grail ferrules are $9 for 25 so they get the thumbs up. They are basically the same as the "glider" ferrules Golfworks sells except the collar is a little shorter.

 

Hey Nessism - and any experienced builder -- I am resurrecting this thread. I plan to put a set of i500s together using some heads and KBS TGI 100 shafts I picked up here on BST.

 

I read through this thread - and I purchased the i500 ferrules and PXG spacers from Billy Bobs (you can buy the spacers by themselves from Billy Bobs for $0.40/per - BTW). This is the first build I have every done with shims or spacers. So I have a few questions:

 

1. Do I put epoxy inside the spacer (so epoxy the spacer to the shaft) and also put epoxy on the outside of the spacer as well (so it adheres to the inside hosel).

2. Is it OK that I only have about 1" of insertion depth on these clubs (after accounting from the spacer)?

3. If I need tip weighting, do I insert the weight between the spacer and the shaft tip (so spacer > tip weight > shaft) or the weight on the outside (so weight > spacer > shaft)?

 

Any other tips for building these? I plan to use Golfworks 24 hour epoxy and Brampton shaft beads - and ample amounts of both to help take up the space.

I will know that the PXG spacer and Ping collared ferrules definately improve the fitment (from a dry fitting perspective). I don't think the collared ferrules alone are enough to center the shaft (seems like the spacer is needed to keep the shaft tip centered.

 

Thanks all!

[Chip Duffer]

I am following. I called Ping today for a price to reshaft (DG105 S300 is too tip stiff to me), and the quote per club was; $35 for the AWT 2.0 or $45 for KBS Tour 105.

[Nessism]

As I understand it PXG heads are bored .370 parallel, and the tip spacers are to center the shaft if .355 taper tip shafts are installed. Obviously, if the shafts you are using are .370 you don't need the spacers.

I don't know what these spacers look like or if they take up insertion dept, but as long as you have 1" of shaft insertion, and if all the parts are coated with epoxy, you should be fine. I would not use shafting beads because it reduces epoxy strength.

 

[Chip Duffer]

> @Qwiklap said:

>

> > @Nessism said:

> > Okay, so I reshafted some i200's with Billy Bob ferrules and it went fine. The ferrule fit is good. No issues.

> > I also reshafted some G410's and this time used the [Grail Golf ferules purchased off ebay](https://www.ebay.com/itm/NEW-PREMIUM-BLACK-GOLF-FERRULES-355-COLLARED-TAPER-TIP-IRON-87-560OD-LOT/362117924322?hash=item544fe905e2:m:mA46Zdarm3y7NmSHUr-jRdg:sc:USPSFirstClass!90503!US!-1&frcectupt=true "Grail Golf ferules purchased off ebay"). These have a shorter collar and the collar is a smig fat but they worked fine. The diameter of these is a pretty good match for the fatter hosel on the 410's. The 410's don't have that necked down area at the bottom of the ferrule like the older Ping's and there is a plastic plug at the bottom of the hosel too. Shaft insertion depth is quite short and the shaft swims in the hosel which sucks because the shaft tip can move side to side which will change the loft and lie. I wrapped the shaft tip with a thin strip of fiberglass drywall tape, two wraps, to eliminate the shaft tilt. Ping just doesn't make it easy. Anyway, the Grail ferrules are $9 for 25 so they get the thumbs up. They are basically the same as the "glider" ferrules Golfworks sells except the collar is a little shorter.

>

> Hey Nessism - and any experienced builder -- I am resurrecting this thread. I plan to put a set of i500s together using some heads and KBS TGI 100 shafts I picked up here on BST.

>

> I read through this thread - and I purchased the i500 ferrules and PXG spacers from Billy Bobs (you can buy the spacers by themselves from Billy Bobs for $0.40/per - BTW). This is the first build I have every done with shims or spacers. So I have a few questions:

>

> 1. Do I put epoxy inside the spacer (so epoxy the spacer to the shaft) and also put epoxy on the outside of the spacer as well (so it adheres to the inside hosel).

> 2. Is it OK that I only have about 1" of insertion depth on these clubs (after accounting from the spacer)?

