2023 Titleist White Box Testing Thread

[jbern]

@snoopy79 & @2puttbogey I had similar trouble with this ball off the putter, but it was only when doing my side-by-side test with the Vice Pro. When I'm only using the TEST ball, I seem to be able to get the feel/speed okay (not great, but okay). I'm not sure why though. Do you think it's the softness being less responsive off the face so I compensate by hitting it way too hard?

[Cfhandyman]

Complete indoor testing – Will the results match on course observations and experience?

Indoor testing Protocol to be conducted like a golf ball fitting, in an indoor golf facility/academy with Trackman 4 as previously stated (page 16 of white box testing forum). I will hit 10 shots each 54* wedge, 7 iron and driver and take the average for each club and ball.   

Test Parameters: I will be specifically looking at the following: clubhead speed, ball speed, smash factor, carry distance, total distance, spin, height, land angle, as well as club path, launch angle and dynamic loft.  The reference ball will be the Titleist ProV1x and the comparator balls will be what I’ve been fitted for by the Ping Ballnamic tool (ballfitting.com) as well as by the Titleist selector tool (ProV1x). The other comparator ball will be the Titleist AVX ball primarily because the shipping label sent by Titleist indicated it was a sleeve of AVX balls and it has the same number of dimples (348) and design pattern as an AVX.   Examining the inner core revealed a 3 piece ball with either purple power colour (AVX) or blueberry bomber colour (TEST).  This is also consistent with other testers have found or we have the same batch of balls. Please note, it could be an upgraded prototype or something totally different.  

 

              2023 AVX ball                “retired” TEST ball after 1 round              AVX – 3 pc, interior                         TEST – 3 pc, interior

Only Titleist knows for sure.  However, testing may reveal a completely different result.  So, I’m open to what the data shows.   

Wedge and partial wedge data has been previously reported (page 17 of white box testing forum)   

7 iron results – There was no real difference between the test ball and the comparator balls with respect to club head speed (76-77 mph), ball speed (107-108 mph), attack angle (-6), club path (-3 to -4), launch angle (13-14) or dynamic loft (18).  Carry distance was approximately 148 yards for all balls and total distance was 164 yards for the majority of the balls.  See Chart 1   AVX was a yard shorter and ProV1x and Chrome Soft X LS were 1 and 3 yards longer respectively.  Average Spin was the least with the Chrome Soft X LS, followed by the test ball.  ProV1x spun the most but all balls were within 150 rpm of each other, so no real difference .  See Chart 2

CHART 1  

CHART 2 

Driver results – Unfortunately, not one of my better driver days and inadvertently brought my iron swing to the driver portion of the testing, so too steep (-3 to 4* angle of attack, yikes) and out to in club path (-4 to -6, double yikes), resulting in low launch, height and reduced carry, however at least I was consistently bad throughout.  See there is a reason testing with Trackman is good as now I know what I need to work on over the winter. Thanks, MyGolfSpy.  

The TEST ball was the shortest of all the balls in total distance, on average 1 – 6 yards shorter. Similar results with carry distance, the Test ball was middle of the pack . The test ball spun the most of all the balls, however there was only 250 rpm of difference between all the balls.  (see chart 2 and 3).  The Srixon, ProV1x and Callaway had the higher ball speeds and 3 mph more than Test, Bridgestone and AVX. All other parameters were similar (data not shown).

CHART 3  

Overall results: The TEST ball performed reasonably well, but Indoor testing on Trackman demonstrated that prototype test ball was on average 1-5 yards shorter with respect to the wedge and driver, with no real difference with the 7 iron. Spin was slightly less. On course, a different story. Test ball was overage 1-10 yards longer. So what’s going on?  

One concern/issue is durability. Two out of the three test balls had to be retired from testing after scuffing and wear. They were removed from testing as a scuffed ball would have negatively impacted the results. Is it possible they are using a softer or thinner cover which results in more green side spin but are more susceptible to scuffing?  Final report to follow.

[2puttbogey]

@jbern I did the same thing yesterday practicing. I started out using the Kirklands I normally play, and then switched to the test bal. It helped, but I still don’t like it. It did make it through my round today though. Aside from the putting feel issue, which may be just a personal preference thing, I still seen a couple strange ball flights. 

[d0m41n]

8 hours ago, 2puttbogey said:

@jbern I did the same thing yesterday practicing. I started out using the Kirklands I normally play, and then switched to the test bal. It helped, but I still don’t like it. It did make it through my round today though. Aside from the putting feel issue, which may be just a personal preference thing, I still seen a couple strange ball flights. 

This is how I felt. Overall I liked it off the putter and wedges but the driver just saw too much variance.

