Tour New Ping i240 irons - 2025 Memorial

[gumpy]

17 minutes ago, Bunkersarebigcups said:

As the performance will likely be incremental gains, I‘ll pass and stick with my i230s. That carbon in the cavity kills the clean look. Otherwise it’s similar I think (profile, offset…)

 

Not really sure why they stop making them look cleaner and opt for that badge… 

Agreed. The i230 will be fine for awhile. 

[gumpy]

Is there a chance the carbon is actually functional? Lower cg with better sound?  Clutching at straws here. 

[PeterJP]

I'd imagine that the i230s will be fine for a *very long* while, just as my G25s will be fine for pretty much as long as I want them to be. (I don't need my 7 iron to have 24 degrees of loft.) Someone above posted that we're beating a dead horse with this topic - but I can't think of a single equipment thread among the tens of thousands here that *isn't* a dead horse we nonetheless keep beating on! *All* the OEMs have long known exactly how to make a range of iron lines that perform for & deliver what a range of golfers want and need in their irons, be it distance or forgiveness or precision/control or a balance of all three in varied ratios/proportions to suit every possible skill set / handicap index. If they want to stay in business the manufacturers are obliged to keep churning out and selling new product; but that doesn't mean we're obliged to keep buying it. If we *do* buy it, and as superficial as this sounds, the 'looks' are as good a metric/guide to our purchasing choices as any other aspect of the design, and probably (given the above noted realities) better than most. When 8 out of 10 posters on the i240 and the driving iron threads complain about the looks, I simply can't spin this as any kind of positive for Ping, or a successful launch. I don't need to wait to see how they 'perform' because I already *know* how they're going to perform -- i.e., they're going to perform great! What major iron brand doesn't these days? 

 

 

 

Edited May 27 by PeterJP

[gumpy]

28 minutes ago, PeterJP said:

I'd imagine that the i230s will be fine for a *very long* while, just as my G25s will be fine for pretty much as long as I want them to be. (I don't need my 7 iron to have 24 degrees of loft.) Someone above posted that we're beating a dead horse with this topic - but I can't think of a single equipment thread among the tens of thousands here that *isn't* a dead horse we nonetheless keep beating on! *All* the OEMs have long known exactly how to make a range of iron lines that perform for & deliver what a range of golfers want and need in their irons, be it distance or forgiveness or precision/control or a balance of all three in varied ratios/proportions to suit every possible skill set / handicap index. If they want to stay in business the manufacturers are obliged to keep churning out and selling new product; but that doesn't mean we're obliged to keep buying it. If we *do* buy it, and as superficial as this sounds, the 'looks' are as good a metric/guide to our purchasing choices as any other aspect of the design, and probably (given the above noted realities) better than most. When 8 out of 10 posters on the i240 and the driving iron threads complain about the looks, I simply can't spin this as any kind of positive for Ping, or a successful launch. I don't need to wait to see how they 'perform' because I already *know* how they're going to perform -- i.e., they're going to perform great! What major iron brand doesn't these days? 

 

 

 

100% agree on the i230 longevity. They will last for ages. I just wanted to upgrade for no other reason than getting shiny new clubs… it’s fine, they’ve saved me money. 

[gumpy]

1 hour ago, Bunkersarebigcups said:

I want them to look good in the bag as well. Makes it fun and confidence inspiring to pull one after you committed to a club. It’s probably stupid, but you know… this is WRX 

Aesthetics are a thing, it is what it is. Such a shame here with Ping after they did such a good job with the blueprints. 

[CallawayLefty]

I’ll preface this by saying I have no intention of switching from BPS, but am I the only one that doesn’t think they look that bad?  I’ll bet they look pretty good in person.  Digging way back in the memory banks here, but I remember when Taylormade released the Tour Preferred series around 2015ish (the ones that had the aggressive back cavities) thinking that they looked terrible in the initial pics, but then ended up loving them.  These kind of remind me of those. 
 

Actually the part of these that I like the least is the kind of squared off toe.  But again, bet they’ll look good when you actually hold them.  

