Anyone can compare Ping i20 irons to i210?

[barnum1]

Hi!

 

I'm playing 8 years old Ping i20 irons, and wonder if anyone has played them and i210?
Could you compare forgiveness for example?

Thanks!

Edited September 25, 2020 by barnum1

[blueonblack]

I've played primarily the S series in Ping in recent-ish years. S-55 were my last port of call. I did have a set of i20's as well, and overall preferred the fairly similar forgiveness of the S series in the smaller head package over the i20's larger head/sole and more offset. I'd be interested in those i210's if I were looking to get into newer Pings. I know I need more help than anything more "advanced" than that. The softer insert in the back of the head sounds like an improvement over the S-55, which are already really nice.

I'm not sure what they call their "stronger loft" option now. If doing a LM fitting, I'd want to see differences with the loft change there.

The more GI style usually have slightly stronger lofts, so pairing the shafts is then helpful of course.

Edited September 25, 2020 by blueonblack

[setter02]

Following.  Am in the same boat after tinkering far too much with irons yet again this season.  Easier to find the i200's, but curious on the i210s

[Fairway14]

On 9/24/2020 at 10:14 PM, barnum1 said:

Hi!

 

I'm playing 8 years old Ping i20 irons, and wonder if anyone has played them and i210?
Could you compare forgiveness for example?

Thanks!

 

If you've enjoyed playing the i20's I expect you will like i200 or i210.

I liked playing my S56 very much, but found the head size of the i20 so large they were counter productive to consistently good shot making, so I sold the i20's and went back to playing S56.

Ping's S-series (S59, 58, 57, 56, 55) were a good balance of relatively small head size yet cavity back forgiveness. I think Ping should have kept this style club within their line, because it was suitable for all skill levels, from beginner to Tour pro.

The i200, i210 (like the i15, i20 before them) I think have too large a head size which makes them a bit bulky to swing-square at impact.

Ping's smaller head models, the iblade and Blueprint, don't have enough cavity back perimeter weighting to make them good for lesser skilled players.

[Nixhex524]

I have played the i20, i25, S56, S55, i200 and now the i210.  All were great in their own right but the i210 just blow them all away if you are looking for a little more help, except for the i200.  The 200s were just as forgiving and performed well but the 210 feel softer to me and sound a little less clicky.  I found the i20 and i25 to be about a club shorter than anything else I was playing at the time but I did appreciate the look and feel, great irons at the time but the i210s are special.  I will note that I picked my i210 up used and they are green dot, + 1/2" and I normally play black dot, standard length.  Still, these i210s are SO easy to hit, and to hit straight.  I will be sending them to Ping for adjustments as I can't see not giving these a real run.  I also LOVED the S55, but the 210 are clearly more helpful through the set without looking too GI. 

[animalgolfs]

6 minutes ago, Fairway14 said:

 

If you've enjoyed playing the i20's I expect you will like i200 or i210.

I liked playing my S56 very much, but found the head size of the i20 so large they were counter productive to consistently good shot making, so I sold the i20's and went back to playing S56.

Ping's S-series (S59, 58, 57, 56, 55) were a good balance of relatively small head size yet cavity back forgiveness. I think Ping should have kept this style club within their line, because it was suitable for all skill levels, from beginner to Tour pro.

The i200, i210 (like the i15, i20 before them) I think have too large a head size which makes them a bit bulky to swing-square at impact.

Ping's smaller head models, the iblade and Blueprint, don't have enough cavity back perimeter weighting to make them good for lesser skilled players.

i210 have TONS of use on Tour.......they could possibly be the most popular Ping iron introduced on Tour.

 

So, that large head- clunky thing is personal on your part. i210 also produce the most spin- over iBlade & s55 

 

 

[setter02]

1 hour ago, Fairway14 said:

 

If you've enjoyed playing the i20's I expect you will like i200 or i210.

I liked playing my S56 very much, but found the head size of the i20 so large they were counter productive to consistently good shot making, so I sold the i20's and went back to playing S56.

Ping's S-series (S59, 58, 57, 56, 55) were a good balance of relatively small head size yet cavity back forgiveness. I think Ping should have kept this style club within their line, because it was suitable for all skill levels, from beginner to Tour pro.

The i200, i210 (like the i15, i20 before them) I think have too large a head size which makes them a bit bulky to swing-square at impact.

Ping's smaller head models, the iblade and Blueprint, don't have enough cavity back perimeter weighting to make them good for lesser skilled players.

