Why so many refinished and surplus pro v’s

[Mes]

there are so many people selling pro v’s.  What’s the deal with this. 

[CarlH]

It's the #1 ball, so everyone thinks that they need to play them, further feeding into the #1 ball position.  If people can buy them refurbished cheaper than the $50 new cost, they will --- but, buyer beware.  Sometimes, they're not what they're advertised to be.

[Middler]

People want the #1 most in demand ball without paying full MSRP, not complicated. As noted, refurbished aren’t the same, neither are waterlogged. If you find one in the rough (not in water) in very good condition, it’s probably good as new.

I know many very good players who only play found balls, and they have no trouble finding Pro V1’s or other tour balls in like new condition. They have 5 gallon buckets of found balls in their garages. I buy new balls, but it’s tempting to use found tour balls in like new condition…

[Pandaman]

16 hours ago, Middler said:

People want the #1 most in demand ball without paying full MSRP, not complicated. As noted, refurbished aren’t the same, neither are waterlogged. If you find one in the rough (not in water) in very good condition, it’s probably good as new.

Pretty much this ^^ I think.  It's not a bad way to get half decent balls at ok prices, especially if you don't know what is actually best for you to use.

Also image/ego.  'I play Pro V1s' sounds much better than 'I use budget distance balls'.

As for me...  I don't buy refurb/lake balls anymore, and I can't justify top prices.  So I currently use the Kirkland, and considering the Inesis 900.

 

[BostonSal]

The refurbished balls' only real shortcoming is that they don't have "Boston Sal" printed on them.

 

If they're real Pro V1s, then they're probably Pro V1s from multiple generations.

The cores will all look different for the guy who saws the balls in half, but I personally would be clueless.

The odds of me noticing any inconsistency would probably be surprisingly close to the odds of my shattering the course record.

 

I might notice a difference in dimple pattern if there are any of those.

Or I might not, but I was always pretty observant about dimple patterns,

this despite not having any idea what the difference would be in performance. 

If I could once again see the classic 336 pattern of my youth, maybe my heart would actually sing.

 

But no Boston Sal?  That's a deal breaker.  On a bad day, after a good night, how would I know who I am?

Edited September 19, 2021 by BostonSal

[TBT]

Just read the ball test report on the refurbished balls….I’ll pass

[Larryd3]

problem with refurbished balls is not knowing what the "real" ball underneath the new paint is or how long it set at the bottom of a lake, etc.  I'll totally pass on refurbished ones.  

[Stuka44]

I guess I've never understood the used ball, refurbished, found ball "thing".    I bought myself $1,000 irons.  I have $400 of other clubs(driver, putter, wedges, hybrids).  I pay on average $35-$55 dollars for a round of golf at my local public courses. I'm on my second Garmin golf watch.  After putting all that financial input into this game, I just can't figure out why I would go out and tee up a refurbished, found, unknown real condition golf ball after all that expense.  Now I don't play Pro V1's, but if I'm going to play I'm going to tee up a "new" ball.

[silver & black]

10 hours ago, stuka44 said:

I guess I've never understood the used ball, refurbished, found ball "thing".    I bought myself $1,000 irons.  I have $400 of other clubs(driver, putter, wedges, hybrids).  I pay on average $35-$55 dollars for a round of golf at my local public courses. I'm on my second Garmin golf watch.  After putting all that financial input into this game, I just can't figure out why I would go out and tee up a refurbished, found, unknown real condition golf ball after all that expense.  Now I don't play Pro V1's, but if I'm going to play I'm going to tee up a "new" ball.

Look at it from another perspective.......

How many of your $1,000 irons do you lose during a round? Driver/wedges/putter? Do you still have them at the end of your round? I have all of my stuff after a round.

What I don't have is at least one of the shiny brand new balls...or more, at the end of a round. Why would I spend $50.00+ for balls that I will lose for various reasons during a round? Why would I spend $50.00+ for balls that honestly don't make a whit of difference in my score or enjoyment of the game? Why would I not play used, urethane covered balls for $12.00 - $15.00 a dozen over brand new "cheaper" balls at the same price?

