Jump to content

11iron

Member
  • Content Count

    18
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

7 Neutral

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Wow Wedgie you are the man, great test, thanks! My three takeaways: - In dry conditions, the matte ball spins >800rpm less and launches ~2 degrees higher than the gloss ball. This makes the two balls, even though they're both Wilson Duo Professionals, designed and manufactured the same except for the paint coat, in effect two different balls. One isn't better than the other, depends on what your game needs. So lets me know the Maxfli Tour (and Tour X, and other balls with both a glossy and matte version) probably differs between its matte and glossy versions as well. Doesn't
  2. >> Here is what I will do: Awesome, Wedgie! >> Let me know if more needs to be done? You mentioned soaking in water - the testing I've seen (MSG photo and T X G videos) uses a spray bottle. The only other input I would make is to make enough swings to make it statistically significant - it's been a while since my Statistics classes, so won't even try to bust out any formulae - as a wag at least a dozen of each? If that's too many swings for you, could maybe combine 2 with 3, and 5 with 6, and make your best guess re. moisture amount on a dewy morning - mayb
  3. Yep, that seems to be all that MGS has published. Hoping if this is really a thing, someone has seen data somewhere...or maybe even has done some measuring on their own.
  4. Yep, that's the article, csnosil. No data provided. Has anyone seen/generated data anywhere to support the matte assertion?
  5. Looking for data, Middler. MGS didn't provide any wet matte vs. dry matte data in comparison to wet gloss vs dry gloss. Agreed data via a robot swing would be super.
  6. Thanks, 03. That's probably one of the places I saw data on wet shots, good info for sure. Also the T X G guys did some testing. But no data on the difference of matte vs gloss, just wet vs dry. I am interested because I've always liked the Maxfli urethane balls, and they now have a matte white version. If there is any actual quantifiable difference, it may be minimized or eliminated with a urethane cover, and with white (there is data to suggest colored dye also changes performance characteristics). So, if someone has a launch monitor, a repeatable swing, some Maxfli Tour (or
  7. Tony Covey stated very emphatically on this week's No Putts Given that matte balls lose more spin / launch higher than non-matte balls when wet. see 37:54 of https://mygolfspy.com/warning-are-you-playing-this-golf-ball-noputtsgiven-38/ Is there any data anywhere to support this? I have seen data that all balls lose spin and launch higher when wet. But specifically matte more so than non-matte? Opinions and personal observation are great, but actual data would be beneficial to prove or disprove this. I have no reason to believe or disbelieve this, but hav
  8. Using the Cobra Ultralight with a BagBoy TriSwivel II. The bag is nice but the front 2 corner club slots get crushed in by the cart arms (due only to the weight of the bag itself), making it difficult to take/get those two wedges out/in. I imagine may be a similar problem on the ClicGear, because the bag simply isn't reinforced/strong enough in this area to prevent this. Not a good bag for push carts in my experience.
  9. Those who play stiff shafts in your irons: do you play your specialty wedges with the standard wedge flex, or stiffer?
  10. Thanks for your replies, cnosil and golfertrb. I will of course hit the clubs myself, for now I am still in info-gathering mode (although I may wait for the next iterations of these clubs in January). I think you are correct cnosil, without any alternate explanations, that the discrepancy is attributable to different testers, although I would have hoped that testers would be selected so as clubs we know to hit longer, higher, and faster would actually hit longer, higher, and faster, not only within tests but between tests conducted at the same time by the same site under the same guidelines
  11. I am a fan of the great data MGS provides, and dive into it often as a means of narrowing down fitting options. I am considering a new set of players irons, have always played (and loved) Ping irons, so am looking at i210 and i500. The selling point of the i500s is higher speed, longer distance, and higher trajectory, whereas the i210s are touted for feel, consistency, and precision. But, the 2019 MGS Most Wanted data has higher ball speed, longer carry and total distance, and higher apex for the i210 vs the i500 across every tested club: 5I, 7I, and PW. Any considered thoughts on this wo
  12. I finally heard back from the USGA on my question. To close the loop, while the USGA measures spin in their conformity tests, they do not use this data for these ratings. These ratings (as Angry Yeti postulated) are merely subjective OEM ratings, meaning a M ball could in fact be higher spin than an H ball.
  13. I have seen the test protocols before, but not the video, thank you. While you may be correct that L M H are taken from OEM literature, I would be surprised if that were the case. I understand they are not testing spin for conformity, but they could easily categorize the balls based on their readings. Doesn't look like anyone knows for sure (at least not thus far), so I will hope that the USGA eventually answers my question. Thank you for the link to the video.
  14. Yes indeed spin on any given shot is player and strike dependent. That is not what these numbers are. They are representative of the ball's relative performance in general. How wide a range the M is would be valuable in comparing balls for some so inclined. You may not be that person, and I completely understand that, but I most definitely could extract value with the numbers.
×
×
  • Create New...