Connect with us

Equipment

2012 PING Anser Irons: All you need to know

Published

on

For the complete write up on GolfWRX’s trip to PING HQ, click here.

by BJackson

Having arranged plans to travel to Phoenix, I was fully expecting to see the successors to PING’s S56 irons. It seemed a natural fit as October marks 2 years since the S56 release and with rumors surrounding an ‘S55’, well…turns out I was dead wrong. While at PING headquarters, Wyatt (SheriffBooth), Greg (pga43), and myself were able to get a preview of the forthcoming Anser line. Boy were we surprised!

Initial impressions are simple –
S56 meets i20, but forged. It’s a slimmed down version of the previous Anser iron. Personally I have gamed S56s, i20s, and currently have 712 AP2s. These new Anser irons remind me exactly what I’ve been looking for – they remind me exactly of Titleist’s AP2s. I know that many complaints surrounding the previous Anser irons involved them being too large, too much offset, etc. Well trust me when I say that PING addressed those complaints. They have soft lines, low offset (just barely more than S56, less than i20), and a crisp feeling at impact and going through the turf. Forged from 8620 steel, with some tungsten in the sole, the feeling at impact made me think of a cross between i20 and a typical forged blade. Very solid. It comes in a brushed satin finish, come stock with your choice of PING CFS or Project X shafts – but get this – can be ordered with ANY shaft offered through PING WRX at no upcharge, save Project X PXi. That’s right, ANY SHAFT upgrade, as offered by PING WRX (they have a rather large selection), except PXi, free of charge. Pretty cool, eh?

As for performance, I had limited time with them. Just a little warm up in the morning before hitting drivers and the game of ‘WRX’ Wyatt and I played against Marty Jertson. I did enjoy my time with them at PING’s range, but would really benefit from more time with them to give a fair review. Let me say I find them very intriguing, very similar to my AP2s, and a set I really, really want to try out. I think this is a set of clubs that will get plenty of positive feedback from those that use them. An overall balanced, stylish, performance based set of irons that provide the best of everything possible from a technological and aesthetic perspective. Multi-material, high MOI, stabilization bars that help flight the irons so long irons fly higher and short irons fly lower. These clubs are really the complete package and I only wish I had more time to test them out side by side with something I’m more familiar with to get a baseline comparison.

That all said, here is what you boys want, pictures! Included at the bottom are comparison shots with the previous generation Ansers.

VIEW WHAT OUR MEMBERS OUR SAYING ABOUT THE PING ANSER IRONS IN THE FORUMS.

[youtube id=”abn-ZOpzrgM” width=”600″ height=”350″]

  • Launch the ball higher with the long irons and lower with the short irons for precise, consistent shot making
  • 8620 steel body combines with a dense tungsten weight and hollow sole to optimize the CG and elevate MOI
  • Predictable ball flights are achieved through progressive stabilizing bar technology
  • Bars angle out wider and are thinner, lowering the CG to launch the ball high in the long irons
  • Bars get vertical and thicker through the shorter irons to bring the ball in lower and more penetrating with high spin

 

Your Reaction?
  • 5
  • LEGIT0
  • WOW0
  • LOL0
  • IDHT0
  • FLOP0
  • OB0
  • SHANK0

Rob is a golf junkie that has been involved with GolfWRX since its inception in 2005. From designing headcovers, to creating logos to authoring articles to social media management to sales and marketing, Rob has done it all. Born and bred in NJ. Favorite golfers: Phil, Freddie. Favorite club: Driver.

19 Comments

19 Comments

  1. Eric

    Dec 26, 2012 at 3:44 am

    Ive hit em inside off a mat. They seemed to me more solid than anything else I hit.1400.00 is bit steep though, and not sure how Ping justifies the price. If I could get a set tossed my way for free, they would most likely be the ones in my bag.

  2. seb

    Sep 16, 2012 at 7:31 pm

    hdc 8

    Played those for the last 6 round, got them with px6.0. So far they seem more forgiving than ap2 but the feeling is as good, I loved the weight of the clubs.

  3. Jake

    Sep 4, 2012 at 11:49 pm

    The reason the Pings are $1400 is because they say “Ping” and or “Anser” on them. If they were stamped “Wilson Staff” they would be $700 bucks. If they were stamped “Wishon” you could get them custom spec’d with KBS C Taper, Nippon Modus, or Dynamic Gold Tour Issue for $700. Just the way it is.