> 3. If I need tip weighting, do I insert the weight between the spacer and the shaft tip (so spacer > tip weight > shaft) or the weight on the outside (so weight > spacer > shaft)?

>

> Any other tips for building these? I plan to use Golfworks 24 hour epoxy and Brampton shaft beads - and ample amounts of both to help take up the space.

> I will know that the PXG spacer and Ping collared ferrules definately improve the fitment (from a dry fitting perspective). I don't think the collared ferrules alone are enough to center the shaft (seems like the spacer is needed to keep the shaft tip centered.

>

> Thanks all!

 

Quiklap,

1) To use the spacer, yes use epoxy to keep it in place and where the shaft inserts to create a solid piece.

2) Make sure you have all of the old epoxy out of the hosel and the base of the spacer.

3) Because Ping only left 1-1/8", it would not be good to give up more shaft seating room with a tip weight. You can add weight through the screw in the toe of the i500. (410 also) The swingweights were rather random when I got them, so I used Golfworks Head Tacking Adhesive. It's a bit thick and will airlock, but if you heat it a bit, it'll flow easily into the head. As a side benefit, this will also enhance the sound, even though Ping has already added hot melt.

[Chip Duffer]

> @Nessism said:

> As I understand it PXG heads are bored .370 parallel, and the tip spacers are to center the shaft if .355 taper tip shafts are installed. Obviously, if the shafts you are using are .370 you don't need the spacers.

> I don't know what these spacers look like or if they take up insertion dept, but as long as you have 1" of shaft insertion, and if all the parts are coated with epoxy, you should be fine. I would not use shafting beads because it reduces epoxy strength.

>

Interesting that you mention using .370 parallel shafts as I had been considering that possibility earlier. the shaft just above the hosel matches a parallel shaft and in fact the OD is also the same as my 575MMC's at .53.

I'm curious why they would use a taper tip if the .370 parallel works. It doesn't seem that there would be a significant difference in deflection between the two.

I have a preferred shaft that I'd like to use and it's only available in .370. I may give that a go on one iron before purchasing a shaft I'm less familiar with.

 

[Nessism]

> @Twin2L said:

> > @Nessism said:

> > As I understand it PXG heads are bored .370 parallel, and the tip spacers are to center the shaft if .355 taper tip shafts are installed. Obviously, if the shafts you are using are .370 you don't need the spacers.

> > I don't know what these spacers look like or if they take up insertion dept, but as long as you have 1" of shaft insertion, and if all the parts are coated with epoxy, you should be fine. I would not use shafting beads because it reduces epoxy strength.

> >

> Interesting that you mention using .370 parallel shafts as I had been considering that possibility earlier. the shaft just above the hosel matches a parallel shaft and in fact the OD is also the same as my 575MMC's at .53.

> I'm curious why they would use a taper tip if the .370 parallel works. It doesn't seem that there would be a significant difference in deflection between the two.

> I have a preferred shaft that I'd like to use and it's only available in .370. I may give that a go on one iron before purchasing a shaft I'm less familiar with.

>

 

.370" shafts are almost always unitized which means they are made to a blank length and then trimmed for the specific head it's installed into. This results in a descending weight progression as the shafts get shorter. Taper tip shafts are typically constant weight and because of that, often they are stiffer because there is more material in them.

[Chip Duffer]

> @Nessism said:

> > @Twin2L said:

> > > @Nessism said:

> > > As I understand it PXG heads are bored .370 parallel, and the tip spacers are to center the shaft if .355 taper tip shafts are installed. Obviously, if the shafts you are using are .370 you don't need the spacers.

> > > I don't know what these spacers look like or if they take up insertion dept, but as long as you have 1" of shaft insertion, and if all the parts are coated with epoxy, you should be fine. I would not use shafting beads because it reduces epoxy strength.

> > >

> > Interesting that you mention using .370 parallel shafts as I had been considering that possibility earlier. the shaft just above the hosel matches a parallel shaft and in fact the OD is also the same as my 575MMC's at .53.

> > I'm curious why they would use a taper tip if the .370 parallel works. It doesn't seem that there would be a significant difference in deflection between the two.

> > I have a preferred shaft that I'd like to use and it's only available in .370. I may give that a go on one iron before purchasing a shaft I'm less familiar with.

