First Look – PING i500 Irons
Irons

First Look – PING i500 Irons

Support our Mission. We independently test each product we recommend. When you buy through our links, we may earn a commission.

First Look – PING i500 Irons

PING has a new entry in the Players Distance category, one it says doesn’t abandon the better golfer in pursuit of more yards.

While designing i500, PING sought to create an iron that goes far, flies high, and feels great, while offering a size, shape, and overall profile that retains its appeal to better players. Fundamentally, the company wanted to take what golfers experience with the G700, specifically high launch and increased distance, and put it in a players package in a way that’s functional.

What PING didn’t want to do was create another distance iron that goes far, flies low, and can’t hold a green worth a damn. PING wanted to do Players Distance in a way that offers a legitimate performance advantage – and as I said, PING wanted to do Players Distance in a way appeals to better players.

Easier said than done. Many have tried, and many have been less than successful.

PING-i500-107

Big Performance from a Small Iron

Fundamental to the challenge is the reality that it’s easy to get distance out of a big club, but it’s hard to do in a smaller club. To give you some clarity around what we’re talking about, the i500 has the same face size as the new i210 (similar to the i200), and while the blade length is a bit longer, it retains the offset of PING’s most player-centric design, the iBlade. i500 is an iron that, while not among the absolute most compact, should never be mistaken for a game improvement club.

The i500 offers hollow-body construction similar to G700. The defining performance characteristics (high launch and bigtime ball speed) come from a C300 maraging steel face that’s robotically welded to the frame. It’s the same material PING uses in its fairway wood and hybrid faces, and it creates what PING’s Marty Jertson describes as a diving board effect. The flexing and rebounding of the face not only contribute to higher ball speeds than you’ll get from traditional iron designs, but it also creates significantly higher launch – albeit with a bit less spin (PING says +/- 700 rpm at 7-iron, compared to i210).

PING-i500-105

A Quick Aside: Hollow Body vs. Goo-Filled

No doubt somebody will leave a response saying something along the lines of “PXG is going to sue PING…” Without wading too much into those weeds, the construction is fundamentally different, though it’s worth mentioning that irons with similar appearing designs can be split into two categories.

PXG and TaylorMade use filler/backing materials like COR2 and SpeedFoam respectively to – as the stories go – make the face more responsive while improving feel.

In the hollow-body camp are Mizuno, Titleist, and PING. The philosophy behind these designs is that you don’t want anything directly behind the face impeding its ability to flex and rebound.

Is one design fundamentally better than the other? It depends on who you ask.

PING-i500-101

A Club Longer

Again, using the new i210 – a reasonably traditional iron design – as our point of comparison. Club for club, higher swing speed players could see as much as 15 yards of additional distance while average speed players may see 7 or 8. It should go without saying that the actual numbers will vary from player to player depending on how the club is delivered. Consider this the requisite your actual mileage may vary disclaimer.

The more compelling point is that the distance gains come with nearly identical launch angle, despite the fact that i500 lofts are up to 2.5° degrees stronger than the i210.

The loft police will, no doubt, be up and arms looking over the spec sheet, but the reality is that any discussion around static loft that ignores peak height and descent angle isn’t worth having. As we’ve said on several occasions before, static loft is nearly meaningless. A slew of dynamic variables contributes to the flight of a golf ball.

“We were comfortable making the lofts a little bit stronger because the ball goes so higher with these irons.” – Marty Jertson

What you get with i500, according to PING, is an iron that launches appreciably higher than anything else in its class – particularly at long iron lengths. Jertson says that tour caliber players can identify a change of 2%-3% in height while average golfers can identify increases in 4% to 5%. According to PING, the peak height of i500 long irons is 10% higher than competitive offerings. 10% is an absolutely massive number and should be immediately apparent to just about anybody who hits the clubs.

The increase in peak height steepens the landing angle, making for a soft landing on greens that, for most, will more than make up for the decrease in spin.

The result is an iron that’s up to a club longer than traditional designs. In practical terms that means that you’ll find yourself hitting an 8-iron in situations where you may have previously hit a 7. Now the cynics will say that PING has done little more than stamp a different number on the sole of the club, but the reality is you’re going to be hitting an iron that flies higher, and because an 8-iron is half an inch shorter than a 7, you’re going to swinging a club that’s easier to control and hit straight. By any practical measure, that’s a performance advantage.

PING-i500-109

What About Workability?

One area where i500 departs a bit from the players camp it’s in the area of workability. Claims of increased workability are a staple of every better players iron release, but that’s not the case with the i500.

