i500 and i210 MPF - not good

[tobiasjd]

I've always seen a divot a good bit past where the ball sat with my blade sets. But with the i500 the divot has gotten much closer to the ball. I think this is a product of having to smother the ball to get contact above the bottom 2 grooves.

 

 

Absolutely. The only way to get "pure" solid contact with a head design that has a sweet-spot which is 'well' higher than the center of the ball, from normal to tighter lies, is to have a very downward AOA with a "touch point" to the ground that is rather close to the back of the ball.

 

If we take the same AOA, but move the initial "touch point" to the turf further forward, the contact has a great chance of becoming "thin".

 

This is why I describe head designs with lower sweet-spots (AVCOG) as "having more room to work with" in the vertical aspect of contact. Our touch point to the ground near the back of the ball doesn't have be as precise, in order to get the sweet-spot under the center of the ball. Also, our AOA doesn't have to be as downward.....

 

In essence, we don't have to "pinch" down and through with as precise of a touch point to the turf or ground. In other words, easier to hit from normal to tighter lies for most players.

 

So with this in mind, everything else aside,...if we wanted to make it easier to start our turf interaction further forward....and or not as deep, we could simply try a head design with a lower sweet-spot.....or at least one that is not really high.

 

Thanks for post. I was still sort of still scratching my head until you summed it up. Explains why the pros would be relatively unaffected by a higher vcog. Since they are striking the ball with so much more precision and usually with a lot more downward angle, they are never going to have to worry about getting that CG at or below the ball center. Also makes me realize that most of us shouldn't necessarily consider the irons pros switch to as a reason to switch ourselves.

[tobiasjd]

I believe that higher VCoG is a consequence of chasing high MOI in the vertical axis. Thick toplines increase vertical MOI, but raises the VCoG.

 

I see. So basically, for many an average golfer, they are sacrificing the ability to hit the "sweet spot", but gaining some MOI higher up the face. So theoretically their vertical misses will be more frequent, but the penalty for those misses is decreased.

[ThinkingPlus]

I believe that higher VCoG is a consequence of chasing high MOI in the vertical axis. Thick toplines increase vertical MOI, but raises the VCoG.

 

I see. So basically, for many an average golfer, they are sacrificing the ability to hit the "sweet spot", but gaining some MOI higher up the face. So theoretically their vertical misses will be more frequent, but the penalty for those misses is decreased.

The penalty is decreased as long as the ball is on a tee or lush grass lie in the fairway or rough. If the lie is tight and very firm, a player with less shaft lean at impact (amateurs with less than ideal impact shaft lean or lower CHS players than generate insufficient ball speed and spin where too much shaft lean yields too low of an apex) will suffer a loss of distance and an odd ball flight (low launch, falls out of the sky).

[BackNineCollapse]

These are some great theoretical discussions, that have nothing to do with what happens with the i500 =). The i500 has a very high VCOG. So what happens when you hit it low on the face (which almost all amateurs do)? Do you get a high spinning, low launching, low ballspeed result? Absolutely not. You can scoop to your hearts content with the i500 and get some amazing launch conditions. There is more going on. I have not been able to get an answer from Ping, but I suspect the high VCOG is very much on purpose. The other design elements all act to increase launch and decrease spin. I suspect if they had a low VCOG (which they certainly could of done if they wanted) the launch parameters would of been much less playable.

 

MPF makes assumptions about the effects of certain measured properties of the club head. Those assumptions are not always correct.

[bladehunter]

I believe that higher VCoG is a consequence of chasing high MOI in the vertical axis. Thick toplines increase vertical MOI, but raises the VCoG.

 

I see. So basically, for many an average golfer, they are sacrificing the ability to hit the "sweet spot", but gaining some MOI higher up the face. So theoretically their vertical misses will be more frequent, but the penalty for those misses is decreased.

The penalty is decreased as long as the ball is on a tee or lush grass lie in the fairway or rough. If the lie is tight and very firm, a player with less shaft lean at impact (amateurs with less than ideal impact shaft lean or lower CHS players than generate insufficient ball speed and spin where too much shaft lean yields too low of an apex) will suffer a loss of distance and an odd ball flight (low launch, falls out of the sky).

