Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

23 Excellent

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
  • Handicap:

Recent Profile Visitors

181 profile views
  1. What Titleist ball is priced lower than a common DTC equivalent? Make sure you are comparing apples to apples because obviously something like the 2-piece ionomer TruFeel will be cheaper than a multilayer urethane ball like the Snell MTB-X (in this case the Snell Get Sum would be a better comparison which is priced lower than the TruFeel). Also you end up paying the higher MSRP if you order direct from Titleist’s site vs buying from a retailer which just doesn’t make sense given the retail availability of Titleist products (with exception to their recent limited releases).
  2. storm319

    Srixon Sale

    Golf Galaxy online has a $10 off QStar Tour. With the current clearance price, it ends up being $9.98 per dozen (reflects when you view in cart). https://www.golfgalaxy.com/p/srixon-2018-q-star-tour-2-golf-balls-18srxu2018qstrtr2gbl/18srxu2018qstrtr2gbl
  3. Already a big thread on this: https://forum.mygolfspy.com/topic/17365-the-one-and-only-kirkland-signature-ball-thread/
  4. No, it is still an ionomer cover and no amount of basting will make it perform like urethane. BTW, the ZStar is my favorite ball.
  5. OP, Generally the difference in spin around the greens between a urethane covered multilayer ball vs a 2-piece ionomer covered ball will be far greater than the difference between the two off the tee. The only time I recommend 2-piece ionomer balls over multilayer urethane is when a golfers swing speed/launch are extremely low or if they lose a lot of balls and cannot personally tell the difference. Your slice is a swing flaw that no ball will be able to correct. There is an abundance of swing instruction resources on the various forums and youtube that will be far more helpful to fixing this problem than a ball change ever will. Next comes price. Used ball re-sellers like LostGolfBalls are contracting with divers to pull balls out of ponds at courses all over the country. Now if you are buying a fairly recent model, it likely wasn’t in the pond for very long and will likely be fine. Also with exception to the ProV1, they are often providing a mix of multiple generations of balls from companies that reuse names (ex B330, ZStar), so you may end up with some balls that are significantly older than the others. Many of these re-sellers also refurbish/refinish balls which means they strip the paint from the urethane cover and repaint/stamp before selling. Stay away from these mainly because you never know what you are going to get under that cover. Ultimately there are often good deals on prior generation models or lower cost alternatives where it is often not much of a savings to go with used water balls over new. When it comes to choosing between similarly constructed balls, specs and tests can help narrow down choices, but nothing can replace personal testing on the course. Below are a couple of recent tests that may help narrow a few choices down: https://mygolfspy.com/most-wanted-golf-ball/ https://www.todaysgolfer.co.uk/features/equipment-features/2019/september/robot-tested-which-golf-bal-suits-my-game/
  6. I think you are referring to the 2-piece ionomer covered QStar vs the OP referencing the 3-piece urethane covered QStar Tour.
  7. You hit the nail on the head. The guidelines are absolutely focused on ease of maintenance for the USGA (I would do the same if I were in the same position although I think 24 months is more reasonable than 12). Ultimately the USGA has been using the conditional local rule paradigm for years to avoid bifurcation as many of these rules are focused on reigning in players at the highest levels while not interfering with the majority of amateur play. As for why Costco/SM Global are not continually resubmitting the original ball, the reality is there is no incentive for them to pay to resubmit a ball that they are no longer selling ($1200 per submission is nothing for Costco, but they are getting nothing for it). Also with limited stock that was available, there would be very few people playing this ball in an event that has the list enforced via a local rule.
  8. The ball is not non-conforming in the sense that it failed one or more of the conformance tests, it just cannot be used in any event where the list has been adopted as a local rule (one ball rule often accompanies this). That would be all events hosted by the USGA, R&A, PGA of America, PGA Tour, and ANGC amping others. Basically if the ball is not being actively played on tour nor actively marketed at retail, it likely won’t last long on this list but can still be played where the local rule is not adopted. Simply the USGAs way of keeping the list tidy and making it easier to maintain (personally I think the inclusion period should be longer).
  9. Submissions expire after 12 months on the list. After that, OEMs must resubmit for the ball to be used for competitions enforcing the one ball rule. https://www.usga.org/content/dam/usga/pdf/2019/equipment-standards/2019-usga-golf-ball-submission-guidelines.pdf
  10. Dean Snell is a pretty good source...check out the Kirkland thread on WRX if you are interested.
  11. SM Global LLC is a packaging and logistics company that packages and imports some of the asian produced Kirkland brand products for Costco (the packaging on the Callaway 3 pack gloves also had this company’s name on it). 180S filed a patent infringement lawsuit related to earmuffs with Costco and SM Global as the defendants several years ago so the products are not exclusive to golf. Ultimately, they are not actually producing the balls.
  12. Callaway didn’t “steal” the Hogan brand so much as got “stuck” with it when buying Spaulding’s golf business when they were in bankruptcy. The reality is they bought it for the ball IP and infrastructure (TaylorMade was outbid and had to settle for Maxfli as a consolation). While Hogan did have a minor resurgence in popularity with their Spaulding led late 90’s releases, the brand had already been suffering a slow death for years before Callaway came along.
  13. Objectively from a basic construction, overall construction, and common performance standpoint, the closest for years has been the Srixon ZStar. The ZStar’s cover being TPU is a bit harder vs the ProV1’s cast thermoset urethane cover which to me has meant greater durability and negligible less spin on lower speed shots.
  • Create New...