The size, sole design, and limited offset should allow better players to control the face to path relationship, dynamic loft and attack angle. Players should be able to flight the ball through different windows, but the lower spin characteristics of the design make it harder to create a ton of curve. While PING doesn’t expect that the i500 will find its way into Bubba’s bag, the upside is that the ball will generally fly straighter, which should prove beneficial for most golfers – even really good players.

At its core, the i500 is designed to give the club golfer what tour golfers already have – the ability to hit the ball high with a ton of speed. Tour players still need some help with the long irons, while club golfers can benefit from the i500 through the entire bag. It’s also worth noting that because PING was able to keep the offset consistent with the iBlade, the i500 provides a more conventional alternative to the Crossover as a long iron replacement, making it ideal for those who play blended sets. That includes Marty Jertson who recently qualified for the 2018 PGA Championship using a i500 long irons paired with the iBlade.

PING-i500-115

Aesthetic Considerations

As I said at the beginning, one of the goals of the i500 project was to increase distance without losing the connection to the better player. That meant keeping the design clean. In addition to minimal offset, the i500 offers a chamfered topline that makes it appear narrower than it is. The sole is a bit wider than the iBlade but a bit narrower than the i210. Iron numbers have been removed from the face to keep things as clean as possible, and the updated Hyrdropearl 2.0 finish is a bit brighter and less flat than the original. On looks alone, it’s fair to describe the i500 as a smaller, shinier G700.

 3 Loft Options

i500-spec

As is it has done with its recent iron offerings; it will offer the i500 in what the company calls PowerSpec. PowerSpec lofts are 1°-1.5° stronger through the set. It’s a good option for higher spin players, or golfers looking for even more distance, particularly in the long irons.

With the release of the i500 and i210, PING will begin offering what it calls RetroSpec. Following a similar progression as PowerSpec, RetroSpec lofts (not shown) are 1°-1.5° weaker than the standard spec. Beyond back in my day golfers, RetroSpec is an option for low spin players seeking more spin or for golfers who only carry three wedges.

As with most clubs, our recommendation is to check your preconceptions at the door and work with a fitter to determine which set of specifications will work best for you.

PING-i500-100

Stock Shaft

The stock shaft for the i500 is the DynamicGold DG 105. Flex for flex the DG 105 will play softer than both the standard Dynamic Gold and the DG 120 that’s stock in the i210. It’s a case of PING leveraging the shaft to increase launch. If the DG 105 isn’t your thing, PING’s no charge shaft catalog includes offerings from Dynamic Gold, KBS, and Nippon.

Hands On

powervprecision

I had a chance to hit the i500 alongside the new i210. PING is billing the choice as one of Power vs. Precision. Make no mistake about it; the i500 is definitely the power option. In testing 7-irons, I found that my numbers mostly matched the averages from PING’s internal testing. On good shots, my launch difference was about .6°, but peak height averages were identical. My spin differences were a bit wider than the test group’s, and as a result, I was a solid 14 yards longer with the i500. What really stands out is that the i500 gets downrange faster than any other iron I’ve ever hit. I know it sounds like hyperbole, but take my word for it (at least until you can try it for yourself) the i500 moves like a metalwood. While it won’t’ be for everyone, the distance – and the consistency for that matter – is impressive.

While we’ve done a good bit of comparison between the i500 and the i210 and while the numbers we’ve chosen have been favorable to the i500, it’s important to keep the irons compartmentalized. The i210 offers traditional performance – albeit with a modern slant. It launches a little higher, spins quite a bit more, it’s more workable, and for me, the increased offset makes for a much more playable long irons. It’s not nearly as long as the i500, and that’s going to be just fine with a segment of golfers.

The i500 offers an entirely different experience – one that we’re not used to from PING (though G700 carved the path). It’s a speed iron that’s infinitely fun to hit, but with its lower spin, and diminished workability it’s not going to be for everyone. Frankly, some may find that they simply hit it too far, but I promise you, you’ll have a blast trying it for yourself.

PING-i500-117

Pricing and Availability

Pre-Sale for the PING i500 begins today (7/16/2018) with consumer availability starting 7/31. MSRP is $175 per iron steel and $190 per iron graphite.

For more information, visit PING.com.