> >

>

> .370" shafts are almost always unitized which means they are made to a blank length and then trimmed for the specific head it's installed into. This results in a descending weight progression as the shafts get shorter. Taper tip shafts are typically constant weight and because of that, often they are stiffer because there is more material in them.

 

The DG S300 is very tip stiff and annoys a neck injury I have. I had to change to a stiff shaft a few years ago that was a little softer I’m the tip. Some days I can play the S300’s just fine, others I struggle to get the ball near my normal trajectory which is mid high. On those days I find myself trying to compensate and over swing with less than optimal results from thin contact.

[Qwiklap]

To help with the conversation - I snapped some pics of the PXG spacer and the tip weights I normally use. That said - I agree with Twin. There just is not enough hosel depth to add even a low-profile tip weight. Better off adding hot melt to the weight port in the toe - or use my WRX standby ... lead tape.

 

 

[Qwiklap]

Also - when I called Ping CS line to ask some questions about these irons - they mentioned that these would be really hard to restart on my own. They said there were special weights in the hosels that (along with the tow screws) provide the forgiveness.

 

Are these “hosel weights” these metal plugs I can see at the bottom of the hosels?

[Chip Duffer]

Another option for swing weight is tungsten powder and a cork done the shaft to achieve your desired SW. just ensure you don’t go above the top of the hosel, which should be no problem.

If you are seeing “metal plugs”, those could be tungsten weights, typically fit down the hosel in 6g and 9g in tungsten and 2g and 4g in brass. If so, they should be epoxied in place.

[Nessism]

I don't see a problem using that brass tip weight along with the "cap" and collared ferrule. The head on the brass tip will eat into your insertion depth by about 1/8" but that won't cause a problem.

How's the OD of that ferrule match that of the i500 hosel?

[Qwiklap]

> @Twin2L said:

> Another option for swing weight is tungsten powder and a cork done the shaft to achieve your desired SW. just ensure you don’t go above the top of the hosel, which should be no problem.

> If you are seeing “metal plugs”, those could be tungsten weights, typically fit down the hosel in 6g and 9g in tungsten and 2g and 4g in brass. If so, they should be epoxied in place.

 

I did see elsewhere in this thread (or another thread) someone caution about “drilling” out the OEM weight plug (Edit: See post #6 in this thread). This appears to be on the bottom of the hosel - and is in each head. I have the “full” 1 1/8” insertion depth - so I don’t think these are left over tip weights. It may just be the way the light is reflecting on the steel at the bottom of the hosel. I tried to capture it here:

 

 

[Qwiklap]

> @Nessism said:

> I don't see a problem using that brass tip weight along with the "cap" and collared ferrule. The head on the brass tip will eat into your insertion depth by about 1/8" but that won't cause a problem.

> How's the OD of that ferrule match that of the i500 hosel?

 

 

Billy Bob’s collated ferrule seems to match the OD very nicely.

[Wataca44]

A few months ago I emailed Ping and asked if I could send back my I500 irons and have the swingweight adjusted up 3 points. The response was "in order to increase the swingweight it would require a total reshaft". ???

[Nessism]

> @Wataca44 said:

> A few months ago I emailed Ping and asked if I could send back my I500 irons and have the swingweight adjusted up 3 points. The response was "in order to increase the swingweight it would require a total reshaft". ???

 

Do the i500's use a hosel weight like the G410's do? If so then maybe they have different weights that are used for swingweighting and the shaft would have to be pulled to gain access.

[Qwiklap]

> @Nessism said:

> > @Wataca44 said:

> > A few months ago I emailed Ping and asked if I could send back my I500 irons and have the swingweight adjusted up 3 points. The response was "in order to increase the swingweight it would require a total reshaft". ???

>

> Do the i500's use a hosel weight like the G410's do? If so then maybe they have different weights that are used for swingweighting and the shaft would have to be pulled to gain access.

 

I think that slug in the bottom of the hosel is the weight (and it was mentioned in post # 6).

