Ping Glide 3.0 wedges - June 2019

[Hedgehog]

Went to see these in the shops, the 60° was so upright looking I couldn't game it.. And whats up with the damn offset, looks horrible compared to Glide 2.0.

I could bet tour players game these in different offset setup..

[mantan]

And the experiment is over. Another extended short game practice with the Eye2 54* and Stealth ES 54*. The Eye 2 is like that exotic looking woman who's a bit aloof. For awhile you get along great then suddenly she is ice cold. The Stealth is like the cute reliable long term girlfriend who you can always count on.

Expensive and impulsive experiment to realize newer isn't always better. I'd be interested to see how the standard Glide 3.0 compares. But I am completely done with the Eye2.

[milesnotsmiles]

> @Hedgehog said:

> Went to see these in the shops, the 60° was so upright looking I couldn't game it.. And whats up with the **** offset, looks horrible compared to Glide 2.0.

> I could bet tour players game these in different offset setup..

 

I need to get hands on with these, could be a dealbreaker for me. Interesting to hear none the less

[rmgatl]

Fwiw still like the 56* eye2. Reliable, routine from fairway, no surprises pitching, one terrific sand save short sided. I bent both the 56* and my i210 uw a little flat...nice. Shot 78 today on tough course, 9 gir, couple awful drives compounded with worse 2nd shots. Reached a short par 5 again today in two with 20* 3 hybrid that replaced my LW (adams red!). Love the 56* only decision simplicity. Bad swings, worse decisions and I'm getting old lol, equipment is fine.

[Hedgehog]

> @milesnotsmiles said:

> > @Hedgehog said:

> > Went to see these in the shops, the 60° was so upright looking I couldn't game it.. And whats up with the **** offset, looks horrible compared to Glide 2.0.

> > I could bet tour players game these in different offset setup..

>

> I need to get hands on with these, could be a dealbreaker for me. Interesting to hear none the less

 

I had the Glide 2.0 in the other hand in the shop and I would go for that model in a heartbeat. Shame, one always hopes the new model would be an upgrade..

[PowderedToastMan]

Just ordered a bone stock 50 degree 3.0 SS. Going to put this wedge through the paces, including a write-up on the Z-Z115 shaft.

 

I considered getting my usual custom specs, but honestly I was curious to try playing the wedge as it was designed. Having been a fan of the Z-Z65 shaft in the past, I also wanted to try a PING steel shaft continuing the Z-Z name. We will see how it goes.

 

I will report back with results in a week or two.

[animalgolfs]

I honestly astoundished for re-releasing an updated Eye2 :)

These frame the ball so nicely, brought a tear to my eye again. I'm in LOVE

Wish someone go back in my pic history........thats real close ;)

[PowderedToastMan]

> @PowderedToastMan said:

> Just ordered a bone stock 50 degree 3.0 SS. Going to put this wedge through the paces, including a write-up on the Z-Z115 shaft.

>

> I considered getting my usual custom specs, but honestly I was curious to try playing the wedge as it was designed. Having been a fan of the Z-Z65 shaft in the past, I also wanted to try a PING steel shaft continuing the Z-Z name. We will see how it goes.

>

> I will report back with results in a week or two.

 

I decided I’m not going to put in the time for a full review, but a brief review. The quick summary is disappointed in the overall package but loved the feel of the club head. You need to custom order the right specs. The stock setup is clearly made for what PING considers to be the average golfer.

 

I compared the wedge head to head with a Glide forged 52 with Dynamic Gold S300. Static weight was noticeably lighter in the stock 3.0, and the head looked huge next to the Glide forged. The stealth finish would help in this regard but that isn’t available at the moment. As I mention later, this wedge could have easily been made smaller and still be wildly forgiving.

 

The stock D2 swingweight in the 3.0 could use a bump, because the static weight is so light. It’s hard to feel the club weight during the swing because of this. I must say though, the one thing I loved about the 3.0 is the feel. It’s a very muted, soft feel, whereas the Tour Gorge I STILL use is very clicky and frankly hard. I love the shape though so it stays in the bag year after year.

 

If you swing the club with any speed at all, order the 3.0 with a different shaft than Z-Z115. The shaft is clearly designed for average or lower speeds, and frankly it’s too light. It really didn’t feel or perform much different than the AWT 2.0’s in the Glide 2.0. To me, S300 felt like rebar compared to the Z-Z115, and S300 isn’t that stiff. As for launch, I didn’t see a difference from the last model. It’s supposed to launch lower, but I didn’t see it. It could have just been the shaft though. I really didn’t get along with the shaft. ZZ-65 from years past was light but fairly stiff, which worked well. ZZ-115 is just light and not very stiff. They might as well just call it ZZ-115 regular flex instead of wedge flex.

