MGS Golf Ball Test

[RickyBobby_PR]

29 minutes ago, Tsecor said:

Silly question but were all the balls 2019 editions? 

Also, what does the 2019 box of Bridgestone Tour BX look like compared to the 2018 edition? I saw Amazon has the BX for $40 but I am unsure if its the new ball or last years model

The 2019 box is on bridgestone’s website

[Kor.A.Door]

2 hours ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

The talk around feel is intriguing. Most associate feel with sound and that’s something mgs has touched on in the study and from what I’ve seen in their replies on social media and the blog.

to me feel is what the feedback I get in my hands/arms on contact. Was there any vibrations, does the club feel heavy or light, does the shaft feel too stiff, too weak, somewhere in the middle. 

What most consider feel with the ball I approach it from a sound perspective just as I do with clubs which will obviously change a bit depending on the ball. I play mostly Prov1 or 1x and sprinkle in some tp5 or 5x. The sound between my g400 and my titleist 917 was different. The sound between my pxg, i210, p790 and miuras are all different. Yet the feel when struck right is the same.

feel for me is a combination of the senses minus sight. It’s the hands the arms the shoulders, what did the ball feel like when the club struck it. I’d it feel soft on the hands, did it feel like a rock, did it click like a hard ball, or did it sound soft, or was it something in between. These are what I call the intangibles of the test. Raw data can point you in a direction, but within the category of balls that fit your criteria, the individual has to find the one that feels right. To me it’s just like the clubs you play, anyone can hit any type and brand of club, but you still need to find what you are looking for based on your own needs. I know plus caps that play full blades. I also know other plus caps, that play large GI’s. They fit their needs perfectly and are both very good. The ball should be no different. Find a ball that suits you and your game will be better for it. What we are all looking for is consistency in the ball. Find one you like a stay with it. 

[Tsecor]

1 hour ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

The 2019 box is on bridgestone’s website

thank you. I know it is, but what does the 2018 box look like? is it different? from what I can tell they are almost identical.

[FrogginBullfish]

That would be the best way to do it. Give us lift and drag coefficients at different spin rates. That's the best measure of performance on the aero package of a ball and is a more accurate measure than just hitting balls outdoors when you have no control over the wind velocity.

Are you thinking of a aerodynamic wind tunnel? It's possible but that only tests the exterior design. It would introduce another test flaw in that the ball deforms when coming off the face of the club. I'm sure the manufacturer engineers know if that effect is significant enough to change results. Probably isn't.

This method would be a secondary test vs just one test of hitting the ball. Not ideal.

This is all minutiae and just fun conversation but I'd be interested in a test that eliminates all error.

My gut feeling is the MGS test got a bad batch of Chrome Soft balls.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using MyGolfSpy mobile app

[RickyBobby_PR]

5 minutes ago, Tsecor said:

thank you. I know it is, but what does the 2018 box look like? is it different? from what I can tell they are almost identical.

Bridgestone is on two year release cycles so the 2019 ball is the 20-8 ball. If it has b330 in the name it’s the older ball. If it just tour b ... then it’s the latest version 

[Tsecor]

Just now, RickyBobby_PR said:

Bridgestone is on two year release cycles so the 2019 ball is the 20-8 ball. If it has b330 in the name it’s the older ball. If it just tour b ... then it’s the latest version 

oh...gotcha......thank you very much......Amazon has these for $40.....not bad...

[RickyBobby_PR]

55 minutes ago, Tsecor said:

oh...gotcha......thank you very much......Amazon has these for $40.....not bad...

Your welcome. That’s a pretty good deal. 

[pilot25]

2 hours ago, FrogginBullfish said:

That would be the best way to do it. Give us lift and drag coefficients at different spin rates. That's the best measure of performance on the aero package of a ball and is a more accurate measure than just hitting balls outdoors when you have no control over the wind velocity.

 

Sent from my Pixel 2 using MyGolfSpy mobile app

 

.
 

 

I agree.  Either the Callaway's were a flawed batch or the dimple pattern is so flawed it created a drag effect lessening yardage by 18.  As someone stated above, since the tour pros were playing a different ball then I'm guessing their QC is horrible and MGS got bad batches.  I cannot believe their dimple pattern is that bad.

 

Edited May 13, 2019 by pilot25

[RickyBobby_PR]

44 minutes ago, pilot25 said:

I agree.  Either the Callaway's were a flawed batch or the dimple pattern is so flawed it created a drag effect lessening yardage by 18.  As someone stated above, since the tour pros were playing a different ball then I'm guessing their QC is horrible and MGS got bad batches.  I cannot believe their dimple pattern is that bad.

