MyGolfSpy 2023 Golf Ball Test!!!

[Javs]

7 hours ago, GolfSpy_APH said:

Question for the group now that the results are in. What would you pay for the LA Golf ball and what are the performance levels required to be at the cost of $70 if any?

First, the ball’s performance would have to significantly outperform the Left Dash or Callaway Chrome Soft X LS for my game. Here is the key, each of us have different games, skill levels and needs for a ball. High swing speed and ability to generate spin requires a different ball than a slow swing speed player. There are already very good balls on the market for my game. So, I don’t believe I would even look at the LA Golf Ball.

[TGD3Putt]

Knowing that Wilson can make some legit balls (looking at you 2023 Wilson Staff Model), I think it would be interesting to see how their cheaper balls compare. 
 

They run deals on their Profile series where they’re less than $30 for 36. These balls have an ionomer cover so I’m assuming less spin which would help the slicers. That being said, my kids find a lot of these on creeks on the right side of the fairway. 

I realize MGS’s policy for cheap balls is you’re basically just buying the look of the ball, but again, I think it would be interesting to test two balls made by the same company with hugely different price points. 
 

I feel like that would be more meaningful than  a ProV1 vs Noodle head to head. 

[StrokerAce]

It would be neat if they were able to group these in price ranges + swing speed and make recommendations.

50+
40-50
30-40
30 and below

I don't like to pay more than 40 for a dozen 

[Dooby]

2 hours ago, JohnnyO3478 said:

If you have not seen this article before - give it a look.  It outlines a good approach - and the associated reasons:

 

https://mygolfspy.com/news-opinion/golf-ball-fitting-101/

I had not seen this or the note about fitting the ball to your irons and then the driver to the ball. I also appreciate the suggestion in there "to play the fastest ball you can find off the driver that delivers the proper flight and spin characteristics through the rest of the bag."

[Shrek74]

14 hours ago, Dooby said:

Did anyone end up telling you the answer to this?

Yes, I did. But I'll post it again in case anyone needs it.

If you go into the Crosstab Data link - https://public.tableau.com/views/MyGolfSpy2023BallTest-public-crosstab/TableData?:language=en-US&:embed=y&:embed_code_version=3&:loadOrderID=2&:display_count=y&publish=yes&:origin=viz_share_link, you can adjust for speed and club and then download in a PDF. Then open that PDF and go to File -> Export To -> Spreadsheet -> Microsoft Excel. You may have to clean that up a bit, but it's what I did and I have my data in Excel now to play with to help me find my next ball or two. Hope this helps.

[Shrek74]

Quick question for the group.

I know my 7 iron speed, but not my 8 iron speed. Is there a formula or a typical step up/down of MPH's when going from one iron to another at standard 1/2" increments between irons?

For example, if 7 iron is 85mph, would the 8 iron be 82mph at a 3mph step, or perhaps 80mph at a 5mph step?

[bmoss234]

I would love to see the new Snell balls in this years tests. 

[JohnSmalls]

27 minutes ago, bmoss234 said:

I would love to see the new Snell balls in this years tests. 

 They both are in the test.

[JohnnyO3478]

1 hour ago, Shrek74 said:

Quick question for the group.

I know my 7 iron speed, but not my 8 iron speed. Is there a formula or a typical step up/down of MPH's when going from one iron to another at standard 1/2" increments between irons?

For example, if 7 iron is 85mph, would the 8 iron be 82mph at a 3mph step, or perhaps 80mph at a 5mph step?

If you mean club head speed, then the difference btw a 7 and 8 for me - on my Rapsodo MLM2Pro is essentially the same.  Maybe an mph or 2.  Hope that helps.

[Rappers]

Firstly, any testing should be carried out with a golf machine like the 'Iron Byron' to ensure accuracy and legitimacy of sampling data.

Which golf balls I would like to see tested primarily depends on how many different makes are to be tested. That said, it should include premium balls manufactured by Titleist, TaylorMade, Callaway, etc. Notwithstanding that, a fair selection of the cheaper balls like Kirkland, Vice, etc.

I would also like to see a range of balls at different compressions and swing speeds in order to evaluate which balls perform best for different golfers. Ideally testing should be carried out in a controlled environment as opposed to outdoors where the elements can have a significant impact on performance.

Finally, data such as dispersion should be included as well as distance and spin rates. Quite simple really - Lol. 