 

 

spot on...and ill add that in the extreme turf conditions You and I have described in the past the amount of shaft lean needed to hit it actually flush is right up there with Tiger from the rough at bethpage black... an unhealthy amount.. So it becomes a calculation of trade offs..

 

 

Now i can absolutely see where a player who normally has a divot start at the ball or under it would not understand this issue.. he/she is coming in steep and thumping down on the ball .... This iron may well be a perfect match

[bladehunter]

These are some great theoretical discussions, that have nothing to do with what happens with the i500 =). The i500 has a very high VCOG. So what happens when you hit it low on the face (which almost all amateurs do)? Do you get a high spinning, low launching, low ballspeed result? Absolutely not. You can scoop to your hearts content with the i500 and get some amazing launch conditions. There is more going on. I have not been able to get an answer from Ping, but I suspect the high VCOG is very much on purpose. The other design elements all act to increase launch and decrease spin. I suspect if they had a low VCOG (which they certainly could of done if they wanted) the launch parameters would of been much less playable.

 

MPF makes assumptions about the effects of certain measured properties of the club head. Those assumptions are not always correct.

 

 

yes..

 

BUT this shoots holes all in the theory that a truly good ball striker ( one coming in shallow with shaft lean ) can play anything equally well... he may .. But from my experience this month not without changing the approach to a steeper attack with same lean . The sole forgives this move, and it works.. But to what degree of help to the good ball striker ?

 

Its clearly showing me that a lower or low VCOG is best for me .... I also suspect it has to do with my sudden bout of hitting wedges poorly.... They dont share this Vcog nor forgiving sole.. Before i swapped i was spot on in both distance control and spin.. Its a smoking gun to the argument ive shouted for a couple years here.. that some players score well ..But do not know what a truly pure strike feels like.

[iteachgolf]

These are some great theoretical discussions, that have nothing to do with what happens with the i500 =). The i500 has a very high VCOG. So what happens when you hit it low on the face (which almost all amateurs do)? Do you get a high spinning, low launching, low ballspeed result? Absolutely not. You can scoop to your hearts content with the i500 and get some amazing launch conditions. There is more going on. I have not been able to get an answer from Ping, but I suspect the high VCOG is very much on purpose. The other design elements all act to increase launch and decrease spin. I suspect if they had a low VCOG (which they certainly could of done if they wanted) the launch parameters would of been much less playable.

 

MPF makes assumptions about the effects of certain measured properties of the club head. Those assumptions are not always correct.

 

 

yes..

 

BUT this shoots holes all in the theory that a truly good ball striker ( one coming in shallow with shaft lean ) can play anything equally well... he may .. But from my experience this month not without changing the approach to a steeper attack with same lean . The sole forgives this move, and it works.. But to what degree of help to the good ball striker ?

 

Its clearly showing me that a lower or low VCOG is best for me .... I also suspect it has to do with my sudden bout of hitting wedges poorly.... They dont share this Vcog nor forgiving sole.. Before i swapped i was spot on in both distance control and spin.. Its a smoking gun to the argument ive shouted for a couple years here.. that some players score well ..But do not know what a truly pure strike feels like.

 

What are you considering shallow and a good ballstriker? Because most great ball strikers hit down on it quite a bit. Way more than most believe.

[animalgolfs]

These are some great theoretical discussions, that have nothing to do with what happens with the i500 =). The i500 has a very high VCOG. So what happens when you hit it low on the face (which almost all amateurs do)? Do you get a high spinning, low launching, low ballspeed result? Absolutely not. You can scoop to your hearts content with the i500 and get some amazing launch conditions. There is more going on. I have not been able to get an answer from Ping, but I suspect the high VCOG is very much on purpose. The other design elements all act to increase launch and decrease spin. I suspect if they had a low VCOG (which they certainly could of done if they wanted) the launch parameters would of been much less playable.

 

MPF makes assumptions about the effects of certain measured properties of the club head. Those assumptions are not always correct.

 

 

yes..

 

BUT this shoots holes all in the theory that a truly good ball striker ( one coming in shallow with shaft lean ) can play anything equally well... he may .. But from my experience this month not without changing the approach to a steeper attack with same lean . The sole forgives this move, and it works.. But to what degree of help to the good ball striker ?

