Ping G710 vs Titleist T400 irons

[jjfcpa]

How do you think these game improvements irons compare?

[luckypolk]

I imagine the same lofted clubs will be comparable. You'll have to compare the T400 6 iron to the G710 7 iron to get a true comparison. Both Titleist and Ping make great sticks. I think while both have produced hot faces built for distance, both companies have a long standing history on focusing on dispersion. They both take pride in you knowing how far your club will go. The launch monitor will tell you the true story for you. I think a lot of people in the market for these will go with the club they like the look/feel of the most since performance should be close if they do a proper comparison. Do they want a sleeker black iron or do they want a silver iron where they can see the tech. Brand loyalty is also always a factor. I don't think these really fit what I'm looking for, but I'll definitely hit both just to see what they do....and I'm sure I'll have fun in the process lol

[BogeyParBogey]

If you're used to players irons these are both probably shockingly large. I'd pick G710.

Dave

[1Mordrid1]

As someone who played the G700, the G710s look and feel much better. The black finish really makes the club look smaller at address. They do not feel as firm as the G700s and the sound on well struck shots is definitely more muted.

Numbers wise the G710 is a few yards longer than my G700s were, but at a cost of around 300-400 rpm spin. But as high as they both fly I don't think I would have any issues with stopping power.

The Titleist T400s are interesting with the 26 degree 7 iron. That is similar to the Rogue Max, which were ridiculously long but had no stopping power for my game.

 

[1Mordrid1]

Actually the G710 7 iron is 29.5 degrees of loft while the spec sheet Titleist has provided shows the T400 7 iron at 26 degrees of loft.

[tucker500]

Different animals in my opinion.

Ping is forgiving and slick looking with the black finish. Great distance and playable for anyone who is ok with the larger size and the feel.

Titleist.....yikes....they are a new breed. 38* PW I think? They are canons due to the lofts, but still spin reasonably close to other super game improvement irons. Height is also similar, while still going a country mile.

Funky look but a lot of fun to hit. They are for the player who wants pure distance and forgiveness. If you already hit an 8 iron 150-160, these are not really aimed at you. But you can still play them for fun!

[luckypolk]

You're right, I got it backwards. You'd need to do the T400 8 iron vs the G710 7 iron.

[kiwihacker]

A 38° pitching wedge? That's 1° stronger than my 8 iron.

A 20° 5 iron and 23° 6 iron? Again 1° stronger than my 3 and 4 iron?

I thought we swapped out the 20-21° and sometimes also the 23-24° iron for hybrids years ago because they were considered 'hard to hit' for the average golfer. Apparently if you stamp 5 or 6 on them instead of 3 or 4 they're fine for the average golfer.

[kiwihacker]

[jjfcpa]

That's a great point. When you get to 20-23 degrees, a lot of golfers, especially amateurs, have a very hard time with gapping. Have they addressed this?

[scooterhd2]

No. if you want hybrids youd probably stop at the 7 iron.

[Marco Colo]

Maybe the other way around? I.e. G710 6 iron vs T400 7i?

[gvogel]

Shaft selection will also be important. (I'm a Titleist/Nippon 105T guy, myself.)

[1Mordrid1]

In theory, with the wide sole and the mass and weight so low and so far back, these new "super distance" irons should play like an open cavity hybrid.

 

We have all seen the "loft jack threads", but the truth is if you couple the stronger lofts with newer technology and designs then you have something more than just a "mislabeled" club. Anyone who doubts this can watch several of the videos on the PXG Gen 3 lines. All 3 have similar launch, ball flight, and spin, yet very different static lofts. So the 21 degree clubs that a lot of players could not elevate 10 years ago are nothing like some of the well designed SGI 21 degree clubs of today.

[jc88]

I'd go G710

[kiwihacker]

So is the 20° 5 iron of today as easy to hit as the 27° 5 iron of 10 years ago? And what distance should I expect to hit it? The 175 I hit a 27° 5 iron of 10 years ago or the 220 I hit a 20° hybrid of 10 years ago?

[Nessism]

T400 lofts are a JOKE. (waiting on people to show up now and tell me to get over the strong loft hate)

[Bad9]

C'mon, Titleist is a players club company they would never do something like that. Its not like they make a set with three clubs between the 9 iron a gap wedge. Or that they haven't done it pre T400.

[kiwihacker]

I especially like the 6° gap between the 43° Wedge 2 and the 49° Gap wedge.

 

What a great setup.

[tucker500]

T200 PW is 43* and GW is 48*, so 5* gap there.

What's 1 more degree?! Then 1 more? Then another? Am I at an 8 iron yet?! haha

 

[1Mordrid1]

Gapping is about consistent yardage, not symetrical static loft gaps. Maybe with the design and weight of the clubs that is the loft needed to get a comparable yardage gap to the other clubs in the set. Until you hit them you really can't know.

