“We want to help every golfer hit it like Bubba,” Ping says. “We want them to hit it high and stop it near the pin.”

For golfers not named Bubba Watson, hitting high-flying iron shots that go at the target isn’t an everyday thing. That’s why Ping aims to create the highest-launching, easiest-hit-irons that it possibly can for golfers who may not hit the center of the club face on every shot.

Ping says these aren’t “game-improvement” irons, but rather game-enjoyment irons. So with its new G400 irons, compared to its G predecessors, Ping has increased launch, raised MOI (moment of inertia, a measure of forgiveness), added ball speed, and changed the looks, feel and sound to “make the game more enjoyable” for golfers.

Fair enough. But what exactly has changed?

cd7c3f30fab17efec2140d79dd8b5a72

For its G400 irons, which are made from Hyper 17-4 stainless steel, Ping says it has “enhanced the entire back cavity,” and it has also added an undercut behind the top rail for more face flex at impact. The top rail works by “relaxing” at impact, which helps to “catapult” the ball higher in the air. To support the flex of the face, Ping’s back cavity has its COR-Eye technology, identified by the circular structure at the center of the club head. The performance enhancements lead to a 4 percent higher launch, a 4 percent increase in MOI and 5 yards of more total distance.

461fd9efa731a8fb290c784841521300

You’ll also notice a large badge on the back cavity that overlays the COR-eye technology. The badging is made from elastomer and aluminum, a combination that Ping says will dampen the sound and enhance the feel quality.

e8454be4c2a78a8d3395a4bfdbab130f

At address, the club heads will also look a bit more compact, according to Ping. That’s because the flange has been smoothed out, and there’s a sharper face radius. This will also help to conceal the offset of the club. Ping says the iron may “look slimmer even though it’s a larger iron.”

c4f647f9e72d833d0fbdf9e72091d495

For the first time in a G-Series iron, Ping has made the finish of the these irons out of HydroPearl Chrome, which you may recognize from its Glide 2.0 wedges and the G400 Crossover. This finish is said to increase face friction and better repel water to reduce fliers and produce a more consistent ball flight in a variety of turf conditions.

4a02d2b39e1dab9ec9d882f7c69fc530

The stock shaft in the Ping G400 irons (4-PW, UW, SW, LW) is an Alta CB graphite shaft powered by Ping’s AWT (ascending weight technology). The shafts range from 85 grams in the short irons to 68 grams in the long irons — the lighter long irons will help golfer create speed, height and distance, while the heavier short irons will help maximize control. Other available shafts include Nippon Pro Modus3, True Temper XP95, Ping AWT 2.0, KBS, Project X and Dynamic Gold shafts.

For more distance, a lower trajectory or both, Ping will also offer its familiar Power Spec option, which means the lofts are bent strong; between 1.5 and 2.5 degrees depending on the loft (higher-lofted irons have less bend compared to the standard lofts).

Ping’s G400 irons will sell for $125 apiece with steel shafts, and $137.50 with graphite.

Related

Discussion: See what GolfWRX members are saying about Ping’s G400 irons

Your Reaction?
  • 182
  • LEGIT9
  • WOW7
  • LOL9
  • IDHT0
  • FLOP9
  • OB2
  • SHANK20

Previous articleHow to Maintain Great Posture in Your Golf Swing
Next articlePing introduces new face material with its G400 Fairways, Hybrids and Crossover
Andrew Tursky is the Assistant Editor at GolfWRX. He played on the Hawaii Pacific University Men's Golf team while earning a Masters degree in Communications. He also played college golf at Rutgers University, where he graduated with a Bachelor of Arts in Journalism.

14 COMMENTS

Not seeing your comment? Read our rules and regulations. Click "Report comment" to alert GolfWRX moderators to offensive or inappropriate comments.
  1. As a seasoned club fitter I must insist, stronger lofts don’t always equal more distance. Loft is just a number to gauge the angle of the club face. Stronger lofts would always equal more distance ONLY if every club were made the same, out of the same material(s).
    Trajectory, not distance, should be closely examined when looking at lofts. If you have two irons, (both 8 irons for example) and one is 2 degrees stronger than the other, but both are flying the same height and trajectory, is loft really a factor?
    example: 43 degree wedge flying higher than a 45 degree wedge and going 5 yards less. Shouldn’t the 43 fly lower and go 5 yards farther than the 45 degree wedge? Yes, ONLY if they are the same make, model, style, material etc etc etc.

    It happens ALL the time.

    The way clubs are made- what they are made of, how they are weighted and designed- help to determine the “loft” club companies must produce clubs with. Nowadays, club companies have to make them “stronger” (than standard) because if they didn’t, the ball flight would be much too high. Way higher than optimal.

    Try this for yourself. Test a blade at your local golf shop on a monitor. Then try a newer game improvement iron (same iron ie. 8 iron to 8 iron) with a “stronger” loft. Try to keep the shaft flex and weight similar as well.
    I guarantee the “stronger” lofted club goes higher.

