Glide 3.0 Eye 2 Grind

[JFM19333]

Looking for feedback. I am considering adding the Eye 2 grind for the highest lofted club in bag. I am very used to the old Eye 2+ grind but was wondering what actual experience is with full shots and use greenside for delicate chips and flop shots. Is it easily opened? What am I giving up relative to standard sole/bounce 3.0 option.

 

Thanks for your thoughts.

[jpbova]

I am interested in this as well. I just picked up a glide 2 ES in 56. I like a wider grind with at least mid bounce on my wedges

[woodlandsgolfer]

Its been so long since I played the old Eye 2, so I don't have recent experience with that. However, I have had the ES grind in Glide and Glide 2.0. I ordered the Eye 2 grind in 54 and 58, and have gone back to 2.0 ES grind. To me they dug way too much. It was great for about the first week or so, but I hit shots that I've never hit before. It felt like when I opened it up, the head would catch in the grass with the huge toe on it. They were also much shorter distance wise. I am not looking for distance in a wedge, but giving up 15-20 yards on the same loft is not ok.

 

That said, you may like them, I've moved on.

[animalgolfs]

> @"woodlandsgolfer " said:

> Its been so long since I played the old Eye 2, so I don't have recent experience with that. However, I have had the ES grind in Glide and Glide 2.0. I ordered the Eye 2 grind in 54 and 58, and have gone back to 2.0 ES grind. To me they dug way too much. It was great for about the first week or so, but I hit shots that I've never hit before. It felt like when I opened it up, the head would catch in the grass with the huge toe on it. They were also much shorter distance wise. I am not looking for distance in a wedge, but giving up 15-20 yards on the same loft is not ok.

>

> That said, you may like them, I've moved on.

 

It's the extra groove they've added on the bottom-same as they did with the XG Eye 2. I can't for the life of me figure out why Ping is doing this!

 

That extra groove just promotes digging unless it's firm & tight{PGA TOUR courses}.

 

They have the Holy Grail staring right in their face & they're just too stubborn{educated}

 

Eye 2+ sole design on >58*...... Eye 2 sole on <58*

 

 

[Signman150]

 

>

> Eye 2+ sole design on >58*...... Eye 2 sole on <58*

>

>

 

I agree 100% with this statement!

 

[JFM19333]

> @animalgolfs said:

> > @"woodlandsgolfer " said:

> > Its been so long since I played the old Eye 2, so I don't have recent experience with that. However, I have had the ES grind in Glide and Glide 2.0. I ordered the Eye 2 grind in 54 and 58, and have gone back to 2.0 ES grind. To me they dug way too much. It was great for about the first week or so, but I hit shots that I've never hit before. It felt like when I opened it up, the head would catch in the grass with the huge toe on it. They were also much shorter distance wise. I am not looking for distance in a wedge, but giving up 15-20 yards on the same loft is not ok.

> >

> > That said, you may like them, I've moved on.

>

> It's the extra groove they've added on the bottom-same as they did with the XG Eye 2. I can't for the life of me figure out why Ping is doing this!

>

> That extra groove just promotes digging unless it's firm & tight{PGA TOUR courses}.

>

> They have the Holy Grail staring right in their face & they're just too stubborn{educated}

>

> Eye 2+ sole design on >58*...... Eye 2 sole on <58*

>

>

 

Exactly - I love the 2+ sole...its fantastic. Never really liked the non + sole and why I am likely to go with the standard sole on the 58*.

[jjfcpa]

I've had the Ping Glide, Glide 2.0, Glide Stealth, and now a 50* Ping Glide 3.0 and a 54* Ping Glide 3.0 Eye2.

 

The original Ping Glide was very good, but I did not really like the Glide 2.0. Switched to the Glide Stealth and liked it better than the 2.0, but still had some drawbacks. I found it unreliable in some tight lie situations and difficult to control when hitting out of the rough.