 

Or the tour pros don’t play it because it’s too soft. 

Its definitely something that would be interesting to see tested again. 

[Peaksy68]

I got given a couple of ERC balls by a Callaway rep today. Once I start playing again I'll do some testing comparing them, Chrome Soft and both this years and the previous model Srixon Z Star. It will be interesting to see how things evolve as my swing speed (hopefully) gets back to its normal (pre frozen shoulder) 105 mph driver speed.

[Mmdanz]

On ‎4‎/‎9‎/‎2019 at 5:03 PM, newballcoach said:

The fire and brimstone from the brand loyalty crew will be insane. Can you imagine if the "holy grail", the Pro V1 ends up being the shortest or least consistent? Titleist truthers will be leaping up from every corner of the internet tweeting at MGS. I would find it funny, I just don't want the staff to have to deal with it.

You mean fire and Bridgestone? haaaaa...

[Tsecor]

They should add a true 100 mph robot swing to the test and also test a 5 iron and a hybrid of some sort....

Edited May 15, 2019 by Tsecor

[RickyBobby_PR]

33 minutes ago, Tsecor said:

They should add a true 100 mph robot swing to the test and also test a 5 iron and a hybrid of some sort....

Why? They talked about the results being linear. So one can draw conclusions based on that.

doing a 100mph would then have those who say I have a 92-95mph ss, what about doing with our speed

[Tsecor]

20 hours ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

Why? They talked about the results being linear. So one can draw conclusions based on that.

doing a 100mph would then have those who say I have a 92-95mph ss, what about doing with our speed

I think it would help validate the test a bit better. Maybe expand the test and add 90/95/100mph.....see if the results truly were linear. Some of the testing of the CS is really good at slower swing speeds and I think validating the 90-100mph range would give the CS a reprieve 

[WalterS]

It was MGS who said they would be linear but they got that info from one of the manufacturers.

[cnosil]

It was MGS who said they would be linear but they got that info from one of the manufacturers.

I don’t think that the answer came from one manufacturer. Based on info I have seen posted, the MGS team worked with an advisory board to help design the test. My assumption would be that the results showed and through discussion with this board that the results would be linear. The results from the two speeds closely aligned so there is no reason to expect that the trend wouldn’t be the same for speed in between.

[Popeye64]

Since I had been gaming the Bridgestone Tour XS this test made me really want to try out the Tour X. In a driver I am a high spin player so even 300-400 rpm drop in spin will really help me out. I did some extensive head to heads over a two day period. Just as in the test the Tour X was longer off the driver by 3 or so yards. Nothing drastic but it was longer. That is just about where the difference between the two was. Playing two balls through every hole at times I had no idea which ball I was playing so it was basically a blind test. They both performed extremely well. Always around the flag, no flyers or any duds. Just reliable repeatable play. This is a ball that is so perfectly suited to my game and gives me the feel I like. From 175 and in the ball plays like it has eyes. Really gives me a straight flight. Isnt overly spinny on full approach shots yet bites on short pitches. Also it feels great off the putter. Not mushy soft but just soft enough that it still gives me good feedback through the hands. I could game either one truthfully and be happy as a clam. When I'm done with either dozen I'm not sure which will stay in the bag. It's that close.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

[Pug]

On 5/4/2019 at 4:19 AM, Thin2win said:

Would I buy Chrome Soft based on this testing? Nope, but that said, they aren't bad balls, I wouldn't scrap them. Depending on your swing speed you are talking 4-9 yards shorter on drives to the average ball in the test. After that they score well with the 7 iron results and the wedges, easily top half in both those tests. And depending on how you want to twist the data potentially better than ProV1 and TP5, so in the scoring areas they are great. 

 

I feel like Callaway should have jumped on that in their press release. I'll play Callaway PR for a moment:

 

The Callaway Chromesoft, more accurate than TP5 and ProV1 from 135 yards in. When scoring matters. 

*source MGS, largest independent golf equipment tester.

 

Instead they went sour grapes, shame. 

 

I appreciate the input. The deciding factor for me was the dispersion data, especially on the drive. Way too many drives wound up in the deep rough, and no one would ever describe my drives as long. The drop in score had a lot to do with more second shots coming from the short grass.