Disclaimer; I don't play "refurbished" balls. Those could be anything from years in the water to who knows. They just have a shiny new paint job. I play "found" balls that have been lost...lost golf balls...lol. They have some dirt and wear... nothing has been done to hide that. They have logos from companies, schools, outings, sports teams, etc...

I have played brand new ProV1's along with found ProV1's in the same round. I can't tell a difference. If most people are honest about it, they can't either.

I don't have the disposable income to play brand new urethane balls for a whole season. I'm guessing I'm not the only one who has to play "on a budget".

My equipment isn't cheap... I have as much $$$ in my equipment as you do. The thing is, I have played the same equipment for a more than a few years. If I played brand new urethane balls all the time, I'm sure it would add up to quite a bit of money after one season. If I could play an entire season with maybe two dozen brand new balls.... sure! The reality is that I usually go through around four dozen balls a season... or more. 

Some of us love to play the game... we just can't afford to play at the level of expense that you and others can comfortably afford. This is not a knock on you/your opinion... I understand what you are saying. It's just another aspect of why some of us choose to play used balls over new balls.

 

Edited September 21, 2021 by silver & black

[MattF]

13 minutes ago, silver & black said:

Look at it from another perspective.......

How many of your $1,000 irons do you lose during a round? Driver/wedges/putter? Do you still have them at the end of your round? I have all of my stuff after a round.

What I don't have is at least one of the shiny brand new balls...or more, at the end of a round. Why would I spend $50.00+ for balls that I will lose for various reasons during a round? Why would I spend $50.00+ for balls that honestly don't make a whit of difference in my score or enjoyment of the game? Why would I not play used, urethane covered balls for $12.00 - $15.00 a dozen over brand new "cheaper" balls at the same price?

Disclaimer; I don't play "refurbished" balls. Those could be anything from years in the water to who knows. They just have a shiny new paint job. I play "found" balls that have been lost...lost golf balls...lol. They have some dirt and wear... nothing has been done to hide that. They have logos from companies, schools, outings, sports teams, etc...

I have played brand new ProV1's along with found ProV1's in the same round. I can't tell a difference. If most people are honest about it, they can't either.

I don't have the disposable income to play brand new urethane balls for a whole season. I'm guessing I'm not the only one who has to play "on a budget".

My equipment isn't cheap... I have as much $$$ in my equipment as you do. The thing is, I have played the same equipment for a more than a few years. If I played brand new urethane balls all the time, I'm sure it would add up to quite a bit of money after one season. If I could play an entire season with maybe two dozen brand new balls.... sure! The reality is that I usually go through around four dozen balls a season... or more. 

Some of us love to play the game... we just can't afford to play at the level of expense that you and others can comfortably afford. This is not a knock on you/your opinion... I understand what you are saying. It's just another aspect of why some of us choose to play used balls over new balls.

 

I absolutely understand what you're saying, but @stuka44 was talking about refurbished balls, not found ones. There's a huge difference between the two. I'd play a found ball and I'd even buy found balls if they're checked and graded, but I would NEVER buy a refurbished ball for the reasons he stated.

[BostonSal]

2 hours ago, Riverboat said:

When you question why people buy used and refurbished balls, you're missing the snob appeal factor. Most people would never notice a difference in their game if they played cheaper balls, in fact as I've argued many times, many would improve using a softer ball. But... they wouldn't be able to say "prov1" when playing partners ask what they are playing. I'm currently gaming vice drive at 12 bucks a dozen, shooting in the 70s, and being asked constantly by guys in the 90s why I play those cheap balls. Same reason I drive a Kia instead of a Mercedes.... if something performs for me, I don't need to spend 3 times as much so others will think I'm cool or rich or whatever my fragile ego needs for validation. I got over that in middle school. 