[Dooby]

I think after digging through the data - I am between the MaxFli Tour X and the Mizuno RB TourX. 

Edited August 30, 2023 by Dooby

[Lookin4Distance]

Hopefully you include the new Bridgestone E9.

[JohnSmalls]

8 minutes ago, Rappers said:

Firstly, any testing should be carried out with a golf machine like the 'Iron Byron' to ensure accuracy and legitimacy of sampling data.

Which golf balls I would like to see tested primarily depends on how many different makes are to be tested. That said, it should include premium balls manufactured by Titleist, TaylorMade, Callaway, etc. Notwithstanding that, a fair selection of the cheaper balls like Kirkland, Vice, etc.

I would also like to see a range of balls at different compressions and swing speeds in order to evaluate which balls perform best for different golfers. Ideally testing should be carried out in a controlled environment as opposed to outdoors where the elements can have a significant impact on performance.

Finally, data such as dispersion should be included as well as distance and spin rates. Quite simple really - Lol. 

All of the bold part of your post is the ball test.  The most basic of metrics: launch, spin, ball speed won't make a statistical difference indoor vs outdoor as those metrics are measured within the first few feet of ball flight.  You do however, want outdoor testing to occur for accurate measurements for peak height, distance at which peak height occurs, and to have accurate/real world overall distance numbers.  Dimples on a golf ball matter and you cannot accurately test a ball's aerodynamics by hitting indoor into a screen with current launch monitor technology.

I agree with your comment on dispersion, as I would like to see it as well.

[JohnnyO3478]

34 minutes ago, Dooby said:

I think after digging through the data - I am between the MaxFli Tour X and the Mizuno RB TourX. 

Have you looked at the Ball Lab reports for those two models?  May be a good tie-breaker ....

[Kurazawa]

All major balls would be fine, but I'm more interested in the best ball for my swing speed performance wise.  I average swing speeds of 81 - 86 with my irons and 85 - 93 with my driver.  Should I be playing pro v's or something else?

[Dooby]

12 minutes ago, JohnnyO3478 said:

Have you looked at the Ball Lab reports for those two models?  May be a good tie-breaker ....

Sadly they are nearly identical in the Ball Lab reports as well haha. 

[cnosil]

11 minutes ago, Kurazawa said:

All major balls would be fine, but I'm more interested in the best ball for my swing speed performance wise.  I average swing speeds of 81 - 86 with my irons and 85 - 93 with my driver.  Should I be playing pro v's or something else?

You need to look at your baseline ball and identify what Performance changes you would like to see.  From there look at the test results and test the ball.  Speed isn’t a big indicator for ball needs.  

[Malski1972]

I would like to see more test data on how offline balls fly when side spin is incorporated.  In other words, will some balls hook or slice less or more when not struck perfectly?  Also would be interested in seeing more performance comparisons between manufactures top end urethane tour balls and their mid price ionomer counterparts.

[garyt1957]

On 2/17/2023 at 7:32 AM, drb1956 said:

Lets get more 2 PIECE, and lower price 3 piece offerings in the mix like some TopFlite, Maxfli, Wilson, all ladies balls, and those that seniors would play. We ALL don't play the TOUR balls! A lot of us for financial reasons play the cheaper 2/3 piece balls on the market. Cally Supersoft for one, but what about Wilson 50 and Triad, or TF Hammer Control and Distance, Srixon Soft Feel, Maxfli Softfli, and Straightfli, and why not the Trifli..Bridgestone E12, and Cally ERC. Any of the DTC 2 piece, and lower priced 3 piece balls too. Matte versions should also be included. Basically anything under $40 should be included, because a LOT OF US play these type of balls! We all don't play ProV1's, because of cost, or we lose too many balls! There are a lot of high cappers here, and we would like to know how our ball performs in your testing.

It's not just high handicap players either. Lots of single digit guys play cheaper balls

[mbrodeur86]

1 hour ago, Dooby said:

I think after digging through the data - I am between the MaxFli Tour X and the Mizuno RB TourX. 

I'm looking at the maxfli tour and the RB tour. Only problem is that I can't find any maxfli here in Canada and if I buy Mizuno's offering plus tax and shipping I'm not far from pro v1 pricing so I'm bummed about it. Would like to save some money 

[JohnnyO3478]

27 minutes ago, Dooby said:

Sadly they are nearly identical in the Ball Lab reports as well haha. 

I thought one was in the mid 80s and one was in the low 70s .....

