When you look up iterative in the dictionary, a staff picture of PING’s R&D team would be a fair accompanying visual. It’s not that other manufacturers don’t work towards continuous improvement (they do) but, with PING, the seemingly minute details become the meat of the story.
This leads us to the PING G440 fairways and hybrids where everything stays mostly the same as the G430 line. However, each update and alteration have a clear objective and compelling performance implication. Put differently, when PING changes something, there’s generally a good reason and important context that golfers should consider.
PING G440 fairways
Because I’m in a bit of a mathy mood, let’s talk about constants and variables. As you peruse the PING G440 line, most of it looks familiar. The models (SFT, MAX, LST) remain as does the basic material construction of each model.
The G440 Max and SFT again use a high strength C300 stainless steel material for the face and 17-4 stainless steel for the body. In addition, PING engineers are sticking with a Facewrap structure alongside its proprietary Spinsistency face curvature.
A quick refresher if you’re so inclined: Facewrap simply means the face material wraps into the crown and sole of the club to increase face flex (and ball speeds) over a larger percentage of the face. Spinsistency is a modified roll profile, particularly low on the face to help promote more consistent spin and increased ball speeds.
Quick note: PING believes there’s more performance it can squeeze out of this blueprint so I wouldn’t expect any complete redesigns in the near future.
What’s new?
As with the G440 drivers, arguably the most important update is something you can’t see. It’s PING’s “free hosel design.” When you think of a typical hosel adapter, it’s a single, cylindrical metal sleeve. With the updated design, PING removes a chunk of the middle portion of the sleeve, leaving the top and bottom sections. If you’re picturing a game of Jenga on the kitchen table, I’m with you.
This sounds structurally questionable but not to worry. PING assures us that, even with less material, the integrity of the hosel design is sound. Again, the primary reason for the new hosel is to free up some weight (a bit over 11 grams in the fairway woods) which PING uses primarily to shift CG lower. That sounds easy enough. However, PING increased the face height on every fairway model by three to seven percent. Absent any alterations, doing so would pull the CG higher, hence the need to find some discretionary mass to reposition lower in the head.
The net result is the same CG height relative to the ground as G430 fairways but given the taller faces, the CG location is effectively lower and more in line with center-face impact.
It’s an easy detail to miss but worth noting that the sole weight on the G440 line is more embedded in the construction which gives the golfer a more consistent resting face angle and should assist with cleaner turf interaction. Subtle, yet profound – potentially.
Let’s talk models
The general theme across all models is taller faces and lower CG. In terms of face height, the G440 SFT has the most shallow face, given that it’s likely used mostly off the turf. It’s also the most draw-biased model of the three and it’s designed with the intent to provide a higher overall flight and trajectory.
As expected, the G440 MAX sits in the middle of the bell curve regarding trajectory, spin and face height. Compared to the G430 Max, ball speed is similar but with a tick more launch and less spin. The net result is eight percent tighter dispersion according to PING player testing.
Then there’s the G440 LST, the one that impressed me most during my range session at PING HQ. The Carbon Fly Wrap crown, deeper overall profile and new HST 220 Ti face material suggest the LST’s priority is as a viable driver alternative. That’s accurate. However, for golfers with a driver swing speed of 100+ mph, it’s plenty capable off the fairway as well.
At address, the deeper face doesn’t readily suggest a club that’s going to be easy to elevate off the fairway. I didn’t find that to be the case and I suspect a good bit of that is due to the new face material and lower CG location.
In the G440 LST, PING saved some weight from the free hosel design, thinner bonding joints on the Carbon Fly Wrap crown and the HST 220 face material which is eight percent thinner than the Beta Ti 2041 it replaces. A heavy 85-gram sole weight is the beneficiary of this harvested weight which helps create the lower CG location.
Compared to the G430 LST, the G440 should be a couple of steps longer off the tee with similar launch and dispersion. Off the turf, it’s one mph faster with marginally higher launch and similar dispersion. Again, these figures are based on PING player testing.
Fun PING G440 info nugget
PING explored HST 220 as a possible face material in the G440 drivers. One small problem: it was too hot. But because fairway woods have smaller faces, it was a better material pathway to pursue for fairway woods.
