The PING i20 is a driver launched around 2012. Key listed specs include 8.5; 9.5; 10.5° loft, 45.25 in length, 460 cc head. This sits at the large end of PING driver heads in the dataset. All else equal, a larger head usually gives the designer more room to push stability and forgiveness across the face.
Key specifications
What kind of driver is the PING i20?
These are geometry/spec tendencies, not measured launch-monitor performance. The middle shaded band is the typical 35th–65th percentile zone.
Who might the PING i20 suit?
- Golfers who like a larger, confidence-inspiring driver profile.
- Faster or naturally high-launch players shopping lower-loft options.
- Golfers who value center contact and control from a relatively shorter driver build.
- No major spec extreme jumps out in the available data. Shaft, total build, impact delivery and personal preference still matter.
How the PING i20 compares
Percentiles compare this model only with PING drivers that have the same field available. Multi-loft models use the mean listed loft for the comparison marker.
460 cc
This sits at the large end of PING driver heads in the dataset. All else equal, a larger head usually gives the designer more room to push stability and forgiveness across the face.
9.5 °
The loft options lean low versus other PING drivers here. That generally points toward a flatter, lower-spin flight than a higher-loft setup, assuming the same delivery.
45.25 in
This is short for a PING driver. A shorter build can trade a little theoretical speed for easier center contact and control for many golfers.
204 g
This specification sits near the middle of comparable PING models in the dataset.
PING i20 build profile
Model information
| Launch year | 2012 |
|---|---|
| Club type | Driver |
| Market | USA |
| U.S. status | historical/discontinued |
| Handedness | RH/LH |
Club specifications
| Loft options | 8.5; 9.5; 10.5° |
|---|---|
| Standard length | 45.25 in |
| Lie angle | 58° |
| Head size | 460 cc |
| Head weight | 204 g |
| Swingweight | D3 |
Stock components
| Shaft | PING TFC 707D; Project X Black |
|---|
PING i20 FAQ
Is the PING i20 designed more for easy launch or a lower flight?+
The representative listed loft is 9.5 °, which sits around the 21st percentile among PING drivers with this field available. The loft options lean low versus other PING drivers here. That generally points toward a flatter, lower-spin flight than a higher-loft setup, assuming the same delivery.
How forgiving-looking is the PING i20 head size?+
The representative listed head size is 460 cc, which sits around the 99th percentile among PING drivers with this field available. This sits at the large end of PING driver heads in the dataset. All else equal, a larger head usually gives the designer more room to push stability and forgiveness across the face.
Is the PING i20 driver length easy to control?+
The representative listed standard length is 45.25 in, which sits around the 16th percentile among PING drivers with this field available. This is short for a PING driver. A shorter build can trade a little theoretical speed for easier center contact and control for many golfers.
Which PING i20 loft should I choose?+
The listed loft choices are 8.5; 9.5; 10.5°. Pick loft from your launch, spin, attack angle and strike — not ego. If you launch it low or lose carry, the higher loft is usually the smarter test; if you already launch/spin it high, test the lower options.
How old is the PING i20?+
The audited record places its launch around 2012. That makes it roughly 14 years old in 2026. Condition, shaft integrity and whether the club was altered since new can matter as much as the original spec sheet on an older club.
What shaft was listed for the PING i20?+
The researched record lists PING TFC 707D; Project X Black. That does not prove every surviving club has that shaft: custom orders and later reshafts are common, so check the actual shaft label before buying used.
Specification note: PING specifications can vary by generation, loft, shaft, market, fitting configuration and custom order. Historical models may be documented only by surviving catalog, retailer or observed-club evidence. Blank fields are intentionally left blank rather than guessed. Verify critical fitting or purchase details against an official PING specification source where available. Primary researched source.