 

This wedge is incredibly forgiving. The shame of it is that PING could have made it a little smaller and it still would have been very forgiving. I’m not really sure why it’s quite as big as it is either. The blade length seemed quite a bit longer than the i210 wedge, which seems strange to me. I’d love to see a return to the Tour-S/Tour Gorge size of wedge with some of this new forgiveness/CTP tech.

 

The tour players are proof that this wedge can be played effectively by better players, but it needs some tweaks from the stock setup. You’ll have to look at Vokey, Callaway, Cleveland, Taylormade wedges if you want to grab off-the-rack wedges that will support a healthy swing speed. None of those guys can offer an equally forgiving wedge in an appealing package though. And that feel too...

 

I wrote this all on my iPhone, so if there are any mistakes, contact Apple support and complain.

 

[animalgolfs]

> @PowderedToastMan said:

> > @PowderedToastMan said:

> > Just ordered a bone stock 50 degree 3.0 SS. Going to put this wedge through the paces, including a write-up on the Z-Z115 shaft.

> >

> > I considered getting my usual custom specs, but honestly I was curious to try playing the wedge as it was designed. Having been a fan of the Z-Z65 shaft in the past, I also wanted to try a PING steel shaft continuing the Z-Z name. We will see how it goes.

> >

> > I will report back with results in a week or two.

>

> I decided I’m not going to put in the time for a full review, but a brief review. The quick summary is disappointed in the overall package but loved the feel of the club head. You need to custom order the right specs. The stock setup is clearly made for what PING considers to be the average golfer.

>

> I compared the wedge head to head with a Glide forged 52 with Dynamic Gold S300. Static weight was noticeably lighter in the stock 3.0, and the head looked huge next to the Glide forged. The stealth finish would help in this regard but that isn’t available at the moment. As I mention later, this wedge could have easily been made smaller and still be wildly forgiving.

>

> The stock D2 swingweight in the 3.0 could use a bump, because the static weight is so light. It’s hard to feel the club weight during the swing because of this. I must say though, the one thing I loved about the 3.0 is the feel. It’s a very muted, soft feel, whereas the Tour Gorge I STILL use is very clicky and frankly hard. I love the shape though so it stays in the bag year after year.

>

> If you swing the club with any speed at all, order the 3.0 with a different shaft than Z-Z115. The shaft is clearly designed for average or lower speeds, and frankly it’s too light. It really didn’t feel or perform much different than the AWT 2.0’s in the Glide 2.0. To me, S300 felt like rebar compared to the Z-Z115, and S300 isn’t that stiff. As for launch, I didn’t see a difference from the last model. It’s supposed to launch lower, but I didn’t see it. It could have just been the shaft though. I really didn’t get along with the shaft. ZZ-65 from years past was light but fairly stiff, which worked well. ZZ-115 is just light and not very stiff. They might as well just call it ZZ-115 regular flex instead of wedge flex.

>

> This wedge is incredibly forgiving. The shame of it is that PING could have made it a little smaller and it still would have been very forgiving. I’m not really sure why it’s quite as big as it is either. The blade length seemed quite a bit longer than the i210 wedge, which seems strange to me. I’d love to see a return to the Tour-S/Tour Gorge size of wedge with some of this new forgiveness/CTP tech.

>

> The tour players are proof that this wedge can be played effectively by better players, but it needs some tweaks from the stock setup. You’ll have to look at Vokey, Callaway, Cleveland, Taylormade wedges if you want to grab off-the-rack wedges that will support a healthy swing speed. None of those guys can offer an equally forgiving wedge in an appealing package though. And that feel too...

>

> I wrote this all on my iPhone, so if there are any mistakes, contact Apple support and complain.

>

 

Ping has always been light on static weight. It was one of Mr K's held beliefs--stiff shaft/light weight. The JZ sorta got away from that thought, but the introduction of the ZZ65 went back to those firm beliefs IMO

[PowderedToastMan]

> @animalgolfs said:

> > @PowderedToastMan said:

> > > @PowderedToastMan said:

> > > Just ordered a bone stock 50 degree 3.0 SS. Going to put this wedge through the paces, including a write-up on the Z-Z115 shaft.

