Ping iBlade vs Ping Blueprint T
Side-by-side factory specifications. Differing values are highlighted.
Ping iBladeinvestment cast · 431 stainless steel with pressed tungsten toe weightsPing Blueprint Tforged · single-piece 8620 carbon steel forging
Specification comparison
| Club | iBlade loft | Blueprint T loft | iBlade lie | Blueprint T lie | iBlade length | Blueprint T length |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3 | 20 | 19 | 59 | 59 | 39 | 38.75 |
| 4 | 23.5 | 22.5 | 59.8 | 59.8 | 38.5 | 38.25 |
| 5 | 27 | 26 | 60.5 | 60.5 | 38 | 37.75 |
| 6 | 30.5 | 29.5 | 61.3 | 61.3 | 37.5 | 37.25 |
| 7 | 34 | 33 | 62 | 62 | 37 | 36.75 |
| 8 | 38 | 37 | 62.8 | 62.8 | 36.5 | 36.25 |
| 9 | 42 | 41 | 63.5 | 63.5 | 36 | 35.75 |
| PW | 46 | 45 | 64.1 | 64.1 | 35.5 | 35.5 |
Highlighted cells differ between the two sets. Lofts and lies are factory standard.
Which should you choose?
The Blueprint T is the stronger-lofted set — up to 1° stronger than the iBlade on matching clubs. Expect longer carry per numbered iron but a flatter descent angle; gapping at the wedge end is where that shows up.
Both charts are reproduced in full on their own pages: Ping iBlade specs and Ping Blueprint T specs.