[vandyland]

I played with the test ball yesterday and despite the fact that my swing is all over the place these balls mostly do (for me) what a ProV1 does while maybe spinning a little less on well hit wedge shots. I don't see a ton of difference except with the durability of the cover. I did come VERY close to losing on the balls on the first hole:

 

 

Also, had some rollout on a pretty well hit 58* but, again, nothing unmanageable but I just would have expected this to sit faster than it did (uphill into the grain). 
 

 

Edited November 20, 2023 by vandyland

[JohnH1]

I did some additional testing in the Full Swing simulator at our local Y (nice, right!)  I was comparing the Titleist test ball against the Taylormade Tour Response stripe. I didn't feel like I was hitting it the best that day but my results were consistent; though I will admit I deleted the less desirable strikes.  It became very obvious to me that I need to turn down the loft on my driver as my spin rates were quite high as was my launch angle.  Here are my Driver (Callaway Epic Flash, stiff shaft) results.

Ball                    Total       Carry   Club head     Launch      Backspin    Height

Test ball              231          206         94.4             15.0           2806          67.6

Tour Response   231          207         95.1              15.4           2744          69.4

The balls were essentially the same off of the driver.

Next I moved to the Pitching Wedge, 43 degree WIlson D300, 3 years old with plenty of use.

Ball                    Total       Carry   Club head     Launch      Backspin    Height

Test ball              117          108         65.8            26.4            7488         63.4

Tour Response    118         109         67.4            25.9            7377          62.9

Again, the exact same results; I can detect no real difference in the performance of the balls.

The weather did get nice for Upstate NY last week and I got out on a sunny, calm 55 degree day. With so many leaves down and covering the fairway, I was very hesitant to use my driver on the test balls as I didn't want to lose any. Since I was playing solo and well ahead of the group behind me, most holes I played 2 balls. And usually from 130 on in, I hit all 3 test balls, plus 1 or 2 of the Tour Responses. On course I felt like I got a bit more yardage out of the Tour Response, and it seemed to stop a little quicker too. That mirrored my first writeup using fairly new Cleveland 52 and 56 degree wedges; the Tour Response flew a little further and stopped quicker.

I've enjoyed doing this test and it did enlighten me to using the simulator more for driver setup, and to check gapping on my bag. Being in Rochester, NY, it is near the end of the golfing season and many local courses have closed. My only wish is that the balls had come out a month earlier so I could have gotten more on-course testing with them.

Have a great Holiday season everyone!

[golfinnut]

For some reason, this ball agrees with me.  I really hit some launching irons yesterday.  The launch window seems to fit my eye really well.  I hit a few 3 woods off the tee that were a perfect piercing trajectory, that seemed to go for miles.  One of the guys in the group was like "That was a 3 wood?"  As my ball breezes by his drive.  LOL   I have no issue stopping this ball on the green either.  The "drop, hop & stop" performance is still the same.  Maybe because of the soft greens like I said earlier.  I was able to back up a number of shots as well.  And I'm not a high spin player.  If this ball comes to production, I'd play it.  

[HikingMike]

23 hours ago, Parshooter36 said:

I did some more testing yesterday with my Uneekor QED launch monitor. This time I tested the test ball against 2 of my gamers from this season. The Callaway Chromesoft Truvis and the Srixon Q Star Tour.  I also gamed the OnCore Elixr for a while, but couldn't find the one I had dotted up for the launch monitor.

I hit 9 iron, 5 hybrid, and driver this time.  I had eerily similar numbers this time around on all 3 clubs.  I wasn't swinging the driver my best, by my 9 iron and hybrid numbers were right where I would expect.  The only real difference was the Chromesoft spun about 10% less than both the test ball and the Q Star Tour.  The Chromesft was also 1 to 2 mph slower which explains why the totals where pretty much dead even.

Overall, I really like the test ball.  It seems to fit in with the lower compression urethane cover balls I've played the past several years.  But assuming this is a premium Titleist, I don't see any significant difference over the Srixon that is about $20 cheaper per dozen.

Thanks again to Titleist and MGS for the opportunity to test.

That's interesting to see your 9 iron spin numbers in comparison to MyGolfSpy's ball test results this year. It looks like the Chrome Soft, Q-Star Tour, and AVX were all near the bottom of spin for "mid iron". 

MyGolfSpy test (link)

• AVX: 7,018
• Chrome Soft: 6,909
• Q-Star Tour: 6,673

and you had-

• TEST: 6,259
• Chrome Soft: 5,740
• Q-Star Tour: 6,016

You got the lowest spin with the Chrome Soft for all 3 clubs, whereas the MyGolfSpy test had less spin with Q-Star Tour (both iron and driver).

[HikingMike]

19 hours ago, Cfhandyman said:

Complete indoor testing – Will the results match on course observations and experience?

