Non Major OEM Golf Balls (Vice, Cut, Snell, MG, etc.)

[El Chivo 11]

 

I know we have all seen the tests but what would explain the tighter results of a human testing a golf ball vs a robot testing.

I say this because TXG on youtube have tested the Cut Grey vs the ProV1x and the disparity wasnt as bad.  

Just love the idea of giving smaller companies a go. I'd like to see your thoughts on using any of these rather than "Ball "x" is on sale used go grab ball "X" for less than a new Pro V".

 

Vice Pro Plus ( 34)

Cut Grey (19)

Here's a weird one Spalding Tour X (24).... 

 

[cnosil 10,944]

 
I know we have all seen the tests but what would explain the tighter results of a human testing a golf ball vs a robot testing.
I say this because TXG on youtube have tested the Cut Grey vs the ProV1x and the disparity wasnt as bad.  
Just love the idea of giving smaller companies a go. I'd like to see your thoughts on using any of these rather than "Ball "x" is on sale used go grab ball "X" for less than a new Pro V".
 
Vice Pro Plus ( 34)
Cut Grey (19)
Here's a weird one Spalding Tour X (24).... 
 

How many shots did Matt hit in TXG? He had a pretty consistent swing so hitting 10 shots will give similar results. With robots you can hit more shots with the same club delivery.

[El Chivo 11]

2 minutes ago, cnosil said:

How many shots did Matt hit in TXG? He had a pretty consistent swing so hitting 10 shots will give similar results. With robots you can hit more shots with the same club delivery.

Not sure of the data set....but how would someone compress the ball differently and/spin be different....Just found it extremely odd.

[BennyLar24 20]

I've been using the Snell MTB-X since the ball test results last year and I absolutely love it. I played ProV1 before, but now I get better average distance off the tee and I haven't noticed any significant difference in shots inside 100 yards. I doubt I'll ever go back.

[Bob Jerabek 10]

I listened to the podcast about this the other day.  
1. You are not really going to beat a ProV for quality control.

2. Very few balls are made differently from years ago because the paten on the research has expired.

3. A DTC ball can be made in the same plant as many OEM’s.

4. Play what you can afford and prefer.

[scooterhd2 250]

Snell MTBX. Absolute money.

[Guest Delete]

6 hours ago, El Chivo said:

 

I know we have all seen the tests but what would explain the tighter results of a human testing a golf ball vs a robot testing.

I say this because TXG on youtube have tested the Cut Grey vs the ProV1x and the disparity wasnt as bad.  

Just love the idea of giving smaller companies a go. I'd like to see your thoughts on using any of these rather than "Ball "x" is on sale used go grab ball "X" for less than a new Pro V".

 

Vice Pro Plus ( 34)

Cut Grey (19)

Here's a weird one Spalding Tour X (24).... 

 

If I had to buy golf balls then I would buy Snell MTB-X. They are all the quality of tour balls for 30-40% less. 

(I play what I find = more Titleist Pro V1/V1x's than I can lose. I have only bought the first 2 dozen balls when I started playing almost 3 years ago. I have since found over 5,000 golf balls, of which about 15% are tour balls ~ 750 or so. I have 6 or 7 dozen left after selling much of them. You all lose enough to keep me in fresh supply. I just buy batteries for my flashlight. It costs me about 6 AA batteries for 150 balls = 20 or so tour balls which are about 3/4 pro V's.)

[Ploobear 12]

I've played snell, vice, cut, etc. I find them on the course enough that I end up playing them quite a bit. I like em. I recognize a difference in feel from my preferred bridgestone, but I've never noticed an incredible difference in results. I really like the customization of vice balls and we had some made for a friendly tournament. Great buy that was well worth it.

[tehuti 387]

I still prefer OnCore and Snell over nearly everything else (at their price point). Played the Cut matte white ball yesterday and I didn’t like it, but I’ll give them another try before writing them off.

If I decide to spend a few extra bucks on a premium ball I will probably go with Callaway.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[aerospace_ray 339]

Very thankful for MGS disrupting the golf ball market through its testing and emphasis regarding quality control or lack thereof for some manufacturers. The tube videos from other people testing is good to.

But I lean more to MGS due to the sample size testing # of shots.

Regarding robot testing > Guessing you can get more consistent strikes with robot testing but I would like a mix of real world human testing combined with robot testing. A scenario kinda like: per the recent robot test, the center impact strike  with golf ball xyz at xx mph should do fly x # of yards with x # yards of roll, and then use the humans that swing the same xx mph swing speed to see if they meet an/or exceed what the robot "perfect impact" testing yields.... 

One of my golf addictions is I will buy/try any golf ball that comes out. Have bought them all or nearly all. And I do my own unscientific - bad golf swing test  . 

And I fit to PRO-V1 and/or Snell MTB. Play both, prefer Snell except for putting (only because I like the feel from PRO V1 a tad more). But in a tournament, I play Snell MTB - period. 

Recent new company/ball that I really like is Quantix F18 Tours. Currently testing. 

Finally,  I like what someone stated at top of this thread, play what you can afford. So many good companies out there, something for everyone. 

[AmishJason 240]

On 6/2/2020 at 8:38 PM, aerospace_ray said:

Very thankful for MGS disrupting the golf ball market through its testing and emphasis regarding quality control or lack thereof for some manufacturers. The tube videos from other people testing is good to.

But I lean more to MGS due to the sample size testing # of shots.

Regarding robot testing > Guessing you can get more consistent strikes with robot testing but I would like a mix of real world human testing combined with robot testing. A scenario kinda like: per the recent robot test, the center impact strike  with golf ball xyz at xx mph should do fly x # of yards with x # yards of roll, and then use the humans that swing the same xx mph swing speed to see if they meet an/or exceed what the robot "perfect impact" testing yields.... 

One of my golf addictions is I will buy/try any golf ball that comes out. Have bought them all or nearly all. And I do my own unscientific - bad golf swing test  . 

And I fit to PRO-V1 and/or Snell MTB. Play both, prefer Snell except for putting (only because I like the feel from PRO V1 a tad more). But in a tournament, I play Snell MTB - period. 

Recent new company/ball that I really like is Quantix F18 Tours. Currently testing. 

Finally,  I like what someone stated at top of this thread, play what you can afford. So many good companies out there, something for everyone. 

Good to know someone out there is giving Quantix a shot (pun definitely intended).  I saw them in the MGS article as well as a couple others that I can't think of the name of.  The idea of yesterday's Pro-V1 being turned into today's DTC tour level ball has my attention.  If I remember correctly that's where Quantix's design came from anyhow.  If they can maintain a level of quality control that's close enough to the big names, then I see no reason to add to the stranglehold that is the top of the ball market.

As far as other balls go, I lost the ability to pass up a dozen of the MG Tour C4 balls and I will be giving them a go soon.  My main curiosity is to see what difference 1 tier on the ball tests results makes.  My usual gamer is the Srixon Q Star Tour.  I have zero complaints about it other than where it ended up on the charts.  The MGs got a bit of love on the ball forum a few years ago (judging by the time and date stamps), but it seems that either everyone moved on to different balls since then.