Tips for creating a Combo set (iBlades)

[jmo15]

I am fairly new to golf equipment and currently swinging the Ping iBlade black dot. I struggle to hit the 4-6 iron solid, so was looking into a set of 4-6 irons that are easier to hit to go with my iBlades 7-PW. Do y'all have any recommendations of which Ping irons would go best with the iBlades? Also, I tend to stand taller hitting longer irons, so would it be a good idea to get something the like the blue dots which are 1* upright? Also, if you guys have any other tips on creating a combo set, it would be very helpful. Thanks!

[lefthack]

I would look at the G series. I don't know Ping lofts, so that might be an issue. But usually when building a blended set, your loft and lie matter, offset might matter, toplines might matter. If the clubs are too different, it could be more issue than it's worth. But if the lofts are close and the look at address works for you, then game on.

 

My set is 3-6 cavity back, 7-PW blade. The blades are 1 degree weaker, but my gaps work.

[jmo15]

48 minutes ago, lefthack said:

I would look at the G series. I don't know Ping lofts, so that might be an issue. But usually when building a blended set, your loft and lie matter, offset might matter, toplines might matter. If the clubs are too different, it could be more issue than it's worth. But if the lofts are close and the look at address works for you, then game on.

 

My set is 3-6 cavity back, 7-PW blade. The blades are 1 degree weaker, but my gaps work.

Thanks for the help. I also saw in another post someone mentioned a MPF chart which it looks like shows how easy each Ping club is to hit. So I looked for something rated slightly easier than the iBlades and came up with the i200 (1* stronger) and the Ping i E1 (.5* stronger).

Is the lie angle the same throughout your cavity back and blades?

[lefthack]

The lies are the same between the two club heads, yes. Lies I don't think will be an issue as much as loft and possibly weight. The weight on mine is wonky because there is only a 2g difference between the CB 6 and the blade 7, but 6g between each head type. I don't really notice, but I also only have 3 rounds with them so far.

[teedub21]

Ping i210 or i200 would be the natural progression. Going from an iBlade to a G series club would be pretty jarring. 

[PEI_Golfer]

As mentioned above, the I200s or I210s will blend in nicely.

[nosedive32]

Ping allows ordering irons in 3 loft configurations so adjusting loft doesn't compromise other aspects of design. If you went I210 here are your loft options for 4-6 iron compared to standard loft for I Blade.

 

I Blade 4=23.5 5=27 6=30.5 7=34

 

I210 Std 4=22.5 5=26 6=29.5

 

I210 Retro 4=24.5 5=28 6=31.5

 

So your two options come down to 1 degree stronger or weaker without further adjustment to alter offset bounce etc. 

[mokedaddy]

For me the i200 matched the launch and spin of the iblades better then the i210.

 

4-6 i200, 7-pw iblades.  Power spec lofts.

Edited April 6, 2021 by mokedaddy

[Hollywoodtlb]

Go find yourself a fitter/builder who knows what he's doing and he can recommend the right club and bend current and future games so you have the right gapping.

[Pepperturbo]

Keep in mind, loft, lie, offset and bounce specs should be as close to the same as possible.  For that you should probably stick with Ping.  Mixing and matching those irons, with shafts and matching swing weights is difficult.  Finding a club builder that has the experience to help is another issue. 

 

That's the reason most OEM's don't make blended sets; too many variables have to align with the stars to make them blend.  To that point, and because golf is hard enough, I don't believe blended irons is the best choice for most people.

 

Titleist set out to make the 620 series blend, and they did a wonderful job of it.  I have both MBs and CB sets, and change the blend in my bag occasionally.  MBs and CBs regardless of number, feel like the same clubs.  Only hard differences are no cavity (playability) vs tungsten in 3 & 4 and cavity backs (greater playability.)

[jmo15]

3 hours ago, nosedive32 said:

Ping allows ordering irons in 3 loft configurations so adjusting loft doesn't compromise other aspects of design. If you went I210 here are your loft options for 4-6 iron compared to standard loft for I Blade.

