MGS Golf Ball Test

[jjfcpa]

I find this kind of strange.  I have 3 favorite balls... in no particular order.

Snell MTB Black

Vice Pro

Bridgestone Tour B RX

And all 3 balls fell into the Good category in their Performance Chart.  Should I be looking for a ball better than "good"?

[tony@CIC]

oh boy the servers are running at max capacity - I can't even get the forum pages to reload. 

[wipierce]

The ball possibly causing me to miss the fairway is certainly depressing...

Sent using the MyGolfSpy mobile app

[00sportsman]

5 minutes ago, perseveringgolfer said:

same here, cant even glimpse the home page, thats been for over 2.5hrs now.

I have the patience of an impatient person from impatientville Idaho

An impatient Scotsman?  Never!!  (My MacKinnon blood made me say that!)

[wipierce]

What's really crazy is the difference is distances at the slower speeds!

Sent using the MyGolfSpy mobile app

[RickyBobby_PR]

5 minutes ago, jjfcpa said:

I find this kind of strange.  I have 3 favorite balls... in no particular order.

Snell MTB Black

Vice Pro

Bridgestone Tour B RX

And all 3 balls fell into the Good category in their Performance Chart.  Should I be looking for a ball better than "good"?

Personally I say yes. I loved the b330-rx and was fit into multiple times when Bridgestone did their in person fittings. The new version is not as good and lags behind both pro v balls and both tp5 balls.

the other two I have not played and I get the concept and people’s desire to play a lower cost tour level ball. If I was going that route I would play the oncore elixir.

[RickyBobby_PR]

3 minutes ago, wipierce said:

What's really crazy is the difference is distances at the slower speeds!

Sent using the MyGolfSpy mobile app
 

Compression matters. Slower speeds don’t compress some tour level balls that well. 

[jjfcpa]

This may be the reason I find myself jumping from one ball to another... Snell MTB Black one day, then Vice Pro the next, and then back to the Tour RX.  I'm a firm believer in playing one ball and one ball only.  Definitely need to pick one and stay with it.  At this point, it may be the Bridgestone Tour X or the Oncore Elixir.  The value choice would be the Elixir.

[pnd4pnd]

Bought me some MTB-X's to check out the results!

[jjfcpa]

What they should have done is suspended comments for the first couple days till everyone had a chance to digest the information.  This would have kept the traffic down so that some of us, me included, could at least view the information.  As it is, I have not been able to get to the website all day.  Disappointing to say the least.

[RickyBobby_PR]

43 minutes ago, jjfcpa said:

This may be the reason I find myself jumping from one ball to another... Snell MTB Black one day, then Vice Pro the next, and then back to the Tour RX.  I'm a firm believer in playing one ball and one ball only.  Definitely need to pick one and stay with it.  At this point, it may be the Bridgestone Tour X or the Oncore Elixir.  The value choice would be the Elixir.

I’m a huge fan of the elixir but I am a Prov1 fan and stick to that. 

[GolfSpy BOS]

What they should have done is suspended comments for the first couple days till everyone had a chance to digest the information.  This would have kept the traffic down so that some of us, me included, could at least view the information.  As it is, I have not been able to get to the website all day.  Disappointing to say the least.

There were only 2 comments on the actual post when I read it on lunch. So I’m not sure that’s what’s dragging it down. Probably just a lot of people trying to view it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[GolfSpy BOS]

What they should have done is suspended comments for the first couple days till everyone had a chance to digest the information.  This would have kept the traffic down so that some of us, me included, could at least view the information.  As it is, I have not been able to get to the website all day.  Disappointing to say the least.

There were only 2 comments on the actual post when I read it on lunch. So I’m not sure that’s what’s dragging it down. Probably just a lot of people trying to view it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[MaxEntropy]

6 minutes ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

I’m a huge fan of the elixir but I am a Prov1 fan and stick to that. 

I got the free sleeve OnCore was sending out - even though the weather has not been the best so far this spring, I really liked the ball.

[PMookie]

Still can’t get to the page.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[jjfcpa]

Looks like they are using AWS (Amazon Web Service) so unless they are not ramping up the bandwidth, I would think it would be able to handle the load.

[THEZIPR23]

1 hour ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

Compression matters. Slower speeds don’t compress some tour level balls that well. 

4. Don’t Worry About Compressing The Golf Ball

Let’s tackle one of the most common golf ball myths. Forget what you might have heard, you swing fast enough to compress the core of the golf ball.