That's an understandable perspective to be sure.

But I don't play the ProV1x as a nine handicapper because of snobbery. Why would I?

I play one ball always without changing because I don't ever want to be thinking about the ball.

I don't want to say,

"Wow, that rolled out much more than I expected. Why am I playing this stupid ball?"   

I can be pretty confident that the Pro V1x doesn't suck and that I missed my shot.

[DiscipleofPenick]

With how expensive they are, I'm always surprised how many I find. You'd think at $4 a ball people would look better. Oh well, if I find a good one with the silver alignment mark it goes in the bag.

[Kansas King]

I wouldn't play refurbs in competition or if I was preparing to compete but for the average recreational golfer who's competition maybe maxes out with a four-man scramble, playing refurbs is just fine. Are they as good as the real deal and can they perform relatively poorly? Sure, but if you're just playing recreationally, does it matter if the drive goes 250 instead of 260? Does spin on chip shots really change enough to matter? I think the answer is generally no. If you're a retired guy out playing at 8:30 AM on Wednesday morning (not betting) and you're just out having social fun-time with friends, achieving peak performance doesn't really matter. I think most golfers know when they are playing good and playing poorly. I don't know of any golfers that played a $1.50 refurb and left the course mad thinking that the ball was 10 yards short of a $4 Pro-V1.

I've always found that golfers find joy when the strike the ball well regardless of equipment used. Being an enthusiast going for absolute peak performance is fine but for the recreational golfer, maybe it doesn't matter. How many of us have gone and played pool in bar? I have and I've always used house sticks and house balls and had a great time. Do house balls and crappy house cues offer the best performance? No, but you had fun anyway. 

If you're a recreational golfer who wants to save a few bucks a year and use refurbs, go for it. Their cheap and give you many of the spin benefits of urethane balls at maybe the expense of some distance depending on the ball. Are there better options for cheap new balls? Sure, but when you're standing in Walmart and you want urethane balls for $20, you aren't going to find anything cheaper than the refurbs. I know a lot of people say that if you're already spending $X amount on golf why cheap out on the balls? It's because saving $20 is saving $20. Sticking to a budget is important for most people and if that means using cheaper balls, then so be it. Financial savings from refurbs is greater than any performance gain from a new ball for most recreational golfers that don't play competitively. 

[Middler]

4 hours ago, Riverboat said:

When you question why people buy used and refurbished balls, you're missing the snob appeal factor. Most people would never notice a difference in their game if they played cheaper balls, in fact as I've argued many times, many would improve using a softer ball. But... they wouldn't be able to say "prov1" when playing partners ask what they are playing. I'm currently gaming vice drive at 12 bucks a dozen, shooting in the 70s, and being asked constantly by guys in the 90s why I play those cheap balls. Same reason I drive a Kia instead of a Mercedes.... if something performs for me, I don't need to spend 3 times as much so others will think I'm cool or rich or whatever my fragile ego needs for validation. I got over that in middle school. 

Most of the guys I know play "new" Titlesists, but not Pro V1's - some lesser Titleist model (e.g. Tour Speed, Velocity). As long as the Titleist script is on the ball, that's all they care about. When looking for another players ball, what are you playing is answered with "Titleist 4" or "Titleist 4 w my 3 black dot marking" - not Pro V1 which is usually MUCH harder to see anyway. And in the rare instance someone asks on the tee, they're looking for brand and number, not model IME...

[silver & black]

12 hours ago, MattF said:

I absolutely understand what you're saying, but @stuka44 was talking about refurbished balls, not found ones. There's a huge difference between the two. I'd play a found ball and I'd even buy found balls if they're checked and graded, but I would NEVER buy a refurbished ball for the reasons he stated.

Yea, I realized that after I hit the submit button...lol. I would never play refurbished balls either.