 

I compared the Glide 3.0 50* against my Callaway MD4 48* and I find the MD4 easier to take full shots with. Especially in tight lies. Probably just because I'm used to the MD4.

 

I really like the Ping Glide 3.0 Eye2 in certain situations. I find it difficult to control in some tight lie situations, but where it really shines is when your hitting out of the rough. It's very easy to open up whether your hitting out of the rough or a bunker. However, I still find the 54* MD4 a little easier to take full swings with and continue to use it if I need to take a full swing with.

 

In summary, I like the Glide 3.0 better than any previous Glides and currently carrying both the MD4 (S grind) and Glide 3.0 Eye2 in the 54* loft. I use the one that I think best fits the shot I'm facing.

[Titleist_PT23]

> @Signman150 said:

>

> >

> > Eye 2+ sole design on >58*...... Eye 2 sole on <58*

> >

> >

>

> I agree 100% with this statement!

The TS is essentially the Eye 2+. High measured bounce but very thin sole width.

[Nessism]

The cup shaped Eye 2 sole is really good out of fluffy sand. Otherwise...I'm not so sure.

[dlygrisse]

> @animalgolfs said:

> > @"woodlandsgolfer " said:

> > Its been so long since I played the old Eye 2, so I don't have recent experience with that. However, I have had the ES grind in Glide and Glide 2.0. I ordered the Eye 2 grind in 54 and 58, and have gone back to 2.0 ES grind. To me they dug way too much. It was great for about the first week or so, but I hit shots that I've never hit before. It felt like when I opened it up, the head would catch in the grass with the huge toe on it. They were also much shorter distance wise. I am not looking for distance in a wedge, but giving up 15-20 yards on the same loft is not ok.

> >

> > That said, you may like them, I've moved on.

>

> It's the extra groove they've added on the bottom-same as they did with the XG Eye 2. I can't for the life of me figure out why Ping is doing this!

>

> That extra groove just promotes digging unless it's firm & tight{PGA TOUR courses}.

>

> They have the Holy Grail staring right in their face & they're just too stubborn{educated}

>

> Eye 2+ sole design on >58*...... Eye 2 sole on <58*

>

>

How does an extra groove promote digging? For the life of me I can’t figure out how that makes any sense. It’s designed to create more spin on slightly thin shots. Which is perfect if you want to hit a low spinner.

 

What promotes digging is a square faced eye 2 grind, if you open it fine, all the bounce is in the toe. The Eye2 + grind digs like a garden hoe. Great off of firm turf though.

 

 

[mantan]

I played the Glide 2.0 ES wedge and was VERY excited about the Eye 2 model of the Glide 3. I bought a 54* the week it came out and was convinced it was going to be my go to wedge.

 

I was a little concerned at how bulky it seemed, but still ready to roll.

 

I NEVER felt good with that wedge. For the few good shots I hit, it just didn't perform as well as my Glide 2.0, especially on full and partial wedge shots. I gave it a few practice sessions and one round and realized it wasn't going to work. I tried the standard model Glide 3.0 as well hoping it would be an improvement over my Stealth. But I realized I just liked the Stealth better.

 

Expensive lesson learned.

[Dayjobdave]

I've recently switched to Glide 3.0 wedges so my feedback is based on only a handful of rounds. I'm loving my 50 54 ss. The 58eye, however, is definitely a different beast, and an acquired taste.

 

I like it, but it does set up very differently from the others. The half groove at the bottom does 'dig like a hoe' for me from the fairway, and will definitely take some getting used to. From the fairway, I don't really like how it looks. that big scoop on the front end makes me think I'm driving Dad's Buick from the late 50's, and i have to feel like i'm digging a trench in order to get the face of the club on the ball and not bounce off the turf into it.

 

But....for me, this club is incredible out of the sand, and it is really really good out of the long grass. In fact, out of the long grass, it cuts through the rough so well that the ball pops out more cleanly than I seem to expect. This will take some getting used to, but I would hardly call this a flaw.

