Blended Iron Set

[Sean_D]

I am thinking about replacing my irons. I currently use PING G400s for which I was fitted. In the last two years, I have gone from a 20 to a 9 and I am looking for a bit more distance control than the G400s offer. In my mind, I have created a theoretical set which contains a Cleveland RTX Zipcore PW @ 45*, PING i210 (or equivalent) at the 9,8,7, and 6 irons, and PING i500 (or equivalent) in the 5 and 4 irons.   

Does anyone have a similar iron set-up? Do you notice a bigger/smaller gap when transitioning between iron types? Does the difference in spin characteristic have a big effect on the shot you attempt to hit? Would you recommend including the 6i in i500 category? Or any other though you may have on the subject. Is there a question I am not asking, which I should be?

[Max13]

  On 12/23/2020 at 9:09 PM, Sean_D said:

I am thinking about replacing my irons. I currently use PING G400s for which I was fitted. In the last two years, I have gone from a 20 to a 9 and I am looking for a bit more distance control than the G400s offer. In my mind, I have created a theoretical set which contains a Cleveland RTX Zipcore PW @ 45*, PING i210 (or equivalent) at the 9,8,7, and 6 irons, and PING i500 (or equivalent) in the 5 and 4 irons.   

Does anyone have a similar iron set-up? Do you notice a bigger/smaller gap when transitioning between iron types? Does the difference in spin characteristic have a big effect on the shot you attempt to hit? Would you recommend including the 6i in i500 category? Or any other though you may have on the subject. Is there a question I am not asking, which I should be?

Expand  

I always thought distance was more ball influenced? You reckon different irons will give you more accuracy?

[Sean_D]

It is not about overall distance, it is about reducing the delta between the longest shot and the shortest shot on similarly struck balls. Using Shot scope tracking every shot I have taken on a golf course this season, I have learned that the shot consistency between my G400 set wedge and my Cleveland blade wedge in heavily in favor of the blade wedge. Empirically, I have noticed the G400s are far more likely to take off "flier" like a 145 yard PW when i normally hit my PW 130 yds. Once I started hitting the RTX wedge the distance became much more consistent. That is what I am looking for.  

[onthehunt526]

  On 12/23/2020 at 9:09 PM, Sean_D said:

I am thinking about replacing my irons. I currently use PING G400s for which I was fitted. In the last two years, I have gone from a 20 to a 9 and I am looking for a bit more distance control than the G400s offer. In my mind, I have created a theoretical set which contains a Cleveland RTX Zipcore PW @ 45*, PING i210 (or equivalent) at the 9,8,7, and 6 irons, and PING i500 (or equivalent) in the 5 and 4 irons.   

Does anyone have a similar iron set-up? Do you notice a bigger/smaller gap when transitioning between iron types? Does the difference in spin characteristic have a big effect on the shot you attempt to hit? Would you recommend including the 6i in i500 category? Or any other though you may have on the subject. Is there a question I am not asking, which I should be?

Expand  

I’ve actually never played a blended set like that. I know if you did something like that with Srixon/Cleveland it doesn’t effect distance gaps. The closest thing I do is carry the U85 utility irons (3 and 4) and the 785 irons (5-PW, AW). You could do a ZX Utility 4 iron, ZX5 5 and 6, And ZX7 7-PW and be fine. The reason that Srixon/Cleveland blending works so well is mainly the shaft lengths are consistent. (1/2” increments all the way down). So the distance gaps should be consistent.

[billchao]

  On 12/23/2020 at 9:09 PM, Sean_D said:

Is there a question I am not asking, which I should be?

Expand  

Is the i500 intended to be blended seamlessly with the i210? I’m not aware that it is. You might see a gap wherever you transition to the i500 because the i500 was designed to be a distance club.

  On 12/23/2020 at 9:43 PM, Sean_D said:

Empirically, I have noticed the G400s are far more likely to take off "flier" like a 145 yard PW when i normally hit my PW 130 yds.

Expand  

I used to have that issue with my G30s and I switched. I actually went far to the other extreme and played a set of blades for a few years. Still had the issue with the blades. Turned out my ballstriking was inconsistent and once in a while I’d accidentally pure it.

I think a blended set is fine, but keep in mind many iron sets today are already blended by design. I play Mizuno JPX919 Forged now and there is a deeper cavity and more mass on the toe of the 4i than there is in the PW, for example.

[Sean_D]

  On 12/23/2020 at 10:51 PM, billchao said:

Is the i500 intended to be blended seamlessly with the i210? I’m not aware that it is. You might see a gap wherever you transition to the i500 because the i500 was designed to be a distance club.

I used to have that issue with my G30s and I switched. I actually went far to the other extreme and played a set of blades for a few years. Still had the issue with the blades. Turned out my ballstriking was inconsistent and once in a while I’d accidentally pure it.

I think a blended set is fine, but keep in mind many iron sets today are already blended by design. I play Mizuno JPX919 Forged now and there is a deeper cavity and more mass on the toe of the 4i than there is in the PW, for example.

Expand  

Looking at the specs of the i500 and the i210, they don’t look like they are designed to be directly blended. The i500s have a loft that is 2* stronger throughout the set. Fortunately, PING offer the set in “retro lofts” which brings them back in line with the i210s. Also, it’s not just distance control I’m looking for, but more control over launch and spin, which is something I believe the i210 would offer above the G400 or i500.

I agree that modern sets have a “blending” already incorporated in the design. In my G400s even the shaft weight gets lighter as the club gets longer (PING AWT 2.0).

[billchao]

  On 12/24/2020 at 2:16 PM, Sean_D said:

Looking at the specs of the i500 and the i210, they don’t look like they are designed to be directly blended. The i500s have a loft that is 2* stronger throughout the set. Fortunately, PING offer the set in “retro lofts” which brings them back in line with the i210s. Also, it’s not just distance control I’m looking for, but more control over launch and spin, which is something I believe the i210 would offer above the G400 or i500.

Expand  

I think the i210 is a fantastic set of clubs and honestly don’t see a reason not to play the whole set if you’re thinking about getting them. They’re less GI than the G400 but they still offer plenty of forgiveness in the longer irons.

Realistically, there is always going to be a greater amount of variability in distance and launch control due to your skill level. That’s kind of what I learned with my blades. The clubs matter, but the effect is secondary to your ballstriking, IMO.

[TourSpoon]

  On 12/23/2020 at 9:43 PM, Sean_D said:

It is not about overall distance, it is about reducing the delta between the longest shot and the shortest shot on similarly struck balls. Using Shot scope tracking every shot I have taken on a golf course this season, I have learned that the shot consistency between my G400 set wedge and my Cleveland blade wedge in heavily in favor of the blade wedge. Empirically, I have noticed the G400s are far more likely to take off "flier" like a 145 yard PW when i normally hit my PW 130 yds. Once I started hitting the RTX wedge the distance became much more consistent. That is what I am looking for.  

Expand  

The blade wedge consistency that you are referencing is it a percentage or as total yards? The wedge should be the most consistent by nature. As far as a flier lie, that is a function of the lie but if you are juicing the short irons from the fairway, that is most likely you jumping on one and if you are playing full out swing with those irons it will happen more often than with a more controlled approach. 

Having played a blended set for over 10 years (Titleist 735s), I would recommend making the break @ the 165-175 yard mark which sounds like it may be between the 6 and 7 for you based on your PW distance. I think from outside 175, most good amateurs aren't likely to be sharpshooting and could use the forgiveness. My set was a blade P-8, mid cavity 5-7, and large cavity 3-4. The only thing I would have changed would be to blade the P-7. 

Good luck in your setup adventure and let us know what you do.