PING iron
Discontinued. Kept here because the published specs still matter to anyone playing one or buying used.
Image not published
The field is every iron in the database that publishes both of the chart's figures — every brand, not just PING.
This set's 7-iron is 34° — 86th percentile, weaker-lofted than 86% of the 889 sets that publish one. The median is 32°.
Loft at each club in the set over the middle half (p25–p75) of every comparable iron set on record — the busiest rung here is built from 900.
A break in the line is a club the set does not publish a loft for — it is never bridged, because joining across a gap would draw a loft the manufacturer never stated. Every brand's name for the gap wedge is pooled into one rung, since only 25 of 917 sets publish two of them.
PING Blueprint · 7-iron
The 7-iron of every comparable iron set on record publishing both loft and lie — 889 of them, binned by density.
PING Blueprint · 7-iron — the leading edge sits behind the line of the shaft by the published figure, drawn to the scale marked and seen from the toe, which is the one view that shows offset truly: it runs perpendicular to the face, so a picture square to the face would have it pointing at you. The outline is a nominal iron — this database holds no head geometry — so the gap the arrow spans is the only measured thing in the frame. The dashed edge is the median of the 7-iron of 580 iron sets on record that publish one.
PING's published offset at each club, over the middle half (p25–p75) of every comparable set on record that publishes one.
A break in the line is a club the set does not publish an offset for — it is never bridged, because joining across a gap would draw an offset the manufacturer never stated. Every brand's name for the gap wedge is pooled into one rung, since only 25 of 917 sets publish two of them.
What this record publishes. Across 9 options: loft, lie, length and swingweight on every one.
9 rows, unsorted, collapsed — use the button below the table to show every option.
| 20 | 3-iron | RH / LH | 59 | 0.12 | 5 | 38.75 | D2 |
| 23.5 | 4-iron | RH / LH | 59.8 | 0.1 | 6 | 38.25 | D2 |
| 27 | 5-iron | RH / LH | 60.5 | 0.08 | 7 | 37.75 | D2 |
| 30.5 | 6-iron | RH / LH | 61.3 | 0.06 | 8 | 37.25 | D2 |
| 34 | 7-iron | RH / LH | 62 | 0.05 | 9 | 36.75 | D2 |
| 38 | 8-iron | RH / LH | 62.8 | 0.04 | 10 | 36.25 | D2 |
| 42 | 9-iron | RH / LH | 63.5 | 0.03 | 11.5 | 35.75 | D2 |
| 46 | PW | RH / LH | 64.1 | 0.02 | 13 | 35.5 | D3 |
| 17 | 2 | RH / LH | 58.3 | 0.14 | 4 | 39.25 | D2 |
Head geometry doesn't change with the shaft, so it's stated once. A blank cell means PING did not publish that figure — we don't estimate.
Where this club's published fitting specs sit among comparable clubs — never how good it is.
| Figure | Published | All irons | 2019 | Among its peers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Strongest-lofted 7-iron | 34° | =677th of 953 | too few comparable clubs to place | =43rd of 68 PING irons · =246th of 508 low-handicap irons |
| Most offset at the 7-iron | 0.05" | 578th of 583 | too few comparable clubs to place | 54th of 54 PING irons · 278th of 283 low-handicap irons |
| Widest loft range | 29° | =629th of 1,104 | too few comparable clubs to place | =53rd of 71 PING irons · =241st of 508 low-handicap irons |
| Most upright lie | 62° | =539th of 941 | too few comparable clubs to place | =34th of 66 PING irons · =264th of 505 low-handicap irons |
| Longest | 36.8" | =700th of 894 | too few comparable clubs to place | =37th of 64 PING irons · =345th of 466 low-handicap irons |
This iron reads as built for a low-handicap player — our deterministic reading of 7-iron offset 0.05", 7-iron loft 34°. A design classification, not a rule about who may play it. How the bands are read →
Or go straight to a comparison: vs Titleist 620 CB · vs Callaway EPIC Forged Iron Set · vs TaylorMade P∙7TW Irons
Other PING irons on record. Irons released in 2019 by other brands, one per brand. Nothing here is a ranking or a recommendation. Browse every club →
2 of 3 parts of this club page are built, and we're filling in the rest.
The site is in beta and the database is still being built, so expect gaps. Know something we don't? Help us fill it in — a link to where it's published is worth more than anything else you could send.