Ballnamic

[PBH3]

Has anyone tried the Ballnamic (https://ballfitting.com/) online ball fitting tool?  Before dropping $40 on it I was curious what your experience was with it and thoughts on the ball it matched you with.

[Shankster]

 

[Larryd3]

I actually tried it yesterday, figured it costs less than a dozen golf balls so it'd be interesting to see what it came up with.  I was quite surprised by the results, my usual gamer, prov1x came in very poorly for me. So my results were  Srixon Z star XV at 93.8%, TaylorMade TP5X  93.7% and Bridgestone Tour BX 90.9% and  at the bottom prov1x at 82.9%.  The surprise is the Tour BX.  I think a big difference is performance into the wind.  Here in the Tampa Bay area we mostly are playing in a decent breeze and the prov1x has been ballooning some, but hadn't really thought about it.   So I'm going to give the Tour BX a try.  On golfxrx in the ball section discussing the  MGS golf ball test a lot of guys are shocked by how good the Tour BX is playing even for the slower swing guys, cause I'm sure not over 100 with driver.  So I'll report back after a couple of rounds and see if there's any noticeable difference in switching balls.  

[Mayday]

@Larryd3- It's been while, curious if you ended up trying any of the recommendations and how it's gone?

[Larryd3]

I did try the Bridgestone Tour BX and it's a good ball no issues with it but I ended up sticking with ProV1.  I just ultimately feel more comfortable with them.  I didn't try the others.  

[Ronnie Morris]

I tried the Bridgestone Tour BX, which is a good ball with no problems, but I ultimately stuck with ProV1. I just feel more at ease around them overall. I skipped the other options.

[Victor Atkins]

I was determined to put the app's suggestion to the test, so I chose two clubs—a Taylormade TP5x and a Srixon Z-Star XV—to play with. The folks at Ballnamic assured me that I'd have more carry off the tee, more control with my irons, and more spin around the greens if I switched to their product.

[PMookie]

I went through this as part of my fitting at Ping. The way that I answered the questions the first time produced AVX as my number one choice over Z Star I play now. It all seemed off when I saw B RX as option 2 when I know that’s a ball for speeds of less than 105, and it spins more. I ended-up paying the $40 online and went through the fitting again and this time Snell MTB-X and Chrome Soft X came out on-top. In-fact, I used all five fittings and every one of them had Chrome Soft X in the top 2, Z Star was last, which is weird because it fits my game very well. Anyway, I ordered a dozen CSX to try, so we’ll see. 

[Vegan_Golfer_PNW]

10 hours ago, PMookie said:

I went through this as part of my fitting at Ping. The way that I answered the questions the first time produced AVX as my number one choice over Z Star I play now. It all seemed off when I saw B RX as option 2 when I know that’s a ball for speeds of less than 105, and it spins more. I ended-up paying the $40 online and went through the fitting again and this time Snell MTB-X and Chrome Soft X came out on-top. In-fact, I used all five fittings and every one of them had Chrome Soft X in the top 2, Z Star was last, which is weird because it fits my game very well. Anyway, I ordered a dozen CSX to try, so we’ll see. 

I think ballnamic may be slightly biased. Idk. All of mine were chrome soft X or ls. Never a Srixon and it nice in a while Titliest or Bridgestone would show up but never in the #1 spot. 

[PMookie]

2 hours ago, Vegan_Golfer_PNW said:

I think ballnamic may be slightly biased. Idk. All of mine were chrome soft X or ls. Never a Srixon and it nice in a while Titliest or Bridgestone would show up but never in the #1 spot. 

Yeah, seemed kind of odd that the Z Star that did so well in MGS ball testing is said to be only an 81% match for me. It’s as long as any ball I’ve tried, with only the BX showing to go a little further off the tee due to less spin, but I’ve not seen how Z Star could be so lowly ranked and RXS to be better?! Definitely odd.

[Vegan_Golfer_PNW]

35 minutes ago, PMookie said:

Yeah, seemed kind of odd that the Z Star that did so well in MGS ball testing is said to be only an 81% match for me. It’s as long as any ball I’ve tried, with only the BX showing to go a little further off the tee due to less spin, but I’ve not seen how Z Star could be so lowly ranked and RXS to be better?! Definitely odd.

agreed. same for me with the Xv or the Diamond

[flsw19]

I tried Ballnamic, reminded of the Golfball Selector, which did something similar. I thought I set price at mid-point so results are a little off;

In order of ranking, Bridgestone Tour BX, Vice Pro-Plus (my current ball), Callaway Chrome Soft X; Bridgestone Tour XS, and Maxfli Tour X (my backup ball)

I have tried all balls. Price points make Vise and Maxfli better choices. Vise also has the coolest colors. The cool colors enhance the smack talking on the tee.

[Hoyoymac]

I’ve tried it and found it to be a good tool to identify some balls that I wouldn’t have maybe considered otherwise.

Swing speed with Driver is 103 MPH and my attack angle with driver is slightly negative so I tend to fight spin.  I have found that the Bridgestone Tour BRX works pretty well for me, like it’s feel and how it checks up around the green.  It has been my gamer for several generations now.

The MaxFli Tour came up as a top match and I have been using that ball along with my previous gamer now.  The Maxfli is about 1/3rd less expensive, gives me a little more carry distance and is slightly firmer than the Bridgestone Tour BRX.  I tend to use the MaxFli Tour more in the summer when temperatures are warmer and the course conditions are softer and the BridgestoneTour BRX when temperatures get cooler. 

I don’t like a large difference in firmness because it changes the sound and feel off of my putter.  I really don’t like a hard ball that produces a loud click.

[vandyland]

I watched the TXG video about Ballnamic and it seemed interesting:

https://youtu.be/DPBGw48pZQ

 

One random takeaway I had from it was that I didn't know the Wilson Triad ball was an anti offline ball. Ballnamic seemed to confirm that the ball did not, in fact, veer offline as much as other balls which is interesting. It made me curious, if it had decent spin retention and ball speed, if I should be playing that ball. I guess one way to test it would be to TRY to hit slices and hooks with it on a monitor (or in real life) and then compare it to your gamer but I am not as consistent as Matt Blois (from TXG) and certainly not as consistent as a robot. Anyway, hadn't heard much about the Triad prior to this. 

 

Edited November 21, 2022 by vandyland