 

Its clearly showing me that a lower or low VCOG is best for me .... I also suspect it has to do with my sudden bout of hitting wedges poorly.... They dont share this Vcog nor forgiving sole.. Before i swapped i was spot on in both distance control and spin.. Its a smoking gun to the argument ive shouted for a couple years here.. that some players score well ..But do not know what a truly pure strike feels like.

 

What are you considering shallow and a good ballstriker? Because most great ball strikers hit down on it quite a bit. Way more than most believe.

 

As do most amateurs, until you reach a certain demographic

[tobiasjd]

These are some great theoretical discussions, that have nothing to do with what happens with the i500 =). The i500 has a very high VCOG. So what happens when you hit it low on the face (which almost all amateurs do)? Do you get a high spinning, low launching, low ballspeed result? Absolutely not. You can scoop to your hearts content with the i500 and get some amazing launch conditions. There is more going on. I have not been able to get an answer from Ping, but I suspect the high VCOG is very much on purpose. The other design elements all act to increase launch and decrease spin. I suspect if they had a low VCOG (which they certainly could of done if they wanted) the launch parameters would of been much less playable.

 

MPF makes assumptions about the effects of certain measured properties of the club head. Those assumptions are not always correct.

 

 

yes..

 

BUT this shoots holes all in the theory that a truly good ball striker ( one coming in shallow with shaft lean ) can play anything equally well... he may .. But from my experience this month not without changing the approach to a steeper attack with same lean . The sole forgives this move, and it works.. But to what degree of help to the good ball striker ?

 

Its clearly showing me that a lower or low VCOG is best for me .... I also suspect it has to do with my sudden bout of hitting wedges poorly.... They dont share this Vcog nor forgiving sole.. Before i swapped i was spot on in both distance control and spin.. Its a smoking gun to the argument ive shouted for a couple years here.. that some players score well ..But do not know what a truly pure strike feels like.

 

What are you considering shallow and a good ballstriker? Because most great ball strikers hit down on it quite a bit. Way more than most believe.

 

As do most amateurs, until you reach a certain demographic

 

I guess it's observed best by where the divot starts. Great ball strikers are catching the ball easily before they've bottomed out, hands leading the clubhead through impact. A descending blow for sure, but the divot starts well past the ball. The adjustment to something steeper would mean the divot would now be starting right at the ball position.

[bladehunter]

These are some great theoretical discussions, that have nothing to do with what happens with the i500 =). The i500 has a very high VCOG. So what happens when you hit it low on the face (which almost all amateurs do)? Do you get a high spinning, low launching, low ballspeed result? Absolutely not. You can scoop to your hearts content with the i500 and get some amazing launch conditions. There is more going on. I have not been able to get an answer from Ping, but I suspect the high VCOG is very much on purpose. The other design elements all act to increase launch and decrease spin. I suspect if they had a low VCOG (which they certainly could of done if they wanted) the launch parameters would of been much less playable.

 

MPF makes assumptions about the effects of certain measured properties of the club head. Those assumptions are not always correct.

 

 

yes..

 

BUT this shoots holes all in the theory that a truly good ball striker ( one coming in shallow with shaft lean ) can play anything equally well... he may .. But from my experience this month not without changing the approach to a steeper attack with same lean . The sole forgives this move, and it works.. But to what degree of help to the good ball striker ?

 

Its clearly showing me that a lower or low VCOG is best for me .... I also suspect it has to do with my sudden bout of hitting wedges poorly.... They dont share this Vcog nor forgiving sole.. Before i swapped i was spot on in both distance control and spin.. Its a smoking gun to the argument ive shouted for a couple years here.. that some players score well ..But do not know what a truly pure strike feels like.

 

What are you considering shallow and a good ballstriker? Because most great ball strikers hit down on it quite a bit. Way more than most believe.

 

Agree. I’m quite down. For sure. Just trying to put it into terms that someone will believe or understand.

 

Most ams equate steep to bad and shallow to good.

 

 

 

All that being said I’m glad you returned. I’d love to hear your thoughts on what I’m seeing . The comparison is the i500 with retro lofts to the 681 Proto mb I’ve used for a couple years. Very low Vcog. Both same shafts , length and grip.