 

I just shafted a couple of them last night -- when I dry fit the heads (with the spacer and ferrule) and rubber banded a grip (Lamkin UTx midsized) to the side of the shaft, the SW was C7. I then used a 5g lead tip weight (with a very low profile head) and got the clubs to D0 (I like D0 to D2). With the tip weight and spacer -- I still had a touch over 1" in insertion depth, so it seems to be fine. The Billy Bob's PXG spacer and i500 collared ferrule seem to center the shaft well and hold it there. And the ferrules fit great to the OD of the hosel (no turning needed -- but I am not a ferrule freak).

 

The clubs are still curing -- but I checked them this AM before work and they seem to be set up nice.

 

I will take come pics tonight.

[Nessism]

> @Qwiklap said:

> > @Nessism said:

> > > @Wataca44 said:

> > > A few months ago I emailed Ping and asked if I could send back my I500 irons and have the swingweight adjusted up 3 points. The response was "in order to increase the swingweight it would require a total reshaft". ???

> >

> > Do the i500's use a hosel weight like the G410's do? If so then maybe they have different weights that are used for swingweighting and the shaft would have to be pulled to gain access.

>

> I think that slug in the bottom of the hosel is the weight (and it was mentioned in post # 6).

>

> I just shafted a couple of them last night -- when I dry fit the heads (with the spacer and ferrule) and rubber banded a grip **(Lamkin UTx midsized)** to the side of the shaft, the SW was C7. I then used a 5g lead tip weight (with a very low profile head) and got the clubs to D0 (I like D0 to D2). With the tip weight and spacer -- I still had a touch over 1" in insertion depth, so it seems to be fine. The Billy Bob's PXG spacer and i500 collared ferrule seem to center the shaft well and hold it there. And the ferrules fit great to the OD of the hosel (no turning needed -- but I am not a ferrule freak).

>

> The clubs are still curing -- but I checked them this AM before work and they seem to be set up nice.

>

> I will take come pics tonight.

 

Did the clubs come from Ping with midsized grips? If not, that's your swingweight issue. The grip counterbalance the swingweight scale and lower the swingweight number. Many here, myself included, believe in swingweighting with a standard 50g grip and if the measured swingweight goes down because a heavy grip is used don't worry about it.

[Qwiklap]

> @Nessism said:

 

>

> Did the clubs come from Ping with midsized grips? If not, that's your swingweight issue. The grip counterbalance the swingweight scale and lower the swingweight number. Many here, myself included, believe in swingweighting with a standard 50g grip and if the measured swingweight goes down because a heavy grip is used don't worry about it.

 

Thanks Nissism as always.

 

I do take that into account. The mid grips will cause SW to drop a couple due to the counterbalancing aspects. With standard grips I would be looking to get to D2-D4 (I like a heavier feeling head). I think the SW was low due to the grips, and the fact that I am using a lighter shaft (KBS TGI 100s) and I have soft-stepped the shafts (the shafts post cutting were about 95g). So to get the SW back to what I want -- I expected to use tip weights.

 

I had to also use tip weights to get SW back up when I built the Srixon + Aerotech i95 setup I am using now.

[Socrates]

> @Nessism said:

> > @Wataca44 said:

> > A few months ago I emailed Ping and asked if I could send back my I500 irons and have the swingweight adjusted up 3 points. The response was "in order to increase the swingweight it would require a total reshaft". ???

>

> Do the i500's use a hosel weight like the G410's do? If so then maybe they have different weights that are used for swingweighting and the shaft would have to be pulled to gain access.

 

Yes, Ping uses different weights in the hosel and different weights in the screew in the toe. These weights vary in densities so you might have the same size plug or screew but they weigh differently. Personally, I think this might be the worst weighting design Ping has ever done in their history.

 

Edit: intentional mis-spell to get past the ridiculous censor.

 

[Qwiklap]

> @Socrates said:

> > @Nessism said:

> > > @Wataca44 said:

> > > A few months ago I emailed Ping and asked if I could send back my I500 irons and have the swingweight adjusted up 3 points. The response was "in order to increase the swingweight it would require a total reshaft". ???

> >

> > Do the i500's use a hosel weight like the G410's do? If so then maybe they have different weights that are used for swingweighting and the shaft would have to be pulled to gain access.

>

> Yes, Ping uses different weights in the hosel and different weights in the screew in the toe. These weights vary in densities so you might have the same size plug or screew but they weigh differently. Personally, I think this might be the worst weighting design Ping has ever done in their history.