    Good lookin’ sticks, for sure.

  4. Ping fan nc

    Sep 3, 2012 at 11:51 pm

    I just hit them side by side vs. Ping anser 2011 version and 712 ap2. Anser both had project x 6.0 and ap2 had Greg xp r300. In a work, answers superior in every way. Now difference between answers, very close call. I like the color scheme of 2011 but like then look at address of the new anser.

  5. strongbear0

    Aug 18, 2012 at 2:20 am

    I was all exited to order my new anser irons today expecting no shaft upcharge after reading this, but to my surprise there is an upcharge for everything including Dynamic Golds and even a grip upcharge for GP tour velvets. KBS C Tapers cost me an extra 21.00 a club. Big retailers ars charging 30-35.00 per club for the C taper upcharge, I ordered mine through a local pro shop. They felt amazing though, but at at almost 1,800 after shaft upcharge, grip upcharge and tax I’m starting to second guess my decision. Hopefully I’ll forget all that once they are in my bag.

  6. Scott

    Aug 9, 2012 at 8:01 pm

    Releasing next week at my local shop. Ping rep is there. I cannot wait to see these. Could be pulling the trigger!

  7. Billy

    Aug 7, 2012 at 10:41 am

    Well I have 2 sets of Anser irons 1 for show and 1 for play and just by looking at the new anser irons I know I must have a set because I do love my pressent set of anser irons

  8. Scott

    Aug 6, 2012 at 8:46 am

    Very curious to read some feedback on whoever gets a hold of these first.

  9. rj

    Aug 2, 2012 at 6:14 pm

    they remind me of the adams cb2 moreso than the a4. i love the feel, playability and forgiveness of my cb2s. so much so, that i truly believe they are the next “classic” iron. i wonder how they compare to these ansers.

  10. Scott

    Jul 27, 2012 at 3:50 pm

    I’m also curious. The author mentioned that these clubs “remind me of the AP2’s.” Then why not save $500 and just go with the AP2’s? What puts these clubs ahead of the AP2?

  11. Jordan Spangler

    Jul 25, 2012 at 11:11 pm

    So are they going to be less forgiving than the prior anser irons? I actually enjoyed a forged forgiving iron. I hope they are as good as last years.

  12. Scott

    Jul 25, 2012 at 10:13 pm

    Why are they so expensive? $1400????!!!!! What makes them $1400? The author says “they remind me of my AP2’s.” Why would someone buy these over the AP2’s and save around $500? Not disputing the writeup just trying to understand what these clubs are all about.

  13. Scott

    Jul 25, 2012 at 9:18 pm

    One question…..when.

  14. Mike Keck

    Jul 25, 2012 at 7:28 pm

    I can’t believe this, I wanted ping, I wanted forged, but the current Anser irons were a little big for my taste so I went with the S56. As I do LOVE them, i miss that unique forged feel and now even though I just dropped a wad of $$$ for my S56 not even 2 months ago, Im going to have to figure out how to get my hands on these. I need to stop visiting GolfWRX.

  15. georgia golfer

    Jul 25, 2012 at 4:40 pm

    Reminds me of Adams A4 tech with the stabilizing bars. Still, I am in the market for new clubs and I like ’em!

  16. Troy Vayanos

    Jul 25, 2012 at 3:21 pm

    I bought the S56 irons late last year and have enjoyed playing them. If PIng have made any improvement in them this can only be a good thing.

    An impressive looking iron!

  17. 2putttom

    Jul 25, 2012 at 3:01 pm

    Wow They are smaller then the previous ANSER and I love the report of no up charge for shafts excpt PXi which I can’t swing anyway. P.S I love my ANSER stix.

  18. Landon Waters

    Jul 25, 2012 at 2:01 pm

    So what’s the word on the release of an S55 iron?