[silver & black]

12 hours ago, Riverboat said:

When you question why people buy used and refurbished balls, you're missing the snob appeal factor. Most people would never notice a difference in their game if they played cheaper balls, in fact as I've argued many times, many would improve using a softer ball. But... they wouldn't be able to say "prov1" when playing partners ask what they are playing. I'm currently gaming vice drive at 12 bucks a dozen, shooting in the 70s, and being asked constantly by guys in the 90s why I play those cheap balls. Same reason I drive a Kia instead of a Mercedes.... if something performs for me, I don't need to spend 3 times as much so others will think I'm cool or rich or whatever my fragile ego needs for validation. I got over that in middle school. 

I disagree. I can definitely tell the difference between a Prov1 and cheaper,  surlyn/ionomer covered balls.

[Middler]

23 hours ago, Riverboat said:

In my experience, people playing other titleists say titleist. Those playing prov1 say prov1, my prov1, prov1 of course, prov1 is there any other ball, or something equally proud, as if the ball you buy is something to be proud of??? What's your score, I don't care about your ball. Oh you had a95? I shot 75 with a ball that cost 1/4 as much. Just saying. 

No one I play with. I guess my 20+ regular golf buddies are more secure/less ego. I play Pro V1's from time to time as do some of my buds, and none of us would ever say more than "Titleist" - and then only if asked. We know each others ball marks, so there's almost never a reason to ask even if we're looking for each others lost ball.

[Stuka44]

I'm just going to throw this out as a last comment on this.  Now I am not professing that anyone needs to use new Pro V1's.  I'm just pointing this math out should one choose to use Refurbished Pro V1's.  Now I'm sure some can find them for less.  Most places I looked them up on the internet, they are around 25$ a dozen for very good or "mint", some are more per dozen some are less.  I'm going to go with 25$ a dozen, basically half price.  I'm going to give two examples other than the Refurbished Pro V's.  This is assuming someone will lose 3 dozen balls in 30 rounds.

30 rounds a year x cost per round +cost of 3 dozen lost balls divided by number of rounds again = cost per round 

30 x $35(random cost per round)= $1,050 + $75 (3 dozen refurb ProV)= $1,125 divided by 30 rounds = $37.50 per round (this is including the cost of all lost balls.

30 x $35 =$1,050 + $150 (3 dozen new ProV)= $1200 divided by 30 rounds = $40 per round

Now if Urethane cover is important to you, Dicks had Srixon Z Star XV for $33 a dozen brand new.  (4 piece ball, urethane cover)

30x $35 = $1050 + $99(3 dozen lost Z-Stars) = $1,149 divided by 30 rounds = $38.30 per round.  

I'm  just trying to point out that if you play more than 25  rounds a year, that the actual cost per round of using even new Titleist Pro V1's  works out to about the cost of 1/2 new pro V1 per round, over 30 rounds. 

Given some of the recent articles about the "quality" of what you are actually buying, and getting with refurbed Pro V's, is it worth half a new one a  round.   

And if you are not hung up on playing the Pro V1 name then Z-Star XV's will cost you 80 cents a round to play a brand new Urethane Covered 4 piece ball, instead of Refurbished. 

If you only play 5 rounds a year and are going to lose 2 dozen new Pro' V's then it would be cost prohibitive, and really increase the cost per round

[mizunocorgi]

I don't understand why people buy refurb balls when they can go with a DTC brand for the same price or less and actually know what they're getting vs. possible lake balls.

Brand name recognition is a hell of a drug I guess.

[Kansas King]

On 9/22/2021 at 4:51 AM, Riverboat said:

There is a difference in feel between any two balls. By difference in game, I basically meant score. The ball is not going to change the score for most players. I've shot under par with brand new tp5's and scuffed up top flites and everything in between. I play low compression balls now because they are easier on my joints and I like the way they react off the driver and on the greens. But this constant harping that urethane is a must and is better for every player is utter nonsense. It is, at its core, largely snob appeal. Most players would never notice a difference in scores playing a less expensive ball unless their subconscious is causing it. It would take a player far better than me for something like that to make a real difference. We are talking scratch players trying to save 1/2 a stroke a round or so. Most other players would be just as likely to benefit from playing a ball that spins less and learning to play for more release. Most higher handicappers come up short of the hole more than 70 percent of the time.  They don't benefit from a ball that stops faster. 