 

I’ve played the i500 a month now and I’ve seen my angle get steeper and divots are definitely closer to the ball. If I swap back to the mb I hit it pretty bad for a couple balls. Shallow it out a bit and go back to divot our in front and the divot goes from 3-4 inches with i500 to easily 6-8 inches in length with the mb. Nice shallow and long. It’s crept to my wedges tooo. Steeper .

 

If i shallow the i500 out I hit a lot of thinnish feeling shots. They squirt out and drop with no distance. It wants a chop down strike.

 

It’s. Not a case of me disliking the i500. It’s a case of me being puzzled by the differences.

[iteachgolf]

These are some great theoretical discussions, that have nothing to do with what happens with the i500 =). The i500 has a very high VCOG. So what happens when you hit it low on the face (which almost all amateurs do)? Do you get a high spinning, low launching, low ballspeed result? Absolutely not. You can scoop to your hearts content with the i500 and get some amazing launch conditions. There is more going on. I have not been able to get an answer from Ping, but I suspect the high VCOG is very much on purpose. The other design elements all act to increase launch and decrease spin. I suspect if they had a low VCOG (which they certainly could of done if they wanted) the launch parameters would of been much less playable.

 

MPF makes assumptions about the effects of certain measured properties of the club head. Those assumptions are not always correct.

 

 

yes..

 

BUT this shoots holes all in the theory that a truly good ball striker ( one coming in shallow with shaft lean ) can play anything equally well... he may .. But from my experience this month not without changing the approach to a steeper attack with same lean . The sole forgives this move, and it works.. But to what degree of help to the good ball striker ?

 

Its clearly showing me that a lower or low VCOG is best for me .... I also suspect it has to do with my sudden bout of hitting wedges poorly.... They dont share this Vcog nor forgiving sole.. Before i swapped i was spot on in both distance control and spin.. Its a smoking gun to the argument ive shouted for a couple years here.. that some players score well ..But do not know what a truly pure strike feels like.

 

What are you considering shallow and a good ballstriker? Because most great ball strikers hit down on it quite a bit. Way more than most believe.

 

As do most amateurs, until you reach a certain demographic

 

Actually most amateurs are way shallower AOA wise. Why they have low point issues. Don’t confuse swing plane and AOA.

[iteachgolf]

These are some great theoretical discussions, that have nothing to do with what happens with the i500 =). The i500 has a very high VCOG. So what happens when you hit it low on the face (which almost all amateurs do)? Do you get a high spinning, low launching, low ballspeed result? Absolutely not. You can scoop to your hearts content with the i500 and get some amazing launch conditions. There is more going on. I have not been able to get an answer from Ping, but I suspect the high VCOG is very much on purpose. The other design elements all act to increase launch and decrease spin. I suspect if they had a low VCOG (which they certainly could of done if they wanted) the launch parameters would of been much less playable.

 

MPF makes assumptions about the effects of certain measured properties of the club head. Those assumptions are not always correct.

 

 

yes..

 

BUT this shoots holes all in the theory that a truly good ball striker ( one coming in shallow with shaft lean ) can play anything equally well... he may .. But from my experience this month not without changing the approach to a steeper attack with same lean . The sole forgives this move, and it works.. But to what degree of help to the good ball striker ?

 

Its clearly showing me that a lower or low VCOG is best for me .... I also suspect it has to do with my sudden bout of hitting wedges poorly.... They dont share this Vcog nor forgiving sole.. Before i swapped i was spot on in both distance control and spin.. Its a smoking gun to the argument ive shouted for a couple years here.. that some players score well ..But do not know what a truly pure strike feels like.

 

What are you considering shallow and a good ballstriker? Because most great ball strikers hit down on it quite a bit. Way more than most believe.

 

As do most amateurs, until you reach a certain demographic

 

I guess it's observed best by where the divot starts. Great ball strikers are catching the ball easily before they've bottomed out, hands leading the clubhead through impact. A descending blow for sure, but the divot starts well past the ball. The adjustment to something steeper would mean the divot would now be starting right at the ball position.