    • johncoll62

      Jan 28, 2013 at 2:06 am

      I was told by my local pro that Ping are consolidating their range of irons. The new G25 has features that are a blend of the G and I series. The next I series will be a blended design with fetures of the I and S series. The next Anser will then become the new tour blade design pitched at the low to no handicapper market. The K series will be discontinued. Bottom line they will be reducing their options from 5 models to 3. That seems to be trend in the industry. Even TM & Callaway have limited their 2013 releases to 2 models

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Accessory Reviews

Review: FlightScope Mevo

Published

on

In 100 Words

The Mevo is a useful practice tool for amateur golfers and represents a step forward from previous offerings on the market. It allows golfers to practice indoors or outdoors and provides club speed, ball speed, smash factor, launch angle, spin rate, carry distance and flight time.

It also has a video capture mode that will overlay swing videos with the swing data of a specific swing. It is limited in its capabilities and its accuracy, though, which golfers should expect at this price point. All in all, it’s well worth the $499 price tag if you understand what you’re getting.

The Full Review

The FlightScope Mevo is a launch monitor powered by 3D Doppler radar. With a retail price of $499, it is obviously aimed to reach the end consumer as opposed to PGA professionals and club fitters.

The Mevo device itself is tiny. Like, really tiny. It measures 3.5-inches wide, 2.8-inches tall and 1.2-inches deep. In terms of everyday products, it’s roughly the size of an Altoids tin. It’s very easy to find room for it in your golf bag, and the vast majority of people at the range you may be practicing at won’t even notice it’s there. Apart from the Mevo itself, in the box you get a quick start guide, a charging cable, a carrying pouch, and some metallic stickers… more on those later. It has a rechargeable internal battery that reaches a full charge in about two hours and lasts for about four hours when fully charged.

As far as software goes, the Mevo pairs with the Mevo Golf app on your iOS or Android device. The app is free to download and does not require any subscription fees (unless you want to store and view videos of your swing online as opposed to using the memory on your device). The app is very easy to use even for those who aren’t tech savvy. Make sure you’re using the most current version of the firmware for the best results, though (I did experience some glitches at first until I did so). The settings menu does have an option to manually force firmware writing, but updates should happen automatically when you start using the device.

Moving through the menus, beginning sessions, editing shots (good for adding notes on things like strike location or wind) are all very easy. Video mode did give me fits the first time I used it, though, as it was impossible to maintain my connection between my phone and the Mevo while having the phone in the right location to capture video properly. The only way I could achieve this was by setting the Mevo as far back from strike location as the device would allow. Just something to keep in mind if you find you’re having troubles with video mode.

Screenshot of video capture mode with the FlightScope Mevo

Using the Mevo

When setting up the Mevo, it needs to be placed between 4-7 feet behind the golf ball, level with the playing surface and pointed down the target line. The distance you place the Mevo behind the ball does need to be entered into the settings menu before starting your session. While we’re on that subject, before hitting balls, you do need to select between indoor, outdoor, and pitching (ball flight less than 20 yards) modes, input your altitude and select video or data mode depending on if you want to pair your data with videos of each swing or just see the data by itself. You can also edit the available clubs to be monitored, as you will have to tell the Mevo which club you’re using at any point in time to get the best results. Once you get that far, you’re pretty much off to the races.

Testing the Mevo

I tested the FlightScope Mevo with Brad Bachand at Man O’ War Golf Center in Lexington, Kentucky. Brad is a member of the PGA and has received numerous awards for golf instruction and club fitting. I wanted to put the Mevo against the best device FlightScope has to offer and, luckily, Brad does use his $15,000 FlightScope X3 daily. We had both the FlightScope Mevo and Brad’s FlightScope X3 set up simultaneously, so the numbers gathered from the two devices were generated from the exact same strikes. Brad also set up the two devices and did all of the ball striking just to maximize our chances for success.

The day of our outdoor session was roughly 22 degrees Fahrenheit. There was some wind on that day (mostly right to left), but it wasn’t a major factor. Our setup is pictured below.

Outdoor testing setup with FlightScope X3 (foreground) and Mevo

The results of our outdoor testing are shown below. The testing was conducted with range balls, and we did use the metallic stickers. The range balls used across all the testing were all consistently the same brand. Man O’ War buys all new range balls once a year and these had been used all throughout 2017.  The 2018 batch had not yet been purchased at the time that testing was conducted.

Raw outdoor data captured with range balls including metallic stickers. Mevo data (blue) and X3 data (orange) were both generated from the same exact shots.

