 thinking about getting a second hand set of quality Irons. These two models spring to mind. can anyone give me their experience of them? Also can you advise of equivilent Irons of similar value? I guess this is too early to get grain flow forged Mizuno products, right? I have the Eye set on loan and they hit nice at the range. hope to get to the course tomorrow to see how they go. All feedback welcome. these clubs in good nick are going for around 100 quid. 3i -SW (grips wouldn't hurt being changed...)
|
 |
 Somchai, Madter club builder Ralph Maltby did extensive tests with all levels of golfer and found no one could really tell the difference between forged and cast clubs. A sweet shot is sweet whatever is hit. The Ping clubs are great bats, but the lofts are pretty old school so don't expect to hit them as far as modern clubs. If you like forged then use them, it makes no difference at all to the playability.
|
|
 Great clubs, but the lofts can be disconcerting if you are used to modern lofts. I got a set of the BeCu Pings and the PW was 51 whereas my previous set it was 44, and the lofts differences down the set were so that I couldnt really relate to what club I needed for each distance. Ok, if you intend to use them, worth the effort, but if its just a whim I wouldnt bother.
|
|
 The Eye2 irons were the last innovative irons Ping ever made and they are a quality piece of kit (and I'm no fan of Ping gear).
Mizuno gear is top drawer too but you'll pay a premium (even 2nd hand) for them. Can't fault them though.
If you're looking for forgiveness, lovely feel without breaking the piggy bank then a set of MacGregor 1025C's are about as good as any.
They feel as good as the Mizunos, have plenty of forgiveness, are forged and - if you shop around (eBay) etc. - you pick them up free with a gallon of petrol (almost). I saw a brand new set for 150 quid not so long ago and for that kind of money they're a steel.
Don't bother with any MacGregor stuff after the 1025 series as they were pure sh!te! The latest MT's are nice - but pricey.
The only cast iron I've hit that felt anywhere remotely as nice as a forged iron was the John Letters TXD irons, which were sublime.
|
|
 I looked at the new MacGregor MT's this morning and they are a Bloody scary looking bit of kit!
|
|
The only cast iron I've hit that felt anywhere remotely as nice as a forged iron was the John Letters TXD irons, which were sublime. Chris, I'm with you that most forged irons feel very much better than cast irons. But what is it that feels different? The answer seems to be the sound. If you were handed a load of clubs and asked to hit them, but wore earplugs you wouldn't tell the difference.
|
|
funny, I've been hitting the ping eye 7i 15 yards or so further at my local range. 185+ compared to 170ish with my Joe Yamamoto 7i. pitching wedge is same at 130. 8i same at 155ish. I like em and like the small head to look down to. bit like a blade. interesting to hear forged doesn't mean shit. I guess sweet is sweet. maybe I just like the lighter head of a modern blade? glad to hear the ping eye and eye two is a good buy thought. It will be my "breaking 90" club and take me down to "breaking 80" at which point I though a nice set of blades would look pretty in my bag when I go on tour!
|
|
any research into grain flow forged vs forged? think grain flow is the key to even energy dispersion. but then it could all still be bollox. I just hit them and liked them at the end of the day. But if Ping Eyes are the way forward, then let it be. They look very old school.
|
|
 i loved teh ping eye 2s could never afford them when i was younger had a 5 iron i got at a car bots sale. shame your n thailand or id lend u a my set of mizuno tp 18s
|
|
aawwwhhh! I'd almost come back to blighty for that offer! Cheers, bud
|
|
 If you are going for older Ping eyes make sure there is a little + on the head or else you may be buying non conforming clubs due to the grooves on the clubs.
|
|
oh, they did the square grooves, did they? any info on which models to avoid?
|
|
i used the Eye 1's for about 4 years, loving the 'old skool' look, then got some Mizuno MP57's earlier this year. my scores are tumbling on an almost weekly basis (i was struggling to break 90, now average mid-low 80's, with a 79 last week). i haven't made any radical changes to my swing, nor the frequency that i play. my new irons are more accurate for both direction and distance and i put that down to the club face and the shaft. old clubs have worn faces. of course, you can fit new shafts to the heads and re-groove the faces, but why not simply use the technology available on newer clubs? it can't all be marketing hype - some things must have improved over the last 30 years...  the sweet spot on the Eye 1's is remarkably small for a 'cavity back' (its not a true cavity back, in all honesty). yes, a pro can pick up any club and work a golf ball, but why add another complication to the game if you don't have to...?! however, i guess its all about finding whats individually right for you, and if they work, they work! me personally, i'll never go back...
|
|
Cast/Forged If you have two ingots of metal exact same size etc., one forged and one cast, if you were to tap them against an anvil you'd know immediately which was which because cast metal is "dead" metal. I've also seen that bloke's reasoning about sound etc. but personally speaking I don't think it's as cut and dry as that. If that was the case then at least some of the big named manufactures cast gear would feel nice but to me they don't, they all feel like sh!t and that includes Mizuno's cast stuff. Other folk may say that it's just an inherent dislike for cast - well that's certainly true now, however, when I first started out & was looking for a new set of irons, when I went to the various shops etc. and had all makes and model of iron shoved in my hands (Callaway, Ping, TM, Cleveland, etc.), I had no idea "who was who" when it came to being the best (a subjective term agreed). I remember being passed 6 irons: Callaway X-12, Ping I3 OS, TM RAC LT's, TM RAC OS's, Cleveland TA'?''s and the MacGregor 1025C's. All were cavity backs and all looked like "shiny pretty things". I had no preconceptions about cast or forged (I didn't even know what those terms were back then) and I didn't know which were the most expensive etc. The idea was to buy the ones I liked best, if they happened to be the most expensive, so be it. In others words *that* was about as blind a test as you could possibly get. Pure fluke that with the exception of the MacGregor (the *only* forged iron in the set - which I'd never even heard of) they all felt like sh!t??? Needless to say, I bought the MacGregor's. How the hell Letter's managed to make the TXD's feel as good as they did is a mystery, although the grip on them were like a really soft wrap grip??? As they're now owned by DG in order to churn out really crap buckety chinky cast pap I guess we'll never know.
|
|
 Somi you will find many a Ping lover who say they haven't got any better since the Ping eye2. Have a sneaky look in Lee Westwoods bag and you will see, yes you guessed it, Pingeye2 irons. If he won't change surely that says something !. I am not a ping lover but if I was I think I would get the Cu ping eye2s, they are sexy 
|
|