For You

For You

Golf Shafts
Apr 14, 2024
Testers Wanted: Autoflex Dream 7 Driver Shaft
News
Apr 14, 2024
A Rare Masters ‘L’: Day Asked To Remove Sweater
Drivers
Apr 13, 2024
Testers Wanted: Callaway Ai Smoke Drivers
Tony Covey

Tony Covey

Tony Covey

Tony is the Editor of MyGolfSpy where his job is to bring fresh and innovative content to the site. In addition to his editorial responsibilities, he was instrumental in developing MyGolfSpy's data-driven testing methodologies and continues to sift through our data to find the insights that can help improve your game. Tony believes that golfers deserve to know what's real and what's not, and that means MyGolfSpy's equipment coverage must extend beyond the so-called facts as dictated by the same companies that created them. Most of all Tony believes in performance over hype and #PowerToThePlayer.

Tony Covey

Tony Covey

Tony Covey





    This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

      Gerry

      5 years ago

      hi help me out here I have being playing g15 irons for last 10 years and have just tried out I 500 7 iron on driving range mats hitting it further and higher during a fitting , cant believe that I could hit a forged iron at all ,I play off 15 and caught in two minds wherther to fork out 1000e for them,any advice would be most helpful.
      Gerry

      Reply

      Dan

      5 years ago

      Bought these instead of the TaylormadeP790’s I was looking at. Performance is good , distance is good, finish on the irons is terrible. They look more worn and scratched after 15 rounds than my Taylormades with over 600 rounds. Ping is aware of the finish problem, I would only purchase these if you don’t golf more than a few rounds a year. They look nothing like new clubs after very little use. For the premium price charged I am very disappointed in the quality of these. I play 100+ rounds a year, I’m an 8 cap and was expecting a quality product for this price, unfortunately this purchase was an expensive mistake.

      Reply

      Peter Fuller

      6 years ago

      My 3 and 4 hybrids have become the best clubs in my bag.The i500 irons have a similar feel to them.Personally,I think these are the best irons PING have ever made.Sure they have a bounce effect.But at set up they give great confidence for a club that looks like a blade but performs with the ease of a hybrid.

      Reply

      Bruce

      6 years ago

      I demoed the i500 yesterday. I found them quite beautiful . My numbers were just so so with marginal increases but I had just played 18 holes, practiced after and then went to hit them so I was a bit tired. The feel was good but not buttery like comparable forged clubs. Going back to try again when I’m fresher.

      Reply

      Stevegp

      6 years ago

      I am interested in demoing the i500. This players’ distance iron trend is taking on a life of its own.

      Reply

      Stevegp

      6 years ago

      I am interested in demoing the i500.

      Reply

      Brooky03

      6 years ago

      Looks like these could be excellent replacements for hybrids. A combo set of i210’s or iBlades with i500’s at the top of the bag could be incredible.

      Reply

      steve hamer

      6 years ago

      why 65 dollars more than the g400 where a stick did they put gold in it or did they think the player had no spending limit good luck to them

      Reply

      Deadeye

      6 years ago

      Ping irons are not normally known for their beauty, but more as tools of a trade. They were appreciated certainly, even loved but viewed as utilitarian, as precision instruments that would not let you down.
      But, wow! The i500 now adds a balanced beauty with smooth flowing lines and as much eye appeal as any new iron I have seen. I want some.

      Reply

      mackdaddy

      6 years ago

      I think they look good but I just don’t think I’m ready to trade my KZG forgings for clubs that are bent to stronger launch angles. I can get my irons bent stronger if all I want are more yards. Really getting more yards with my irons seems like a waste on many levels. How do I keep the gaps at 4*? Do I lose a club at the hybrid or woods level and add a wedge? My four wood is 16.5* my 4 hybrid is 23* and my 3 hybrid is 19*. Buying these would mean I would have to redo my entire bag. I would have to take a hard pass.

      Reply

      Brooky03

      6 years ago

      You wouldn’t have to redo the entire bag, you’d just have to figure out which i500 iron matches the distance/performance of the 4 hybrid and start the set there, or keep the 4 hybrid and start the iron set one club down. The lofts don’t matter, the distance and stopping power (height and spin) are what matters.

      Reply

      P.J.

      6 years ago

      When Taylormade and Callaway jacked up the loft’s (or down, actually) despite the launch angles – so many hater’s came on here complaining about it. Now Ping finally joins suit… now that’s funny!
      Forged used to mean a single piece of metal, but now you can label it forged if you just use that for the face?!?

      Reply

      Nick

      6 years ago

      I can not wait to demo both of these irons.
      The i500 is a work of art.

      Reply

      NEF

      6 years ago

      Curious. It appears the review was written with steel shafts tested. What is the performance difference with graphite shafts? My experience tells me that there is a major difference in clubs shafted with graphite and steel.

