Jump to content
Check out the Spin Axis Podcast! ×
Note: This thread is 5798 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

Recommended Posts

Posted
I recently purchased a set of Ping Zing 2's in great condition. I can hit the ball straighter with them, compared to my 08 Big Berthas, but the ball doesn't go nearly as far. Question is...

1. Is it the difference in loft on the clubs?

2. Difference in shafts? The Zings have the Steel JZ stiff shafts while the BB's have the steel regular flex shafts. If this is the case, can you or would you re-shaft the Zings?

3. Simply new vs. older technology?

Thanks in advance for the help!

PING K15 Driver
Tour Edge 4 Wood
PING K15 7 Wood
PING i15 Hybrid
PING Zing-2 Irons


Posted
It will be more than likely old vs. new technology. A golf publication here in the UK compared some Mizuno blades TP19 (90s blades) verses some MP67s (08/09) and the short iron distance were just about the same, but when it came to the long irons, the modern 3 iron was a full 40 yards longer on average. The club design in modern clubs changes as you go thru the set as you know, but i would assume this was not the case many years ago. Callaway irons have a tonne of perimeter weighting to launch the ball high, also something they did not go to the extreme with back then.
What I Play:
Wilson Mini Stand Bag | PING G10, 10.5°, Proforce V2 HL S | PING G5, 15°, 18°, Aldila NV 75 S | PING G5, 19°, Aldila VS Proto By You 80 S
Mizuno MX200 4-PW S | Ping Tour W 50/12 X | Ping Tour W 58/TS X | A selection of putters, all 35.5 inches.

Posted
I recently purchased a set of Ping Zing 2's in great condition. I can hit the ball straighter with them, compared to my 08 Big Berthas, but the ball doesn't go nearly as far. Question is...

Probably some of all of the above. The first thing I would do would be to contact Ping and Callaway and find out the original specs (loft/length) for each model. If you find out the Callaways are a couple degrees stronger, that might be your answer. Extra length per club could be a factor as well.

Depending on your swing, the shaft flex could have something to do with it also. Depending on your SS, you might get more out of a less stiff shaft. Usually when we use a shaft that is too stiff, we tend to lose distance and a lower trajectory. Is the ball flight the same with the Pings or is it lower? In my experience that is something that can be worked on and you can get that distance back when you get used to playing with the stiffer shaft. The technology could have some to do with it, but IMHO I would put it far down the list. Ping has always made solid clubs. The newer technology focuses more on the forgiveness and ballflight than helping distance. A friend pulls out his Eye 2's every once in a while and doens't lose anything compared to his newer Mizunos.

I will judge my rounds much more by the quality of my best shots than the acceptability of my worse ones.


Posted
Gotcha. I kinda thought that was the case, but I thought the shafts may have been a factor as well.

Thanks for the info!

PING K15 Driver
Tour Edge 4 Wood
PING K15 7 Wood
PING i15 Hybrid
PING Zing-2 Irons


Posted
The lofts between these two sets are fairly similar. You should expect to lose a little distance with the Pings, but not a ton.

Ping Zing 2's:
PW 47
9 42.5
8 38.5
7 34.5
6 30.5
5 27
4 24
3 20.5

Big Bertha:
PW 45
9 41
837
7 33
6 29
5 26
4 23
3 20

If you are hitting more accurately with the Pings, why reshaft?
Driver: r7 Superquad 9.5°
5W: Speed LD
Hybrid: Rescue TP 19°
Irons: MP-57 3i-PW
Wedges: SM Oil Can 52° and 58°Putter: Rossa Daytona

Posted
Probably some of all of the above. The first thing I would do would be to contact Ping and Callaway and find out the original specs (loft/length) for each model. If you find out the Callaways are a couple degrees stronger, that might be your answer. Extra length per club could be a factor as well.

My swing speed is slow; probably around 80...think regular flex shafts would help? If so, I assume its ok to reshaft an older club like the Zings?

