Ping Glide 3.0 wedges - June 2019

[dciccoritti]

> @elwhippy said:

> Saw these about three hours ago in local store. I will pass. Heads look clumsy, way too much bounce and the re-hashed Eye 2 heads look awful.

 

Funny, I also just saw these in a local store about an hour ago and completely agree with everything you said.

 

[Anser3]

Which Ping grind is most similar to the PM grind on the Callaway PM wedges? Is it the Eye2?

[mantan]

Hmm...

 

Had an extended range session and 9 holes with the 54* Eye 2.

 

Good

It is absolutely phenomenal around the greens. Crazy spin. Easy to open up. VERY versatile. I'm a mid handicapper with a decent short game and felt like a surgeon with it.

 

Bad

 

I hit a Jason Day/Steve Stricker dead hands wedge. I feel absolutely money with my 54* Glide 2 stealth from 20-80 yards. It's like shooting a jump shot to hit a high soft shot to where I am aiming. I could not hit that shot to save my life with the Eye2. Something about the setup just made it awkward to try to hit it with the bounce. I was hitting a ton of shots low and hot. The only way I could hit partial shots was to take a traditional swing with the 'clock' method. Even then it was about 5 yards shorter than my Glide 2 with the same swing.

 

Misc

 

The Glide 2 Stealth felt a lot 'softer' at impact. The Glide 3 wasn't harsh...but was definitely clicky.

 

Overall I am a bit disappointed. I have my club championship this weekend. Like the 9 holes I played today, I will put both in the bag in pull my lob. I rarely use my lob on full/partial swings. And around the green the Eye2 is crazy easy to open up and hit high.

 

I have the PGAATSS 60-day playability deal. But I am not sure what wedge I would trade it for. Crazy as it sounds, I may keep both in the bag long term and use them for different purposes.

 

[Shakespeare]

Bought the 54 ss grind and 60 ts grind today...wanted to get the eye 2...but couldnt pull the trigger. I like tbe way these look

[MtlJeff]

> @Anser3 said:

> Which Ping grind is most similar to the PM grind on the Callaway PM wedges? Is it the Eye2?

 

It has to be the eye2, considering the PM grind is literally a knock off of the eye2

[soap1984]

I got a set of these and tried them at the range. I really like the look, I was able to hit every shot with them and thought they felt as good as the vokeys. Didn't like the look of the eye two but never really have. 60 does feel like it has a lot of bounce if you don't like that I can see not going with these

[rmgatl]

Didn't love ts grind, eye2 was his overall favorite fwiw.

[bladehunter]

Saw them in person yesterday too. I wasn’t completely frightened. But I’d have to demo these on course to have an opinion. Or to buy. They look that odd. And I’m saying that as a former PM grind player. I’d be more looking for turf interaction. In store on carpet they look like the leading edge sits way above the ground. As in loads of bounce on the 60. Curious to see how effective the bounce plays.

[PowderedToastMan]

Any thoughts on the stock shaft? Aside from weight, how does flex/launch/spin compare to Dynamic Gold?

[bladehunter]

> @PowderedToastMan said:

> Any thoughts on the stock shaft? Aside from weight, how does flex/launch/spin compare to Dynamic Gold?

 

I hit with the amt. not bad at all. Feels very similar to the modus in my irons. But hard to get away from s400 honestly. Just so predictable

[dlygrisse]

Yes. The PM was Callaways effort to copy Phil’s old Eye2 wedge he grew up with. > @Anser3 said:

> Which Ping grind is most similar to the PM grind on the Callaway PM wedges? Is it the Eye2?

 

 

[dlygrisse]

> @bladehunter said:

> Saw them in person yesterday too. I wasn’t completely frightened. But I’d have to demo these on course to have an opinion. Or to buy. They look that odd. And I’m saying that as a former PM grind player. I’d be more looking for turf interaction. In store on carpet they look like the leading edge sits way above the ground. As in loads of bounce on the 60. Curious to see how effective the bounce plays.

 

There is almost negative bounce on the heel with much more bounce towards the toe. To me the older version, haven’t played the 3.0 yet, played much lower bounce than the actual spec because of the grind. Especially when the face is open. Although they play as a higher bounce from the sand because of the scooped sole and overall wider flange. For me I found the PM grind “diggy” especially on soft turf.

