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



Top 5 or 6 in driver launch angle, spin and distance with driver at 115 mph. What’s not to like ?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I think the article mentioned a wayward shot or two at the 115 swing speed and that dropped it to a lower ranking. But I’m certainly no expert on this subject. I’m mid 90s and played it a lot last year and think it is great. Probably the straightest ball off the tee I have ever played.


Sent from my iPad using MyGolfSpy
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I bought (pre-test report) 4 dozen 5A Mint QStarTour from LGB for $9/dozen. I’ve been very pleased with the results. I’ll keep using them and if I find a stinker, I’ll just throw it out at that price.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Pug said:

Got 2 dozen Chrome Soft for Christmas then I read the test and watched the video.  We know from both that I bought into the hype about “feel” so into the shag bag they go. Went to the Bridgestone website and did the online test. The recommended ball? The e 12 Soft. 😖Bridgestone needs to catch up. Looks like I am going to be buying a couple of sleeves of Tour BX and Pro Vx and doing my own test. 

Once again my hat is off to MGS for this great test. I only wish I had the info before my wife asked me what I wanted for Christmas!

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. 

 

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, 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’m not well versed in the subject and as a result not sure I buy into strokes gained stuff but everywhere I look it’s the distance aspect and proximity to the hole are pretty big topics of discussion. Overall imo 4-5 maybe 6 yards isn’t much but when getting into 7+ extra yards that’s close to one club closer to the green. Which means hitting an easier club into the green and more than likely improving proximity to the and having a better chance of one putting.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I'm not sure why they would claim using a robot to test a golf ball is not an accurate assessment of the flight characteristics of a ball. I wonder what they use during their R&D. Maybe MGS didn't use the proper clubs mounted to the robot or something. The point is all the balls were tested using the same setup, so it may not be an absolute accurate representation of any one ball  but it would be an accurate comparison of all balls using the same setup...in my opinion....but then what the hell do I know.

Edited by WalterS
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Thin2win said:

Would I buy Chrome Soft based on this testing? Nope, but that said, they aren't bad balls... 

Also, I wouldn't stop buying them if they were the ball that i was just in love with. 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

... Perhaps I missed this info. I tried reading the comments but still came up empty. How many shots with each ball were tested? Did they hit the Maxfli Tour X one time with the driver? 10 times? 20 times? 100 times? Same with 7 iron and wedge. How many times did MGS's robot hit each ball with each club. If the Tour X had a 657 shot area after 10 balls because 1 of them was more off line than others, that number may change with 20 balls and radically change with 100 balls. Of course it could be the same as 1 out of 10 balls produced off line results, but it would be very informative to know how many balls were hit. 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, chisag said:

... Perhaps I missed this info. I tried reading the comments but still came up empty. How many shots with each ball were tested? Did they hit the Maxfli Tour X one time with the driver? 10 times? 20 times? 100 times? Same with 7 iron and wedge. How many times did MGS's robot hit each ball with each club. If the Tour X had a 657 shot area after 10 balls because 1 of them was more off line than others, that number may change with 20 balls and radically change with 100 balls. Of course it could be the same as 1 out of 10 balls produced off line results, but it would be very informative to know how many balls were hit. 

Take a look at the standard deviation chart.  That will show you how consistent each ball was

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I think the "how many balls were hit per club per model" has been asked here and in the comments and I too haven't seen an answer and even listening to their YouTube chat afterwards didn't reveal the answer. Or I just missed it period too. 

Edited by WalterS
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

jlukes, how does looking at the std dev chart tell you how many times a certain ball was hit with any club?

Edited by WalterS
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see Chromesoft not fairing as well as people think, or hoped. I have noticed however that the softer balls performed better than a Prov1 etc in the colder conditions. I wonder does a higher compression ball fair worse in colder weather or does it just 'feel' worse as it feels harder when its 40*?

I'm using prov1's based on the MGS test, used one today in 44* temp, but I have a game tomorrow in 40* weather so will try a chromesoft and see how it feels and compares.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, perseveringgolfer said:

I see Chromesoft not fairing as well as people think, or hoped. I have noticed however that the softer balls performed better than a Prov1 etc in the colder conditions. I wonder does a higher compression ball fair worse in colder weather or does it just 'feel' worse as it feels harder when its 40*?

I'm using prov1's based on the MGS test, used one today in 44* temp, but I have a game tomorrow in 40* weather so will try a chromesoft and see how it feels and compares.

 

... 40* isn't golf. That's one man field hockey. 🤣  

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, WalterS said:

I think the "how many balls were hit per club per model" has been asked here and in the comments and I too haven't seen an answer and even listening to their YouTube chat afterwards didn't reveal the answer. Or I just missed it period too. 

... Pretty important info to leave out imo. I would have much less confidence in 10 balls than 100 balls. 1 bad ball in 10 is pretty bad but 1 bad ball in 100 is pretty good. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Another confusing statement in the original article under the FAQ, I only see 2 balls, the Qstar and the MTBX that are over 20 yds in the std dev chart(or any other chart). Am I missing something here?;

Looking at the charts again, I suppose if you take the avg offline and add it to the std dev offline then you'll get the over 20 yds.

Q:  What type of consistency issues did you observe during the test?

A: In high-speed driver testing, several balls produced shots more than 20 yards or more offline. Those balls were the Bridgestone Tour B RX and Tour B RXS, Callaway Chrome Soft and Chrome Soft X, Kirkland Signature 3-Piece, Maxfli Tour and Tour X, MG Tour C4, Mizuno RB and RB Tour X, Snell MTB-X, Srixon QStar Tour and ZStar XV, TaylorMade TP5X, Titleist AVX and Tour Soft (Ionomer), and Vice Pro Plus.

 

 

Edited by WalterS
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, perseveringgolfer said:

I see Chromesoft not fairing as well as people think, or hoped. I have noticed however that the softer balls performed better than a Prov1 etc in the colder conditions. I wonder does a higher compression ball fair worse in colder weather or does it just 'feel' worse as it feels harder when its 40*?

I'm using prov1's based on the MGS test, used one today in 44* temp, but I have a game tomorrow in 40* weather so will try a chromesoft and see how it feels and compares.

The colder it gets the harder it is to compress a ball. Iirc around 65* starts the change 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Spent 3 hours with a fitter the other day. After we got done with the club recommendations, we talked about the balls that would suit my slower swing speed none of which were Callaway's.


Sent from my iPad using MyGolfSpy

  • Like 4

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...