PING K15 Driver
Tour Edge 4 Wood
PING K15 7 Wood
PING i15 Hybrid
PING Zing-2 Irons


Posted
The lofts between these two sets are fairly similar. You should expect to lose a little distance with the Pings, but not a ton.

They definitely are more accurate; I was just trying to get a little distance back if it was possible. I wasnt sure if tweeking the clubs (new shafts) would help a bit.

PING K15 Driver
Tour Edge 4 Wood
PING K15 7 Wood
PING i15 Hybrid
PING Zing-2 Irons


Posted
I recently purchased a set of Ping Zing 2's in great condition.

They are irons, sounds like they're doing exactly what they should be doing. The entire point of irons is to hit the ball a known and consistent distance with an end goal of putting it as close to a static target as humanly possible. If you're worried about how far that you're hitting your irons, you have the wrong end goal in mind.

Yonex Ezone Type 380 | Tour Edge Exotics CB Pro | Miura 1957 Irons | Yururi Wedges | Scotty Cameron Super Rat | TaylorMade Penta


Posted
They are irons, sounds like they're doing exactly what they should be doing. The entire point of irons is to hit the ball a known and consistent distance with an end goal of putting it as close to a static target as humanly possible. If you're worried about how far that you're hitting your irons, you have the wrong end goal in mind.

I understand, I really do like the accuracy the Zings bring; just curious as to why they are shorter in distance.

PING K15 Driver
Tour Edge 4 Wood
PING K15 7 Wood
PING i15 Hybrid
PING Zing-2 Irons


Posted
I'd say the difference in distances the OP is seeing is due primarily to the stronger lofts in the BB's. To me this shouldn't be a problem either. Enjoy the added accuracy and club up as you figure out the new yardages.

Nike Vapor Speed driver 12* stock regular shaft
Nike Machspeed 4W 17*, 7W 21* stock stiff shafts
Ping i10 irons 4-9, PW, UW, SW, LW AWT stiff flex
Titleist SC Kombi 35"; Srixon Z Star XV tour yellow

Clicgear 3.0; Sun Mountain Four 5


Posted
I'd say the difference in distances the OP is seeing is due primarily to the stronger lofts in the BB's. To me this shouldn't be a problem either. Enjoy the added accuracy and club up as you figure out the new yardages.

Don't forget the other variables in play either. Stronger lofts will make the ball go further, that's for sure. A softer shaft with a softer tip will give you more distance as well (with the trade off of not going as straight). My guess is that the OP is benefiting from the stiffer shafts as they relate to accuracy but they may be, perhaps, a touch stiff for maximum distance. When it comes to irons though, that's a trade off that should be made every time.

Yonex Ezone Type 380 | Tour Edge Exotics CB Pro | Miura 1957 Irons | Yururi Wedges | Scotty Cameron Super Rat | TaylorMade Penta


Posted
Don't forget the other variables in play either. Stronger lofts will make the ball go further, that's for sure. A softer shaft with a softer tip will give you more distance as well (with the trade off of not going as straight). My guess is that the OP is benefiting from the stiffer shafts as they relate to accuracy but they may be, perhaps, a touch stiff for maximum distance. When it comes to irons though, that's a trade off that should be made every time.

You guys bring up a great point the more I think about it. Accuracy is probably more important than distance. Thanks for the help!

PING K15 Driver
Tour Edge 4 Wood
PING K15 7 Wood
PING i15 Hybrid
PING Zing-2 Irons


Posted
My swing speed is slow; probably around 80...think regular flex shafts would help? If so, I assume its ok to reshaft an older club like the Zings?

Yes and yes. Ping will charge you about $17 per club but you might be able to get it done locally for less.

My Implements of Destruction (carried in a Hoofer Lite bag):

DRIVER: Big Bertha Diablo 10 degree draw, Aldila regular flex
FAIRWAY WOODS: G2 14 degree 3 wood & 17 degree 5 wood
IRONS: S59 3-PWWEDGES: M/B 54, 58, & 60 degree PUTTER: I Series Anser 4 (or G5i Anser, Anser 2F, or original...