> > >

> > > I considered getting my usual custom specs, but honestly I was curious to try playing the wedge as it was designed. Having been a fan of the Z-Z65 shaft in the past, I also wanted to try a PING steel shaft continuing the Z-Z name. We will see how it goes.

> > >

> > > I will report back with results in a week or two.

> >

> > I decided I’m not going to put in the time for a full review, but a brief review. The quick summary is disappointed in the overall package but loved the feel of the club head. You need to custom order the right specs. The stock setup is clearly made for what PING considers to be the average golfer.

> >

> > I compared the wedge head to head with a Glide forged 52 with Dynamic Gold S300. Static weight was noticeably lighter in the stock 3.0, and the head looked huge next to the Glide forged. The stealth finish would help in this regard but that isn’t available at the moment. As I mention later, this wedge could have easily been made smaller and still be wildly forgiving.

> >

> > The stock D2 swingweight in the 3.0 could use a bump, because the static weight is so light. It’s hard to feel the club weight during the swing because of this. I must say though, the one thing I loved about the 3.0 is the feel. It’s a very muted, soft feel, whereas the Tour Gorge I STILL use is very clicky and frankly hard. I love the shape though so it stays in the bag year after year.

> >

> > If you swing the club with any speed at all, order the 3.0 with a different shaft than Z-Z115. The shaft is clearly designed for average or lower speeds, and frankly it’s too light. It really didn’t feel or perform much different than the AWT 2.0’s in the Glide 2.0. To me, S300 felt like rebar compared to the Z-Z115, and S300 isn’t that stiff. As for launch, I didn’t see a difference from the last model. It’s supposed to launch lower, but I didn’t see it. It could have just been the shaft though. I really didn’t get along with the shaft. ZZ-65 from years past was light but fairly stiff, which worked well. ZZ-115 is just light and not very stiff. They might as well just call it ZZ-115 regular flex instead of wedge flex.

> >

> > This wedge is incredibly forgiving. The shame of it is that PING could have made it a little smaller and it still would have been very forgiving. I’m not really sure why it’s quite as big as it is either. The blade length seemed quite a bit longer than the i210 wedge, which seems strange to me. I’d love to see a return to the Tour-S/Tour Gorge size of wedge with some of this new forgiveness/CTP tech.

> >

> > The tour players are proof that this wedge can be played effectively by better players, but it needs some tweaks from the stock setup. You’ll have to look at Vokey, Callaway, Cleveland, Taylormade wedges if you want to grab off-the-rack wedges that will support a healthy swing speed. None of those guys can offer an equally forgiving wedge in an appealing package though. And that feel too...

> >

> > I wrote this all on my iPhone, so if there are any mistakes, contact Apple support and complain.

> >

>

> Ping has always been light on static weight. It was one of Mr K's held beliefs--stiff shaft/light weight. The JZ sorta got away from that thought, but the introduction of the ZZ65 went back to those firm beliefs IMO

 

Agreed, but the combination of light and not very stiff is where things differ here. It makes this wedge not as playable on full swings, which a gap wedge will be used for. ZZ65 would have been much better, in my opinion, in this wedge, and still playable for slower swingers.

 

I also have doubts that the wedge I received played to D2. Even if it did, I think PING should consider upping their swingweights a bit in their stock wedges, particularly if they go with a low static weight.

 

[GolfTurkey]

This is my initial review of the Glide 3.0 SS 60 degree based on two sessions around the practice green. I ordered it with my specs which are the Dynamic Gold 120 shaft and orange dot. I compared it to my Vokey V grind, whose grooves are sadly shot and the V grind is currently unavailable.

 

Before hitting a ball: this thing is light even with the DG 120 and the head is huge! The shaft isn't heavy but is also not particularly light, so the head and swing weight must be super light. It didn't bother me when chipping/pitching but I'm not sure that I will like it when hitting a full shot. After about 20 min I stopped noticing the size of the "heed" (reference to the "gargantuan cranium from I married an axe murderer)

 

Spin: this is where the Glides really shine. I think Glides spin more than anything that I have tried including new Vokeys, and spins a ton more than a dead Vokey (obviously).