 

 

[JDIL]

> @GolfTurkey said:

> My Vokey V grind's grooves have gone to wedge heaven. I looked at the Glide 3.0's and ordered the 60 SS. Is it my imagination or does it have a little more heel relief than the 2.0; I think there may be a general trend towards the V shaped sole?

 

The V grind was on my radar was as my next purchase. I hear it has the Versatility of a high bounce when square, but good heel relief when opened up. I was under the impression the TS grind was similar. Is the SS grind more similar then?

 

[Maverick22]

> @PowderedToastMan said:

> Any thoughts on the stock shaft? Aside from weight, how does flex/launch/spin compare to Dynamic Gold?

 

I demo’d a few of these at our club, and all had the new zz115 shaft. I found the club much too light (and too light in the head) and assume that is attributable to the shaft. On full swings this was especially noticeable. I will probably order a few of these wedges but will get a different (heavier) shaft - probably the DG 120 shaft or ordinary DG.

 

 

[PowderedToastMan]

> @Maverick22 said:

> > @PowderedToastMan said:

> > Any thoughts on the stock shaft? Aside from weight, how does flex/launch/spin compare to Dynamic Gold?

>

> I demo’d a few of these at our club, and all had the new zz115 shaft. I found the club much too light (and too light in the head) and assume that is attributable to the shaft. On full swings this was especially noticeable. I will probably order a few of these wedges but will get a different (heavier) shaft - probably the DG 120 shaft or ordinary DG.

>

>

While I appreciate the input, you commented on the only part of my question I specifically requested no input on.

“Any thoughts on the stock shaft? Aside from weight, how does flex/launch/spin compare to Dynamic Gold?”

[mantan]

I played the Eye 2 for 36 holes this weekend and by the final 9 I was done with it. I really wanted to love it, but there is just something off about it. It's clunky to look at and for me didn't perform as well as my 2.0 stealth. It's probably more a comfort thing right now.

 

[rmgatl]

My range session with 56* eye2 today was very good. Gaps well vs my uw, used same 3/4 swing on both with same results, just 15 yards distance gap. None of the upright lie angle weirdness of the pm grind (fixable of course but annoying). I like the shaft, play my wedges +1" and weight was ok, heavier than my uw with a 95 recoil but didn't bother me. Bounce was fine on relatively full swings under our usual absurdly wet conditions. If you play on firm/dry conditions, who knows, it's like a swamp here nearly all the time.

Hit high/low around green, I liked the bounce. I like playing wedges a little open and love the 56*. I'd rather have too little loft than too much. Flop shots were easy. Yes some offset but not enough imo to obsess over.

The club has (to me) a very historically conventional ping look. If you like that, great, if you don't then don't get this wedge, get the regular glide which looks more like vokey or cleveland etc. I used to play an isi copper and nickel S3 57* wedge as a sand/lob and this reminded me a bit of that. Before the isi I played eye2+, eye2 etc so this eye2 looks normal to me.

I think this is a very versatile wedge that does everything well and couple things (sand, flop) really well. But you have to be ok on the look. If you are, I think it just comes down to technique (mostly does anyway, all kinds of great wedges available, hard to buy a short game).

[mantan]

> @rmgatl said:

> My range session with 56* eye2 today was very good. Gaps well vs my uw, used same 3/4 swing on both with same results, just 15 yards distance gap. None of the upright lie angle weirdness of the pm grind (fixable of course but annoying). I like the shaft, play my wedges +1" and weight was ok, heavier than my uw with a 95 recoil but didn't bother me. Bounce was fine on relatively full swings under our usual absurdly wet conditions. If you play on firm/dry conditions, who knows, it's like a swamp here nearly all the time.

> Hit high/low around green, I liked the bounce. I like playing wedges a little open and love the 56*. I'd rather have too little loft than too much. Flop shots were easy. Yes some offset but not enough imo to obsess over.

> The club has (to me) a very historically conventional ping look. If you like that, great, if you don't then don't get this wedge, get the regular glide which looks more like vokey or cleveland etc. I used to play an isi copper and nickel S3 57* wedge as a sand/lob and this reminded me a bit of that. Before the isi I played eye2+, eye2 etc so this eye2 looks normal to me.