Posted
Two points - I had a set of Zing 2s for about a year, I don't think I ever hit any irons as far, regardless of loft. The Zing 2 PW was the longest I've hit, as was the 6 iron. Probably had more to do with the shaft than the clubhead, they were stiff, but played softer than other stiff-shafted irons I've owned or used.

But...the distance didn't make me any better. It really means nothing when it comes to irons-two things you want are accuracy and distance control. If you know how far each iron goes who cares what it says on the sole? The last thing I would do is replace the shafts if you are repeatedly hitting them straight.

Posted
I actually played my first round with the Zing 2's today and the distance was actually pretty good. I guess the range didn't give me a really true perspective. I really love these clubs!

PING K15 Driver
Tour Edge 4 Wood
PING K15 7 Wood
PING i15 Hybrid
PING Zing-2 Irons


Posted
I play with ping eye`s and I need to remind myself constantly that my mancard is not in jepardy by simply hitting one more club than my partners ; )
  • Thumbs Up 1

cleveland Hibore xls 8.5* driver
Cleveland Hiborexls 13* 3 wood
Ping S 56
Nike oz putter


Note: This thread is 5798 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • TST Partners

    Carl's Place
    PlayBetter
    Golfer's Journal
    ShotScope
    The Stack System
    FitForGolf
    FlightScope Mevo

    Coupon Codes (save 10-20%): "IACAS" for Mevo/Stack/FitForGolf, "IACASPLUS" for Mevo+/Pro Package, and "THESANDTRAP" for ShotScope. 15% off TourStriker (no code).
  • Posts