Indoor testing Protocol to be conducted like a golf ball fitting, in an indoor golf facility/academy with Trackman 4 as previously stated (page 16 of white box testing forum). I will hit 10 shots each 54* wedge, 7 iron and driver and take the average for each club and ball.   

Test Parameters: I will be specifically looking at the following: clubhead speed, ball speed, smash factor, carry distance, total distance, spin, height, land angle, as well as club path, launch angle and dynamic loft.  The reference ball will be the Titleist ProV1x and the comparator balls will be what I’ve been fitted for by the Ping Ballnamic tool (ballfitting.com) as well as by the Titleist selector tool (ProV1x). The other comparator ball will be the Titleist AVX ball primarily because the shipping label sent by Titleist indicated it was a sleeve of AVX balls and it has the same number of dimples (348) and design pattern as an AVX.   Examining the inner core revealed a 3 piece ball with either purple power colour (AVX) or blueberry bomber colour (TEST).  This is also consistent with other testers have found or we have the same batch of balls. Please note, it could be an upgraded prototype or something totally different.  

 

              2023 AVX ball                “retired” TEST ball after 1 round              AVX – 3 pc, interior                         TEST – 3 pc, interior

Only Titleist knows for sure.  However, testing may reveal a completely different result.  So, I’m open to what the data shows.   

Wedge and partial wedge data has been previously reported (page 17 of white box testing forum)   

7 iron results – There was no real difference between the test ball and the comparator balls with respect to club head speed (76-77 mph), ball speed (107-108 mph), attack angle (-6), club path (-3 to -4), launch angle (13-14) or dynamic loft (18).  Carry distance was approximately 148 yards for all balls and total distance was 164 yards for the majority of the balls.  See Chart 1   AVX was a yard shorter and ProV1x and Chrome Soft X LS were 1 and 3 yards longer respectively.  Average Spin was the least with the Chrome Soft X LS, followed by the test ball.  ProV1x spun the most but all balls were within 150 rpm of each other, so no real difference .  See Chart 2

CHART 1  

CHART 2 

Driver results – Unfortunately, not one of my better driver days and inadvertently brought my iron swing to the driver portion of the testing, so too steep (-3 to 4* angle of attack, yikes) and out to in club path (-4 to -6, double yikes), resulting in low launch, height and reduced carry, however at least I was consistently bad throughout.  See there is a reason testing with Trackman is good as now I know what I need to work on over the winter. Thanks, MyGolfSpy.  

The TEST ball was the shortest of all the balls in total distance, on average 1 – 6 yards shorter. Similar results with carry distance, the Test ball was middle of the pack . The test ball spun the most of all the balls, however there was only 250 rpm of difference between all the balls.  (see chart 2 and 3).  The Srixon, ProV1x and Callaway had the higher ball speeds and 3 mph more than Test, Bridgestone and AVX. All other parameters were similar (data not shown).

CHART 3  

Overall results: The TEST ball performed reasonably well, but Indoor testing on Trackman demonstrated that prototype test ball was on average 1-5 yards shorter with respect to the wedge and driver, with no real difference with the 7 iron. Spin was slightly less. On course, a different story. Test ball was overage 1-10 yards longer. So what’s going on?  

One concern/issue is durability. Two out of the three test balls had to be retired from testing after scuffing and wear. They were removed from testing as a scuffed ball would have negatively impacted the results. Is it possible they are using a softer or thinner cover which results in more green side spin but are more susceptible to scuffing?  Final report to follow.

Great charts!

[Parshooter36]

14 minutes ago, HikingMike said:

That's interesting to see your 9 iron spin numbers in comparison to MyGolfSpy's ball test results this year. It looks like the Chrome Soft, Q-Star Tour, and AVX were all near the bottom of spin for "mid iron". 

MyGolfSpy test (link)

• AVX: 7,018
• Chrome Soft: 6,909
• Q-Star Tour: 6,673

and you had-

• TEST: 6,259
• Chrome Soft: 5,740
• Q-Star Tour: 6,016

You got the lowest spin with the Chrome Soft for all 3 clubs, whereas the MyGolfSpy test had less spin with Q-Star Tour (both iron and driver).

Who knows, It could be that my QED is not as accurate as the GC Quads used in their testing, or it could just be me.  Also, the Chrome Soft I used was a Truvis which my QED seems to pick up the spin on, so I did not dot that one up like I did the others.  It could just be that the Chrome Soft numbers are off, I will look and see if I have a regular Chrome Soft in my collection to put dots on and test again.

[HikingMike]

10 minutes ago, Parshooter36 said:

Who knows, It could be that my QED is not as accurate as the GC Quads used in their testing, or it could just be me.  Also, the Chrome Soft I used was a Truvis which my QED seems to pick up the spin on, so I did not dot that one up like I did the others.  It could just be that the Chrome Soft numbers are off, I will look and see if I have a regular Chrome Soft in my collection to put dots on and test again.