I honestly agree with part of this. I think many golfers actually benefit from higher launching balls that run out more. Most golfers don't know how to properly control spin around the green and urethane balls have a tendency to be very inconsistent around the greens for non-highly skilled golfers. In some cases playing with a Noodle is superior to a Pro-VI

22 hours ago, stuka44 said:

I'm just going to throw this out as a last comment on this.  Now I am not professing that anyone needs to use new Pro V1's.  I'm just pointing this math out should one choose to use Refurbished Pro V1's.  Now I'm sure some can find them for less.  Most places I looked them up on the internet, they are around 25$ a dozen for very good or "mint", some are more per dozen some are less.  I'm going to go with 25$ a dozen, basically half price.  I'm going to give two examples other than the Refurbished Pro V's.  This is assuming someone will lose 3 dozen balls in 30 rounds.

30 rounds a year x cost per round +cost of 3 dozen lost balls divided by number of rounds again = cost per round 

30 x $35(random cost per round)= $1,050 + $75 (3 dozen refurb ProV)= $1,125 divided by 30 rounds = $37.50 per round (this is including the cost of all lost balls.

30 x $35 =$1,050 + $150 (3 dozen new ProV)= $1200 divided by 30 rounds = $40 per round

Now if Urethane cover is important to you, Dicks had Srixon Z Star XV for $33 a dozen brand new.  (4 piece ball, urethane cover)

30x $35 = $1050 + $99(3 dozen lost Z-Stars) = $1,149 divided by 30 rounds = $38.30 per round.  

I'm  just trying to point out that if you play more than 25  rounds a year, that the actual cost per round of using even new Titleist Pro V1's  works out to about the cost of 1/2 new pro V1 per round, over 30 rounds. 

Given some of the recent articles about the "quality" of what you are actually buying, and getting with refurbed Pro V's, is it worth half a new one a  round.   

And if you are not hung up on playing the Pro V1 name then Z-Star XV's will cost you 80 cents a round to play a brand new Urethane Covered 4 piece ball, instead of Refurbished. 

If you only play 5 rounds a year and are going to lose 2 dozen new Pro' V's then it would be cost prohibitive, and really increase the cost per round

This may be the case for you. However, I know many golfers that lose a sleeve of balls per round. It's really going to be course dependent. If you're a average golfer playing on a course with lots of natural brush or a links course, only losing one ball, every other round is not realistic. Plus, regardless of the "per round" cost, $75 is $75. For many people, that is a material amount of money that they will want to spend elsewhere if they can. If someone going out on the weekends with friends, they probably don't really care about performance that much. Just because doing something is expensive, like golf, it doesn't mean that it justifies spending even more.

13 minutes ago, mizunocorgi said:

I don't understand why people buy refurb balls when they can go with a DTC brand for the same price or less and actually know what they're getting vs. possible lake balls.

Brand name recognition is a hell of a drug I guess.

Brand name recognition is a thing because many people don't spend the time or have the time to do the research. They know Pro-V1s are good so they will buy used/refurbs before they even consider putting in the time and research to buy a DTC ball. Heck, many don't even know what the actual difference is between urethane and surlyn, they just know the brand. Why do you think so many people played the Nike Mojo, often what I think of being one of the worst "name brand" balls ever made?

It's all about branding. If anyone is on this forum or thread, they likely know more about golf and golf equipment than 95% of other golfers out there. There is only so much time in the day. We happen to enjoy researching golf but many others just want a no fuss round where they may not even care about the equipment they're using. They just trust the brands. This isn't a bad thing either. I'm a researcher when it comes to buying anything but there are times when I just don't care or have the time, and I will buy the brand name thing regardless of price (assuming it's within reason).