 

 

No idea where you are going with this.  Saying the S line is good for beginners yet the iblade and blueprints aren't good for 'lesser skilled players'...   Who has less skill than a beginner...  Also, 2 of the best ball strikers on Tour when the I20's were launched gamed them in Mahan and Westwood.  Hell Mahan actually gamed a 3-LW set...  The i20s are one of the best iron releases of the past 15 years and is far more playable for a 'beginner' than the S series.

 

Too much poor opinion towards the i line vs. reality given the Tour play of the 200/210 models.

[Fairway14]

13 minutes ago, gwelfgulfer said:

 

 

No idea where you are going with this.  Saying the S line is good for beginners yet the iblade and blueprints aren't good for 'lesser skilled players'...   Who has less skill than a beginner

Yes, Ping's S 59, 58, 57, 56, 55 had a relatively small head (easy to swing-square at impact for all skill level players) and also offered perimeter weighting (which provide a bit of distance and accuracy forgiveness for mishit shots).

The above two design factors (found in all the S-series irons) made them suitable for all skill level players, and in keeping with Ping founder Karsten Solheim's convictions.

Karsten's heirs have mostly abandoned his convictions and the company now follows what other companies in the industry do, which is try and "categorize" designs-models for different skill level players. The result is some Ping models (iblade, Blueprint) with little to no perimeter weighting, and the rest of the line (i and G series) with too large of a head size. Karsten's good sense concept of one model suitable for all skill level players was abandoned by his heirs.

[setter02]

^ I'm not sure you you can ever say something has too big a head sized when compared to an Eye2 or the likes...  Sure they had a more versatile sole, but they are massive and pretty dam ugly...

 

As for saying that they've abandoned something, give you're head a shake, companies can't stay stagnant and just produce the same thing every year (unless you are a PV1...) and have people think it's the best thing out there.  If they did, then we would have more of the irons you don't seem to like and think aren't very good...

[Fairway14]

1 hour ago, gwelfgulfer said:

^ I'm not sure you you can ever say something has too big a head sized when compared to an Eye2 or the likes...  Sure they had a more versatile sole, but they are massive and pretty dam ugly...

 

As for saying that they've abandoned something, give you're head a shake, companies can't stay stagnant and just produce the same thing every year (unless you are a PV1...) and have people think it's the best thing out there.  If they did, then we would have more of the irons you don't seem to like and think aren't very good...

 

The Eye 2, just like the Karsten I,2,3 etc... which preceded the Eye 2, had a relatively thin top line as well as a significant upward slope from heel-to-toe. This shape was a design conviction of Karsten Solheim, and it offered both aesthetic and functional benefits.

 Sadly, Karsten's heirs abandoned his good sense head shape in favor of the relatively boxy head shapes common within the industry.

[blueonblack]

3 hours ago, Fairway14 said:

 

If you've enjoyed playing the i20's I expect you will like i200 or i210.

I liked playing my S56 very much, but found the head size of the i20 so large they were counter productive to consistently good shot making, so I sold the i20's and went back to playing S56.

Ping's S-series (S59, 58, 57, 56, 55) were a good balance of relatively small head size yet cavity back forgiveness. I think Ping should have kept this style club within their line, because it was suitable for all skill levels, from beginner to Tour pro.

The i200, i210 (like the i15, i20 before them) I think have too large a head size which makes them a bit bulky to swing-square at impact.

Ping's smaller head models, the iblade and Blueprint, don't have enough cavity back perimeter weighting to make them good for lesser skilled players.

I'm interpreting the i210 to be the next refinement from the S-55? Did they make them larger? I haven't seen the i210 in person.

The G710 has just enough of the Eye 2 in there to recognize it as a Ping. I totally agree on the smaller heads of the S series being almost as forgiving as the i20's with much more shot making capability. That was an easy choice for me.

 

My first Pings were the i3 O-size and the head size was still about the same as the S series, but the offset was helpful in my development in squaring the face and a little higher apex.

[Fairway14]

12 minutes ago, blueonblack said:

I'm interpreting the i210 to be the next refinement from the S-55? Did they make them larger? I haven't seen the i210 in person.

The G710 has just enough of the Eye 2 in there to recognize it as a Ping. I totally agree on the smaller heads of the S series being almost as forgiving as the i20's with much more shot making capability. That was an easy choice for me.

 

My first Pings were the i3 O-size and the head size was still about the same as the S series, but the offset was helpful in my development in squaring the face and a little higher apex.

 

i200 , i210 is significantly larger head size than S59-58-57-56-55.

