Jump to content
txgolfjunkie

MGS Golf Ball Test

Golf Ball Test Results...Pre-Reveal  

56 members have voted

This poll is closed to new votes
  1. 1. Which brand do you think performs the best in MGS Golf Ball Test to be revealed Monday? (I have no idea what balls are being tested but this is my best bet)

    • Bridgestone (e6, e12, Tour B X, Tour B XS, Tour B RX)
      11
    • Callaway (Chrome Soft, Chrome Soft X, ERC Soft)
      1
    • Cut (Red, Green, Blue, Black, Brown, Mauve, Burgundy, Candy Apple, Cyan, Golden Rod)
      0
    • Maxfli (Tour, Tour x)
      0
    • Mizuno (RB Tour, RB Tour X)
      0
    • Snell (MTB Red, MTB Black, MTB X)
      11
    • Srixon (Q Star, Z Star, Z Star XV, LGBTQ Star)
      4
    • TaylorMade (TP5, TP5x, Project (a), Project (s))
      8
    • Titleist (Pro V1, Pro V1x, AVX, Tour Soft, Velocity, DT TruSoft)
      15
    • Vice (Drive, Pro, Pro Plus, Pro Soft)
      5
    • Volvik (I don't even know if they're in the test)
      0
    • Wilson (DUO Soft, DUO U, FG Tour)
      0
    • Other
      1

  • Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.
  • Poll closed on 04/29/2019 at 10:00 PM

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, SmoothG said:

Two balls that I have not tried yet but am interested to try after seeing results is the Vice Pro and OnCore Elixr.  If you end up giving the Elixr a go, I'd be very interested to see a comparison post on your thoughts. 

I ordered the Elixir after reading the results.  It definitely seems to be an outlier and provide better than expected results.  

One thing I noticed about the Vice Pro is, according to the charts and my experience, it is a great ball for getting in the fairway.  I've used Snell Black, Tour B RX, and Vice Pro extensively indoors and can't see any differences except the Snell feels a little better off the putter.  The Vice Pro feels better off the irons.

 

Since I need distance, the Elixir may be a good option for me.  I'll let you know.  I hope they show up for my round on Saturday (3 days from now).

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wouldn't it be great if any new or updated balls released in the future would be submitted to MGS for this same test methodology so we, as consumers, could evaluate them based on what we currently see in these charts.  I know it will never happen, but I know in my case, I will be very skeptical of claims made by ball manufacturers.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was watching the final round of the LPGA La event this past Sunday and up pops a Srixon irons ad with the "Most Wanted MGS logo on the ad. 

Would't be fun to start seeing the Titleist and other golf ball TV and print ads with "MGS Top Performer" logo on them. 

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I thought the same thing - especially when the irons are actually 4 yards longer.  I've always felt the TP5X was a bit of a longer ball anyways - especially with irons, so this matches up with that.  I don't do any sort of measuring with most drives so it's difficult for me to tell if I'm longer/shorter with the driver, but with irons you clearly know the yardage into a green.


I’d wager a lot of it has to do with efficiency in flight from the dimple pattern.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, mooremikea said:

It seems like they should almost be equal.  

 

1 hour ago, TR1PTIK said:

That is a bit of a puzzle.

I would venture to say it has to do with either manufacturing quality and/or dimple patterns and depth.  Or Dean Snell is a grey wizard and shall further be known as Gandalf.

  • Like 5
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing I think is missing, unless somehow I missed it, how did they place the balls in their respective categories (i.e. excellent, very good, etc.). I assume it is some combination of distance and shot area? Personally, I would like to see more details on that side of it.

Admittedly, I am out of town for work and have really only scanned the post, so it may be there.

1 minute ago, JohnSmalls said:

I would venture to say it has to do with either manufacturing quality and/or dimple patterns and depth.

I would guess that any difference that doesn't make logical sense has to be a result of aerodynamics. Once the ball has left the club face, aerodynamics is the only thing that really matters.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you read the comments... and they are growing daily, there a section in there where Tony explained how they came up with the categories and how the balls were assigned to each.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, MaxEntropy said:

One thing I think is missing, unless somehow I missed it, how did they place the balls in their respective categories (i.e. excellent, very good, etc.). I assume it is some combination of distance and shot area? Personally, I would like to see more details on that side of it.

