Refinished Ping ISI’s. Ping Repair Department does it again!

[deejaid]

I had slipped a few pics of these clubs into an Eye 2 thread in the classic section but thought they really deserved a thread of their own.

 

So after a few years of playing my ISI’s on and off and always thinking I should send them back to Ping for a refinish, I finally went ahead sent them off. I decided I wanted them done in the Guyson finish and the Customer Service Rep was a bit confused as he didn’t know what that was, so I guess classic Ping refinishes aren’t terribly common at the Repair Center. After the Rep called over to the repair shop to make sure that finish was available we finalized my order, Guyson Finish, black paint fill, new shaft labels, and two white dot wedges bent to green dot to match the set. I should add that after the Rep got off the phone with the repair department he mention the “starshot” finish but I was set on the Guyson and didn’t want to confuse the poor guy.

 

Well I sent the clubs off last Monday, they received them Wednesday. By the following Monday I had tracking info that they were on their way back to me, so 3 days in the shop, and I received them yesterday. Pretty great turnaround if you ask me. And when I opened them up, wow! Better than new ISI’s! I always loved the ISI’s quirky shape but add the Guyson finish and these things just pop! And price? $17.75 a club. So for just under $250 which includes shipping to and from, I got a brand new set of clubs.

 

Ping’s Customer Service is second to none and if you ever thought of breathing new life into your classic Ping’s, this is the way to do it.

 

 

Before

 

 

 

 

And After

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Buzzkill]

Great job, enjoy!

[SubaruWRX]

 

[mogc60]

Wow those look sharp!! I always loved the shape of the ISI...those short irons are fantastic.

[Titleist_PT23]

Does this actually improve how the clubs play or do they just look nice? PING has said they don't re-work the grooves (I think because they may loose too much metal/weight). However, some people have commented that the face surface roughness, not the grooves, will impact wedge spin more.

[No_Catchy_Nickname]

I was thinking that they looked alright to begin with, but they look really great now. Paintfill doesn't bother me much, but they do look a lot better with that black lettering.

[T.B.]

Great looking clubs I’m sending in my i20s this winter.

[jdemocko]

Sweet, They were always my favorite shape. Quirky little turds.

[braincramp52]

Very Nice!

[NRJyzr]

> @agolf1 said:

> Does this actually improve how the clubs play or do they just look nice? PING has said they don't re-work the grooves (I think because they may loose too much metal/weight). However, some people have commented that the face surface roughness, not the grooves, will impact wedge spin more.

 

 

That is exactly it. Grooves are for impediments, not as a spin producer. Tom Wishon is the source for the clubface surface roughness comments; he's suggested having the clubface blasted with Aluminum Oxide to refresh the spin.

 

Years ago, testing of grooveless face irons was done. Spin *increased* on clean lie shots. Turns out, one component of spin is having a perfectly flat face, which was a side result of their process in creating the grooveless club. When you use an iron, you're not only lessening the surface roughness with each shot, you're also damaging the surface integrity. Microscopic examination shows a lot of little pits and nicks.

 

Deejaid, these look awesome. I've also got a set of ISI in the garage, they're DGX100, which is a bit much for me these days. You're reviving the background thoughts of having them reshafted and maybe touched up a bit.

 

Awesome stuff.

 

Apologies for the momentary derail above.

[Nessism]

> @"T.B." said:

> Great looking clubs I’m sending in my i20s this winter.

 

i20's are chrome plated. There isn't much Ping can do to them.

[CROUSE99]

Wow. Those look great! Ping just seems to know how to do customer service.

[Celebros]

Never thought I'd say ISIs were pretty, but your irons are pretty. Enjoy!

[deejaid]

Thanks everyone. There is a previous thread or two here from 2009 about Ping Guyson refinished ISI’s that had a few pictures but nothing really since. I figured I’d post these up to let people know Ping is still offering this type of refinish 10 years later, and that a 20 year old set of Ping’s can look better than new.

 

I hope to get them out for a round tomorrow although might have another classic persimmon player joining me with his 1951 Spalding set which would mean my 1954 Hogan’s or ‘58 Dynapowered’s would get the call. Might just have to play twice this weekend.

[duff]

Very nice - I have a set of ISI's that I don't use - now you have me thinking I should send them off and start playing them again.

Curious, what is the "starshot" finish and does Ping list the various finishes available on their website?

[Celebros]

> @duff said:

> Very nice - I have a set of ISI's that I don't use - now you have me thinking I should send them off and start playing them again.

> Curious, what is the "starshot" finish and does Ping list the various finishes available on their website?

 

Just slightly duller than the OP's Guyson finish, apparently:

 

 

[deejaid]

> @duff said:

> Very nice - I have a set of ISI's that I don't use - now you have me thinking I should send them off and start playing them again.

> Curious, what is the "starshot" finish and does Ping list the various finishes available on their website?

 

Unfortunately Ping doesn’t list any of the available finishes anywhere on their site. You pretty much just need to call up and talk with a customer service rep and even then there might be some confusion.

 

I believe this is the “starshot” finish, a smoother, darker finish Ping used later on on putters.