[Lobbing Iron]

8 minutes ago, CallawayLefty said:

I’ll preface this by saying I have no intention of switching from BPS, but am I the only one that doesn’t think they look that bad?  I’ll bet they look pretty good in person.  Digging way back in the memory banks here, but I remember when Taylormade released the Tour Preferred series around 2015ish (the ones that had the aggressive back cavities) thinking that they looked terrible in the initial pics, but then ended up loving them.  These kind of remind me of those. 
 

Actually the part of these that I like the least is the kind of squared off toe.  But again, bet they’ll look good when you actually hold them.  

I really like the shaping.  If the i were black and the carbon painted or covered with aluminum they would look really good to me.  I think the shape is better than the i230s

Edited May 27 by Lobbing Iron

[CallawayLefty]

10 minutes ago, Lobbing Iron said:

I really like the shaping.  If the i were black and the carbon painted or covered with aluminum they would look really good to me.  I think the shape is better than the i230s

 

Agreed - don't think the shaping is bad...lots of stuff I like (just that one comment, which seems to show up mostly in the long irons).  In particular, it looks like maybe the sole width is a tiny bit narrower, which is one of the things I love about the BPS.  I do actually get the strong reaction from the group because I also opened this up and expected to see something different than what I saw.  But all club companies spend years developing clubs, and those companies are primarily filled with people who love golf clubs...so I doubt these look bad in person, and if they did, they would have been kicked out or refined a long time ago.  

[rainkingjr]

They look like Pings to me. Never going to win a beauty contest, but will perform. Wait until these get into peoples hands and we'll have another thread with nothing but high praise. This place is so predictable sometimes.

 

For the record, count me as the oddball who thinks they look fantastic.

Edited May 27 by rainkingjr

[CallawayLefty]

4 minutes ago, rainkingjr said:

They look like Pings to me. Never going to win a beauty contest, but will perform. Wait until these get into peoples hands and we'll have another thread with nothing but high praise. This place is so predictable sometimes.

 

For the record, count me as the oddball who thinks they look fantastic.

 

Agreed.  The next wave of comments will be when people actually hold and hit them, and the feedback will go way up, both on performance AND looks.  It's always a little jarring as color schemes changes for manufacturers.  The only company whose clubs always look the same is Titleist, which was probably my gripe with this year's T series release...probably time to shake things up just a TAD.  But that's also why people always love Titleist - just very vanilla looking (in a positive way) and never any earth shattering changes (or at least not in a very long time).  

[Lobbing Iron]

I was planning on getting new irons this year, and will wait to hit these before I buy.

[Puttersaurus Rex]

18 hours ago, NailedIt said:

Good luck getting tour pros in these.

Yet, we love it when a tour pro is playing a beat up old club, and somehow LAB putters with questionable aesthetics are popular here.  
 

Aesthetics are easily ignored when the individual holding the club chooses to do so.

[NailedIt]

1 minute ago, Puttersaurus Rex said:

Yet, we love it when a tour pro is playing a beat up old club, and somehow LAB putters with questionable aesthetics are popular here.  
 

Aesthetics are easily ignored when the individual holding the club chooses to do so.

I guess we'll just have to wait and see...

[379]

4 minutes ago, Puttersaurus Rex said:

Yet, we love it when a tour pro is playing a beat up old club, and somehow LAB putters with questionable aesthetics are popular here.  
 

Aesthetics are easily ignored when the individual holding the club chooses to do so.

I like the LAB comp. Though they're ugly, many purists play them. Tour adoption could change the tide of opinions on this set.

[pullfade]

Looks like a typical Ping I series to me. Everyone hated the blue, now the red. Carbon will have some functionality. I'm sure these will be like every other I series. Consistent, workable and forgiving.

[glm]

19 hours ago, Pnwpingi210 said:

I agree!!!!!   LOL!

[glm]

I'll keep my iblades but thanks for sharing

[bigeasy]

6 hours ago, gumpy said:

Is there a chance the carbon is actually functional? Lower cg with better sound?  Clutching at straws here. 