I have not swung a G710, but the G700 was one of the most good sense head shapes Ping has had since the Eye 2. Specifically, the G700 head was relatively shallow top-to-bottom, not tall faced-clunky like i15, i20, i200, i210. The downside to G700 was the hollow body-flex face produced inconsistent carry distance.

 

[Meerkat213]

I played the i20s for two years and loved them. The forged bug bit me and I played Mizunos for 2 years. Now, I’m 1 year into my i210 experience and it’s been great. They really are just good at everything: performance, forgiveness, looks, etc. I also have a set of s55 irons and those clubs are probably my favorite irons to mess around with but my 210s are what I play when I want to shoot a score. 

[Blingy]

G'day,  while I've never owned i210 I have used almost every other set of ping i series irons from original eye to eye2, i3, i10, i15,i20, i25, iE1, i200. There were a few changes that ping made when the moved from i25 to the iE1 that made the transition a bit more like changing to another brand rather than the normal i series progression (length was different,  color coding changed, they changed from CFS to AWT stock shaft etc).  But dont get me wrong, the iE1s were great as are the I200s.  I did demo the i210 when they were first released and they felt fantastic but I found I was hitting them almost a club further than my i200s which meant I would have a big gap between my pw and my other wedges.  As my current gaps were good I decided not to go to the i210 as I really liked the i200s. 

 

I'll be keen to see the next i and s series release.

[Nixhex524]

i210s are larger in the long irons, but as you get down to 8,9,PW, there isnt too much difference from the S line.  The S line seemed to be somewhat of a progressive head size throughout the set but larger in the scoring irons.  For a players CB, the S56 and 55 (especially the 55) are pretty friendly, I would say not much harder to hit than the i20/25 honestly.  BUT, the just in forgiveness in the 200/210 is very noticeable.

[Fairway14]

1 hour ago, Nixhex524 said:

i210s are larger in the long irons, but as you get down to 8,9,PW, there isnt too much difference from the S line.  The S line seemed to be somewhat of a progressive head size throughout the set but larger in the scoring irons.  For a players CB, the S56 and 55 (especially the 55) are pretty friendly, I would say not much harder to hit than the i20/25 honestly.  BUT, the just in forgiveness in the 200/210 is very noticeable.

 

My perspective is that if 100 guys each played a dozen rounds with a set of S55, and a dozen rounds with a set of i210, half of those guys might find that they strike more quality-square-contact shots with the S55 set.

 

[blueonblack]

Super interesting. Made the wrong assumption the i210 were the "new" S-55 from the photos. Thought they mostly made adaptations to the elastomer insert by the description, and making that softer. 5 years away, and I'm suddenly lost with the Ping lineup?

World..... upside down.... right now.

 

I guess the S-56/S-55 were that good and they had to do something "different?"

 

[Smokey227]

I may be in the minority but I think the i20 and i25 are the best irons Ping has made since the eye2.

 

i played the i20 from right after their release until the release of the i200. I loved the look and feel of the i200s and ordered them immediately. I really liked the long iron but didn’t get along with the short irons as well. The i200s launched higher and spun less for me and I was just inconsistent with the short irons. 
 

I bounced around on some irons after that and bought a used set of i25s off eBay planning to take them with me when I travel for work. I took them out on the course just to test them and they haven’t left the bag since. They are a few yards shorter than the i200s but they are so much more consistent for me. 
 

I’ve only tried the 4 iron in the i210 and it seemed to look and perform same as the i200. Maybe a little softer. 

[blueonblack]

For me, i3 with the weight behind the face still allowed a little more face angle manipulation through impact and just a more natural feel of the head rotating through especially with the lesser offset of the S series. i20's I could feel the perimeter weight, and the COG back behind the shaft moreso. The MOI/forgiveness is there for sure, but if you don't necessarily want that help, it feels like it "gets in the way" to me. The i3 Osize was so much thinner in the soles alone, for example, even compared to the i5 which I also had, that they almost lost their "i" moniker back then already? Like they became i series "wide sole." The turf interaction you get is different with the i and S. More skimming/planing with the i20. (Sorry, my reference points are old now.)

 

I think thinner yet forgiving soles, and doing more perimeter weighting akin to the i20.

i3 with more forgiveness would be superb. I'm on board. i300. i300WS.

 

Ping. Hire me. I'm available.

Edited September 26, 2020 by blueonblack

[Nixhex524]

14 minutes ago, Fairway14 said:

 

My perspective is that if 100 guys each played a dozen rounds with a set of S55, and a dozen rounds with a set of i210, half of those guys might find that they strike more quality-square-contact shots with the S55 set.