>

> Edit: intentional mis-spell to get past the ridiculous censor.

>

 

Interesting -- and nowI know why "screew" was always getting replaced with XXXX

Seems like it would be super easy to weight the head by just hot melting the head through the toe port.

Question: I unscrewed one of the toe ports and found some hot melt or head tack in there (I saw syrupy strings attached to the screww). I bought the heads on BST -- does anyone know if Ping is putting hot melt/head tack in the head? Or did someone just add that to the heads I have?

[Socrates]

> @Qwiklap said:

> > @Socrates said:

> > > @Nessism said:

> > > > @Wataca44 said:

> > > > A few months ago I emailed Ping and asked if I could send back my I500 irons and have the swingweight adjusted up 3 points. The response was "in order to increase the swingweight it would require a total reshaft". ???

> > >

> > > Do the i500's use a hosel weight like the G410's do? If so then maybe they have different weights that are used for swingweighting and the shaft would have to be pulled to gain access.

> >

> > Yes, Ping uses different weights in the hosel and different weights in the screew in the toe. These weights vary in densities so you might have the same size plug or screew but they weigh differently. Personally, I think this might be the worst weighting design Ping has ever done in their history.

> >

> > Edit: intentional mis-spell to get past the ridiculous censor.

> >

>

> Interesting -- and nowI know why "screew" was always getting replaced with XXXX

> Seems like it would be super easy to weight the head by just hot melting the head through the toe port.

> Question: I unscrewed one of the toe ports and found some hot melt or head tack in there (I saw syrupy strings attached to the screww). I bought the heads on BST -- does anyone know if Ping is putting hot melt/head tack in the head? Or did someone just add that to the heads I have?

 

That is thread lock. They don't hotmelt the iron heads as far as I know.

[Nessism]

> @Socrates said:

> That is thread lock. They don't hotmelt the iron heads as far as I know.

 

Someone in a different thread said they found quite a lot of that gooey stuff inside their i500 heads, so that suggests it's done for weighing (to a point anyway). Threadlock is typically just a small dab of material on the screw threads.

 

 

[Qwiklap]

> @Nessism said:

> > @Socrates said:

> > That is thread lock. They don't hotmelt the iron heads as far as I know.

>

> Someone in a different thread said they found quite a lot of that gooey stuff inside their i500 heads, so that suggests it's done for weighing (to a point anyway). Threadlock is typically just a small dab of material on the **** threads.

>

>

 

Yeah -- it did seem like more than just threadlock. More like weight adjustment.

[Chip Duffer]

I have read that they do use hotmelt for weighting. I also saw a good bit in my i500’s.

[Socrates]

> @Twin2L said:

> I have read that they do use hotmelt for weighting. I also saw a good bit in my i500’s.

 

Rep told me they didn't. Another thing he got wrong, I guess.

[playoffbeard23]

Update to this topic! Man am I glad that I wasn't trying to re shaft these Ping i500 two years ago when there was no solution for the crazy hosel size debacle. Pulled and cleaned all the i500 heads, def going to need to make sure every little bit of epoxy at the bottom is cleared out on these, attempting to reheat with CTaper 130x for a player taking them out of his Mizuno JPX900 and into the i500 irons.

 

-Luckily I had two of the PXG iron adapter ferules and the end cap it comes with however the ferrule does not fit the collar is too big to fit into the hosel. Had a bag of .355 collared iron ferrules that fit nice and snug but will definitely be using the end caps from the PXG to make sure the bottom fits snug as well. So far dry fitting with these the swing weight without doing anything was right on at D2 (likely from the heavy shaft and playing ⅜" longer due to the shorter hosel depth. 

 

-Has anyone else had issues with the .355 PXG ferule fitting into any of these ping heads? on the calipers the PXG collar OD is .43" and the normal .355 collar OD is .40" and fit perfect into the i500 hosel. Guessing the PXG hosel is even larger than the .40" hosel ID I'm getting on these i500s. I will reiterate the end cap seems like a must from my dry fitting, without it you can feel it wiggle at the bottom may not be an issue after epoxy with the collar at the top but I wouldn't risk it.

 

Anyone know if you can buy that little end cap separately?