Our testing showed that golf balls do not perform differently at different swing speeds – at least not to any significant degree. Balls that are fast at 115 MPH are fast at 85 MPH. The bottom line is that a short ball doesn’t become a long ball when swing speed decreases.

Launch and spin relationships don’t change much either. While there can be exceptions, a ball that’s low spin off the driver, is often low spin off a wedge. Speed doesn’t change that relationship either.

[PlaidJacket]

Can't get to the data either. Oh well, I'll chill and try later or another day. At least the forum is working. 

[MaxEntropy]

Let's see if I can get the quote tags to work properly (edit: nope). This is what I tried to post earlier.

From the ball test:

"Q: Are Direct to Consumer balls as good as those from big golf companies?

A: While some direct to consumer brands produce excellent balls, it’s important to understand that larger brands like Titleist and Bridgestone do have more control over the entire manufacturing process, and there is some evidence to suggest that can lead to a more consistent product. If you’re willing to tolerate a bit more inconsistency from ball to ball, direct to consumer brands can offer tremendous savings."

My comment, last week:

"...the company who controls more aspects of the supply chain/manufacturing should end up with more uniform balls. Where do all these companies get their polymers/rubber? In the case of Bridgestone and Srixon, I would guess they control more of the process just because of the type of business their parent companies are (SRI in Srixon = Sumitomo Rubber Industries) and Bridgestone is the largest tire company in the world. They likely make their raw polymers or have very tight controls on the sources (by virtue of the total volumes the parents may order), whereas others may be dependent on other companies to provide raw polymers or even pre-mixed rubber compounds where how much you pay determines how wide the tolerances are for the material you get.

If my thinking is correct, I would expect Bridgestone and Srixon to have the lowest dispersion..."

 

I'll take my royalties in the form of equipment, thanks! 

EDIT: for some reason, using in-line UBB code quotes is nesting them, even though that is not my intention. This will have to suffice.

[Berg Ryman]

Finally got in. Disappointed to see the Duo Professional not tested, but as it's the successor to the Duo Urethane, I'd expect similar results. Now, my page didn't load the tables so I'll have to do some digging, but I see my NY brethren in that second tier with the Elixr, might have to jump on it and support the local guys!

[perseveringgolfer]

right, I'm in (at last) and loving the detailed analyses. Great job MGS staff. I think this will be a game changer for many.

 

I can't seem to find out how to access the complete data though to do some personal analysis, am I missing a link?

 

Before this I was -maybe- going to get more chromesoft as I liked the feel, however I had some long drives at the weekend with a Prov1x and was significantly shorter the next day with a TM TP5. So the advice to stick with one ball is sound, I just didnt know what that might be, until now.

Looks like it's going to be Prov1x going forward.

Thanks MGS 

[RickyBobby_PR]

23 minutes ago, THEZIPR23 said:

4. Don’t Worry About Compressing The Golf Ball

Let’s tackle one of the most common golf ball myths. Forget what you might have heard, you swing fast enough to compress the core of the golf ball.

Our testing showed that golf balls do not perform differently at different swing speeds – at least not to any significant degree. Balls that are fast at 115 MPH are fast at 85 MPH. The bottom line is that a short ball doesn’t become a long ball when swing speed decreases.

Launch and spin relationships don’t change much either. While there can be exceptions, a ball that’s low spin off the driver, is often low spin off a wedge. Speed doesn’t change that relationship either.

My experience shows it does. When being fit by Bridgestone spin and launch both changed when I went from the b330 rx and rxs to the s.

i along with a buddy of mine messed around with the duo balls a few years ago and they were too soft and went nowhere near the same as prov, b330 s for him and rx for me. 

[perseveringgolfer]

5 hours ago, TSauer said:

I was able to see the post for a second and the page crashed.. looks like Pinnacle Gold took the top spot...

you little trickster you

[MaxEntropy]

4 minutes ago, perseveringgolfer said:

right, I'm in (at last) and loving the detailed analyses. Great job MGS staff. I think this will be a game changer for many.

 

I can't seem to find out how to access the complete data though to do some personal analysis, am I missing a link?

 

Before this I was -maybe- going to get more chromesoft as I liked the feel, however I had some long drives at the weekend with a Prov1x and was significantly shorter the next day with a TM TP5. So the advice to stick with one ball is sound, I just didnt know what that might be, until now.

