| Ping Eye 2 [message #1035147] |
Sat, 27 May 2006 22:36 |
|
Can someone please explain why one would choose the copper version over
the traditional eye 2 model?Do they swing/hit differently with the same
shaft / grip,etc? Are they better suited for a certain type golfer or
is it purely aesthetics?
Thank you
|
|
|
| Re: Ping Eye 2 [message #1035194 ] |
Sun, 28 May 2006 06:07 |
|
coloradogolf wrote:
> Can someone please explain why one would choose the copper version over
> the traditional eye 2 model?Do they swing/hit differently with the same
> shaft / grip,etc? Are they better suited for a certain type golfer or
> is it purely aesthetics?
>
> Thank you
>
They're supposed to have better "feel" since it's a softer metal
compound. However, there are health concerns from toxicity of the metal
(don't lick your 7 iron) and no one makes copper-beryillium clubs anymore.
--
Howard U. Dewing
I made up this name. It was a choice between this and Watson deMehneux.
|
|
|
| Re: Ping Eye 2 [message #1035204 ] |
Sun, 28 May 2006 07:59 |
|
"Howard U. Dewing" <sample [at] sample.net> wrote
> coloradogolf wrote:
>> Can someone please explain why one would choose the copper version over
>> the traditional eye 2 model?Do they swing/hit differently with the same
>> shaft / grip,etc? Are they better suited for a certain type golfer or
>> is it purely aesthetics?
>>
>> Thank you
>>
>
> They're supposed to have better "feel" since it's a softer metal compound.
> However, there are health concerns from toxicity of the metal (don't lick
> your 7 iron) and no one makes copper-beryillium clubs anymore.
I was always under the impression that the berrylium copper heads were
actually HARDER, and therefore yielded a softer feel. But I'm not a
metallurgist, so I could be wrong. Wouldn't be the first time.
In any case, some better players preferred the berrylium copper heads, as
they were slightly smaller, supposedly making them somewhat easier to
"work."
Because berrilium copper was heavier than stainless steel, Ping made the
dyes for these berrylium copper heads marginally smaller, meaning they were
a little harder to hit (for a recreational player, anyway). The sweetspots
were certainly smaller. I had a set. Hated them.
I spoke to Bobby Grace a few years ago. BG is one of the world's biggest
collectors of All-Things-Ping, and is an authority on the value of Ping
items among collectors. He told me that Ping made a very small number of
berrylium copper head sets using the standard Eye2 dyes (slightly larger
than the dyes usually reserved for the berrylium heads). As a result, these
heads were noticeably heavier, and a few of these sets were attached to the
old Ping ZZ Lite shafts (the berryliums were usually attached to Ping's
"Micro-Taper" shafts, one of the worst shafts ever made). The heavier
heads, combined with the ultra-stiff, but very light ZZ-Lite shafts, made
for what Grace called "a magic combination." There weren't but about two
dozen sets of these sets ever made, and fewer than that are probably still
in existence today, making them one of the rarest of the rare Ping
collectibles. And as such, among the most valuable.
Randy
|
|
|
| Re: Ping Eye 2 [message #1035213 ] |
Sun, 28 May 2006 11:45 |
|
--WebTV-Mail-15872-6124
Content-Type: Text/Plain; Charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Randy's comments cover the story on the BeCu irons.
Just to amplify a couple of points he made: the micro taper were awful.
Good players didn't use them long before re-shafting the heads.
One of the reasons given for the superiority of BeCu over steel was that
it is a denser metal. IOW there were fewer "hot spots" on the head and
it provided a more consistent feel.
Ping had to stop making them along with their nickel heads due to
workers having to breathe the lethal dust. They are truly collectors'
items.
On a personal note: I have always told people that I wasted a year and
a half trying to play the damn things. It was an "ego" thing maybe.
I had played blades for my entire golf life and as Ping came to become
more and more popular and I played against people that I knew who had
switched to the Ping iron, I began to see that their poor shots weren't
as bad as my poor shots in terms of length or accuracy.
Anyway, a pro friend of mine from SC, who I played with one entire
winter, used the BeCu irons and touted them every day. He was a plus HC
and I took his advice seriously enough to try a set.
By that time I had played the stainless steel Eye2s and felt that they
were OK once I got used to the offset so I went with the BeCus and
fought them for the rest of that year and the next.
I never found that reported "feel." In fact, they felt dead and clunky
to me and I was completely unable to work the ball like I could with my
old blades.
Some of the rest of my problems with them were more Indian than arrow,
but
I finally gave up on them - even the highly regarded SW and LW.
--WebTV-Mail-15872-6124
Content-Description: signature
Content-Disposition: Inline
Content-Type: Text/HTML; Charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
<html><body> <html><body bgcolor="white"text="black"></body></html>
--WebTV-Mail-15872-6124--
|
|
|
| Re: Ping Eye 2 [message #1035362 ] |
Mon, 29 May 2006 05:06 |
|
On 27 May 2006 13:36:17 -0700, "coloradogolf"
<amandalurie [at] hotmail.com> wrote:
>Can someone please explain why one would choose the copper version over
>the traditional eye 2 model?Do they swing/hit differently with the same
>shaft / grip,etc? Are they better suited for a certain type golfer or
>is it purely aesthetics?