 

Turf interaction / forgiveness: The Glide SS is pretty forgiving compared to most retail wedges but sadly not as good as the V grind. With half decent technique it's almost impossible to duff a V grind except out of the most extreme lies. The V grind just zips and slides off the turf like diving on a slip 'n slide with dishwashing liquid poured on it. The Glide is great on good lies but digs quite a lot more on dodgy lies e.g. a wet uphill lie. It also had more of a tendency to slide under the ball with the ball going nowhere in fluffy rough. I didn't duff many shots with the Glide but just enough to make me concentrate more on my technique and contact than I would like, especially on non-standard lies. (bearing in mind that I tested this on Bermuda and made a point of finding some difficult into the grain shots). With the V grind I feel like any reasonable swing I put on it will work so I can concentrate more on the target and what shot I am trying to hit. I could also feel the back of the Glide hitting the turf and bumping around a lot more than the V grind, which is to be expected because it doesn't have that "V" heel and toe relief.

 

Opening it up/flop shots: This was the biggest surprise of my test. I will open up my lob wedge for extra height when necessary but I very rarely attempt a genuine "full Phil" lob shot. I suck too badly at it unless I spend so much time practising it that I can't practice anything else and the rest of my game falls apart. In theory the V grind should be much better at flop shots because of all the stuff shaved off the back of the wedge. For some reason the Glide worked so much better it was ridiculous. I have a tendency to drop-kick / semi-blade the V grind when trying to flop but the Glide slid along the ground and then it felt like the bounce or back of the wedge kicked the face up into the ball. Whether or not that was really happening doesn't matter; I was actually able to look semi-competent when flopping for the first time in a very long time, so much so that I might put that shot back in the bag.

 

Summary (vs V Grind Vokey): more spin, less forgiving but still pretty good and very good for flop shots (at least with my suspect flop technique).

 

 

[Maverick22]

> @GolfTurkey said:

> This is my initial review of the Glide 3.0 SS 60 degree based on two sessions around the practice green. I ordered it with my specs which are the Dynamic Gold 120 shaft and orange dot. I compared it to my Vokey V grind, whose grooves are sadly shot and the V grind is currently unavailable.

>

> Before hitting a ball: this thing is light even with the DG 120 and the head is huge! The shaft isn't heavy but is also not particularly light, so the head and swing weight must be super light. It didn't bother me when chipping/pitching but I'm not sure that I will like it when hitting a full shot. After about 20 min I stopped noticing the size of the "heed" (reference to the "gargantuan cranium from I married an axe murderer)

>

>

> Spin: this is where the Glides really shine. I think Glides spin more than anything that I have tried including new Vokeys, and spins a ton more than a dead Vokey (obviously).

>

> Turf interaction / forgiveness: The Glide SS is pretty forgiving compared to most retail wedges but sadly not as good as the V grind. With half decent technique it's almost impossible to duff a V grind except out of the most extreme lies. The V grind just zips and slides off the turf like diving on a slip 'n slide with dishwashing liquid poured on it. The Glide is great on good lies but digs quite a lot more on dodgy lies e.g. a wet uphill lie. It also had more of a tendency to slide under the ball with the ball going nowhere in fluffy rough. I didn't duff many shots with the Glide but just enough to make me concentrate more on my technique and contact than I would like, especially on non-standard lies. (bearing in mind that I tested this on Bermuda and made a point of finding some difficult into the grain shots). With the V grind I feel like any reasonable swing I put on it will work so I can concentrate more on the target and what shot I am trying to hit. I could also feel the back of the Glide hitting the turf and bumping around a lot more than the V grind, which is to be expected because it doesn't have that "V" heel and toe relief.

>

> Opening it up/flop shots: This was the biggest surprise of my test. I will open up my lob wedge for extra height when necessary but I very rarely attempt a genuine "full Phil" lob shot. I suck too badly at it unless I spend so much time practising it that I can't practice anything else and the rest of my game falls apart. In theory the V grind should be much better at flop shots because of all the stuff shaved off the back of the wedge. For some reason the Glide worked so much better it was ridiculous. I have a tendency to drop-kick / semi-blade the V grind when trying to flop but the Glide slid along the ground and then it felt like the bounce or back of the wedge kicked the face up into the ball. Whether or not that was really happening doesn't matter; I was actually able to look semi-competent when flopping for the first time in a very long time, so much so that I might put that shot back in the bag.

>

> Summary (vs V Grind Vokey): more spin, less forgiving but still pretty good and very good for flop shots (at least with my suspect flop technique).

>

>

Thanks for your review, which I was interested in as I am thinking of ordering a couple of these wedges with DG 120. I am concerned with your comments about the weight of the club. What swingweight did you order for your wedge?

