|
Share this article:
Digg |
StumbleUpon |
del.icio.us |
Reddit
Yes, I am aware I stuffed variants of the word “conformity” into the title three times. Ping has always been sort of the black sheep of the market, coveting function over form; performance over flash. Make no bones about it, I am in the camp that thought the USGA went about things all wrong in trying to “reign in” the game via the groove rule change. In this way, they forced the manufacturers to perhaps abandon what they would normally be pursuing and developing in favor of being in compliance with the new rule. As only the second set of wedges I have tried with the conforming grooves, Ping has met the challenge. But, does the end result leave us pining for the grooves of old? I loved the Ping Tour W wedges. The grooves were aggressive, but did not chew up golf balls too badly. The feel was excellent for a cast club. I also noticed more Ping staffers with the Tour W in their bag than past Ping wedge offerings. Considering Ping’s WRX department can grind their wedges to many custom grinds, Ping really is overlooked in many respects in the wedge game. After reviewing the Ping S56 irons, I looked forward to seeing how the feel would pan out with the Tour S wedges given they use this newer cavity insert which produced great feel in the S56 irons is also used for the Tour S’s. If the Tour S’s turned out to be a “conforming” version of the Tour W, that was just fine by me. In some ways, the Tour S’s are an improvement yet again. I opted for my typical 50-54-58 setup in the Tour S’s, with 12, 12, and 10 degrees of bounce, respectively. There are two finish options, and the brushed satin was my only choice given the lofts I chose. I must admit, I wish the Rustique finish would have been available, as that would complement the oil can finishes I tend to favor. The satin finish is pretty well devoid of glare, however, and made for a tidy look with the S56 irons in the bag. The bounces were just right for the conditions I frequently see, with adequate bounce to keep them from digging, but a gentle enough heel, toe, and back edge relief to be very versatile. I did not opt for any special WRX grinds this time, and the stock setup worked quite well. I found the slightly wider sole helped these heads to play with a bit more effective bounce than stated. However, on tight lies around the green, the slight relief allowed me to slip the head under the ball without issue. From the sand, the Tour S’s “smacked” the sand nicely, and their heavy feel gave them an authoritative feel that encouraged me to get the club moving and let the head do much of the work, especially for sand shots. The cavity insert feels softer than that of the Tour W’s, and gave the Tour S’s an improved feel with less comparative back end “click” sound after impact. Spin, spin, spin. Pros had too much of it, apparently. Ping stepped up with the Tour S’s with new, more refined manufacturing techniques to make the narrower, shallower conforming grooves as sharp as allowed. The new grooves worked well for some shots. In particular, I noticed the Tour S’s acted largely like that of the Tour W’s around the green. There is a definite “check then release” quality about them around the greens. Spin was almost up to the level of non-conforming grooves. From the rough, however, on more full shots, the “flyer” was unfortunately back for me. I did struggle some with predicting how the ball would come out of such lies, and spent more time studying my lies than I have in some time. Also, the trajectory was noticeably higher with the Tour S’s. The ball seems to want to climb the face a little more with the slightly less aggressive grooves. This did aid in landing the ball softer. But, it was also just a tad harder to keep shots down as well. Given the rules and parameters Ping must now comply with, they did a great job, and thus far (albeit my sampling is limited,) these are the best “conforming” grooves I have tried thus far. Whereas my shots with non-conforming grooves would tend to back up 6 feet or so on fuller swings, the Tour S’s tended to hit softly, hop forward slightly, and then stop after 2 or 3 feet of rollout. Getting to back pins may be easier in this sense, but I must admit, I like being able to stop it out of the rough with non-conforming grooves. I liked the divots the Tour S’s took, with enough bounce to keep from taking “beaver pelts,” the entered the turf and exited easily, and the divots were just a tad shallower than some other wedges I have tried. My Tour S’s were paired with Dynamic Gold S400 shafts, which I use in many sets. All specs were right on, which was to be expected, as they were built by the WRX department. My heavier swingweight requests of D7 in the Gap wedge, and D8 in the 54 and 58 I believe prompted the “special” build by WRX. They hit the mark perfectly with each, and topped off the Tour S’s with some multi-compound grips. I put the Tour S’s on my swingweight scale a few times just to check and double check. They felt heavier than their swingweights would suggest. I suspect the Center of Gravity placement has something to do with this, as I have noted this phenomenon with iron sets bearing a more rearward COG. I admit, I am not a huge fan of conformity. When thinking back on Ping and their beginnings, conformity is almost the diametric opposite of what comes to mind when thinking of Ping and their unique ways. With the Tour S wedges, Ping has taken conformity and put their own “spin” on things, even if it means just a touch less spin, overall. With great feel, (perhaps the best in a Ping wedge to date,) and adequate spin, Ping is positioned to perhaps add some Ping wedge loyalists going forward to complement their many irons and woods fans. I also implore people to look into the WRX grind options if seeking a really customized set of wedges. Ping is often overlooked there and they shouldn’t be. For more information, visit: http://www.ping.com Michael White Independent Equipment Reviewer GolfDiscussions.com
|