Admittedly, I am out of town for work and have really only scanned the post, so it may be there.

I would guess that any difference that doesn't make logical sense has to be a result of aerodynamics. Once the ball has left the club face, aerodynamics is the only thing that really matters.

Another thing not explained in the report is how they went about placing the balls on the tee. I would think that if you could identify the variances in physical properties prior to placing the ball on the tee and align them a certain way that the results would be different. Maybe not better, but certainly different. I submitted a comment to the blog regarding this so hopefully Tony will respond.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe I will try some Pro V1X, and Some tour B X.  

The Snells, as far as they went, and as spinny as they spun, have a massive shot area compared to everything else.  Am I reading that right? 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, bens197 said:

I’m just going to throw this out there as an interlude.

This is a ridiculously comprehensive test that many of us will utilize for our own benefit.

Consider a donation for the effort. I’m not just saying this to sound all holier than thou. I’m sending something today because I believe in the mission these guys have established.

Carry on with your day...


Sent from my iPhone using MyGolfSpy

Agree to this. MGS helps me find a ball that keeps me on the fairway, means I have to spend less money buying balls... might as well pass the savings to MGS!

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, bens197 said:

I’m just going to throw this out there as an interlude.

This is a ridiculously comprehensive test that many of us will utilize for our own benefit.

Consider a donation for the effort. I’m not just saying this to sound all holier than thou. I’m sending something today because I believe in the mission these guys have established.

Carry on with your day...


Sent from my iPhone using MyGolfSpy

I am efforting a donation as we speak!  It's more than earned by the guys.

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I missed all of this thread last week, and only got the announcement about the test last night; a little light reading before I fell asleep.  It did take me 1.5 hours to read all of your comments, thank you very much; most interesting!

The data in the test does not seem all that unusual, at least from my playing experiences.  Yes, I have a slower swing speed but soft balls fly less for me than higher compression balls like the test says.  That's good because the higher compression balls also spin more around the green, which I need too.  I am happy to play any of the tour balls; PV1 TP5, and Z-Star are my top choices.

I have a few of the KSig 3-piece balls left, but I did not find them to be a good ball for my game; definitely shorter and less spin.  I have plenty of the original KSig 4-piece balls, and I will stick with those until the next MGS ball test comes out.  It will probably take me that long to parse the data to select a few balls to consider.

Oh BTW, it's been rumored that if you lefties head to the southern hemisphere, the right-handed balls work just fine!  🤣

  • Like 3
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Kenny B said:

I have a few of the KSig 3-piece balls left, but I did not find them to be a good ball for my game; definitely shorter and less spin.  I have plenty of the original KSig 4-piece balls, and I will stick with those until the next MGS ball test comes out.  It will probably take me that long to parse the data to select a few balls to consider.

 

... Intersting Kenny. I have tried plenty of balls that did not spin enough. But the Kirkland 3 piece is the only ball I have played that spun too much. I just cannot control short iron spin and balls a little offline draw/fade more than any other ball I have played. I do love the Kirkland 4 piece and still have a couple dozen left over but I gave the 3 piece balls to my wife that can use the additional spin. Obviously ymmv ...

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just getting to catch up from where I left off before the weekend. What an awesome test and response from the MGS community. I love having all this data to read over and check out. 

I am disappointed the Chrome Soft X finished so low. I have had some success with it, and do enjoy the soft feel, but I may need to look at other options. The lack of distance and spin in most areas is a concern. I have always liked the Srixon's and I have a combination of them and some Bridgestone's right now that I will have to hit into the woods to see if I figure out a new ball to play. I definitely like the way the Bridgestone Bx performed as well.

But I'm a guy who likes to save a bit of money. I buy last years golfballs on sale (or when there are sales) I don't like to pay full price for them, so maybe the oncore or snell are more up my alley. Even at their biggest discount numbers, they are still $40/dozen Canadian, while the Srixon is $50 and in stores, not a ton of savings there (and before any shipping costs).

