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

Our Sponsors

1 hour ago, WalterS said:

And what ball was that?

Bridgestone B XS. (Yellow). 


Lefties are always in their Right Mind

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 I've been a Bstone XS player for years, but I tried the TP5 Pix and Z Star yesterday.  Both played very well. The Z Star spun more around the green and felt a little more firm. I found the Z Star had a lower trajectory on drives and long irons.  I think if someone was playing the Truvis, the Pix graphics would be appealing. It's a bit more subtle.  I'll be going back to the XS, however, I could easily game either of the Z Star or TP5.  

 The Bstone ball rep said that 2020, will showcase new technology in their ball.  It did sound similar to Callaway a couple of years ago with "the Ball that changed the ball."   Supposedly something that other companies will try and copy??? Interesting at least.

 This MGS report has really excited golfers, so I'm all in on their tests.

Hit 'em well everyone!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I found a Vice Driver ball on the course yesterday and used it on 18. Felt good off the driver and irons but like hitting a rock with the putter. First time I've found a Vice ball and thought I'd hit while while I had the chance...it went in the shag bag.

  • Like 2

In the bag:
:taylormade-small: M5 Project X Even Flow Blue 6.0
Fairway: Sub 70 939X 15° Project X Even Flow Blue 6.0
:755178188_TourEdge: CBX 119 19° hybrid Project X Even Flow Blue 6.0
:bridgestone-small: Tour B JGR 4-GW UST Mamiya Recoil 680 F4
:cleveland-small: Smartsole S
:yes-small: Tracy
Bag: 
:Ogio: Alpha Convoy 514
Balls::Snell: MTB-X

Cart: :CaddyTek: CaddyLite ONE Ver. 8

God Bless America🇺🇸, God save the Queen🇬🇧, God defend New Zealand🇳🇿 and thank Christ for Australia🇦🇺!

 

image.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I read through a lot of this thread and the folks who point out the two tests are not the same are very accurate. Iron Byron + outdoors vs human + trackman. Tough to gauge. Both have merit but more testing should be done.

 

Problems I see:

1. More than 20+ balls should be tested. I think minimum 100.

 

2. Biggest and most important, the balls need to be from different manufactured batches. Balls sold in a specific region (i.e. North East) are from the same manufactured batch. There isn't enough of a test base to determine if the chrome soft were defective.

 

3. A human shouldn't be used nor an outdoor environment. Too many changing variables.

 

4. If the Iron Byron is set up to hit indoors on a screen then the results from the TXG group can be verified against the MGS.

 

5. The same club needs to be used in both tests. Better yet no club used and the test is done using a specialized pneumatic launcher in a controlled environment.

 

As of right now, I don't see how either test produces confirmation of results since both introduce error and more than one.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, VBPUTTS said:

 I've been a Bstone XS player for years, but I tried the TP5 Pix and Z Star yesterday.  Both played very well. The Z Star spun more around the green and felt a little more firm. I found the Z Star had a lower trajectory on drives and long irons.  I think if someone was playing the Truvis, the Pix graphics would be appealing. It's a bit more subtle.  I'll be going back to the XS, however, I could easily game either of the Z Star or TP5.  

 The Bstone ball rep said that 2020, will showcase new technology in their ball.  It did sound similar to Callaway a couple of years ago with "the Ball that changed the ball."   Supposedly something that other companies will try and copy??? Interesting at least.

 This MGS report has really excited golfers, so I'm all in on their tests.

Hit 'em well everyone!

So that was the Z Star not Z Star XV? And you thought it was a little too firm. If it was the XV I could understand that but if it's the Z Star then it should feel softer than the XS and spin less according to the data.

What, Tiger is allowing them to change his ball. I'm guessing he must have a lot of input into the changes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've read and analysed the report, but can anyone who's gleaned the following info from it clarify some info I'm looking for please?

What Srixon Z star and Bridgeston ball perform better than the Chromesoft and just behind the Prov1 and Prov1x based on a 100mph driver ss and 88mph 6 iron?