Looks like it's going to be Prov1x going forward.

Thanks MGS 

I've gotten to view the text a couple times, but the Tableau tables only displayed properly for me once, now they don't. I was a moron and hit refresh when everything was loaded to see if any good comments were there yet.

[Thin2win]

4 minutes ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

My experience shows it does. When being fit by Bridgestone spin and launch both changed when I went from the b330 rx and rxs to the s.

i along with a buddy of mine messed around with the duo balls a few years ago and they were too soft and went nowhere near the same as prov, b330 s for him and rx for me. 

I think you might be thinking compression, not compressing. What they found, and I believe are saying is that we all swing fast enough to compress a golf ball, regardless of its compression rating. But those balls with higher compression ratings tend to go further.  That would match you and your buddies findings with the Duo.  

Two different things, similar words

[JohnSmalls]

34 minutes ago, Berg Ryman said:

Finally got in. Disappointed to see the Duo Professional not tested, but as it's the successor to the Duo Urethane, I'd expect similar results. Now, my page didn't load the tables so I'll have to do some digging, but I see my NY brethren in that second tier with the Elixr, might have to jump on it and support the local guys!

I was hoping the Duos would have scored well, but alas it was not to be.  Probably has something to do with the overall premise of soft = slow.  I wish MGS could have gotten Duo Pro and FG Tour in the mix.

[Thin2win]

This was an excellent test. The data is going to take us as much time to consume as it took them to make it, no wonder we had weeks of waiting. Biggest take aways for me:

1. use the same ball
2. most of that top "tier" of balls, are going to give good consistent results.
3. my testing that showed the Wilson Duo was 20 yards shorter than the other golf ball I use was pretty spot on. Sorry Wilson. 

I am curious about their suggested ball fitting technique. The Bridgestone method makes the most sense to me, fit for your driver. Finding the ball that gives the best distance/dispersion is the biggest effect on score. Shorter approaches and more fairways / less OB tee shots always made sense to me on how to fit for a ball. 

The recommendation of starting with what putts and chips the best and work back, didn't work in my mind when I read it other places online or saw it in a YouTube video, and it still doesn't make sense to me know. That I think is my only gripe with the entire article. That and editing didn't check a "lowe" instead of "lower" but I make more mistakes than that in one forum comment, so I'll let it slide this time =).

 

[TR1PTIK]

10 minutes ago, Thin2win said:

I think you might be thinking compression, not compressing. What they found, and I believe are saying is that we all swing fast enough to compress a golf ball, regardless of its compression rating. But those balls with higher compression ratings tend to go further.  That would match you and your buddies findings with the Duo.  

Two different things, similar words

It's also important to note - as the MGS blog did - that compression ratings are not measured the same across the board for all manufacturers. Some measure total compression while others only measure core compression. MGS measured total compression on all balls tested. Yet another way OEMs confuse the general public for their own gains. Props to MGS for sharing the truth!

[THEZIPR23]

11 minutes ago, Thin2win said:

I am curious about their suggested ball fitting technique. The Bridgestone method makes the most sense to me, fit for your driver. Finding the ball that gives the best distance/dispersion is the biggest effect on score. Shorter approaches and more fairways / less OB tee shots always made sense to me on how to fit for a ball. 

The recommendation of starting with what putts and chips the best and work back, didn't work in my mind when I read it other places online or saw it in a YouTube video, and it still doesn't make sense to me know. That I think is my only gripe with the entire article. That and editing didn't check a "lowe" instead of "lower" but I make more mistakes than that in one forum comment, so I'll let it slide this time =).

 

But if you hit that shorter approach and the ball doesn't hold the green, or you can't hit the chip to a make able distance, it doesn't matter. I am a firm believer in everything with golf should be learned/tested from the hole to the tee.

[bens197]

48 minutes ago, Berg Ryman said:

Finally got in. Disappointed to see the Duo Professional not tested, but as it's the successor to the Duo Urethane, I'd expect similar results. Now, my page didn't load the tables so I'll have to do some digging, but I see my NY brethren in that second tier with the Elixr, might have to jump on it and support the local guys!

I was waiting on these results to pick my ball for 2019.  I was pleased to see the ELIXR perform so well in the testing and will probably take advantage of their marketing teams incessant efforts to earn my business through promotional $25/dozens

And like you say, being from WNY, its always nice to support the home team.