You’ll notice some peculiar data in the sand wedge spin category. To be honest, I don’t fully know what contributed to the X3 measuring such low values. While the Mevo’s sand wedge spin numbers seem more believable, you could visibly see that the X3 was much more accurate on carry distance. Below is a quick summary of the percent differences between each of the parameters as presented by the Mevo and the X3 in our outdoor session when separated out for each club. As previously mentioned, though, take sand wedge spin with a grain of salt.

Table showing the percent difference of each parameter between Mevo and X3 grouped by club (outdoor testing).

The first thing we noticed was that the Mevo displays its numbers while the golf ball is still in midair, so it was clear that it wasn’t watching the golf ball the entire time like the X3. According to the Mevo website, carry distance, height and flight time are all calculated while club speed, ball speed, launch angle and spin rate are measured. As for the accuracy of the measured parameters, the Mevo’s strength is ball speed. The accuracy of the other measured ball parameters (launch angle and spin rate) is questionable depending on certain factors (quality of strike, moisture on the clubface and ball, quality of ball, etc). I would say it ranges between “good” or “very good” and “disappointing” with most strikes being categorized as “just okay.”

As for the calculated parameters of carry distance, height and time, those vary a decent amount. Obviously, when the measurements of the three inputs become less accurate, the three outputs will become less accurate as a result. Furthermore, according to FlightScope, the Mevo’s calculations are not accounting for things like temperature, humidity, and wind. The company has also stated, though, that future updates will likely adjust for these parameters by using location services through the app.

Now, let’s talk about those metallic stickers. According to the quick start guide, the Mevo needs a sticker on every golf ball you hit, and before you hit each ball, the ball needs to be placed such that the sticker is facing the target. It goes without saying that it doesn’t sound like a whole lot of fun to spend time putting those stickers on every ball, let alone balls that will never come back to you if you’re at a public driving range. Obviously, people are going to want to avoid using the stickers if they can, so do they really matter? Below is a table of data showing the percent difference between the Mevo’s data and the X3’s data of what we collected outdoors with a driver and range balls with and without the use of the stickers.

Table showing how the percent difference of each parameter changes between Mevo and X3 when you use the metallic stickers and when you don’t

The FlightScope website says that the metallic stickers “are needed in order for the Mevo to accurately measure ball spin.” We observed pretty much the same as shown in the table above. The website also states they are working on alternative solutions to stickers (possibly a metallic sharpie), which I think is wise.

Another thing we thought would be worth testing is the impact of different golf balls. Below is a table of data showing the percent difference between the Mevo’s data and the X3’s data of what we collected outdoors with a driver and range balls as compared to Pro V1’s. All of this data was collected using the metallic stickers.

Table showing how the percent difference of each parameter changes between Mevo and X3 when you switch from range balls to Pro V1’s

As shown above, the data gets much closer virtually across the board when you use better quality golf balls. Just something else to keep in mind when using the Mevo.

Indoor testing requires 8 feet of ball flight (impact zone to hitting net), which was no problem for us. Our setup is pictured below. All of the indoor testing was conducted with Titleist Pro V1 golf balls using the metallic stickers.

Indoor testing setup with FlightScope X3 (foreground) and Mevo

The results of our indoor session are shown below.

Raw indoor data captured with Pro V1’s including metallic stickers. Mevo data (blue) and X3 data (orange) were both generated from the same exact shots.

Below is a quick summary of the percent differences between each of the parameters as presented by the Mevo and the X3 in our indoor session when separated out for each club.

Table showing the percent difference of each parameter between Mevo and X3 grouped by club (indoor testing)

On the whole, the data got much closer together between the two devices in our indoor session. I would think a lot of that can be attributed to the use of quality golf balls and to removing outdoor factors like wind and temperature (tying into my previous comment above).

As far as overall observations between all sessions, the most striking thing was that the Mevo consistently gets more accurate when you hit really good, straight shots. When you hit bad shots, or if you hit a fade or a draw, it gets less and less accurate.