 

[GolfTurkey]

I didn't order a specific swingweight. My understanding (could be wrong) is that Ping will build it to the standard swingweight as per their published specs (or as close as possible), provided that the shaft/length you specified allows for it. Their website says D4 but my guess is that it's nowhere close to that.

[GolfTurkey]

I played a round today and it had very nice turf interaction and a soft feel on full(ish) shots. My i500's in retro loft have almost no offset and that threw me off at first.

 

I missed the first couple a little right and then I realised that I was rotating the head at address so that I saw no offset, which meant that the face was pointing right. No issues after correcting that and the spin was very good.

 

Also no problems chipping and flop shot performance that I saw in practice was confirmed. I hit 2 and the first one was 6 inches short. The second had a serious degree of difficulty; downhill sidehill lie to a green running away from me.i closed my eyes and hit it as hard as I could and it would have gone in for eagle if the pin wasn't leaning towards me. It makes no sense that I can flop with the combination of my wonky technique and this wedge that isn't really designed for it. It's like when two ugly people produce a good looking child !

[adam2883]

Ordered the 52 SS and the 58 TS with 6.0 PX LZ shafts and got them in on Friday. Was able to hit some balls and play 9 holes with them. The wedges feel really good, I like the looks of the 52* but not crazy about the looks of the 58*. I have been playing Vokeys since 2003 and never had any complaints, I can hit just about any shots I want with them, high, low, mid, esp. with my 58*. I struggled to control the trajectory with the Glide 58, with both wedges the ball just wanted to shoot up in the air. Didn't really see any increase/decrease in spin on or around the greens, distance wise the 58 Glide seemed to be a few yds shorter than my SM7. I think they are solid wedges but for me I just dont see the reason for change from something I am very comfortable with and is a strength of my game. The Glides will be ending up on BST shortly.

[Messier11]

I ordered the following Glide 3.0's: 50*-ss, 54*-ss, 60*-ss, and 60*ts with Dynamic Gold S300 shafts. (Also ordered the I-210 irons 5-U). After multiple extensive range sessions and one round with the Glide 3.0s, they probably won't stay in the bag very long. I love the larger size, forgiveness, and feel. But in my life I've never played a more "diggy" wedge. I don't know if it's the leading edge grind or what but these things like to take out chunks of earth, and this was on all the Glides. Normally I'm a sweeper that barely clips grass, so I'm very surprised at the poor turf interaction compared to other wedges I've used this year (Cleveland RTX 4, Cobra MIM). In fact, the 50* I-210 U-wedge had great turf interaction that I'm accustomed to while the 50* Glide didn't. Anyway, sorry for the unfavorable review in my first post here, I'm still on the GEA forum with 1putt1 as my handle but evidently that was taken here.

[ASN21]

TXG showed a 6000 rpm gain for the Glide 3.0 over the Vokey SM7 when the golf ball and wedge face was sprayed with water. Very impressive Ping!

[leo the lion]

> @ASN21 said:

> TXG showed a 6000 rpm gain for the Glide 3.0 over the Vokey SM7 when the golf ball and wedge face was sprayed with water. Very impressive Ping!

 

Agreed. Ian and Matty did some great testing in the video and I will be adding those into my Ping fitting in a few weeks.

[300_yard_drives]

> @ASN21 said:

> TXG showed a 6000 rpm gain for the Glide 3.0 over the Vokey SM7 when the golf ball and wedge face was sprayed with water. Very impressive Ping!

 

Compared to a used Vokey. What a great comparison. New wedges spin the ball significantly more with debris and water on the face. Not saying that hydropearl doesn’t work but it wasn’t a fair test.

[braincramp52]

> @300_yard_drives said:

> > @ASN21 said:

> > TXG showed a 6000 rpm gain for the Glide 3.0 over the Vokey SM7 when the golf ball and wedge face was sprayed with water. Very impressive Ping!

>

> Compared to a used Vokey. What a great comparison. New wedges spin the ball significantly more with debris and water on the face. Not saying that hydropearl doesn’t work but it wasn’t a fair test.

 

The Vokey had similar spin numbers as the Glide when hit dry so it must not have been used much if at all.

[Hedgehog]

Dude, that Vokey did not perform like at all compared to the Glide, wow. Would like to see that same test from real fairway that has moisture.

 

[braincramp52]

> @Hedgehog said:

> Dude, that Vokey did not perform like at all compared to the Glide, wow. Would like to see that same test from real fairway that has moisture.

