PING iron
The PING i Iron Set is an iron in 9 options from 20°–50°.
Built against the iron fieldpublished figures only
Image not published
Where this club lands
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 32° — 60th percentile, weaker-lofted than 60% of the 889 sets that publish one. The median is 32°.
Loft ladder against the field
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.
PING i Iron Setmiddle half of the field
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.
The head half
Read the set through
PING i Iron Set · 7 Iron
- LOFT · X AXIS32°
- 60th percentile — weaker-lofted than 60% of the 889 sets that publish a 7-iron
- LIE · Y AXIS62°
- 44th percentile — flatter than 56% of the 889 sets that publish a 7-iron
7-iron field: Loft × Lie
The 7-iron of every comparable iron set on record publishing both loft and lie — 889 of them, binned by density.
Offset
PING i Iron Set · 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.
Offset through the set, against the field
PING's published offset at each club, over the middle half (p25–p75) of every comparable set on record that publishes one.
PING i Iron Setmiddle half of the field
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.
Specifications by option
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 | 60 | 0.21 | 39 | D1 |
| 23 | 4 Iron | 60.5 | 0.19 | 38.5 | D1 |
| 26 | 5 Iron | 61 | 0.17 | 38 | D1 |
| 29 | 6 Iron | 61.5 | 0.14 | 37.5 | D1 |
| 32 | 7 Iron | 62 | 0.09 | 37 | D1 |
| 36 | 8 Iron | 62.8 | 0.07 | 36.5 | D1 |
| 41 | 9 Iron | 63.5 | 0.05 | 36 | D1 |
| 45 | PW | 64.1 | 0.03 | 35.5 | D2 |
| 50 | UW | 64.1 | 0.03 | 35.5 | 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.
Measured against comparable clubs
Where this club's published fitting specs sit among comparable clubs — never how good it is.
| Figure | Published | All irons | 2015 | Among its peers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Strongest-lofted 7-iron | 32° | =438th of 953 | too few comparable clubs to place | =26th of 68 PING irons · =48th of 508 low-handicap irons |
| Most offset at the 7-iron | 0.09" | =496th of 583 | too few comparable clubs to place | =38th of 54 PING irons · =196th of 283 low-handicap irons |
| Widest loft range | 30° | =552nd of 1,104 | too few comparable clubs to place | 52nd of 71 PING irons · =191st 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 | 37" | =265th of 894 | too few comparable clubs to place | =1st of 64 PING irons · =83rd of 466 low-handicap irons |
player level — derived
This iron reads as built for a low-handicap player — our deterministic reading of 7-iron offset 0.09", 7-iron loft 32°. A design classification, not a rule about who may play it. How the bands are read →
Or go straight to a comparison: vs Cleveland CG Black CB Iron Set · vs Cobra Fly-Z Iron Set · vs Mizuno JPX EZ Forged Iron Set
More irons
PING Karsten Iron Set 2014 · 24°–55° · 8 options PING G400 Iron Set 2017 · 20.5°–58° · 10 options PING i210 discontinued 2018 · 19°–50° · 9 options PING Blueprint discontinued 2019 · 17°–46° · 9 options Cleveland CG Black CB Iron Set 2015 · 22°–56° · 9 options Cobra Fly-Z Iron Set 2015 · 17°–60° · 11 options Mizuno JPX EZ Forged Iron Set 2015 · 22°–50° · 8 options TaylorMade RSi TP Iron Set 2015 · 17°–47° · 9 options
Other PING irons on record. Irons released in 2015 by other brands, one per brand. Nothing here is a ranking or a recommendation. Browse every club →
What's on this page
In progress2 of 3 built
2 of 3 parts of this club page are built, and we're filling in the rest.
- PING's own specs, not built yet.We haven't found PING's own page for this club yet — everything here comes from the sources listed at the foot of the page.
- Published options, built.9 configurations with 5 of the 7 specs an iron can publish.
- Stock shaft, built.PING names no stock shaft for this club on the sources we hold, so there's nothing to link.
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.