Do you honestly think Ping didnt put the carbon in there for a functional reason?

[bogeyk]

26 minutes ago, bigeasy said:

Do you honestly think Ping didnt put the carbon in there for a functional reason?

I’d have to guess that the carbon allows them to have a thinner face without the feel/sound being too negatively affected. 

[hammergolf]

7 hours ago, gumpy said:

So it is hardened and much harder than the 8620 blueprints are made from. Also the tuning is sound deadening. It helps but doesn’t fully bridge the gap to the actual softer steels that naturally sound like that. Also with ear muffs on some people can actually tell the difference. When I practice at the sim I have AirPods in. 

 

7 hours ago, gumpy said:

So it is hardened and much harder than the 8620 blueprints are made from. Also the tuning is sound deadening. It helps but doesn’t fully bridge the gap to the actual softer steels that naturally sound like that. Also with ear muffs on some people can actually tell the difference. When I practice at the sim I have AirPods in. 

No, the heat treatment procedure Ping uses actually makes the grain more uniform which leads to softer sound/feel. The difference between 431 and 8620 is very minor. Even the older heads made of 17-4 were very hard for tour pros to tell the difference with ear plugs in. 

[skibmg]

While they aren’t the lookers that my BPS are, they’ll definitely be going in for me at least in 4-6 iron. Ironically, the 4 and 5 in BPS are easier than the six but only changing the 6 is silly so all three getting swapped. For the record I loved my i20s and so the business does bug me as much. 

[bullsfan]

Annnnnnd this is why I refuse to stop playing my Ping Eye 2's in 2025! A clean simple cavity back iron, with no BS badging and elastomer plugs that fall out over heavy use. Time to go back to what works Ping!

[sofla]

On the bright side, there is carbon. 

[chollier986]

They’re growing on me

[maowv]

Ping made a great club with the i210. (If I could ever find a new set of i210 heads I would go back to them).

Then they made a cleaner-looking version with the i230.

 

Other OEMs have gone with the clean look with a lot of success - think the new P770 and P790 series. Similar with some of the newer Cobra irons. That new Titleist T250 that is coming soon is similar.

 

Then Ping goes with this ... Yes, I hate this look. This looks like something sold at Walmart or K-Mart back in the day.

 

But the curious part is why move away from a look that has been very successful over the past 5 years or so?  

Edited May 27 by maowv

[kingbing]

We should find out soon if any staff players are playing the i240’s.  I’m assuming someone will have them in the bag this weekend.

[KnoxvilleReb]

I don't think they look terrible, but obviously a departure from the super clean look. I'm more concerned with how they perform. My hope is that the carbon had clear enough performance benefits that made it a no-brainer for them to depart from that super clean look. I guess we'll see. 

[radiman]

1 minute ago, KnoxvilleReb said:

I don't think they look terrible, but obviously a departure from the super clean look. I'm more concerned with how they perform. My hope is that the carbon had clear enough performance benefits that made it a no-brainer for them to depart from that super clean look. I guess we'll see. 

They could have painted the carbon to match the rest of the cavity. This was a conscious visual design choice. That may be the saddest part of it all.  They did this on purpose.  

 

Personally, I think these do not look good.  Big step back compared to what they've been doing with the i series irons.  They really peaked with the i210 in my mind.  The 230 looks pretty good though too.  

 

Now, in terms of performance, I am sure these will be every bit as decent as the i series irons that preceded them.  I think there are enough options out there that a golfer can be pretty picky.  Ping loyalists won't bat an eye though and I am sure these will sell pretty well. 

[Nixhex524]

3 hours ago, Lobbing Iron said:

I really like the shaping.  If the i were black and the carbon painted or covered with aluminum they would look really good to me.  I think the shape is better than the i230s

 

I would agree here, the shaping is actually nice and the grooves look spread out more like the BPs which for some odd reason I prefer.  BUT... looks do matter and the back of that thing.... I really expected better.  That carbon is enough for me to pass, even though I am sure there is a reason and story behind it.

[WesternRacing]

All they need is a VTEC sticker on the back…