Haven't had a chance to view the comments yet but as I am staring at a Snell Golf ad banner, I wonder how many are going to accuse MGS of selling out?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, newballcoach said:

But I'm a guy who likes to save a bit of money. I buy last years golfballs on sale (or when there are sales) I don't like to pay full price for them, so maybe the oncore or snell are more up my alley. Even at their biggest discount numbers, they are still $40/dozen Canadian, while the Srixon is $50 and in stores, not a ton of savings there (and before any shipping costs).

Haven't had a chance to view the comments yet but as I am staring at a Snell Golf ad banner, I wonder how many are going to accuse MGS of selling out?

 

... I now I am sounding like a broken record but not only are the Snells a great deal hen you buy at least 3 dozen drops the price to under $30 but the Maxfli Tour balls are on sale thru 5/4 at 2 for $50. Normally $34.99 so really a great deal on a ball that tested well. And keep in mind the variances of balls that may or may not have some off center issues, the Maxfli's are aligned for optimum performance off the tee or on the green where you can use the balanced alignment aid. MGS did not align the Maxfli's during the test and I would think there is a very good chance their test performance would be even better had they done so. But I understand why they didn't to keep things equal. 

... I have been writing reviews for over 20 years now and have been accused of "selling out" too many times to count, especially at WRX where I stopped posting reviews. I have absolutely no doubt MGS accepting advertising with Snell has zero influence on anything they do. It can be a catch 22 for the OEM when a site loves their product and they want to take advantage of the good press, at least for conspiracy theorists. 🙄

  • Like 6
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well looks like I'm going to have to get rid of those refurbished balls 😄

 

Been thinking about trying out the new Maxfli balls but was waiting for this, gonna have to head to Dick's this weekend 😀

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, newballcoach said:

Just getting to catch up from where I left off before the weekend. What an awesome test and response from the MGS community. I love having all this data to read over and check out. 

I am disappointed the Chrome Soft X finished so low. I have had some success with it, and do enjoy the soft feel, but I may need to look at other options. The lack of distance and spin in most areas is a concern. I have always liked the Srixon's and I have a combination of them and some Bridgestone's right now that I will have to hit into the woods to see if I figure out a new ball to play. I definitely like the way the Bridgestone Bx performed as well.

But I'm a guy who likes to save a bit of money. I buy last years golfballs on sale (or when there are sales) I don't like to pay full price for them, so maybe the oncore or snell are more up my alley. Even at their biggest discount numbers, they are still $40/dozen Canadian, while the Srixon is $50 and in stores, not a ton of savings there (and before any shipping costs).

Haven't had a chance to view the comments yet but as I am staring at a Snell Golf ad banner, I wonder how many are going to accuse MGS of selling out?

Oh there are plenty of ruffled feathers for sure along with those who are yapping 'sell out'. But I don't think that's the case at all. Because if it were, the same could easily be said about Titleist since the Pro V1(X) received similar marks. That said though, I think the most important thing this test highlighted was the huge disparity in performance, which can make a difference for most amateur golfers. It will be interesting to see if the MGS test results in more thorough testing methodologies. If it does, that's a good thing because I believe more data = more informed purchases. Lastly, I've always laughed at how tribal people get over golf gear. Seems like most amateurs would be best served to play what will help them achieve lower scores and not try to get social media brownie points from a golf equipment/ball manufacturers. 

  • Like 5
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When selecting balls that I have, or would play, a major dilemma presents itself: the distance of the Bridgestone Tour X off driver is about 9 yards longer than TP5X, but when switching to 7 iron, the distance and accuracy of the TP5X is significantly better! Wedge-wise, the Bridgestone had a smaller area offline by 6 yards.
One thing I find interesting in the wedge info is the MTB Black was offline by an avg of .453 yards with a shot area of 5.7 yards, but the TP5X was only offline by .007 more, .460, but had a shot area four times larger, 22.85 yards. What the heck?! More front-to-back distance dispersion????


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’ll be curious to see if anyone here switches their ball out that are in the good,fair or bad categories to one of the other two and how it affects their game and/or score positive or negative 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...