 

I suspect that next spring, when i get some serious time with these wedges, I will have to make a call on the 58 eye sole. For me, it would be a club that I use from the sand and from the greenside rough, and that is pretty much it. If it performs well, I can spend a club-slot on this, and the early returns are this is almost like cheating out of the sand. However, it will take a lot of practice for me to find a way to use this club from the fairway, but I don't really need a 58 from the fairway very often anyway.

 

Overall, definitely a unique and different sole on this club. I imagine that there will be a split between those who love it and those who hate it, and pretty much no one who uses this will be neutral.

[bladestriker]

I think the Eye2 sole shines at 58° or 60° that’s why those were legendary, the SW was 57.5° and LW 61° in vintage spec

[animalgolfs]

> @dlygrisse said:

> > @animalgolfs said:

> > > @"woodlandsgolfer " said:

> > > Its been so long since I played the old Eye 2, so I don't have recent experience with that. However, I have had the ES grind in Glide and Glide 2.0. I ordered the Eye 2 grind in 54 and 58, and have gone back to 2.0 ES grind. To me they dug way too much. It was great for about the first week or so, but I hit shots that I've never hit before. It felt like when I opened it up, the head would catch in the grass with the huge toe on it. They were also much shorter distance wise. I am not looking for distance in a wedge, but giving up 15-20 yards on the same loft is not ok.

> > >

> > > That said, you may like them, I've moved on.

> >

> > It's the extra groove they've added on the bottom-same as they did with the XG Eye 2. I can't for the life of me figure out why Ping is doing this!

> >

> > That extra groove just promotes digging unless it's firm & tight{PGA TOUR courses}.

> >

> > They have the Holy Grail staring right in their face & they're just too stubborn{educated}

> >

> > Eye 2+ sole design on >58*...... Eye 2 sole on <58*

> >

> >

> How does an extra groove promote digging? For the life of me I can’t figure out how that makes any sense. It’s designed to create more spin on slightly thin shots. Which is perfect if you want to hit a low spinner.

>

> What promotes digging is a square faced eye 2 grind, if you open it fine, all the bounce is in the toe. The Eye2 + grind digs like a garden hoe. Great off of firm turf though.

>

>

 

By adding the extra groove they some how extended the leading edge. Not only extended but it's damn near flat sole camber at the point of that extra groove. They did this with the Eye 2 XG as well.

 

Both these clubs leading edge sits extremely close the the turf{height wise}. It's also has some "rounding" to the leading edge at that groove-its not a straight line leading edge- it protrudes at that extra groove. All this leads to digging, especially in any type of wet conditions. They took clubs that were God send{Eye 2} where either type of swing worked {steep or sweep}.

 

I'll take pics-if needed on my explanation

[animalgolfs]

> @dlygrisse said:

>

> What promotes digging is a square faced eye 2 grind, if you open it fine, all the bounce is in the toe. The Eye2 + grind digs like a garden hoe. Great off of firm turf though.

>

>

 

I disagree with this statement whole heartily. The Eye 2+ us the most vertile grind on a wedge.

 

Rounded leading edge

Rounded sole chamber from to back

Sole relief grind on back

 

Made for any type of shot from any type of condition - opened up or played square face.... The Eye 2 + sole has NO dig whatsoever IMO

[skraly]

I have the Glide 3.0 Eye2 grind in 54 and 58. Best wedges I have used. Very versatile from all lies. A nice, solid feel. Excellent spin. I don’t understand at all these complaints of them digging. That has not been my experience at all.

[Lancj1]

> @Dayjobdave said:

> I've recently switched to Glide 3.0 wedges so my feedback is based on only a handful of rounds. I'm loving my 50 54 ss. The 58eye, however, is definitely a different beast, and an acquired taste.

>

> I like it, but it does set up very differently from the others. The half groove at the bottom does 'dig like a hoe' for me from the fairway, and will definitely take some getting used to. From the fairway, I don't really like how it looks. that big scoop on the front end makes me think I'm driving Dad's Buick from the late 50's, and i have to feel like i'm digging a trench in order to get the face of the club on the ball and not bounce off the turf into it.

