Eye 2’s reviews are numerous. They all agree with me. Only glad that my opinion is not unique. About 22 years ago, I purchased my new set. Other clubs are forged, deep cavity and forged. I tried them all. But Eye 2 is the best. Comparable, yes, but superior is an impossible task. These clubs have a poor sound quality. This is an acceptable price for the club’s performance and forgiveness. The one downside to all this is the distance between the clubs. Although some lofts on the irons are a bit outdated, they still provide great distances and trajectories. Perhaps my pro shop could change the lofts. If they’re able (Golfsmth states they can), I’ll have the perfect golf irons.
My Eye 2 irons have been my constant companion over the years. I have come to understand after years of trying one and another, and I must say, there are many wonderful sets out there in the market, that I will stay with my Eye 2 irons until the end of their useful life, that is, if they don’t out live me, today age 57, As it stands today I have only replaced my long 4 iron with a Ping G5 25° hybrid as the 3 iron with a #7 G5 wood. This addition together with my G5 driver, #3 & #5 woods and an old Ping Putter make up my bag. A better set of clubs is impossible to find. The only thing that is missing in my bag is a Ping Eye 2+ LW that I will have the loft changed from 58° to 60° once I am able to find at a reasonable price. It is outrageously priced at $145.00 on eBay, but it’s something I will pay to have the greatest set of irons I could imagine.
If my Eye 2’s were to die, and I haven’t yet, I think I would buy either the Mizuno MX-19 (or the Ping G5). They are similar in performance, and they’re comparable with the Eye 2s. Being a technical guy, and having been involved in the machine-tooling industry for many decades, I believe I know how to distinguish between performance and looks. Many golf clubs are today designed to look good, rather than be game-enhancing.
The best thing for you is the most important. These +20-year-old club members are not to be missed. These irons were made using technical insight and vision. Ping is not able to produce a comparable iron today as it did 20 years ago. For middle and low handicappers, rapture and distance are not the things they want. These golfers would happily pay up to +$1,000 for an innovative and tangible technical improvement.