Which G440 fairway model is right for you?
PINGs approach to fitting is holistic in the sense that each new model is designed with a specific use case in mind which is largely determined by what the other 13 clubs in the bag are intended to do. With that in mind, PING is adding a G440 LST 5-wood and G440 MAX 4-wood. The G440 SFT offerings will remain the same as the G430 line.
Leveraging several data sets, including Arccos and PINGs proprietary 3D motion capture system FOCAL, the R&D team has been able to draw several meaningful conclusions.
For example:
- If your driver swing speed is 85-90 mph, the lowest-lofted fairway wood you should carry is a 4-wood.
- If your driver swing speed is around 100 mph, your optimal fairway wood setup is 3-wood, 7-wood, 4-iron.
- If your driver swing speed is about 80 mph, the likely setup is 4-wood, 7-wood, 5-hybrid.
Before you hoist your torches and pitchforks, I’m aware that fitting guidelines are not absolute truths and some individuals might find success with alternative setups.
That said, PING’s data is quite comprehensive and compelling.
Ping G440 hybrid
Rather than developing discrete hybrid models, PINGs approach was to create six lofts, (2-7) incorporating LST, MAX and SFT attributes where necessary. In terms of offline bias, the G440 2-hybrid is the LST (fade bias), 3 and 4 are neutral (MAX) and 5,6 and 7 have varying amounts of draw bias like the SFT.
To achieve this, PING shifts the CG from toe to middle to slightly heel side.
Here’s some interesting background information. On the LPGA, 90 percent of PING contracted players use a 4-hybrid and 60 percent a 5-hybrid. Given that the average LPGA swing speed is similar to the targeted male PING G series player, the tour staff serves as a perfect source of feedback and on-course R&D.
In terms of changes as compared to G430 hybrids, the G440 has a bit less face height (so more in line with the fairway woods) which allows for a slightly thinner (six percent) face. The overall shaping is more balanced (less toe bias) and the CG is 12 percent lower largely due to the free hosel design.
To create better gapping solutions, PING felt the hybrids needed a higher trajectory (and better stopping power) but with a bit more distance. The thinner face and lower CG provided the speed boost and an increase in static loft bumped up the flight. So, mission accomplished there.
My $0.05
Sitting with PING engineers in a meeting room discussing new equipment feels more like a symposium at a small liberal arts college than you might think. What’s clear is that PING is comfortable with a launch some might consider predictable, even boring.
But plenty of golfers take comfort in this approach, one that breeds confidence because the tech story is based in substantive R&D without the need for creative storytelling or audacious claims. It’s a good bit of the reason that in our annual brand surveys it’s clear that consumers trust PING’s approach and continue to support it.
If there’s a criticism of PING, it’s that fairway woods haven’t always had the horsepower to keep up with the industry leaders, particularly in the standard/core model (for PING that’s the MAX). I’ll allow our Most Wanted testing to provide a summative assessment but my sense is that the G440 line will more than hold its own.
And yet, focusing on the performance of any single club largely ignores the benefit of PINGs Co-Pilot fitting ecosystem which works to optimize both distance and trajectory gapping for every club in the bag. The message here is that while we often evaluate a club based on it’s individual attributes, playing better golf requires 14 clubs, each with optimized distance, trajectory and flight characteristics.
Pricing and Availability
PING G440 Fairways are available in the following models/lofts: MAX – 3/15°, 4/17°, 5/19°, 7/21°, and 9/24°, SFT – 3/16°, 5/19° and 7/22°, LST 3/15° and 5/19°
Stock shafts are PING Alta CB Blue 65 and PING Alta Quick 35/45
MSRP is $385 (MAX and SFT), $600 (LST)
PING G440 Hybrids are available in the following lofts: 2/17°, 3/20°, 4/23°, 5/26°, 6/30° and 7/34°
Stock shafts are PING Alta CB Blue 70 and PING Alta Quick 35/45
MSRP is $325
For more information, visit PING.com
Looking for a deal? The award-winning PING G430 Hybrid is now heavily discounted!
The post Why I’m Intrigued by The PING G440 Fairways and Hybrids appeared first on MyGolfSpy.
