One thing I’ve learned over the years trying/testing/reviewing irons is you just have to wait a while before making up your mind. Like Diana Ross and the Supremes sang, you can’t hurry love.

George (beruo), editor.

Pros: Feel, feel and feel. Performance and looks are awesome to Cons: You can see the back of the sole from address on the 3 and 4 iron Bottom Line: This is a hit from Ping! At first glance the i20 Irons seem to be a departure from the old i-lines. These modifications include the vertical custom tuned port (CTP), as well the stabilization bar in the cavity. This is a carryover from PING’s S56s.

Just a few short days after PING announced the G20 irons, interest immediately shifted over to what the i20s might hold. With nothing more than a low-quality Ti. Vo’d screencap of a wedge on a desktop and lots of hearsay led WRXers to speculate on the plans of PING. PING brought a group of us down to clarify the rumors, and to let us know what was in store for us. The buzz was justified, I have to tell you. PING now allows Golf to use the site because of the amount of interest. WRX displays the i20 range!

At first glance, the i20 irons are an obvious departure from the i-lines of the past. Most notable of these improvements are the horizontal custom tuning port (CTP), and cavity stabilization bars. These features were carried over from the PING S56s. The stabilization bars help improve feel along with a thicker face in the impact area, while the vertical CTP construction allows for a lower center of gravity and different options for weight positioning.

PING’s mixed set concept is another feature that makes the i20s stand out. As was the case with the i15s, the i20s are noticeably longer heel to toe in the long irons, gradually decreasing in size to the wedges. PING increased the thickness of the top rail on the long irons and made it thinner in the wedges. This dramatically increases the MOI at the most critical places for golfers.

Along with the tungsten weighting in the toe, these three features increase the MOI across the horizontal axis by about 3% throughout the set, and between 4% (PW) and 12% (3iron) more vertical axis forgiveness over the i15 irons. This is significant considering the irons’ smaller headweight and larger size than drivers. The i20s give golfers the ability to pitch a wedge almost as well as S56s. They also have a 3-iron that’s easier to hit that the S56s.

Tony Covey PING’s G20 driver would be a better choice for most golfers, especially if fairways are a priority to you. The distance gain offered by the PING G20 driver might not be worth the sacrifice of accuracy. I certainly wouldn’t fault anyone for dropping the i20 in your bag today.”

The latest step in My. Golf. Spy’s ULTIMATE REVIEW System. Our firm has always supported custom fitting. (I might have implied that off the rack was for chumps). As our partners in the game of golf have begun to support and accept our system, it now allows us to more accurately fit the testers we have tested for our equipment. Custom fitting seems like a natural progression in our review process.

For this review we worked with PING to ensure the best fit for our pool of testers. Though 2 of our test samples are basically off-the-rack models (sometimes off-the-rack does actually work), PING had the opportunity to provide any combination of shaft and i20 head. We expect that custom fittings will be a major part of most club testing we do as we develop the ULTIMATE REVIEW system. Our belief is that golfers should not buy pre-made clubs.

This is what PING would like you to know:

Aerodynamic for Distance The crown reduces drag to maximize clubhead speed, ball velocity and distance.

A long and forgiving tungsten weight adds to the MOI. It positions the CG to facilitate low-spin, accurate driving and precise trajectories.

Classic Shape An elegant 460cc head design that inspires confidence from golfers of any ability.

How We Tested For our test of the PING i20 driver we collected detailed performance data from 4 testers who were asked to hit a series of shots on our 3Track Equipped simulators from about. Golf Tark’s Indoor Golf was used for testing. It is a state-of the art indoor facility in Saratoga Springs. Below the performance section, you can view detailed data on each shot. This information is the base for our final performance score. Testers were asked to rate PING’s i20 Driver as well as provide feedback regarding their subjective criteria (sound, touch, perception forgiveness, likelihood of buying), and LOP (likelihood-of-purchase). This data is the basis for our overall subjective score. It was tested using stiff drivers (9.5 and 10.5 degrees) and with x-stiff and flex drivers. The PING Drivers received the PING Driver TFC 707D (9.5 and 10.5 Stiff), and the PING Driver TFC169D Tour (8.25 and 8.5 respectively).

Our updated testing protocols were used for the Ping i20 driver tests. Full details of our testing and scoring procedures can be found here . Scores are determined using a point system. Points are calculated per shot by using the formula distance minus accuracy. Each tester has been given a theoretical maximum score based on their previous tests. The percentage of that maximum theoretical score that is achieved by each individual tester represents the individual score for the PING i20 driver. This is the average performance score of all our testers. Because only 4 testers were used for this test, no scores were dropped before calculating the overall score.

As an FYI, this evaluation was only conducted with 4 testers. Tim has been out of the season due to injury. Our senior tester also did not take part because the loft/flex options in the PING I20 range do not offer a good fit.