  2. I recently had a club fitting and tried out the G400’s against Cobra F7’s and Mizuno JPX 900s. I did research in advance to understand their lofts, lengths and lie compared to my current Mizuno 825 Pros which are already +1″ and +2deg UP (I’m 6’6).
    I wasn’t surprised by the lower lofts of each brand as they compete to say their clubs hit longer and straighter than other brands. If people fall for the gimmick, I feel sorry that they don’t do their research.
    I was hitting the g400 slightly better than the other 2, I liked the sound and feel as well as the frosted look because it wasn’t glaring at me on the hot sunny day as was the case with the F7s.
    I probably would have been happy with any of the 3 though. Aesthetically, the g400’s are a little “fatter” than the other brands I tried as well as my current set, but I can overlook that as it’s on the bottom of the club which I don’t see while hitting the ball. I decided to go with the G400’s as I also plan to get the new driver which I was hitting farther and straighter (see my name) than other drivers I’ve tried (Cobra F7, JPX-900 and 2017 M2 driver) and I like less club brands in my bag. I also like Bubba.
    The other nice thing about their lofts being lower (and I’m one to tell people what degree loft I hit as opposed to a club number when they ask) is that I need to buy less clubs. My old set is 4-GW…8 irons. In the G400’s I only need 6-UW….2 clubs less and less money spent.
    Appreciate everyone’s thoughts and comments on these. Buy em if you like em, avoid em if you don’t.

  3. You want your irons to go 10 yards farther you say? No problem. Just paint new numbers on them. Now a 9I becomes an 8I and flies 10 yards farther than a 9I. See how simple that was?

    Absurd, you might say? That’s EXACTLY what’s going on with irons. Stronger lofts and longer lengths are what define the next iron up in a set.

    The higher COR brought about by slots (pioneered by TM, copied by a lot of others, including Ping now) add distance irrespective of changes in loft and length, certainly. But the rest is a con. Be sure you’re not being taken in by claims of longer lengths if the increase is due (in part or in full) to lengthening the shaft and/or strengthening the loft.

    Oh, and if you DO go for longer lengths, be sure to get fit. Your lie angle just changed and you’re going to need flatter lies than usual. But I suspect most people suckered in by this stuff just grab ‘em off the rack and go. (Ironic, since Ping pioneered the idea of pre-fit lie angles with their dot system).

    These Ping G-400 look like great clubs and are a technical advancement over the Ping G. But if you already play the Ping G, don’t expect much (if any) real improvement. The distinctions do not necessarily add up to a real difference.

  4. Nice to see Ping decided to sell Taylormade PSi irons. Ho hum.

    Higher launch angles mitigated by stronger lofts with higher COR. So they go a little farther, in part by fudging the specs so the 8 is really a 7, the 5 is really a 4, etc. The other part is the everyone-is-doing-it speed slots to increase COR.

    None of this is bad. But none of it is new. Except for Ping, that is.

    Still the 17-4 steel. Better get the dot color right, ’cause you ain’t bending them much.

    Having a set add 5 yards, especially when part of those come from jacked-up lofts and longer graphite shafts, is a distinction without a difference. Your game won’t improve a bit with these compared to the previous G series.

    There have been very few real leaps in irons over the past 5 decades:

    — Cast irons (cheap)–Spaulding
    — Cavity backs (forgiving)–Ping
    — U grooves (spin, then banned, but really never left)–Ping
    — Cavity backs with forged steel (forgiving and soft)–Hogan Edge
    — Slots (higher MOI and COR)–Taylormade
    — Single-length irons that actually work–Wishon, Cleveland, et al

    That’s the list, I think. These new irons by Ping are a few years late.

    • And the point made is what? That every new iron release should have new, groundbreaking tech? Completely, absolutely literally impossible. That new irons should only be released when new tech has been developed? In modern capitalism, essentially impossible. Like every other golf company, they feel pressure to “introduce” new products once or twice every year, replacing their entire lineup more or less every two. If they don’t, they will be the easiest target in the world for competitors’ marketing; Ping has been left behind, Ping is standing still; Don’t play with 5 year old technology… And they would likely lose their tour presence.

      The solution would be to dial back capitalism and increase education; smarter consumers with less hyaenas trying to tear all the money out of their pockets at every turn. Both of those goals would be moving further away currently – at least for the USA.

      On the other hand – golf is a luxury to begin with, so it’s not the first place to show grave concern with hyped marketing and phantom tech. In this arena, there isn’t a shortage of choices, including an eBay full of enough clubs to last eternity, and last year’s models with significant discounts.

      • You’re looking at it from Ping’s perspective. I was commenting from a player’s perspective. And from that player’s perspective, this release offers nothing new. This is just Karsten catching up.

  5. Nice write up, a few more changes than I expected. I will check them on a launch monitor and compare them to the last model. I will purchase or not dependent upon the outcome.

    • Break it down this way, make you wedge 44 degrees instead of 47, simple. oh, and add a half inch while you are at it. Wow, is this Wedge long. As PT Barnum said, there is a sucker born every minute. But, PING is also is and has made the best clubs, they are just cheating to sell em.

      • loft is always relative to the geometry of the head, tuning the trajectory. Old lofts would create a ballooning effect. PING uses a progressive length chance where the long irons a +1/2 – +1/4 longer and it transitions to the “old” standard in the control clubs like a 9, PW, etc. If you like the old lofts, PING is 100% custom and will accomodate!

  6. These look like anyone with a 10+ hdcp would do well by giving them a try. No gimmicks like slots or cage bars. I tend to gravitate towards a shiny metal rather than the frost that these have. Ping will sell a lot of these if the distance is really there

  7. I love the look of these new improved G400s. I particularly love the HydroPearl Chrome finish. I don’t want my clubs reflecting glare at address cause it’s too annoying. These are lovely awesome clubs and will find a place in my bag soon. Good job Ping.

LEAVE A REPLY