 

You got things backwards. The guys with low point well forward hit more down. Think Sergio. Guys who are shallow are the ones who have low point at the ball

[iteachgolf]

These are some great theoretical discussions, that have nothing to do with what happens with the i500 =). The i500 has a very high VCOG. So what happens when you hit it low on the face (which almost all amateurs do)? Do you get a high spinning, low launching, low ballspeed result? Absolutely not. You can scoop to your hearts content with the i500 and get some amazing launch conditions. There is more going on. I have not been able to get an answer from Ping, but I suspect the high VCOG is very much on purpose. The other design elements all act to increase launch and decrease spin. I suspect if they had a low VCOG (which they certainly could of done if they wanted) the launch parameters would of been much less playable.

 

MPF makes assumptions about the effects of certain measured properties of the club head. Those assumptions are not always correct.

 

 

yes..

 

BUT this shoots holes all in the theory that a truly good ball striker ( one coming in shallow with shaft lean ) can play anything equally well... he may .. But from my experience this month not without changing the approach to a steeper attack with same lean . The sole forgives this move, and it works.. But to what degree of help to the good ball striker ?

 

Its clearly showing me that a lower or low VCOG is best for me .... I also suspect it has to do with my sudden bout of hitting wedges poorly.... They dont share this Vcog nor forgiving sole.. Before i swapped i was spot on in both distance control and spin.. Its a smoking gun to the argument ive shouted for a couple years here.. that some players score well ..But do not know what a truly pure strike feels like.

 

What are you considering shallow and a good ballstriker? Because most great ball strikers hit down on it quite a bit. Way more than most believe.

 

Agree. I’m quite down. For sure. Just trying to put it into terms that someone will believe or understand.

 

Most ams equate steep to bad and shallow to good.

 

 

 

All that being said I’m glad you returned. I’d love to hear your thoughts on what I’m seeing . The comparison is the i500 with retro lofts to the 681 Proto mb I’ve used for a couple years. Very low Vcog. Both same shafts , length and grip.

 

I’ve played the i500 a month now and I’ve seen my angle get steeper and divots are definitely closer to the ball. If I swap back to the mb I hit it pretty bad for a couple balls. Shallow it out a bit and go back to divot our in front and the divot goes from 3-4 inches with i500 to easily 6-8 inches in length with the mb. Nice shallow and long. It’s crept to my wedges tooo. Steeper .

 

If i shallow the i500 out I hit a lot of thinnish feeling shots. They squirt out and drop with no distance. It wants a chop down strike.

 

It’s. Not a case of me disliking the i500. It’s a case of me being puzzled by the differences.

 

Divot being closer to the ball isn’t steeper. A shallow divot way forward doesn’t mean you’re shallower, it often means the opposite. Don’t confuse divot depth with AOA. Julian barely takes a divot, and hits down on a 4 iron about 7-9*

[FlyOver]

Once again small sampling here and only began reading this because of my experience. I am a sweeper/picker with a slight early release. Brought my new i500 to the range and tried to hit a half dozen balls....felt terrible with no launch at all. I thought what a piece of s***.

 

Began pressing the shaft forward and trying to trap it more....night and day difference. High bombs. The more forward shaft lean I had the better the strike.

 

Funny side note...a buddy of mine has a set of mp33 that Cwebb mentioned above and was at the range that day. Seemed easier for me to hit than the i500 without manipulating my swing.

 

I can be wrong, but I think if you need to forward shaft lean the I500. It means you are adding offset in order to get the ball airborne. Makes sense since, the I500 has very little offset. Then again, I wouldn’t want to have to change my swing to play a new set of irons.

[Cwebb]

 

Thanks for post. I was still sort of still scratching my head until you summed it up. Explains why the pros would be relatively unaffected by a higher vcog. Since they are striking the ball with so much more precision and usually with a lot more downward angle, they are never going to have to worry about getting that CG at or below the ball center. Also makes me realize that most of us shouldn't necessarily consider the irons pros switch to as a reason to switch ourselves.

 

It would be similar to trying to get the detailed specs of your tennis racket the same as Roger Federer or Rafael Nadal. Does that make any sense for most players?

[Cwebb]

Once again small sampling here and only began reading this because of my experience. I am a sweeper/picker with a slight early release. Brought my new i500 to the range and tried to hit a half dozen balls....felt terrible with no launch at all. I thought what a piece of s***.

 

Began pressing the shaft forward and trying to trap it more....night and day difference. High bombs. The more forward shaft lean I had the better the strike.