Since our 2 shortest players did not take part in this review it shouldn’t surprise that their overall averages have been higher than any prior review. All four of our testers ran an average total distance of 270.80 yards (256.17 miles carry). Noteworthy is that all 4 testers achieved distance totals that are above their historical averages, while two of our testers put up some of the biggest numbers they’ve ever achieved. It suffices to state that, when it comes to distances, the PING 20 is right at or close the top of all time’s longest list.

The PING TFC707D, contrary to what golfers might assume, is actually lower launching among the two shafts for the i20. (The Project Xblack is the other). Although our testers are generally low-ball hitters in general, most posted vertical launch angles slightly higher than average. Nick has been having amazing runs of low bullets lately, so it was great to see him getting closer to the optimum value, though there is still a lot to do.

As a group our testers averaged 11.44 degrees of vertical launch, with 13.27 on the high end and 9.69 on the low. PING recommended that I use the XStiff shaft for my specific case. This is to reduce my runaway spins.

It doesn’t matter if it does, but I spent time with our tester to get him ready for the real thing. He carried the PING 20 almost 330 yards in one swing; it was the longest distance he could hit with any driver…and possibly the longest time I have ever seen the simulator.

Accuracy and spin. This should not surprise anybody. The i20 is a driver that was created with the top player in mind. But it doesn’t perform as well as other drivers. The average distance that our four testers missed was 17.65 yards. Our best tester (and the lowest handicap golfer) was accurate by 15.11 yards. While our worst tester was accurate by 21.25 yard. The chart below shows that consistency and grouping have not been as effective as in other tests.

The accuracy numbers, however, are quite impressive. I mean…17.65…that’s solid, and we’re talking about a driver that’s not really intended for mid-high handicap golfers.

Spin is perhaps the most intriguing of all the numbers we looked at with the G20. Our tests show that PING tried to improve the fit of our golfers. (note that our fitting recommendations are based only on past results and not an in-person fitting). This resulted is spin numbers that are actually lower than expected. Our testers had a total of 2460.07 RPM of backspin. However, one tester managed more than 2000 RPM while another tester was at an astounding low 1678. This suggests that perhaps a soft shaft or a tip with less friction may be of some use to him.

PING is another company that has had its drivers struggle with subjective things. I think design elements have a lot to do with this. PING is one of the best-known gamer drivers. And there’s no denying that they have some aesthetic concerns. PING can be proud that they didn’t jump on the square bus and get involved in the triangular stuff. The designs were not necessarily traditional but they are still largely conventional. However, some of them may not be as beautiful as others.

Looks, It wasn’t that long ago that my comment was something along the lines “If anyone has made a more beautiful golf club than PING,” Actually I probably said that before the Anser Forged irons came out, and after seeing the Ping i20 , and listening to my tester’s feedback, you’ll never hear me say such a thing again.

Comparing with our previous two PING drivers (G20 & G15), the i20 has a more sophisticated, traditional look…just a whole lot more pleasing to the eye. Its matte black crown is what makes the i20 stand out (remember Cleveland Hi-Bore). Although companies have talked about contrast in the past, matte crowns completely remove glare from shadows and glare. This finish is unlike any other. The finish is also very attractive.

PING’s aligning aid is the only thing that can take down this crown. Though perhaps more effective than most at its intended purpose (actually providing alignment rather than simply promoting the brand), it has never been the most popular with our testers. Quite honestly, I am slightly surprised they put it on what is offered as the driver of choice for better players.

The sole is largely smooth with only “PING and “i20” disrupting the flow of the majority of the surface area. Two tungsten sole weights are visible towards the rear. Visually they break things up a bit, which is good. The visible technology they provide is something golfers love, even if you don’t want it to be there.

Final, Project X Black shafts, as well as the TFC707D stock shafts, make for a very striking black-onblack design that is nearly always liked by our testers. My honest opinion is that I believe the entire set of elements is perfect. But, you can get more guys in a space and they will all argue that Giselle Bundchen should be considered a pork.

The overall rating of sound and touch was high, but perceptions can vary greatly. A tester believed he hadn’t hit it very well. We are wrong. One of our testers said he felt the driver was a bit too harsh and loud. To my mind, he might be correct. This is the reason I love the sound quality and feel of PING i20.

For me, the PING I20 has the greatest feeling and probably the best sounding driver that we have ever heard. Really. It’s amazing how the i20 feels when it misses that sweet spot even a tiny bit. The feeling changes drastically…it becomes a lot harsher and more clanky. This is the only thing you can be certain of. That is something I also love. It’s not surprising that a ball wasn’t well-struck is causing surprises. That’s what feedback is all for.

And really, apart from massive distance, shouldn’t there be some reward for perfect contact? You can have perfect contact with your PING i20.