Asking as I liked the chromesoft but MGS tests clearly show it's lacking, prov1x is better but I dont think I have the consistent SS or strike to justify it's use.


Driver     Awaiting NEW Driver (after 10 yrs)  
4 Wood   Callaway Big Bertha Steelhead plus 4+  :callaway-small: Callaway shaft in 'Firm' flex

Hybrid     Titleist 910H 19*    :titelist-small:   Diamana ahina 'flower' shaft in 'S'

Irons         Mizuno MP18SC 4-PW   :mizuno-small:  N.S Pro Modus3 Tour 105 in 'S'

Wedges    Callaway Mack Daddy forged in black 50* and 54*  :callaway-small:   KBS Tour in 'R'

Putter        'YES' Tracy 11 C groove 34.5"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, pilot25 said:

I read through a lot of this thread and the folks who point out the two tests are not the same are very accurate. Iron Byron + outdoors vs human + trackman. Tough to gauge. Both have merit but more testing should be done.

 

Problems I see:

1. More than 20+ balls should be tested. I think minimum 100.

 

2. Biggest and most important, the balls need to be from different manufactured batches. Balls sold in a specific region (i.e. North East) are from the same manufactured batch. There isn't enough of a test base to determine if the chrome soft were defective.

 

3. A human shouldn't be used nor an outdoor environment. Too many changing variables.

 

4. If the Iron Byron is set up to hit indoors on a screen then the results from the TXG group can be verified against the MGS.

 

5. The same club needs to be used in both tests. Better yet no club used and the test is done using a specialized pneumatic launcher in a controlled environment.

 

As of right now, I don't see how either test produces confirmation of results since both introduce error and more than one.

 

 

 

 

If done indoors that takes out the aerodynamics of the ball. 

  • Like 2

Driver: Titleist 917D3 9.5 with Graphite Design MAD Pro 65g S

Wood: Titleist 917F2 with UST Mamiya Helium 5F4

Hybrid: Titleist 816H1 21 with Atmos Blue 85 S

Irons: Titleist 718 AP3 4i, 718 CB 5-6, MB 7-9 with KBS $ Taper 125

Wedges: Vokey SM7 46/50/54/60 with DG s200

Putter: Scotty Caemeron Super Rat1

Ball: Titleist Prov1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If done indoors that takes out the aerodynamics of the ball. 
Absolutely true unless tested in a big enough environment like a stadium where there is no wind and the temp and humidity can be controlled.

Share this post


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

So that was the Z Star not Z Star XV? And you thought it was a little too firm. If it was the XV I could understand that but if it's the Z Star then it should feel softer than the XS and spin less according to the data.

What, Tiger is allowing them to change his ball. I'm guessing he must have a lot of input into the changes.

It was the regular Z Star (Yellow) and firmer throughout the bag.  It was not bad, just less muted compared to the TP5 or XS.

 Who knows about 2020.  It could be visual technology (camo), microchips like Oncore, or a hole-attracting magnet. 🤣🤣🤣

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are other ways to test the aero package on a golf ball to demonstrate any tangible differences between brands/models.

Absolutely true unless tested in a big enough environment like a stadium where there is no wind and the temp and humidity can be controlled.


Sent from my Pixel 2 using MyGolfSpy mobile app

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Going to compare the Oncore Elixir, Vice Pro, and Tour B RX tomorrow during my round.  Won't be able to test extensively, but I do plan to hit some comparative shots to see how they perform.  I've been playing the Vice Pro the last few rounds and really like it, and I've played the Tour B RX for the last year.
Thus far, I've only had a change to hit the Elixir indoors and it definitely feels softer than Vice Pro and RX, and I've also noticed that it runs out a little more on putts.  How it performs on the course may be a completely different game.
Looking forward to this comparison. Just picked up some Elixir's myself but haven't out them in play yet.