[Kanoito]

I just played my first round with the Vice Pro today.

Durability: played 1 ball for 18 holes and no visible signs of tear and wear

Accuracy: hit 10/14 fairways

Distance: similar to my previous gamer

Spin: no backspin, since I rarely take a divot, but with a 7i full swing, ball stopped 1m away from the pitch mark

AAANNNDDD... *drumrolls*

I shot a 79, breaking 80 for the first time in my life.

I've found my new gamer... for now... 

 

 

[VBPUTTS]

4 hours ago, Kanoito said:

I just played my first round with the Vice Pro today.

Durability: played 1 ball for 18 holes and no visible signs of tear and wear

Accuracy: hit 10/14 fairways

Distance: similar to my previous gamer

Spin: no backspin, since I rarely take a divot, but with a 7i full swing, ball stopped 1m away from the pitch mark

AAANNNDDD... *drumrolls*

I shot a 79, breaking 80 for the first time in my life.

I've found my new gamer... for now... 

 

 

Congrats on the 79!!! 

[MattF]

I put the MTB-X into play on Friday for the first time and it's the ducks guts. I have 2 dozen Blacks to lose and then I'm all in on the X.

[Alf. S]

38 minutes ago, MattF said:

I put the MTB-X into play on Friday for the first time and it's the ducks guts. I have 2 dozen Blacks to lose and then I'm all in on the X.

The Duck's Guts, what does that mean?

I guess a bit like the "Dog's Bollocks"!

[Tsecor]

Just picked up some Bridgestone tour BX and TP5X and look forward to testing these against the pro v 1 this week in real life on course amateur golfer testing.

I was not in love with the BXs. Thought it ballooned a bit in the wind and felt too soft off the putter. It made me want to hit the putter harder and I blew it by the hole a few times.

We'll see how the higher compression balls play

[MattF]

3 hours ago, Alf. S said:

The Duck's Guts, what does that mean?

I guess a bit like the "Dog's Bollocks"!

Yes mate. I actually wrote something else, but being a family friendly forum, I changed it to another Aussie colloquialism.

[tchat07]

Just grabbed the BX looking forward to seeing if there is any difference for my game.

Sent from my SM-G950U using MyGolfSpy mobile app

[shortgame]

Can't believe how controversial the ball test became. I thought it was very enlightening. I played the chrome soft, loved the three piece but hated the new 4 layered version. Been looking for a replacement the whole year. I always thought I wanted to play a softer ball with my 92MPH swing. Boy was I wrong, this test led me to the Pro V1x and couldn't be happier. Went from a 85 compression ball to a 110. My drives have increase 23 yards and more predictability around the greens. keep up the good work MGS. Haters will always be haters and winners will always be with MGS.

[downlowkey]

I probably should have posted in this thread, but a potentially interesting observation re: the Maxfli Tour lineup:

CG/MOI -vs- Cover Seam 

[WalterS]

1 hour ago, shortgame said:

Can't believe how controversial the ball test became. I thought it was very enlightening. I played the chrome soft, loved the three piece but hated the new 4 layered version. Been looking for a replacement the whole year. I always thought I wanted to play a softer ball with my 92MPH swing. Boy was I wrong, this test led me to the Pro V1x and couldn't be happier. Went from a 85 compression ball to a 110. My drives have increase 23 yards and more predictability around the greens. keep up the good work MGS. Haters will always be haters and winners will always be with MGS.

Wow, a 23 yard increase just by going from a chrome soft to a ProV1X with a 92mph ss, really. Was that just one drive or was that consistent over a few rounds? If that's over numerous rounds that's bloody amazing, because the ball test doesn't even show that kind of difference between those 2 balls at any SS. Were you checking that with a shot function on your gps?

[shortgame]

I've played 5 rounds since switching from the Chrome Soft to the Pro V1x. Using GPS my average drive with the chrome soft was 225 yrds. With the Pro V1x my average went to 248 (60 drives). That is carry plus roll but all on the same course with same course conditions. 

[WalterS]

1 minute ago, shortgame said:

I've played 5 rounds since switching from the Chrome Soft to the Pro V1x. Using GPS my average drive with the chrome soft was 225 yrds. With the Pro V1x my average went to 248 (60 drives). That is carry plus roll but all on the same course with same course conditions. 

Damn, that's more than pretty good, 60 drives and that's the average. Those Chrome Soft balls are ones I never liked, never played them long enough to really check drive distance averages, just never like the way they flew or their distances period.