[Nessism]

No way the CG position makes up for the ridiculous lofts. People believing that don't understand club head design.

[snapier]

While at the Titleist Performance Institute in Carlsbad a few years ago, part of the experience was a discussion with the design group. Several aspects were discussed and the topic of lower lofts came up. Their position was each iron was designed to achieve a specific trajectory. For example, a Titleist 7 iron from each model/design delivered the same trajectory. GI irons with better weighting, lower CG, hotter faces, etc., generally required less loft to achieve the desired trajectory. Their touring pros rarely questioned or asked about static loft, rather they expect a 9 iron to have a 9 iron trajectory. Same numbered irons from a T100 and T300 should launch at the same trajectory, despite the 4-5 degree differences in static loft. Anyway, that was their story

[kiwihacker]

What I have found to be consistent with all, well most, of these jacked loft setups is that a Gap Wedge at 49°-50° and a Sand wedge at 54°-55° seems to be sacrosanct so in order to get to this loft from the 43°-44° PW you need 5-6° gaps whilst there are only 2°-3° lofts increments in the long irons. But if the lower cog, club design and modern design technology means a 38° club can perform the role of a pitching wedge then surely all this tech can also be poured into a 42° club you can call a sand wedge? And a lob wedge at say 46°? Static lofts are meaningless in these high tech clubs.

[1Mordrid1]

If you still doubt it then watch the youtube video on the PXG Gen 3 different sets....Or better yet, go hit a set of PING G700 or G710 against a set of i210s or even Titleist AP2's and then come back and honestly tell us the G700 does not have a higher flight despite the stronger loft.

[Nessism]

I've owned and played everything from blades to full sized GI clubs so I don't need to watch someone else hit balls to know what strong lofts and different CG positions do for a club. Oh, and I'm a mechanical engineer and have been building (and experimenting) with different irons for more than 25 years too. Don't believe me? Go look up some posts by Tom Wishon where he says strong lofts are pure marketing and then tell him he's full of it. As I understand it he was offered the lead design engineering job at Titleist once upon a time but he turned it down. Anyway, I know that a low and rear CG affects flight, but no way in hell that explains the lofts of the T400. Titleist has been doing the dual gap wedge BS on the AP1 for a while now and this methodology has just gone ape with the T400. The lofts are a marketing decision, not a technical solution.

[jjfcpa]

In terms of distance, do you think the T400 will deliver more distance than the G710 assuming you hit clubs with the same lofts against each other? Or will the same lofts essentially neutralize any distance benefit that one might have over another?

[1Mordrid1]

Since I have not hit the T400 yet, the only insight I could provide is a comparison of the Rogue Max irons and the G700 because I did compare those side by side when I had G700s. The Rogue Max for my swing did not fly as high as the G700 but the carry distance was similar, the big difference was the stopping power. I could stop any of the G700 irons pretty quickly with the 5 iron getting maybe 6 to 8 ft of rollout. The Rogue Max the 7 iron was getting about 5 to 6 foot of rollout and the 5 and 6 were pretty hard to stop on the greens. However, keep in mind my results were on fast and firm Phoenix greens. There is no guarantee that the T400 will play the same, but that is the only comparison I have with irons with that strong of loft.You must be right......I guess the thousands of youtube videos reviewing these clubs are all doctored to make it look like these clubs fligh higher than they actually do.......Especially the ones on the G700s where at least 4 well known youtube golf personalities are amazed at the height and stopping power of the G700s....We are all fools for not realizing they were all in cahoots together. And their shennanigans worked because even my golf ball believed it and flew higher and further when hit by the G700s.

I don't buy in to all of the koolaid and marketing hype. And I agree that not all SGI "strong lofted" irons are designed and created equally. The Rogue Max were in the same loft zone as the T400 and I did not find them to have any extra carry because the launch was too low with those lofts and that design. But with several other GI and SGI irons the design does allow the ball to fly much higher than similarly lofted irons from previous generations. And I know this not because I read it somewhere, bit because I actually hit the irons to see for myself. But with the T400 I will not make any claims or judgements until I can actually hit them.

[jjfcpa]

So it sounds like the G710, if it follows the same characteristics of the G700, might be easier to hold greens with?

[1Mordrid1]

I would think so. When I hit the G710's they were a couple yards longer and spin was slightly less than the G700 while the trajectory remained the same for both. So I don't think the couple hundred rpm difference would effect stopping power significantly between the 2. And like I said I have not hit the T400 to know for sure, but the only similarly lofted iron I have hit, the mid to long irons were harder to hold the firm greens I play on mainly because they lacked the height and steep descent that the G700 provided.