 

I Blade 4=23.5 5=27 6=30.5 7=34

 

I210 Std 4=22.5 5=26 6=29.5

 

I210 Retro 4=24.5 5=28 6=31.5

 

So your two options come down to 1 degree stronger or weaker without further adjustment to alter offset bounce etc. 

Thanks for the help. I just found out about MPF ratings a couple days ago, so I was using the Ping MPF chart and noticed that the i210s have a lower MPF (338) than the i200s (474). This seems pretty considerable since the iBlade MPF is 430. I could be wrong because I am not too familiar with the MPF chart, but would the better option for me be the i200s since I am looking for something easier to hit? I understand that getting fit is probably the answer for all of this, but I don't think they have these older clubs readily available at the golf stores for me to hit. So I am trying to do a fitting without actually swinging them lol. Thanks for the help nosedive32

[jmo15]

2 hours ago, mokedaddy said:

For me the i200 matched the launch and spin of the iblades better then the i210.

 

4-6 i200, 7-pw iblades.  Power spec lofts.

This is the exact setup I had in mind. Thanks.

[jmo15]

1 hour ago, Hollywoodtlb said:

Go find yourself a fitter/builder who knows what he's doing and he can recommend the right club and bend current and future games so you have the right gapping.

I was thinking of doing that, but figured they wouldn't have these older clubs readily available to test out. Granted I am fairly new to golf equipment and have only ever been to Golf Galaxy and PGA Superstore, and I have never seen these clubs there. They have older clubs in the used section, but I would have to be lucky for them to have i200/i210s there. Thanks Hollywoodtlb

[jmo15]

50 minutes ago, Pepperturbo said:

Keep in mind, loft, lie, offset and bounce specs should be as close to the same as possible.  For that you should probably stick with Ping.  Mixing and matching those irons, with shafts and matching swing weights is difficult.  Finding a club builder that has the experience to help is another issue. 

 

That's the reason most OEM's don't make blended sets; too many variables have to align with the stars to make them blend.  To that point, and because golf is hard enough, I don't believe blended irons is the best choice for most people.

 

Titleist set out to make the 620 series blend, and they did a wonderful job of it.  I have both MBs and CB sets, and change the blend in my bag occasionally.  MBs and CBs regardless of number, feel like the same clubs.  Only hard differences are no cavity (playability) vs tungsten in 3 & 4 and cavity backs (greater playability.)

Thank you for the insight. I was thinking of getting 1 degree upright for 4-6 since I tend to stand taller, but I understand now why lie should be kept consistent between clubs. Thanks for the help. I am for sure going to stick with Ping and through my research, have noticed many people playing the i200/i210 and iBlade combo so I would think they would fit together pretty well. The lofts in the i200s are 1* stronger than the iBlades which I believe would be fine since I struggle for distance with my long irons (4-6). Thanks Pepperturbo

[nilopol]

I have contemplated this many times.  I play iblade 5-w and use a older i20 4 hybrid at 23*.  But one option although you would have the lowest iron same # as your highest iblade would be to look at the i500 range.   

[jmo15]

1 hour ago, nilopol said:

I have contemplated this many times.  I play iblade 5-w and use a older i20 4 hybrid at 23*.  But one option although you would have the lowest iron same # as your highest iblade would be to look at the i500 range.   

I am looking for a more forgiving 4-6 iron. I just learned about this MPF chart the other day so I am not sure exactly what I am looking at, but I assumed the higher the MPF rating, the easier the club is to hit. The i500 is much lower than the iBlade, but if you look at MOI which I associated with forgiveness based on some quick google searches, is much higher on the i500. Am I understanding this right? I just narrowed my focus at the i200 solely based on MPF. 

[lefthack]

Oh hey, I like the look of that i500. I haven't looked real hard at Ping. I think if you can get the lofts right, that could be a great option.

