Jump to content
TESTERS WANTED! ×

2puttbogey

Member
  • Posts

    352
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by 2puttbogey

  1. Final Review Callaway Chrome Tour & Tour X

    by 2puttbogey

     

    Before I start the review just a quick little bio summary since it’s buried in an earlier post. I’m a 49 year old male. A 10 handicap, and  live in Hawaii. 
     

    First Impression 

    9 / 10

    Both balls have the look of premium quality. Because it’s white box testing there was nothing to differentiate them in the box. There were no blemishes or seams to be seen, and all the printing was perfect. IMG_1466.jpeg.3ea1d8072be04e75050837e75535ab16.jpeg

    Each ball has the triple track, but there’s no way to know if they are on the balance point of the ball. I would like to have had a check go to run on them to see, but unfortunately I don’t, hopefully one of the other reviewers does and was able to run it on them. 

    I will be expecting the X to be a better fit for me in the testing as it is supposed to be the higher launching, firmer balls with more spin.

    Aesthetics 

    8 / 10

    The only issue I had with them is that it’s a new/updated product, and the branding looks exactly like the Chrome Soft. The only way to tell the ball you’re using is the small print underneath the Callaway logo.IMG_1525.jpeg.ca4fe27eafbb3c5429ff32bda2744e44.jpeg

    As expected I did a drop test on the cement, and the X was the firmer sounding ball. Neither ball was very “clicky”. Both balls have a soft feel to the touch, and a bit of a tacky feeling.

    The Numbers 

    18 / 20

    I gave this a consistent score with what I was seeing with the balls throughout the testing. I’m not much of a data guy, although I do have a Mevo I use to check carry yardage occasionally. I will let those in the testing pool with better launch monitors post the numbers. I was more concerned with on course performance.

    On Course Performance 

    18 /20

    • Off the Tee Both versions of the ball were great off the tee. The X has a firmer feel and makes a louder sound. The biggest was in the trajectory. The X was higher launching than the Tour.   

       

    That was the Tour

    That was the X

    Both balls performed as expected with the X being a little longer for be due to the higher launch that gave me added carry.

    Approach  The difference in launch was also apparent off the short irons and wedges .  Both balls spun well, I seen more from the X. IMG_1480.jpeg.a6a08182a2ae2a4216aac1c3dcedf305.jpeg

    This is the release from on the Tour.IMG_1478.jpeg.3b9c711aac2f03b4cf9b4349c217d40e.jpeg

    This is the backspin on the X.

    Probably due to the trajectory, and more expected spin I saw more stopping power from the X.

    Ball Flight As I have already touched upon I found the X to launch, and peak higher. This is consistent through out the bag for me. This is what I expected. This is also consistent with what I see from the X versions from other manufacturers, and lean towards those models. Playing in Hawaii I get to play in the wind, and although the X was higher in flight there was no ballooning, although hitting into the wind the Tour did get slightly more distance.IMG_1473.jpeg.9cf6abc80b9ebeb3c001fd5652d4528f.jpeg

     

    • Around the Green  Here  I felt the balls were indistinguishable. Both had a soft feel to them, and neither seemed to spin more than the other. I got the same control I need from both balls.

     Putting  Again the balls were indistinguishable. Both felt soft, but not like a marshmallow. There was enough firmness to be able to control the distance. The triple track is helpful to be sure you’re lined up correctly, and the putter face is square.

    The Good/Bad and In Between 

    19/20

    With this being a ball test there’s not a lot to add as in between. I will use this to mention the durability. Unfortunately I only had one ball survive 18 holes , and it held up great.IMG_1482.jpeg.98b1b2892e2b8ff8f260f9dcf3a4e452.jpegIMG_1481.jpeg.c6590eee4acbb18f0e329d57730cf698.jpeg

    I did have one hit the cart path and it scuffed as one would expect, not really a manufacturer issue there. On the other hand I did have one scuff from an approach with a wedge, but of course I didn’t take a photo right away and proceeded to lose the ball soon after so you’ll just have to take my word for it.

    Play it or Trade it

    15/20

    This is where the cost becomes the issue. With the balls being $55 a dozen they are in the top tier of cost per dozen. This is the only thing that would keep me from playing it. Do they preform well? Absolutely! Are they so good that I need to play them for basically $5 a ball? No! If I were playing a ball in that price tier already would I switch to it? Probably not. The cost is not exclusive to Callaway, and probably has to put them in this range to not look like a cheap option when it’s obvious they want some of the ProV market share. I will say that using Tour over soft was a good choice. 
     

    Conclusion

     The Chrome Tour line is right on par with the other manufacturers premium tour line of balls. Both versions preform as expected and marketed. With premium looks and feel the Chrome Tours will be looking to dig into the ProV market. With the constant all around performance that just may have a chance.

    Final Score 87/100
  2. 4 hours ago, chisag said:

     

    ... It is just so personal. I gave Kirklands to 2 of my playing partners. One is an 81 yr old dude that is crazy straight and he gained about 10 yds because the spin is keeping his ball in the air longer. He now drives the ball around 180-200 and after building him an Aerojet with a NVS 45 A Flex driver the ball really was the final piece of the puzzle for him. The fact that he is only paying $15 a dozen and rarely loses a ball is just a nice bonus. 