      Reply

      ROD

      6 years ago

      Seems like “FORGED” is so in fashion lately, that the word is used for marketing purposes mainly and doesn’t completely reflect reality.

      This are forged face welded into a casting body…

      Reply

      LeftyBradd

      6 years ago

      Damn these look good. I laugh at some of the comments above. Unless you are a 5 index or lower, does workability really matter? Shouldn’t you be aiming for more GIR. I am a 9.5 index and I have gotten there by focusing on GIR and putting.

      If I can hit my 7 iron 200 yards consistently with the i500, that means I don’t need to be as far off the tee which takes the least consistent club out of the bag (Driver)in a lot of cases.

      Also, I may not need to buy an iron longer than 7 so price wise I may only need 4 irons which makes for an interesting discussion. I can spend the extra money on lessons with wedges as that is the worthwhile investment.

      Can’t wait to hit them…assuming they make them in LH.

      Reply

      Don

      6 years ago

      I hear ya! Good thing about Ping is that they treat lefties better than most other golf companies.

      Reply

      Bill G.

      6 years ago

      All the companies are pricing their irons higher and higher. They are going to make it where only the rich can afford to play golf. One of the largest complaints about getting new people into golf is the cost and then the time it takes to play a round. Sounds like PING is wanting to become another PXG. These clubs cost to much for me, so not interested.

      Reply

      Johnny Penso

      6 years ago

      If the cost of a set of irons, which spread out over a few years is only $100-200 per year is a prohibiting factor in playing golf then the green fees will probably shut the door for you as well. Lots of perfectly good used clubs out there to try.

      Reply

      MG

      6 years ago

      You say don’t worry about the spin because it launches so high but then compare it to the i210 and the i500 launches lower, has a lower peak height, and has less spin. Sounds like a probably for amateurs playing baked out greens at there local muni.

      Reply

      Johnny Penso

      6 years ago

      You’re talking about differentials that are pretty meaningless in the grand scheme. A couple hundred rpm of spin, a foot or two of height is not going to make much difference at all on the course.

      Reply

      Brooky03

      6 years ago

      The i500 launches higher relative to static loft. The i500 7-iron is 30.5*. The i210 is 33*, and they’re both the same length. Despite being nearly 3* stronger, the i500 launches almost the same height as the i200. For moderate swingspeed golfers, it looks like the i500 irons are basically one club longer than the i210’s. This means you’d be hitting an i500 8-iron where you’d hit an i210 7-iron. And I’d bet the i500 8-iron would provide more stopping power (combination of launch and spin) than the i210 7-iron. Shorter clubs are easier to control, so that’s a win for the i500.

      Reply

      Johnny Penso

      6 years ago

      And I’m willing to bet that the i500 8 iron and the i210 7 iron probably have similar enough ball flights and spin characteristics that they play almost identically on the course. People get all worked up about numbers on a piece of paper for no reason. A ball that flies 3 feet higher or had 300 rpm more or less spin is going to end up in the same spot give or take a couple of feet. There is far, far, far, far greater variation introduced by the quality of your strike compared to anything else.

      JH

      6 years ago

      @steve. Confused by your comment. I believe you are saying you want your iron degrees to be a version of old spec? You want this regardless of dynamic launch? Sounds like these (according to the article) fly 4-5% higher than current irons. I want my 7 iron to fly like a 7 iron, regardless of loft, as long as the control is there. Just like I want my driver to fly like I want, regardless of loft. If the “7-iron is a marginally strong 6 iron”, but flies like a 7 iron, seems like a pot of gold to me. Trying to figure out where you are coming from on this.

      Reply

      Steve

      6 years ago

      Thanks for engaging with my own confusion, JH. Let me try to engage with it further… But, you will likely agree after reading, I am still not sure how I feel about these.

      1. Yes, hitting 7 from where you would normally hit 6 is great. It makes me feel strong, and, since a 7 is shorter in length than a 6, it should have more control. Check: plausible win.
      2. If we put the loft back closer to a traditional 7, I will not feel as strong, but I will hit it much higher, probably with 7000 revs. I might get more shots sucking back, because of descent angle combined with spin; then, I would also feel cool and may also have more control, or at least ability to get to pins I should not attack. Check: (slightly less?) plausible win
      3. I accept the adage that “the number on the bottom of club does not matter”. What matters is whether I am comfortable that I have my gaps and distances down across the set.