[Hollywoodtlb]

2 hours ago, jmo15 said:

I am looking for a more forgiving 4-6 iron. I just learned about this MPF chart the other day so I am not sure exactly what I am looking at, but I assumed the higher the MPF rating, the easier the club is to hit. The i500 is much lower than the iBlade, but if you look at MOI which I associated with forgiveness based on some quick google searches, is much higher on the i500. Am I understanding this right? I just narrowed my focus at the i200 solely based on MPF. 

It’s kind of short sighted to pick an iron based off of a chart like this. The i500 is very similar to the P790, so I’m surprised to see them in different categories. 

[krod10359]

On 4/5/2021 at 10:50 AM, jmo15 said:

I am fairly new to golf equipment and currently swinging the Ping iBlade black dot. I struggle to hit the 4-6 iron solid, so was looking into a set of 4-6 irons that are easier to hit to go with my iBlades 7-PW. Do y'all have any recommendations of which Ping irons would go best with the iBlades? Also, I tend to stand taller hitting longer irons, so would it be a good idea to get something the like the blue dots which are 1* upright? Also, if you guys have any other tips on creating a combo set, it would be very helpful. Thanks!

Just hit the ball better 

[nilopol]

There is a thread that I have seen in the past debating this MPF score especially with i500.  Lots of it got technical with VCOG coming into the calculation.   I tried to ignore it and focus on how they actually play in my hands.  I would suggest getting maybe one iron vs a set of long irons in any of your choosing and then see how that goes.  For me, I start to loose consistency and ball speed on irons below 5 iron, therefore I'm still confident with the iblade 5 iron, but am still loving my i20 rescue 23* in my 4 iron spot.  As when I'm in trouble,  I have option of hooding my 5 iron or punching out with my i20 rescue.   My trouble always comes from the tee and the Driver.  

[jmo15]

The more I read into MPF, the more I think it does not matter at all Haha

[NRJyzr]

15 hours ago, jmo15 said:

The more I read into MPF, the more I think it does not matter at all Haha

 

The final MPF score doesn't.  But the details that make up the score have a great deal of value.

 

If you miss on the toe quite a bit, you might want something with a larger C-Dimension.  If you're a shallow swinger/sweeper, you might do better with lower vertical CG clubheads; steeper swingers may (emphasis on "may") prefer somewhat higher vertical CGs.  And MOI is the measurement of actual forgiveness.

 

For vertical CG, it's worth noting the midpoint of a golfball is 0.840"

 

[jmo15]

7 hours ago, NRJyzr said:

 

The final MPF score doesn't.  But the details that make up the score have a great deal of value.

 

If you miss on the toe quite a bit, you might want something with a larger C-Dimension.  If you're a shallow swinger/sweeper, you might do better with lower vertical CG clubheads; steeper swingers may (emphasis on "may") prefer somewhat higher vertical CGs.  And MOI is the measurement of actual forgiveness.

 

For vertical CG, it's worth noting the midpoint of a golfball is 0.840"

 

I am not sure what vertical CG but is that the VCOG numbers on the chart? Which VCOG number should I be looking at here?

[NRJyzr]

43 minutes ago, jmo15 said:

I am not sure what vertical CG but is that the VCOG numbers on the chart? Which VCOG number should I be looking at here?

 

Yes, VCOG is what I'm referring to (vertical center of gravity).  I'd suggest the "Actual VCOG" is the number to look at.

 

The "C" Dim. number is the distance in inches from the COG to the centerline of the hosel, at the sole.

 

 

[jmo15]

5 minutes ago, NRJyzr said:

 

Yes, VCOG is what I'm referring to (vertical center of gravity).  I'd suggest the "Actual VCOG" is the number to look at.

 

The "C" Dim. number is the distance in inches from the COG to the centerline of the hosel, at the sole.

 

 

Thanks for explaining. really appreciate it.

[BrickDaFunk]

One thing that you also might need to consider is turf interaction between the two club designs in the blended set. I used to game the ie1’s, and I thought it was a great iron set, but they weren’t the best for my swing getting through the turf on the course I play.  I made the switch to iBlades, which have a thinner sole design compared to the ie1’s, and haven’t looked back.