>

>

 

Me too. Hitting off mats usually lowers spin considerably.

[300_yard_drives]

> @lawsonman said:

> > @300_yard_drives said:

> > > @ASN21 said:

> > > TXG showed a 6000 rpm gain for the Glide 3.0 over the Vokey SM7 when the golf ball and wedge face was sprayed with water. Very impressive Ping!

> >

> > Compared to a used Vokey. What a great comparison. New wedges spin the ball significantly more with debris and water on the face. Not saying that hydropearl doesn’t work but it wasn’t a fair test.

>

> The Vokey had similar spin numbers as the Glide when hit dry so it must not have been used much if at all.

 

That is my point. I don’t notice much spin difference between a used wedge and a new one from the fairway with no water or debris, but once the lie is less than ideal it really gives the upper hand to the new club

[QuigleyDU]

> @lawsonman said:

> > @Hedgehog said:

> > Dude, that Vokey did not perform like at all compared to the Glide, wow. Would like to see that same test from real fairway that has moisture.

> >

> >

>

> Me too. Hitting off mats usually lowers spin considerably.

 

I was impressed by this test. I have never been interested in ping wedges, but now I am. The wet ball test was very interesting to me. I like to play really early so wet grass and dew are always an issue. This could be a changer.

[Hedgehog]

> @QuigleyDU said:

> > @lawsonman said:

> > > @Hedgehog said:

> > > Dude, that Vokey did not perform like at all compared to the Glide, wow. Would like to see that same test from real fairway that has moisture.

> > >

> > >

> >

> > Me too. Hitting off mats usually lowers spin considerably.

>

> I was impressed by this test. I have never been interested in ping wedges, but now I am. The wet ball test was very interesting to me. I like to play really early so wet grass and dew are always an issue. This could be a changer.

 

Remember the Glide 2.0 also have this finish.

[ASN21]

> @300_yard_drives said:

> > @ASN21 said:

> > TXG showed a 6000 rpm gain for the Glide 3.0 over the Vokey SM7 when the golf ball and wedge face was sprayed with water. Very impressive Ping!

>

> Compared to a used Vokey. What a great comparison. New wedges spin the ball significantly more with debris and water on the face. Not saying that hydropearl doesn’t work but it wasn’t a fair test.

You sound like a bitter Vokey apologist.

[braincramp52]

> @300_yard_drives said:

> > @lawsonman said:

> > > @300_yard_drives said:

> > > > @ASN21 said:

> > > > TXG showed a 6000 rpm gain for the Glide 3.0 over the Vokey SM7 when the golf ball and wedge face was sprayed with water. Very impressive Ping!

> > >

> > > Compared to a used Vokey. What a great comparison. New wedges spin the ball significantly more with debris and water on the face. Not saying that hydropearl doesn’t work but it wasn’t a fair test.

> >

> > The Vokey had similar spin numbers as the Glide when hit dry so it must not have been used much if at all.

>

> That is my point. I don’t notice much spin difference between a used wedge and a new one from the fairway with no water or debris, but once the lie is less than ideal it really gives the upper hand to the new club

 

We will have to agree to disagree. I would have thought those guys would have said that was a used vokey and taken that into consideration. They don't miss much and are very impartial to brand.

[JStang]

The launch angle from the wet vokey was eye opening. If any of you ever hit with impact tape on the face, I'm sure it has a similar effect. The launch angle with impact tape on an iron is quite a bit higher.

[300_yard_drives]

> @ASN21 said:

> > @300_yard_drives said:

> > > @ASN21 said:

> > > TXG showed a 6000 rpm gain for the Glide 3.0 over the Vokey SM7 when the golf ball and wedge face was sprayed with water. Very impressive Ping!

> >

> > Compared to a used Vokey. What a great comparison. New wedges spin the ball significantly more with debris and water on the face. Not saying that hydropearl doesn’t work but it wasn’t a fair test.

> You sound like a bitter Vokey apologist.

 

I haven’t used a vokey wedge since 2010. I don’t even like them. I’m a Cleveland edge guy. Best in business in my opinion even though my wife works at ping and I get to try whatever I want.

[Stanks]

SO my local shop doesn't have any of the demo's open and ready to use so I had to hit a new one with tape on but, I liked. I liked the shape and how it sat. I look forward to giving it a try and checking on grab power with out tape but, I liked what I saw.