> I think this is a very versatile wedge that does everything well and couple things (sand, flop) really well. But you have to be ok on the look. If you are, I think it just comes down to technique (mostly does anyway, all kinds of great wedges available, hard to buy a short game).

 

Agree about being 100% comfortable with the look. I used to play ISI's and thought I was comfortable with the traditional PING look. But it was a bit more jarring this time around for some reason. In an extended practice session I felt absolutely great around the greens with it. On the final day off CC while in contention in my flight I absolutely butchered a simple chip with it. 100% user error...but I remember sitting never feeling quite comfortable at address. I'm going do have a couple of more range sessions before making a final decision. During practice it felt very versatile and easy to hit. But short game is all about confidence.

[GolfTurkey]

> @jdang307 said:

> > @GolfTurkey said:

> > My Vokey V grind's grooves have gone to wedge heaven. I looked at the Glide 3.0's and ordered the 60 SS. Is it my imagination or does it have a little more heel relief than the 2.0; I think there may be a general trend towards the V shaped sole?

>

> The V grind was on my radar was as my next purchase. I hear it has the Versatility of a high bounce when square, but good heel relief when opened up. I was under the impression the TS grind was similar. Is the SS grind more similar then?

>

The TS is more similar to the V grind except that I would say that the V grind has more bounce and a slightly thicker sole, which means that the TS is slightly less idiot (i.e. me) proof. I went for the SS because of past issues with the TS digging in the bermuda that I play in.

 

 

[rmgatl]

> @mantan said:

> > @rmgatl said:

> > My range session with 56* eye2 today was very good. Gaps well vs my uw, used same 3/4 swing on both with same results, just 15 yards distance gap. None of the upright lie angle weirdness of the pm grind (fixable of course but annoying). I like the shaft, play my wedges +1" and weight was ok, heavier than my uw with a 95 recoil but didn't bother me. Bounce was fine on relatively full swings under our usual absurdly wet conditions. If you play on firm/dry conditions, who knows, it's like a swamp here nearly all the time.

> > Hit high/low around green, I liked the bounce. I like playing wedges a little open and love the 56*. I'd rather have too little loft than too much. Flop shots were easy. Yes some offset but not enough imo to obsess over.

> > The club has (to me) a very historically conventional ping look. If you like that, great, if you don't then don't get this wedge, get the regular glide which looks more like vokey or cleveland etc. I used to play an isi copper and nickel S3 57* wedge as a sand/lob and this reminded me a bit of that. Before the isi I played eye2+, eye2 etc so this eye2 looks normal to me.

> > I think this is a very versatile wedge that does everything well and couple things (sand, flop) really well. But you have to be ok on the look. If you are, I think it just comes down to technique (mostly does anyway, all kinds of great wedges available, hard to buy a short game).

>

> Agree about being 100% comfortable with the look. I used to play ISI's and thought I was comfortable with the traditional PING look. But it was a bit more jarring this time around for some reason. In an extended practice session I felt absolutely great around the greens with it. On the final day off CC while in contention in my flight I absolutely butchered a simple chip with it. 100% user error...but I remember sitting never feeling quite comfortable at address. I'm going do have a couple of more range sessions before making a final decision. During practice it felt very versatile and easy to hit. But short game is all about confidence.

 

Played 18 today and still like the 56* eye2. Refreshing to not have to decide between my 54* glide and 58* pm grind. I like the eye2 from the fairway better than pm (plays lot more like my i210s), 56* is plenty of loft in this club. I used to play gorgeous founders clubs series 200 blades with mizuno forged wedges, so I get the blade look. But can also see why so many tour players have used eye2 style sand wedges...really perform. Ymmv.

[mantan]

> @rmgatl said:

> > @mantan said:

> > > @rmgatl said:

> > > My range session with 56* eye2 today was very good. Gaps well vs my uw, used same 3/4 swing on both with same results, just 15 yards distance gap. None of the upright lie angle weirdness of the pm grind (fixable of course but annoying). I like the shaft, play my wedges +1" and weight was ok, heavier than my uw with a 95 recoil but didn't bother me. Bounce was fine on relatively full swings under our usual absurdly wet conditions. If you play on firm/dry conditions, who knows, it's like a swamp here nearly all the time.