The last parameter to address is club speed, which came in around 5 percent different on average between the Mevo and X3 based on all of the shots recorded. The Mevo was most accurate with the driver at 2.1 percent different from the X3 over all strikes and it was the least accurate with sand wedge by far. Obviously, smash factor accuracy will follow club speed for the most part since ball speed is quite accurate. Over every shot we observed, the percent difference on ball speed was 1.2 percent on average between the Mevo and the X3. Again, the Mevo was least accurate with sand wedges. If I remove all sand wedge shots from the data, the average percent difference changes from 1.2 percent to 0.7 percent, which is very, very respectable.

When it comes to the different clubs used, the Mevo was by far most accurate with mid irons. I confirmed this with on-course testing on a relatively flat 170-yard par-3 as well. Carry distances in that case were within 1-2 yards on most shots (mostly related to quality of strike). With the driver, the Mevo was reasonably close, but I would also describe it as generous. It almost always missed by telling me that launch angle was higher, spin rate was lower and carry distance was farther than the X3. Generally speaking, the Mevo overestimated our driver carries by about 5 percent. Lastly, the Mevo really did not like sand wedges at all. Especially considering those shots were short enough that you could visibly see how far off the Mevo was with its carry distance. Being 10 yards off on a 90 yard shot was disappointing.

Conclusion

The Mevo is a really good product if you understand what you’re getting when you buy it. Although the data isn’t good enough for a PGA professional, it’s still a useful tool that gives amateurs reasonable feedback while practicing. It’s also a fair amount more accurate than similar products in its price range, and I think it could become even better with firmware updates as Flightscope improves upon its product.

This is a much welcomed and very promising step forward in consumer launch monitors, and the Mevo is definitely worth a look if you’re in the market for one.

Your Reaction?
  • 19
  • LEGIT1
  • WOW0
  • LOL1
  • IDHT0
  • FLOP2
  • OB1
  • SHANK5

Continue Reading

pga tour

Sergio Garcia WITB 2018

Published

on

Equipment is accurate as of the 2018 Honda Classic (2/20/2018).

Driver: Callaway Rogue Sub Zero (9 degrees)
Shaft: Mitsubishi KuroKage Dual Core 70TX

3 Wood: Callaway Rogue 3+ (13.5 degrees)
Shaft: Mitsubishi KuroKage XT 80TX

5 Wood: Callaway Rogue Sub Zero (18 degrees)
Shaft: Mitsubishi KuroKage XT 80TX

Irons: Callaway Apex Pro 16 (3, 4), Callaway Apex MB 18 (5-9 iron)
Shafts: Nippon Modus Tour 130x

Wedges: Callaway Mack Daddy 4 (48-10S, 54-10S, 58-08C)
Shafts: Nippon Modus Tour 130x

Putter: Odyssey Toulon Azalea
Grip: Super Stroke 1.0 SGP

Golf Ball: Callaway Chrome Soft

Related:

Discussion: See what GolfWRX members are saying about Garcia’s clubs.

Your Reaction?
  • 38
  • LEGIT3
  • WOW1
  • LOL1
  • IDHT0
  • FLOP0
  • OB0
  • SHANK0

Continue Reading

pga tour

Gary Woodland WITB 2018

Published

on

Equipment is accurate as of the 2018 Honda Classic (2/19/2018).

Driver: TaylorMade M3 440 (9 degrees)
Shaft: Acra Tour-Z RPG

Fairway Woods: TaylorMade M2 2017 (15 degrees)
Shafts: Accra Tour-Zx 4100

Driving Iron: Titleist 716 T-MB (2)
Shaft: KBS Tour C-Taper 130 X

Irons: Titleist 716 MB (4-9)
Shafts: KBS Tour C-Taper Limited Edition Black PVD 130 X

Wedges: Titleist Vokey SM7 (48-10F, 52-08F, 56-10S), Callaway Mack Daddy PM Grind (60-10)
Shafts: KBS Tour C-Taper Limited X (48), KBS Hi-Rev Black PVD S-Flex (52, 56, 60)

Putter: Scotty Cameron Circle T 009
Grip: Scotty Cameron Pistol

Golf Ball: Bridgestone Tour B X

Related:

Discussion: See what GolfWRX members are saying about Woodland’s clubs. 

Your Reaction?
  • 3
  • LEGIT0
  • WOW0
  • LOL1
  • IDHT0
  • FLOP0
  • OB0
  • SHANK1

Continue Reading

19th Hole

Facebook

Trending