    • Day 41, June 14.  I spent 10 minutes, half hitting W half hitting 6-iron, practice shots (indoors, off a mat, into a net)
    • Day 620 - 2026-06-14 Got some work in before and after lessons. Definitely didn't adduct my arms 130° in doing so.
    • Day 79: played 18. Shot a +5 76. Iron play was much better - 11 GIR. Hit a drive 380. Normal day. 
    • Day 14 (14 Jun 26) - Continued work with irons (8i-Pw), hard foam balls and getting consistent impact - same as previous drills - using gates for 1/2 and “simulated” course conditions on the second half.  
    • I like discussing the golf swing. Whether you call it "swing theory" or what, I like to talk about things that can expand the potential for what I know and understand. As a scientist, I like being shown that I'm wrong, too, because as I've said a bunch of times… "you're wrong and here's why" is an instant opportunity to upgrade my knowledge. I also like to help golfers, and one of the things I'm most glad to have moved away from from 15 years ago was the "Hands In" idea from S&T. Jim Waldron is often credited (probably rightly so) with explaining why so many Tour players and good players talk about "keeping their hands in front of themselves" while it appears that they're moving their arms around their bodies. From over 30 years ago: I've also got videos like… this (Instagram link here😞 I'm happy to say that I've become friends with Shaun and Mike at Athletic Motion Golf (AMG), too. I tend to get along with other smart folks who measure things, who look critically at information, who don't assume that what they thought 20 years ago holds true today. I get along with folks who look for chances to instantly upgrade their knowledge. Andy Plummer remains one of the people who does not look for these opportunities. He didn't care in early 2013 when we had evidence that the information in their S&T 2.0 DVDs was bogus, and they seemingly don't care now. They've been attacking (it's their favorite pastime) AMG in particular for the better part of a year now. There have been a few shots back at them from AMG (like… this), no doubt. But as is typical of the AMG fellas, it's with measured data. Well, recently, Andy took yet another shot at AMG: https://www.instagram.com/p/DZfHe0DuPXC/. Andy demonstrates that true power in the golf swing comes from doing stuff like this: Andy claims that the idea that the arms mostly lift and lower, while the body turns, is bogus. What golfers should be doing is using "angular velocity" to abduct and adduct their shoulders to move the club fast like this (above). Then he makes a ridiculous example of what AMG supposedly teaches, but misses by a mile. Now, it doesn't take a biomechanist to know that you can't possibly swing as Andy demonstrates. His right arm is so far around and behind him that his left arm would have to grow several feet to reach the grip of the club (or alignment stick), and a follow-through with the right arm position like that would be absolutely silly. But, it's a demonstration, so let's not read too much into it. However, I find ideas like this dangerous. Again, I like to help golfers, and in my opinion, the idea that you should abduct and adduct your arms a lot is a dangerous one. There's some adduction and abduction going on, but… it's not much. Anyway, this statement was posted: 130 degrees of dynamic range of horizontal abduction and adduction is quite the claim! I posted some comments to Andy and others, and was issued a challenge: Well, okay then. Here's Bryson's lead shoulder adduction: This measures the angle between the "virtual spine," the left shoulder, and the elbow. Bryson has a 97.34° "adduction angle" at P1, a 62.53° angle at P4, and returns to an 89.21° angle at impact. Rounding, that's a change of 34° from address to the top, and then a change (back toward the angle at address) of about 26° from the top to impact. If we want to worry about only horizontal abduction and adduction (where D = adduction and B = abduction): Left shoulder: 8.33° D, 38.74° D, 14.67° D Right shoulder: 1.03° D, 55.75° B, 14.04° B If we call moving the arms farther around you as negative, those are changes of -30.41° from P1 to P4 for the left shoulder and +24.07° from P4 to P7 for the left shoulder and -56.78° and +41.71° for the right shoulder. I have no idea on earth where he gets 130°. From the last frame of Bryson's swing where he's at 126.98°? But the lowest that number gets is 62.53°, for a range of 64.45, or less than half of the 130° claimed (plus it includes part of the swing, post-impact, that has no bearing on what the ball does). For good measure, another pretty good player: Left: 22.55° D ➡️ 33.35° D (∆ 10.8°) ➡️ 17.36° D (∆ 15.99° from P4, 5.19° from P1) Right: 15.03° D ➡️ 24.29° B (∆ 39.32°) ➡️ 1.93° D (∆ 26.22° from P4, 13.1° from P1) Of the biomechanists and experienced 3D users (on any platform), none of them have seen anything like 130° of dynamic adduction/abduction from a good player P1 to P7. And, like my little joke above, even if you go to the end of the swing, you rarely get much more than a little over halfway there. Maybe Andy is adding them? He does say in the video "and then add it to that with the lead arm." (I think that's what he says, but this isn't an additive type system.) I regularly coach golfers out of positions with a lot of adduction and abduction. I regularly work golfers away from moving their arms around their bodies. Even my juniors (the ones who have paid attention anyway! 🤣) can recite "arms = up/down, body = around." Like this: So, I don't know where this leaves us. Andy claims to have seen something on GEARS that shows 130° of dynamic adduction/abduction. I'm open to being wrong, but… I don't think I am here on this one. And, until that comes to be, I will continue to stand up for what I think is the best information, and do my best to work with golfers toward simpler, easier moves that don't get them stuck. Simpler, easier moves like the moves Tour players and great players tend to make, not complicated, difficult moves. Shaun and Mike said it in a video once where they demonstrated that the average Tour player adducts their lead arm 20° across their chest from the top to impact (P4 to P7), while the amateur often tries to go 40°. They said something like "the amateur is trying to move their arm TWICE the distance in the same amount of time as the professional athlete." Yep. The swings of great players are often easier and simpler. They are not abducting and adducting their arms much in comparison to average golfers. As a smart man once said: "Why would you teach something (abduction in this case) that bad golfers already do?" On a related note… the S&T crowd continues to be… well, who they've been as long as I've known them. Take this comment for example: I mean… I would think that this is pretty self-explanatory, but then again… I didn't think it needed explaining to begin with. P.S. As I was finishing up this article, another biomechanist replied with something so simple I hadn't even thought of it as I had immediately jumped into looking at the actual measurements: "90 doesn’t even seem physically possible.“ No, sir. It doesn't.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Welcome to TST! Signing up is free, and you'll see fewer ads and can talk with fellow golf enthusiasts! By using TST, you agree to our Terms of Use, our Privacy Policy, and our Guidelines.