 

Funny side note...a buddy of mine has a set of mp33 that Cwebb mentioned above and was at the range that day. Seemed easier for me to hit than the i500 without manipulating my swing.

 

Then again, I wouldn't want to have to change my swing to play a new set of irons.

 

Great point. Unless someone plans on changing their swing.....and wants specs that "promote" those changes, a good fitting is one where the clubs fit the player.....not the player fitting themselves to the clubs

[bladehunter]

These are some great theoretical discussions, that have nothing to do with what happens with the i500 =). The i500 has a very high VCOG. So what happens when you hit it low on the face (which almost all amateurs do)? Do you get a high spinning, low launching, low ballspeed result? Absolutely not. You can scoop to your hearts content with the i500 and get some amazing launch conditions. There is more going on. I have not been able to get an answer from Ping, but I suspect the high VCOG is very much on purpose. The other design elements all act to increase launch and decrease spin. I suspect if they had a low VCOG (which they certainly could of done if they wanted) the launch parameters would of been much less playable.

 

MPF makes assumptions about the effects of certain measured properties of the club head. Those assumptions are not always correct.

 

 

yes..

 

BUT this shoots holes all in the theory that a truly good ball striker ( one coming in shallow with shaft lean ) can play anything equally well... he may .. But from my experience this month not without changing the approach to a steeper attack with same lean . The sole forgives this move, and it works.. But to what degree of help to the good ball striker ?

 

Its clearly showing me that a lower or low VCOG is best for me .... I also suspect it has to do with my sudden bout of hitting wedges poorly.... They dont share this Vcog nor forgiving sole.. Before i swapped i was spot on in both distance control and spin.. Its a smoking gun to the argument ive shouted for a couple years here.. that some players score well ..But do not know what a truly pure strike feels like.

 

What are you considering shallow and a good ballstriker? Because most great ball strikers hit down on it quite a bit. Way more than most believe.

 

Agree. I’m quite down. For sure. Just trying to put it into terms that someone will believe or understand.

 

Most ams equate steep to bad and shallow to good.

 

 

 

All that being said I’m glad you returned. I’d love to hear your thoughts on what I’m seeing . The comparison is the i500 with retro lofts to the 681 Proto mb I’ve used for a couple years. Very low Vcog. Both same shafts , length and grip.

 

I’ve played the i500 a month now and I’ve seen my angle get steeper and divots are definitely closer to the ball. If I swap back to the mb I hit it pretty bad for a couple balls. Shallow it out a bit and go back to divot our in front and the divot goes from 3-4 inches with i500 to easily 6-8 inches in length with the mb. Nice shallow and long. It’s crept to my wedges tooo. Steeper .

 

If i shallow the i500 out I hit a lot of thinnish feeling shots. They squirt out and drop with no distance. It wants a chop down strike.

 

It’s. Not a case of me disliking the i500. It’s a case of me being puzzled by the differences.

 

Divot being closer to the ball isn’t steeper. A shallow divot way forward doesn’t mean you’re shallower, it often means the opposite. Don’t confuse divot depth with AOA. Julian barely takes a divot, and hits down on a 4 iron about 7-9*

 

Hmm. So you’re saying my description says steep both irons ? Why the difference ?

 

Not looking for definitive answer. Just wonder if you’ve ran across a on off situation like this.

 

Edit Sorry just re-read what I posted and realize that thought one thing and said another meant to say steep not shallow

[FlyOver]

Once again small sampling here and only began reading this because of my experience. I am a sweeper/picker with a slight early release. Brought my new i500 to the range and tried to hit a half dozen balls....felt terrible with no launch at all. I thought what a piece of s***.

 

Began pressing the shaft forward and trying to trap it more....night and day difference. High bombs. The more forward shaft lean I had the better the strike.

 

Funny side note...a buddy of mine has a set of mp33 that Cwebb mentioned above and was at the range that day. Seemed easier for me to hit than the i500 without manipulating my swing.

 

Then again, I wouldn't want to have to change my swing to play a new set of irons.

 

Great point. Unless someone plans on changing their swing.....and wants specs that "promote" those changes, a good fitting is one where the clubs fit the player.....not the player fitting themselves to the clubs

 

Amen CWebb!