 

 

That is possible, and would depend on the skill level obviously.  Having played both, I can only offer my opinion that as good as the S55 are (and I loved them), the i210 are WAY easier, especially in the long irons and that's where it counts IMO.  I held some i25s up against the i210 today and 4i to 4i, the i25 is slightly shorter heel to toe but they look almost the same in every other way (besides finish obviously).  Top line and offset are very similar.  I didn't want to believe in a "GI" iron as I have been playing well with my Icons, but dang, one round out and I am sold.  Watching a few of my buddies move to more forgiving irons (P790, 585) I started asking what I am trying to accomplish here.  There is plenty of tech out there, may as well use it!

[blueonblack]

Used to be S, i, and G. Sometimes something special like an Anser Forged, etc.

I thought the lineup used to be a little more clearly delineated as I view it now? Players, semi-GI, GI.

I know their overall shapes over the years, so you can still kinda pick them out....or so I thought! That i200 "got" me.

But I just need time to go look around more!

More I think about it though....S-55 short irons with i20 long irons. Is that what they are trying to be? If so, skip the i300 series. LOL!

Or DO we???.....

Earlier in my playing days....i20 no question. I wanted that help. I chose the O-size back then even when the pro said I could do the i3 blade version if I wanted to. I need more help, as I stop at the 5i now.

Edited September 26, 2020 by blueonblack

[Fairway14]

1 minute ago, Nixhex524 said:

 

That is possible, and would depend on the skill level obviously.  Having played both, I can only offer my opinion that as good as the S55 are (and I loved them), the i210 are WAY easier, especially in the long irons and that's where it counts IMO.  I held some i25s up against the i210 today and 4i to 4i, the i25 is slightly shorter heel to toe but they look almost the same in every other way (besides finish obviously).  Top line and offset are very similar.  I didn't want to believe in a "GI" iron as I have been playing well with my Icons, but dang, one round out and I am sold.  Watching a few of my buddies move to more forgiving irons (P790, 585) I started asking what I am trying to accomplish here.  There is plenty of tech out there, may as well use it!

 

You are echoing the commentary trotted out by every major brand,  golf retail floor sales employees, and the most common perception of golf discussion forum participants.

But I think the only true test is for a guy to play a dozen rounds with each and see for himself the shot making and scoring results. If you've played lots of rounds with both S55 and i20 then you know which model worked best for you.

These days I don't see too many people swinging 2, 3, or 4 irons. If a player has not found a 19* to 23* hybrid that he strikes consistently better than a long iron, especially from less than ideal lies, then he probably has not tried hard enough to find one.

[Nixhex524]

4 minutes ago, Fairway14 said:

 

You are echoing the commentary trotted out by every major brand,  golf retail floor sales employees, and the most common perception of golf discussion forum participants.

But I think the only true test is for a guy to play a dozen rounds with each and see for himself the shot making and scoring results. If you've played lots of rounds with both S55 and i20 then you know which model worked best for you.

These days I don't see too many people swinging 2, 3, or 4 irons. If a player has not found a 19* to 23* hybrid that he strikes consistently better than a long iron, especially from less than ideal lies, then he probably has not tried hard enough to find one.

I will say, the S55 were better than the i20 for me.  I play to a 3 index currently and consider myself a better than average ball striker with the irons.  I had some really good days with the S55 and so far only one round with the i210.  I didnt feel like I mishit a single i210 yesterday.  I can't remember when I had a round like that in any recent history.  The 4i was actually fun to hit, I had no reservations and there is the issue... guys playing hybrids are doing so MOSTLY in part because they can elevate it easier than a 4i.  Personally I prefer the iron as I think it is far easier to work and flight and most of the better players I play with play long irons instead of hybrids.  I just recently bought a Utility iron to replace my Hogan Icon 4 iron, it's small and intimidating.  With the i210, I do not need to do that.  No reason and that's why these companies design sets like this nowadays.  The 55s are great, but I can see why someone may not want to play the 4 iron in that set... The i20 is more forgiving but nowhere near as good as the i210, Ping just improved the i line which is their job, which is also why I am echoing what they claim because they do exactly what they were designed to do.  Again, not taking anything away from the 20 or 25s but in the case of the 210, they are a step forward.