> > > Hit high/low around green, I liked the bounce. I like playing wedges a little open and love the 56*. I'd rather have too little loft than too much. Flop shots were easy. Yes some offset but not enough imo to obsess over.

> > > The club has (to me) a very historically conventional ping look. If you like that, great, if you don't then don't get this wedge, get the regular glide which looks more like vokey or cleveland etc. I used to play an isi copper and nickel S3 57* wedge as a sand/lob and this reminded me a bit of that. Before the isi I played eye2+, eye2 etc so this eye2 looks normal to me.

> > > I think this is a very versatile wedge that does everything well and couple things (sand, flop) really well. But you have to be ok on the look. If you are, I think it just comes down to technique (mostly does anyway, all kinds of great wedges available, hard to buy a short game).

> >

> > Agree about being 100% comfortable with the look. I used to play ISI's and thought I was comfortable with the traditional PING look. But it was a bit more jarring this time around for some reason. In an extended practice session I felt absolutely great around the greens with it. On the final day off CC while in contention in my flight I absolutely butchered a simple chip with it. 100% user error...but I remember sitting never feeling quite comfortable at address. I'm going do have a couple of more range sessions before making a final decision. During practice it felt very versatile and easy to hit. But short game is all about confidence.

>

> Played 18 today and still like the 56* eye2. Refreshing to not have to decide between my 54* glide and 58* pm grind. I like the eye2 from the fairway better than pm (plays lot more like my i210s), 56* is plenty of loft in this club. I used to play gorgeous founders clubs series 200 blades with mizuno forged wedges, so I get the blade look. But can also see why so many tour players have used eye2 style sand wedges...really perform. Ymmv.

 

I may be coming around. Another long practice session and I realized I just needed to adjust to the looks a bit. How I feel/visualize the club through impact is a bit different with the high toe shape. When I made that adjustment, it was great. I especially loved it out of the sand. The ball comes out incredibly soft with a ton of spin.

[milesnotsmiles]

Thinking of switching out my SM6 gap for one of these.. looking at something to fly a bit more than my SM6 on approach. But I also use my 52 ALOT around the green, so a little worried that I'll lose some of the feel and touch with the larger profile..

[joesgonegolfing]

> @granata10 said:

> Just curious, did you use the TS grind in your glide 2.0s? If so did you notice any difference in turf interaction. I have always used the TS grind and really like it, just hoping it hasn’t changed much

>

> > @joesgonegolfing said:

> > I got mine today 54/12-SS and 60/06-TS....nine holes with them. Really nice, like the rounded bottom. All shots seemed to really spin a good bit more than my Stealth wedges (1.5 years old). Also played with my new i210s which replaced my iBlades. Seamless transition from iBlade to i210 and I think the 210s are a better all around club.

>

>

 

Yes, in the 60, and the SS in the Stealth 56. What I notice is the 3.0 is better in that the rounded bottom edge on both the 54SS and the 60TS allows for more varied positions of the wedge on the turf. The new TS grind with the rounded leading edge is better and more versatile than the older Stealth leading edge.

[RacineBoxer]

> @milesnotsmiles said:

> Thinking of switching out my SM6 gap for one of these.. looking at something to fly a bit more than my SM6 on approach. But I also use my 52 ALOT around the green, so a little worried that I'll lose some of the feel and touch with the larger profile..

 

The Ping wedges aren't necessarily known to be distance leaders- I know that's a crazy thing to say about wedges!!! MGS (2018) did a wedge study and while they rated the Glide 2.0 stealth #1, it was because of a variety of reasons (including most importantly accuracy and strokes gained). The Glide 2.0 ranked slightly below average on distance. Obviously the Glide 3.0 is a different club than the 2.0 stealth, it's even made out of a different material. But I wouldn't just assume that you'll hit the Glide further than the SM6 provided the lofts are the same.

[milesnotsmiles]

p> @RacineBoxer said:

> > @milesnotsmiles said:

> > Thinking of switching out my SM6 gap for one of these.. looking at something to fly a bit more than my SM6 on approach. But I also use my 52 ALOT around the green, so a little worried that I'll lose some of the feel and touch with the larger profile..