 

 

 

Like I said, I didn’t want to confuse the Rep anymore than I already had and knew I wanted the Guyson finish so I didn’t ask what all finishes they have available.

 

[deejaid]

> @Celebros said:

> > @duff said:

> > Very nice - I have a set of ISI's that I don't use - now you have me thinking I should send them off and start playing them again.

> > Curious, what is the "starshot" finish and does Ping list the various finishes available on their website?

>

> Just slightly duller than the OP's Guyson finish, apparently:

>

>

>

 

Haha, you posted the same pic as I was typing my response.

 

[Nessism]

Guyson = shot peen

Starshot = glass bead blast

Tumbled = tumbled

[deep18]

Dude. Awesome, just awesome.

[Celebros]

> @Nessism said:

> Tumbled = tumbled

 

No truer words have ever been written.

 

 

[sdandrea]

Working on a set for a local buddy. Installing graphites in them, and he wanted new paintfill and the patina removed. Amateur job, but I did it myself.

 

 

[cardoustie]

Love seeing refreshed Pings

[Chip Duffer]

Beautiful!! Well done, enjoy!!!

[boggyman]

Holy .... Batman!! > @sdandrea said:

> Working on a set for a local buddy. Installing graphites in them, and he wanted new paintfill and the patina removed. Amateur job, but I did it myself.

>

>

>

>

>

 

 

[sm_watts]

The black paint fill is the difference maker for me

[cardia10]

Couple questions here-

1. If grooves have little impact on spin in clean lies, why is the USGA so adamant about groove radius not being too sharp. If grooves played no impact other than channeling debris, wouldn't their only concern be about groove volume and not edges?

2. When I hit a good wedge shot that zips back from a clean lie, shreds of my ball are in the grooves. I can't believe the edge of a ball catching the edge of a groove doesn't contribute something to spin.

 

If grooves were no big deal, there wouldn't be years of lawsuits about them.

 

> @NRJyzr said:

> > @agolf1 said:

> > Does this actually improve how the clubs play or do they just look nice? PING has said they don't re-work the grooves (I think because they may loose too much metal/weight). However, some people have commented that the face surface roughness, not the grooves, will impact wedge spin more.

>

>

> That is exactly it. Grooves are for impediments, not as a spin producer. Tom Wishon is the source for the clubface surface roughness comments; he's suggested having the clubface blasted with Aluminum Oxide to refresh the spin.

>

> Years ago, testing of grooveless face irons was done. Spin *increased* on clean lie shots. Turns out, one component of spin is having a perfectly flat face, which was a side result of their process in creating the grooveless club. When you use an iron, you're not only lessening the surface roughness with each shot, you're also damaging the surface integrity. Microscopic examination shows a lot of little pits and nicks.

>

> Deejaid, these look awesome. I've also got a set of ISI in the garage, they're DGX100, which is a bit much for me these days. You're reviving the background thoughts of having them reshafted and maybe touched up a bit.

>

> Awesome stuff.

>

> Apologies for the momentary derail above.

 

 

[Nessism]

> @cardia10 said:

> Couple questions here-

> 1. If grooves have little impact on spin in clean lies, why is the USGA so adamant about groove radius not being too sharp. If grooves played no impact other than channeling debris, wouldn't their only concern be about groove volume and not edges?

> 2. When I hit a good wedge shot that zips back from a clean lie, shreds of my ball are in the grooves. I can't believe the edge of a ball catching the edge of a groove doesn't contribute something to spin.

>

> If grooves were no big deal, there wouldn't be years of lawsuits about them.

>

 

1) The 2010 CC groove rule was focused on spin out of the rough, not spin from clean lies. Some companies, like Taylormade with their zinky Y grooves, were getting pretty inventive with their grooves and the USGA wanted to be sure the situation didn't get out of hand.

 

2) Those old type sharp edge grooves that shave balls can impart a little extra spin over radiused grooves, but not the extent that some think. It's the faces surface roughness that's really responsible for contact friction and the resulting spin. That's why modern wedges almost always have a milled (rough) face these days.

[NRJyzr]

> @cardia10 said:

> Couple questions here-

> 1. If grooves have little impact on spin in clean lies, why is the USGA so adamant about groove radius not being too sharp. If grooves played no impact other than channeling debris, wouldn't their only concern be about groove volume and not edges?

> 2. When I hit a good wedge shot that zips back from a clean lie, shreds of my ball are in the grooves. I can't believe the edge of a ball catching the edge of a groove doesn't contribute something to spin.

>

> If grooves were no big deal, there wouldn't be years of lawsuits about them.

>

 

Nessism covered most of the high points, but....

 

The "years of lawsuits" was actually nothing more than a slap fest over how to properly measure the distance between grooves. The USGA was perfectly fine with sharp Eye2 grooves until Ping started radiusing the edges. That's what caused the ruckus.

 

As for why the USGA worries about sharpness, who can say? They've made some seriously goofy rulings in the past few decades, I wouldn't give them too much benefit of doubt for knowing their subject matter.

 

 

[glm]

SWEET!