      It is with 3. that I struggle the most, despite agreeing with the adage. I have played the P790s, and think they are nice (as I expect are these Pings, AP3s, and even the T-mbs, although the latter may not quite be in the same power category). However, at the bottom of the set, 7-P, I had very large gaps: 15-20 yards. I am used to that, when we are talking about wedges, but not when we are talking about 7, 8 and 9. So, the set would need to be bent weak, and quite a bit to avoid adding at least one extra wedge.

      @leftybrad seems rather ok with having a set 7-P, and carrying more wedges. I guess I am not entirely comfortable with the idea of carrying 5 or even 6 wedges. Note: I currently carry 4: the P (47) from my J40 CBs, a 52, 57 and 62.

      Worse, I am based in South Africa. If I want a set make-up like that, it is special order everything, and will take at least a month to receive. — hell, we do not even have p790 udi stock, yet — Basically, everyone sells full sets, and you cannot simply buy a partial set, or even a mixed set; further, you can find strong ‘scoring’ wedges, say 46-48, only once in a while. So, even if I wanted to follow @leftybrad’s approach, which is a sensible compromise, I do not really have the option. I guess I could keep the P from J40 set, and bend these strong at the bottom end… maybe that would work? Then, I would be carrying five wedges, two with a “P” on them, but – hey – it does not matter what is on the bottom. Still, it does not “feel” right.

      Reply

      THOMAS CRISAN

      6 years ago

      here we go $$$$$ and more $$$$$

      Reply

      THOMAS CRISAN

      6 years ago

      more marketing hype. when will it end? if u hit a pitching wedge 100 yards then why would you need a wedge that goes 107 yards? isn’t this why iron sets have four to five degrees of loft between the irons.
      And 1700+$ for set of irons is? Well you decide!!!!!

      Reply

      BRIANM

      6 years ago

      Seams to me they have it backwards. Shouldn’t the long flying club have the offset and the precision workable club be traditional?

      Reply

      Mark

      6 years ago

      I agree, totally confused that the precision iron has more offset, which puts me off even trying them. Have a couple of friend who play the i200 and was considering the i210 before I heard about the increased offset. It should be the i210 which has the iBlade offset. JMO

      Reply

      txgolfjunkie

      6 years ago

      Who cares about loft jacking if the club performs for you?! I’m a high spin/high launch/steep AoA player and these i500 have tickled my fancy. I sure hope we see a post soon about testers needed for these irons.

      Kudos to Ping for always finding ways to improve their lineup instead of the same thing year after year.

      Reply

      Rob C

      6 years ago

      Very good piece, on what the I500 is and what it isnt’. I tried it and the 210 myself over the weekend. As mid to high cap, I found the 500 definitely out of my range. It is certainly a beautiful looking club and the traditionalist will love it. I don’t think you can lay it out there any more than you did on the lofts, yet there will still be screams from the “Get off my lawn” crowd.

      However, the I210 was a different story, I’ll save my comments for that blog.

      Reply

      Steve

      6 years ago

      I continue to struggle with this “conversation”. I fully agree with the height observation, and believe that hitting any iron loft for loft a bit higher ought to be a good thing. And, it looks like such an iron would yield a bit of additional distance. BUT, the loft on a 7 iron is a marginally strong 6 iron. I currently hit my traditional 6 about 12 yards farther than my traditional 7, and spin it about 800-1000 RPM less. So, it really looks to me like this a 6 iron dressed up as a 7 iron. Retrospec sounds a minor improvement, but I would actually like to see this be Truespec. Then you can tell me that we have the same comparison.

      Sorry, Tony, it is starting to sound like Ping is joining the TM marketing bandwagon. I should accept that what golf is, but I used to have real respect for them (even without playing any of their clubs).

      Reply

      Rob C

      6 years ago

      And there it is :(

      Reply

      Tess

      6 years ago

      ^^^ LOL ^^^
      More to come too.

      David N

      6 years ago

      These are works of art.

      Reply

    Leave A Reply

    required
    required
    required (your email address will not be published)

    This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

    Golf Shafts
    Apr 14, 2024
    Testers Wanted: Autoflex Dream 7 Driver Shaft
    News
    Apr 14, 2024
    A Rare Masters ‘L’: Day Asked To Remove Sweater
    Drivers
    Apr 13, 2024
    Testers Wanted: Callaway Ai Smoke Drivers
    ENTER to WIN 3 DOZEN

    Titleist ProV1 Golf Balls

    Titleist ProV1 Golf Balls
    By signing up you agree to receive communications from MyGolfSpy and select partners in accordance with our Privacy Policy You may opt out of email messages/withdraw consent at any time.