>

> The Ping wedges aren't necessarily known to be distance leaders- I know that's a crazy thing to say about wedges!!! **** (2018) did a wedge study and while they rated the Glide 2.0 stealth #1, it was because of a variety of reasons (including most importantly accuracy and strokes gained). The Glide 2.0 ranked slightly below average on distance. Obviously the Glide 3.0 is a different club than the 2.0 stealth, it's even made out of a different material. But I wouldn't just assume that you'll hit the Glide further than the SM6 provided the lofts are the same.

 

oh that's interesting, I was under the impression that the glide series was the way to go for more distance in the approach game. Have a fitting coming up, doubt they will have glide 3.0 in stock but will be interested in seeing what a 'difference' between wedge distance of the same loft would be.

[FlashNoonan]

I just went and saw these at a local PGA store today. Does the PGA store have these priced incorrectly? I noticed the Eye2's were $199 (Which is ridiculous btw) and the regular 3.0's were $149. Maybe it's just in my location? I've noticed other retailers have the 3.0 and Eye2 for $149. Either way I'll most likely be skipping the 3.0 line. I really like the 2.0 stealth's.

[Drawman]

> @FlashNoonan said:

> I just went and saw these at a local PGA store today. Does the PGA store have these priced incorrectly? I noticed the Eye2's were $199 (Which is ridiculous btw) and the regular 3.0's were $149. Maybe it's just in my location? I've noticed other retailers have the 3.0 and Eye2 for $149. Either way I'll most likely be skipping the 3.0 line. I really like the 2.0 stealth's.

 

Retail is $150 (steel) for either the Eye2 or TS/SS/WS grinds. Add $20 for graphite.

 

 

[Drawman]

> @gregh729 said:

> > @Drawman said:

> > Mine (54*WS; 58*Eye2) are due to arrive on Friday. Can’t wait.

>

> Please let us know how that set up works. It is exactly what I am thinking of getting.

 

I'm coming from the Glide 2.0 WS wedges, which I loved. I wondered why I couldn't hit a flop shot with my 58* but then realized that all of that bounce prevented me from getting under the ball (duh!).

 

The Glide 3.0 54* WS is similar to the 2.0 version, but the 58* Eye2 wedge is very versatile. It works great in medium to compact sand (don't yet know about "beach" sand), and I've tried a few successful flops from the rough with it as well. I haven't braved a flop from a tight fairway yet, as I've got to relearn my flop technique!

 

Glad I bought the Eye2 grind for my lob wedge, as I had the original in the 80s/90s and it was money. But boy, is it taking some getting used to that look. However, the more I hit it, the better it looks!

 

A big learning for me is that I play enough (100 rounds a year) to replace my wedges every year. My 2.0s were two years old, and I felt guilty replacing them. New wedges and a ProV1 make for (well hit) shots that stop on a dime!

[mantan]

> @FlashNoonan said:

> I just went and saw these at a local PGA store today. Does the PGA store have these priced incorrectly? I noticed the Eye2's were $199 (Which is ridiculous btw) and the regular 3.0's were $149. Maybe it's just in my location? I've noticed other retailers have the 3.0 and Eye2 for $149. Either way I'll most likely be skipping the 3.0 line. I really like the 2.0 stealth's.

 

Yep, as someone else said they are all $150.

 

You can't go wrong with the Stealth. They are REALLLY good. Softer than the other glide models and look great. I'm leaning toward using the PGATourSS playability guarantee to trade my 54* Eye 2 for a 58* and go back to my 54* stealth.

[PowderedToastMan]

> @milesnotsmiles said:

> Thinking of switching out my SM6 gap for one of these.. looking at something to fly a bit more than my SM6 on approach. But I also use my 52 ALOT around the green, so a little worried that I'll lose some of the feel and touch with the larger profile..

 

This is what I’m concerned about, head size. I still play a Tour Gorge 52, which apparently is a small-sized wedge by today’s standards. Desperate to upgrade to something with a softer feel though at a non-Glide forged price.

 

I’m someone who absolutely won’t switch unless the look is right, particularly with irons and wedges, even if the performance is great.