[Cwebb]

Also wanted to add an analogy.... that an iron design with a high sweet-spot (AVCOG) is much like a deep faced fairway wood....and an iron with a low sweet-spot is like a shallow faced fairway wood.

 

Most players, especially those who are not the most gifted professionals, find that a deep faced fairway wood is more difficult to hit solid at a high percentage....from normal to tighter lies (not teed up).

 

It's easier to understand impact point and it's effect on solid contact with a fairway wood, because the sweet-spot is vertically right near the center. With an iron, it's obviously not in the vertical center and can be harder to visualize it's location, unless you know the measurement and have seen an image like the one posted earlier, to get an understanding

[vagolfnut]

Way to technical for me. I just test out clubs and if it feels and looks good I buy. Very simple

[dmeeksDC]

So I’ve been looking at various irons I have played or tested because the weather sucks tonight and I’m bored so why not obsess about the vertical center of gravity of golf clubs according to data compiled by one Mr. Ralph Maltby and his associates.

 

No wonder I stuck with my TaylorMade RAC LT irons for so long. VCOG of .696 Man those were great irons. And of recent models, the Mizuno 900 Hot Metals, which I like a lot, are a really good choice for low COG .(.775) and also for a more centered COG. The MP5’s, another blade known as easier to hit, are .789

 

It does seem like clubmakers go through periods where they make irons with a higher COG and then a period where it drops down again. (Using .840 as the dividing line.)

 

And some, such as Bridgestone, seem to like lower VCOG in several models, usually even under .800. Most of the Srixon heads too. Almost all the Pings were lower COG through 2016 and definitely have gone up in the past two years. Interesting that beloved Pings such as the S57, S56 and the legendary S55 — all low.

 

Callaway is all over the spectrum but the standard Rogue, Epic, Epic Pros and original Apex Pros are all low. I gamed those Apex Pros (2014) and felt they were the best Apex heads. Rogue Pro, Rogue X and current X Forged are high. Yet the 2007 and 2009 X Forged were really low.

 

At the very least it all makes for a great on-course excuse; ‘This damn .856 vertical center of gravity is killing me today!’

 

I’m trotting that one out soon.

[MattUtah]

I posted weeks ago in this thread that it’s hard to buy into these ratings meaning much, but they oddly match up with my feelings about various Callaway and Ping irons I’ve played.

 

If anyone wants to test a newish iron with a super low vcog, the ‘17 Callaway Steelheads are super low. FOR ME, they’ve been easier than anything else I’ve tried.

[iteachgolf]

 

 

yes..

 

BUT this shoots holes all in the theory that a truly good ball striker ( one coming in shallow with shaft lean ) can play anything equally well... he may .. But from my experience this month not without changing the approach to a steeper attack with same lean . The sole forgives this move, and it works.. But to what degree of help to the good ball striker ?

 

Its clearly showing me that a lower or low VCOG is best for me .... I also suspect it has to do with my sudden bout of hitting wedges poorly.... They dont share this Vcog nor forgiving sole.. Before i swapped i was spot on in both distance control and spin.. Its a smoking gun to the argument ive shouted for a couple years here.. that some players score well ..But do not know what a truly pure strike feels like.

 

What are you considering shallow and a good ballstriker? Because most great ball strikers hit down on it quite a bit. Way more than most believe.

 

Agree. I’m quite down. For sure. Just trying to put it into terms that someone will believe or understand.

 

Most ams equate steep to bad and shallow to good.

 

 

 

All that being said I’m glad you returned. I’d love to hear your thoughts on what I’m seeing . The comparison is the i500 with retro lofts to the 681 Proto mb I’ve used for a couple years. Very low Vcog. Both same shafts , length and grip.

 

I’ve played the i500 a month now and I’ve seen my angle get steeper and divots are definitely closer to the ball. If I swap back to the mb I hit it pretty bad for a couple balls. Shallow it out a bit and go back to divot our in front and the divot goes from 3-4 inches with i500 to easily 6-8 inches in length with the mb. Nice shallow and long. It’s crept to my wedges tooo. Steeper .

 

If i shallow the i500 out I hit a lot of thinnish feeling shots. They squirt out and drop with no distance. It wants a chop down strike.

 

It’s. Not a case of me disliking the i500. It’s a case of me being puzzled by the differences.