[JohnnyO3478]

22 minutes ago, mbrodeur86 said:

I'm looking at the maxfli tour and the RB tour. Only problem is that I can't find any maxfli here in Canada and if I buy Mizuno's offering plus tax and shipping I'm not far from pro v1 pricing so I'm bummed about it. Would like to save some money 

How's the Triad pricing in Canada?  They spec real close to Tour CG for my swing speed - and have significantly more 35 yd greenside spin than the RB Tour.

[StrokerAce]

38 minutes ago, Malski1972 said:

I would like to see more test data on how offline balls fly when side spin is incorporated.  In other words, will some balls hook or slice less or more when not struck perfectly?  Also would be interested in seeing more performance comparisons between manufactures top end urethane tour balls and their mid price ionomer counterparts.

just for fun I'd like to see them test balls marketed as "straight" - Polara, Maxfli StraightFli, etc. (I realize the Polara is illegal, but just for fun)

[Stugotz]

Regarding the DTC space: Cut (Grey, Blue and DC), Sugar, Snell, and of course Vice 

[PhilM75072]

I'm surprised they include the Callaway Supersoft, Vice Pro Zero, Wilson Duo Soft and balls from a few DTC companies like Snell, Vice, Seed, OnCore and PXG, but fail to include the Callaway ERC Soft and balls from some other DTC companies like Cut, Sugar and Trust. I guess I don't understand the criteria for what is included vs what is excluded from the test.

[Malski1972]

@StrokerAce I have tried the Polara balls before, they definitely are a lot straighter when used correctly, but I don't like playing illegal balls.  I would like to see the real difference among the Bridgestone e6, e9, e12, and Tour X for example.  Is one truly "straighter" then the other, and how much distance is lost even at higher swing speeds.  I would gladly give up a few yards if it means I an find my drive and have a playable second shot!

[mbrodeur86]

17 minutes ago, JohnnyO3478 said:

How's the Triad pricing in Canada?  They spec real close to Tour CG for my swing speed - and have significantly more 35 yd greenside spin than the RB Tour.

Oh really? I'll have to check. What swing speed are you playing at? I'm in between high and mid (closer to mid)

[Dooby]

40 minutes ago, JohnnyO3478 said:

I thought one was in the mid 80s and one was in the low 70s .....

Mizuno RB TourX was an 84 and the MaxFli TourX was 73.  So you are right about the overall scoring, but if you dig into why they are scored that way, they are a very, very similar ball but the difference was the compression consistency with Mizuno being very consistent and MaxFli lacking that consistency in the compression.

[tdc1]

I have skimmed the results of this latest test but will look deeper this weekend.

Two unrelated questions come immediately to mind when looking briefly at the results of the test and the comments in this thread:

(1) As a slow swing speed driver (85-88) who is a sweeper/picker with irons (divots pretty much only on fat shots) and knows more spin at the green would really be beneficial, which numbers (e.g., driver vs. iron, distance vs. spin) make most sense to pursue first?  (Admittedly mostly a rhetorical question because without a full-blown ball fitting it will have be trial-and-error on the course.)

(2) How many balls do you buy during a year?  In the past 3 years I think I have bought a total of 6 dozen.  In that same time I’ve sold ~1000, given away to playing partners ~200-300, or kept/played ~200 foundlings.  (I’m picky about the quality and condition of the foundlings I’ll play; for example, I’ll sort Pro Vs by year, check for cart path skid marks, club damage, etc., and take those out of play.  Given how often my wife sees me empty my golf bag and sort through these foundlings, I can’t imagine the push back I’d face if I brought home a new cube of balls from Dick’s!)  Just curious to know what other do.  

 

 

 

 

[cnosil]

1 hour ago, tdc1 said:

(1) As a slow swing speed driver (85-88) who is a sweeper/picker with irons (divots pretty much only on fat shots) and knows more spin at the green would really be beneficial, which numbers (e.g., driver vs. iron, distance vs. spin) make most sense to pursue first?  (Admittedly mostly a rhetorical question because without a full-blown ball fitting it will have be trial-and-error on the course.)

In my opinion and also what Tony indicated on today's No Putts Given.    Use your ball as a baseline and try to determine what you need to change.  If you need more spin around the green, look at balls that spin more with the short irons than your baseline.  If you want more distance,  look at the balls with more distance.  it is really a trial and error type of approach;  there isn't a single answer for anyone.