[Fairway14]

30 minutes ago, Nixhex524 said:

  The 4i was actually fun to hit, I had no reservations and there is the issue... guys playing hybrids are doing so MOSTLY in part because they can elevate it easier than a 4i.  Personally I prefer the iron as I think it is far easier to work and flight and most of the better players I play with play long irons instead of hybrids.  

 

I just don't observe many players having a need to swing 4-iron. It's rare that a par 3 is of such long yardage to require a 4-iron. It's rare that a par 4 is so long that a 4-iron is needed for the approach to the green. If a long driver has as little a 4-iron to reach a par 5 green he is probably playing too far forward of tee blocks, but that's a separate subject. From where on the golf course are the long iron guys you play with swinging those 2, 3, 4-irons ?

The significant advantage of a 22* or 23* loft hybrid is that it gives a player a club from which to hit long yardage shots from less than ideal lies, such as sloped or within the grassy rough. 

[Nixhex524]

27 minutes ago, Fairway14 said:

 

I just don't observe many players having a need to swing 4-iron. It's rare that a par 3 is of such long yardage to require a 4-iron. It's rare that a par 4 is so long that a 4-iron is needed for the approach to the green. If a long driver has as little a 4-iron to reach a par 5 green he is probably playing too far forward of tee blocks, but that's a separate subject. From where on the golf course are the long iron guys you play with swinging those 2, 3, 4-irons ?

The significant advantage of a 22* or 23* loft hybrid is that it gives a player a club from which to hit long yardage shots from less than ideal lies, such as sloped or within the grassy rough. 

A few of the courses in my area have longish Par 3s, in the 190 - 200 yd range.  Obviously this varies with pin and tee placements but it is not uncommon.  We also have some longish par 4s in the 475-500 range and short par 5s in the similar length...  Shortish par 4s in the 330-350 range can also call for a long iron off the tee for placement... it just depends on the course but I have use for my long irons just about every round I play.  I play from our blue tees which is in the 6400-6700 range typically.  

[High Draws Low Fades]

1 hour ago, Fairway14 said:

 

I just don't observe many players having a need to swing 4-iron. It's rare that a par 3 is of such long yardage to require a 4-iron. It's rare that a par 4 is so long that a 4-iron is needed for the approach to the green. If a long driver has as little a 4-iron to reach a par 5 green he is probably playing too far forward of tee blocks, but that's a separate subject. From where on the golf course are the long iron guys you play with swinging those 2, 3, 4-irons ?

The significant advantage of a 22* or 23* loft hybrid is that it gives a player a club from which to hit long yardage shots from less than ideal lies, such as sloped or within the grassy rough. 

I’d have to disagree. I’m a +1 and end up needing it all the time. 215 yard par 3, 2nd shot on a long 480 yard par 4, 2nd shot into short risk reward par 5s, as well as a safe shot for when I can’t reach a par 5 just to name a few instances. I usually play from 6800 to 7200 yards at elevation. For me the 4 iron is much easier to hit straight than a hybrid and easier to flight etc. I’d also much rather hit 4 iron from out of the rough or a less than ideal lie. But yeah, I’m sure hybrid makes sense for plenty of players, just not everyone. 

Edited September 27, 2020 by High Draws Low Fades

[blueonblack]

I used to be "long" and liked the 20 and 23 degree in some hybrids. Played the Idea Pros for most of that time, so those are pretty small as far as a hybrid.

But remember how many tour guys and champions tour guys played smaller hybrids like that? Have some i25's that aren't helping me a ton anymore.

But I was at the height of my own game, long off the tee, and still employed hybrids plenty. Sometimes the 4i would go back in for certain par 3's that the hybrids were not proving accurate enough. But for risk/reward par 5's, I hit a ton in two using those hybrids for more control than a 3W in doing so.

It was always hard to make that "switch" for me from iron to hybrid, wherever that was in the bag. Mostly right/left control issues moreso than distance with the hybrids. Love them as another short game club(s) as well.

[Meerkat213]

Just for giggles...here’s the s55 vs the i210 when I was testing them out. Pretty similar but the 210 is a more forgiving club. 

[NRJyzr]

20 minutes ago, Meerkat213 said:

Just for giggles...here’s the s55 vs the i210 when I was testing them out. Pretty similar but the 210 is a more forgiving club. 

 

The MOI as measured by GolfWorks... S55 MOI is 12.9, i210 is 14.957.

 

That CG of the i210 is fairly high, though.  Can see where it could be an issue for some players.

 

 

Edited September 27, 2020 by NRJyzr

[barnum1]

Lots of information here, thanks!

 

Did I understand this correctly: i210 are more forgiving than i20?