>

> But....for me, this club is incredible out of the sand, and it is really really good out of the long grass. In fact, out of the long grass, it cuts through the rough so well that the ball pops out more cleanly than I seem to expect. This will take some getting used to, but I would hardly call this a flaw.

>

> I suspect that next spring, when i get some serious time with these wedges, I will have to make a call on the 58 eye sole. For me, it would be a club that I use from the sand and from the greenside rough, and that is pretty much it. If it performs well, I can spend a club-slot on this, and the early returns are this is almost like cheating out of the sand. However, it will take a lot of practice for me to find a way to use this club from the fairway, but I don't really need a 58 from the fairway very often anyway.

>

> Overall, definitely a unique and different sole on this club. I imagine that there will be a split between those who love it and those who hate it, and pretty much no one who uses this will be neutral.

 

I was thinking of my reply to this discussion then realized this post says what I wanted to say. Ive a Glide 3 54 SS which I use for anything from 80 yards in, and a 58 Eye sole which I will never consider for full shots, but its got the job of green side rescue from rough, deep fringe and sand. Its that good for those I am willing to make the space for it.

[crazygolfnut]

I have not tried the new version but at one time I did have the Eye 2 XG wedge. I found it worked very well out of fluffy sand and long rough but I could not hit it from tight lies or wet hard sand. Probably just me.

[Chip Duffer]

I have the Glide 3.0 Eye2’s in both 54* and 60* with the ZZ115 shafts. They feel incredibly balanced and easy to swing. I just came to these from the stealth 2.0 54*SS and 58* ES.

 

I am very happy with the smooth solid “flush” feel on full shots, and playability from all lies. I’ve had shots from firm, tight fairways, hard pan pitches and wet soft fairways and have found them to be forgiving, accurate and confidence inspiring. I really like the way they frame the ball, making alignment so easy.

 

I do understand though, that some who hood or close down the face may have issues with the toe digging. I find that on tight lies or when opening the face I tend to favor heel side of center where there is relief in the sole, which prevents the toe from digging.

 

For players experiencing the toe digging may benefit from having the wedge adjusted 1 or 2* upright. Just a thought.

 

[dlygrisse]

> @mantan said:

> I played the Glide 2.0 ES wedge and was VERY excited about the Eye 2 model of the Glide 3. I bought a 54* the week it came out and was convinced it was going to be my go to wedge.

>

> I was a little concerned at how bulky it seemed, but still ready to roll.

>

> I NEVER felt good with that wedge. For the few good shots I hit, it just didn't perform as well as my Glide 2.0, especially on full and partial wedge shots. I gave it a few practice sessions and one round and realized it wasn't going to work. I tried the standard model Glide 3.0 as well hoping it would be an improvement over my Stealth. But I realized I just liked the Stealth better.

>

> Expensive lesson learned.

 

I played the original Glide ES grind for awhile. It was a very versatile wedge, but I play off of a lot of soggy zoysia and I would get underneath it a bit too much on occasion. Went to the Stealth SS and I am pretty happy.l No wedge is perfect for all shots in all conditions, but if you are going with the Eye2 sole grind you need it understand it's kind of a love it or hate it wedge for a lot of people. You REALLY need to understand how the sole interacts with the turf or sand. Depending on your angle of attack and what part of the wedge contacts the ground you will get very different results. The toe of the club is very bouncy, while the heel digs like a shovel. Great for open faced flops.

[Hertsjoatmon]

For those who had issues with the eye 2 digging, have your tried bending them a degree weak? 

 

I'm thinking of getting a 56 bent to 57 for use out of bunkers and rough and partial shots around the green when I need to carry an obstruction. 

 

I figure it would only help more out of the bunkers and also prevent as much digging as people seem to be encountering. 

 

I have a eye 2 becu sand wedge I practice with and wanted something similar as a gamer