    ... The other player is one of my pards wife and she has a tendency to open her body too quickly and cut across the ball producing a 20-15yd slice. When she is timing her body rotation well the Kirkland produced longer carries for her too, but when swinging poorly he slice was exaggerated. Moving to a Chrome Soft gave her the best of both worlds when swinging well or poorly. Her best drives may be a few yards shorter than with the Kirkland but her average and poor drives are much better. Asa shorter hitter she doesn't lose many balls so the added expense of the Chrome Soft balls is worth it for her as she will play one ball for 3 or 4 rounds. 

    I absolutely agree that it’s personal. I was having no issues with the balls for a white. I changed equipment and that’s when it showed up. It’s mostly noticeable with the irons.

  3. The most interesting thing I have discovered doing this testing is the difference between balls. I didn’t think I was good enough for it to matter, but it has. I have been playing the Kirkland thinking I haven’t seen a difference to make me change. Well this has exposed a difference. The Chrome Tours, PV1s, and Maxfli balls that I have used during this testing have shown that the Kirkland is half to a full club shorter for me. For the purposes of the Callaway testing I have liked both balls. Personal preference is the X, but the standard tour has been good as well. Unfortunately for me I have now realized that I will need to spend more than $15 a dozen on balls. Now I just need to decide which one. Chrome Tour X will be on the list to see what I’m going to be gaming.

  4. 5 hours ago, KenRider said:

    @2puttbogey recommended Waiehu as well. We're going to give it a shot.

    You will not be disappointed. Some of the best greens on the island, and 3 holes in a row along the ocean. The picture in @KenRiderpost is the 5th tee. Here a couple more pics. One country the green on 15, and one from the back nine looking down on the front nine. I play the Dunes every Wednesday morning (819 tee time but usually start earlier) if you want to check that course out.

    61110400462__082C5E6C-8584-4096-BA82-C8107E9E8501.jpeg

  5. Played with them again today , and was very pleased with how it played again. I tried to get a shot tracer on a drive, but of court didn’t perform well under the pressure. I did get a coupons of the spin out though.

    The second picture is a SW into a par 3. It had a little bit of comeback to it, and I’m not much of a high spin player.

    First picture is a GW to a downhill green with the wind. This one had much more rollout. 

    IMG_1480.jpeg

    IMG_1478.jpeg
     

    This is the first ball to survive all 18 holes for me, and I was impressed with the durability. I wiped the grass stains, and the ball still looked brand new. 

    IMG_1482.jpeg

    IMG_1481.jpeg

  6. Played a round with just the X today. I was very impressed with the all round performance of the ball. I expected the X to be a better fit for me, but  testing both versions together yesterday I was smitten with the standard tour version. After the round today I can see why I thought the X would be the one for me. I’m a pretty low spin player so the added spin benefits me. I love the launch and all my distances were spot on and consistent. I will be using just the standard tour tomorrow for my round and give feedback on that one. So far they got me reconsidering my cheapness  with balls and play the one that I like best after the testing.

  7. Got on course with them today. I was very happy with the performance of both balls. They both have a soft feeling cover, but do have performance differences. As expected the X is has more of a click to  it off the irons , and a firmer feel off the driver. Around the green they both had a nice feel to them. Off the putter same thing, if I didn’t look I would not know which one I was using. The main differences I saw between them was the trajectory. The X was a noticeably different peak height. I was seeing similar distances from both balls. On paper the X would be a better fit for me, but I was enjoying the regular tour version a bit more, unfortunately I lost 2 of them. They held up well. I did get a scuff on the tour late in the  round from a wedge shot, but unfortunately I lost that ball to show a picture. Overall very pleased with my first experience with them.

     

    IMG_1473.jpeg

    IMG_1472.jpeg
     

    X- Tour X

    T- Tour

    K- Kirkland 

    First  picture was tee shot with driver and got slightly more distance with the Tour model.

    Second picture tee shot with hybrid and again the standard tour was longer, with the Kirkland between them distance wise( only picture with Kirkland)

    IMG_1474.jpeg
     

    Last picture here the X just edged out the standard tour this time. 
     

    As you can see for me distance wise is negligible between them. Trajectory was the biggest difference. Hopefully I can get some shot tracer shots of them next week.

  8. 6 hours ago, KenRider said:

    I'm hoping they're a little late as we have a trip scheduled to Maui for the beginning of March and I was thinking (hoping) I could do on-course testing there. We're playing Kapalua, Kaanapali, and Walea. @2puttbogey, any suggestions on other good-value courses there?

    Dunes at Maui Lani is my home course, and it’s a good value course. Usually some good deals on golf now for it as well. Waiehu the muni course is great, but difficult to get on early so if you don’t mind playing later in the morning or early afternoon I highly recommend it. Pukalani is up the Miya little so it has nice views. Maui Nui is the one to avoid. If you have any other questions let me know.

×
×
  • Create New...