:ping-small:   :taylormade-small:     :rife-putters-1:   :OnCore:
'16 Taylormade M2 9.5*
Ping G Crossover 18*
Ping G Crossover 24*
Taylormade RSI2 6-PW
Taylormade MG 52* & 58*
Rife Barbados
Oncore Elixr

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There are other ways to test the aero package on a golf ball to demonstrate any tangible differences between brands/models.


Sent from my Pixel 2 using MyGolfSpy mobile app

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, pilot25 said:
8 hours ago, RickyBobby_PR said:
If done indoors that takes out the aerodynamics of the ball. 

Absolutely true unless tested in a big enough environment like a stadium where there is no wind and the temp and humidity can be controlled.

Golf is played outdoors and should be tested that way. 

  • Like 1

Driver: Titleist 917D3 9.5 with Graphite Design MAD Pro 65g S

Wood: Titleist 917F2 with UST Mamiya Helium 5F4

Hybrid: Titleist 816H1 21 with Atmos Blue 85 S

Irons: Titleist 718 AP3 4i, 718 CB 5-6, MB 7-9 with KBS $ Taper 125

Wedges: Vokey SM7 46/50/54/60 with DG s200

Putter: Scotty Caemeron Super Rat1

Ball: Titleist Prov1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, pilot25 said:

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.

If they received a bad batch of Chrome softs wouldn’t that be a bigger issue? That would point back to a very poor QC process. So if one batch was bad and made it out of the factory, isn’t it likely that many more bad batches made it out of the same facility? 

  • Like 3

Lefties are always in their Right Mind

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Kor.A.Door said:

If they received a bad batch of Chrome softs wouldn’t that be a bigger issue? That would point back to a very poor QC process. So if one batch was bad and made it out of the factory, isn’t it likely that many more bad batches made it out of the same facility? 

I had the same reaction about the implication for Callaway QC.  Now that we know that the tour pros were not using the retail ball, it makes sense that the Chrome Soft would have these type of results in the MGS testing.  There had to be  clear reasons they were not using it.

Share this post


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

I had the same reaction about the implication for Callaway QC.  Now that we know that the tour pros were not using the retail ball, it makes sense that the Chrome Soft would have these type of results in the MGS testing.  There had to be  clear reasons they were not using it.

The Thing about it is that I really like the Chrome soft, especially the yellow and black. I very much play golf by feel. For what ever reason the Chrome soft golf ball just has the right feel. However, if I let myself just pick a ball based on the test and not worry about cost, the test chose the BXS Bridgestone. Played it on Saturday and shot 44-37. I struggled around the greens on the front. The BXS has a similar feel to it on the mid-irons and putter, and feels a bit firmer off the driver, which is good. I am going to play this ball for a while and give it a good test, the decide if I want to try something else or stay with it. I don’t like to change balls, but sometimes I let other things influence my choices. I don’t like spending that much for balls, but they do run a 4 for 3 on the BXS So I can get them approx 34 a dozen of I decide to go that route. Good luck to all in their ball quest. 

Edited by Kor.A.Door
  • Like 1

Lefties are always in their Right Mind

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.


Driver: Titleist 917D3 9.5 with Graphite Design MAD Pro 65g S

Wood: Titleist 917F2 with UST Mamiya Helium 5F4

Hybrid: Titleist 816H1 21 with Atmos Blue 85 S

Irons: Titleist 718 AP3 4i, 718 CB 5-6, MB 7-9 with KBS $ Taper 125

Wedges: Vokey SM7 46/50/54/60 with DG s200

Putter: Scotty Caemeron Super Rat1

Ball: Titleist Prov1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Played with the Maxfli Tour X balls this weekend, thanks to this test and really came away happy with the results.

  • Like 3

:taylormade-small: SLDR 10.5 Oban HB

:taylormade-small: R11s Rip Phenom

:Hogan: Ft. Worth Black Irons

:cleveland-small: 588 RTX Rotex 2.0 54

:cleveland-small: CG10 58

:odyssey-small: Sabertooth

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, 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

Yes they were all 2019 editions

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...