 

Divot being closer to the ball isn’t steeper. A shallow divot way forward doesn’t mean you’re shallower, it often means the opposite. Don’t confuse divot depth with AOA. Julian barely takes a divot, and hits down on a 4 iron about 7-9*

 

Hmm. So you’re saying my description says steep both irons ? Why the difference ?

 

Not looking for definitive answer. Just wonder if you’ve ran across a on off situation like this.

 

Edit Sorry just re-read what I posted and realize that thought one thing and said another meant to say steep not shallow

 

No I’m saying you’re shalloweron the deeper divot further back one. And it’s likely more to do with the higher bounce and wider sole than with the VCOG.

[bladehunter]

Well. That’s what I originally ( other threads ) blamed it on. Was quickly told how silly that was since the ball was long gone before turf interaction , so couldn’t be that. Lol.

 

I agree. I think the sole is as much as any of it.

[extrastiff]

Way to technical for me. I just test out clubs and if it feels and looks good I buy. Very simple

Ill do similar. I'll try to find a used single iron of the set on eBay or something, and configure it the ways I like(+1, 1 flat, grip, etc) and see if I really like it. Then buy the set.

[dmeeksDC]

I posted weeks ago in this thread that it’s hard to buy into these ratings meaning much, but they oddly match up with my feelings about various Callaway and Ping irons I’ve played.

 

If anyone wants to test a newish iron with a super low vcog, the ‘17 Callaway Steelheads are super low. FOR ME, they’ve been easier than anything else I’ve tried.

 

Funny how those clubs did not seem to catch fire like the Apex, yet everyone I know who plays them says the same thing you do — they perform very well. I play with a guy who went from Apex to the SH Pro and he definitely is better with the Steelheads.

[PreppySlapCut]

Well. That’s what I originally ( other threads ) blamed it on. Was quickly told how silly that was since the ball was long gone before turf interaction , so couldn’t be that. Lol.

 

I agree. I think the sole is as much as any of it.

It’s definitely a factor. You added bounce by bending them weak. If you want to stick with the retro spec lofts, grind the soles a little bit and kill the leading edge.

[BMuller23]

I’ve been following this thread for a little while now and most of the discussion has been around the i500 regarding its VCOG, however, the i210 also has a higher VCOG than a golf ball and that is the club I am interested in. I have hit the i210 indoors and out and haven’t seen any noticeable difference in performance from the iE1s. Can anyone who has a little more long term experience with the i210s give me some feedback? Thanks in advance.

[dmeeksDC]

I’ve been following this thread for a little while now and most of the discussion has been around the i500 regarding its VCOG, however, the i210 also has a higher VCOG than a golf ball and that is the club I am interested in. I have hit the i210 indoors and out and haven’t seen any noticeable difference in performance from the iE1s. Can anyone who has a little more long term experience with the i210s give me some feedback? Thanks in advance.

 

Have not gamed the 210 but own the 200 and have hit the iE1 many times. Don’t really see peformance distances except based on shaft and spec changes. My understanding is the main update in the i210 is an even thinner face and expanded vibration dampening material in the tuning port. Supposedly the feel at impact is much softer, which you may or may not have experienced.

 

In terms of on-course, I would expect nothing would really change performance-wise except the iE1’s would be a little more playable. I don’t think the VCOG on the i200’s are an issue. Have not been for me but I tend to go down and get it. To me a lower VCOG is much more about increasing my margin for error on a poor swing. And spin. I do like low-launch shafts and I feel like that with a low COG gets me in a good spin range.

[High Draws Low Fades]

I've been following this thread for a little while now and most of the discussion has been around the i500 regarding its VCOG, however, the i210 also has a higher VCOG than a golf ball and that is the club I am interested in. I have hit the i210 indoors and out and haven't seen any noticeable difference in performance from the iE1s. Can anyone who has a little more long term experience with the i210s give me some feedback? Thanks in advance.

 

Been playing the i210s for a few months. Not sure why the VCOG is so high, but I haven't noticed it at all. I'm sure Ping is fully aware of what they're doing and there must be other technology that offsets the high VCOG. I've hit plenty of long iron shots very low on the face that have a good flight and don't lose much yardage. Honestly, I wouldn't put too much thought into what has been said in this thread in your decision to buy i210s. The i210s are a very forgiving players iron.