>
>Thank you
In a book I got from Dynacraft Golf on club building, the author
recommended not adjusting the loft and lie on copper clubs because
they break easily when adjusted.
That was enough for me to leave them alone.
|
|
|
| Re: Ping Eye 2 [message #1035366 ] |
Mon, 29 May 2006 05:28 |
|
Bullshit. As long as you don't grind or sand the clubs and inhale the dust,
they are perfectly safe. You are probably in more danger from golf course
chemicals when licking clubs.
They stopped making beryllium-copper clubs because of the problems with
beryllium during manufacturing.The Tellevast area of Bradenton, Florida had
an American Beryllium plant. The accounts of beryllium pollution coming out
of there should be sufficient to scare away any manufacturer of golf clubs
when there are so many safer materials available.
"Howard U. Dewing" <sample [at] sample.net> wrote in message
news:lm9eg.197427$7a.118176 [at] pd7tw1no...
>
> They're supposed to have better "feel" since it's a softer metal compound.
> However, there are health concerns from toxicity of the metal (don't lick
> your 7 iron) and no one makes copper-beryillium clubs anymore.
> --
|
|
|
| Re: Ping Eye 2 [message #1035373 ] |
Mon, 29 May 2006 06:30 |
|
More Bullshit
Ping Stopped making Copper Beryllium clubs when thay got caught illegally
dumping the residue.
The were heavilly fined by the State and Feds, and got out of the business.
The clubs are safe to play, just don't eat one.
"sfb" <sfb [at] spam.net> wrote in message
news:BaydnYT-9Pno9-fZnZ2dneKdnZydnZ2d [at] comcast.com...
> Bullshit. As long as you don't grind or sand the clubs and inhale the
> dust, they are perfectly safe. You are probably in more danger from golf
> course chemicals when licking clubs.
>
> They stopped making beryllium-copper clubs because of the problems with
> beryllium during manufacturing.The Tellevast area of Bradenton, Florida
> had an American Beryllium plant. The accounts of beryllium pollution
> coming out of there should be sufficient to scare away any manufacturer
> of golf clubs when there are so many safer materials available.
>
> "Howard U. Dewing" <sample [at] sample.net> wrote in message
> news:lm9eg.197427$7a.118176 [at] pd7tw1no...
>>
>> They're supposed to have better "feel" since it's a softer metal
>> compound. However, there are health concerns from toxicity of the metal
>> (don't lick your 7 iron) and no one makes copper-beryillium clubs
>> anymore.
>> --
>
>
|
|
|
| Re: Ping Eye 2 [message #1035377 ] |
Mon, 29 May 2006 10:35 |
|
"R&B" wrote:
> "Howard U. Dewing" <sample [at] sample.net> wrote
>> coloradogolf wrote:
>>> Can
snip
> I spoke to Bobby Grace a few years ago. BG is one of the world's biggest
> collectors of All-Things-Ping, and is an authority on the value of Ping
> items among collectors. He told me that Ping made a very small number of
> berrylium copper head sets using the standard Eye2 dyes
Mine are the Eye2 +
(slightly larger
> than the dyes usually reserved for the berrylium heads). As a result, these
> heads were noticeably heavier,
the new pings with the heavy metal insert seems heavier than the BeCu´s
and the (range) ball does go farther with what seems is the same effort
and a few of these sets were attached to the
> old Ping ZZ Lite shafts
I have this too I took them to the range/clubmaker down the road
and we put the entire set on the frequency meter to see where they cam
in on the chart.
if you have a Rifle 6.0 shaft that¨s about what these things cam in as
I´d have to dig up the sheet if you want the numbers
>the berryliums were usually attached to Ping's
> "Micro-Taper" shafts, one of the worst shafts ever made). The heavier
> heads, combined with the ultra-stiff, but very light ZZ-Lite shafts, made
> for what Grace called "a magic combination." There weren't but about two
> dozen sets of these sets ever made,
I didn´t know that
and fewer than that are probably still
> in existence today, making them one of the rarest of the rare Ping
> collectibles. And as such, among the most valuable.
I got mine off of Ebay for $285, but to be fair the guy who was selling
them lived in Hawaii. and the auction ended at 2 in the morning
I guess they sat in a closet for 15 years
>
> Randy
>
>
|
|
|
| Re: Ping Eye 2 [message #1035390 ] |
Mon, 29 May 2006 15:03 |
|
On Sun, 28 May 2006 23:28:52 -0400, "sfb" <sfb [at] spam.net> wrote:
>Bullshit. As long as you don't grind or sand the clubs and inhale the dust,
>they are perfectly safe. You are probably in more danger from golf course
>chemicals when licking clubs.
Although "perfectly safe" in reality and "perfectly safe" in public
perception don't always agree.
The book _Freakonomics : A Rogue Economist Explores the Hidden Side of
Everything_ by Steven D. Levitt, Stephen J. Dubner is a fun book. In
one chapter they note what people get scared of vs what is dangerous.
|
|
|