It's only a few hundred RPM too - not much. But it's interesting to note that the TEST for you slots into roughly the same spot as the AVX as slightly higher spin than both Q-Star Tour and Chrome Soft.

[Madden B]

First off, thanks to Titleist and MGS for giving me a chance to play with some new golf balls, it seems like I am being type cast as a ball "demo"er! Although to be fair, my dad is thrilled anytime I get golf balls to test to save him a few bucks!  Anyways, I did the Sugar golf ball review this summer and am always thrilled to get to test anything! So thanks again. 

Now, here are my thoughts on these Titleist Demo Balls. 

• They look a lot like the AVX by way of dimple pattern and cover material/shine/feel. 
• They are super hot, really felt like they were long off the tee. I was playing in colder weather and the course I was at has long fairways that just roll forever when the ground is hard, so maybe that was adding to the distance? But I did play 2 balls (Test ball vs. ChromeSoft X) and felt like I was getting 5-10 extra yards pretty consistently across the entire round.
• Lower ball flight than I am used to, but not anything that was alarming to me. Could account for the added distance
• I liked the feel around the greens, had no problem stopping them and getting them to hold up. 
• They feel super soft, maybe a little too soft. But again, I liked chipping with them and being around the greens.
• Durability was an issue for me. I was chipping with one of the balls and practicing around the green and the cover took a bit more damage than I would have guessed it should have, based on comparing against ChromeSoft and ProV1s, my normal gamers. 
• Didn't quite have the control with my irons that I feel used to having. I shot 1 under with the Chromesoft and 2 over with the Test ball. Now, I know that is a small sample size and could be chalked up to other things, but my normal gamer was 3 shots better on the round. I am going to try and get another round in but the winter weather is basically here now in Utah, the mountains got a lot of snow last night and I don't know if I am going to get out again to do it? But I missed a lot of greens on approach shots, which usually isn't my issue. But I did get up and down a lot to save pars. 
• Overall, nice ball, just not sure I would throw it in the bag just yet and would like more testing. I do have 1 more ball left that I am going to go use in my friend's simulator, so hopefully I can get some more data on the speed, carry distance, roll out, apex height, etc. I will keep you posted.

And last thing here, I am posting a link to a couple of YouTube videos I made using the ball. This is holes #3 (par 5, 510 yards), 4(par 4, 450 yards), and 5 (par 4, 350 yards) at Glen Eagle in Syracuse, Utah, a great course that I play a LOT. I went 1 under on that stretch with the Titleist test ball but you will see that I got up and down 3 times. So only 1 GIR but 3 fairways hit, just didn't have the control with my irons and approach shots, but really nice off the tee. And I am in the one in the short sleeve shirt, my friend was playing his normal ball. 

 

 

[Cfhandyman]

4 hours ago, JohnH1 said:

I did some additional testing in the Full Swing simulator at our local Y (nice, right!)  I was comparing the Titleist test ball against the Taylormade Tour Response stripe. I didn't feel like I was hitting it the best that day but my results were consistent; though I will admit I deleted the less desirable strikes.  It became very obvious to me that I need to turn down the loft on my driver as my spin rates were quite high as was my launch angle.  Here are my Driver (Callaway Epic Flash, stiff shaft) results.

Ball                    Total       Carry   Club head     Launch      Backspin    Height

Test ball              231          206         94.4             15.0           2806          67.6

Tour Response   231          207         95.1              15.4           2744          69.4

The balls were essentially the same off of the driver.

Next I moved to the Pitching Wedge, 43 degree WIlson D300, 3 years old with plenty of use.

Ball                    Total       Carry   Club head     Launch      Backspin    Height

Test ball              117          108         65.8            26.4            7488         63.4

Tour Response    118         109         67.4            25.9            7377          62.9

Again, the exact same results; I can detect no real difference in the performance of the balls.

The weather did get nice for Upstate NY last week and I got out on a sunny, calm 55 degree day. With so many leaves down and covering the fairway, I was very hesitant to use my driver on the test balls as I didn't want to lose any. Since I was playing solo and well ahead of the group behind me, most holes I played 2 balls. And usually from 130 on in, I hit all 3 test balls, plus 1 or 2 of the Tour Responses. On course I felt like I got a bit more yardage out of the Tour Response, and it seemed to stop a little quicker too. That mirrored my first writeup using fairly new Cleveland 52 and 56 degree wedges; the Tour Response flew a little further and stopped quicker.

I've enjoyed doing this test and it did enlighten me to using the simulator more for driver setup, and to check gapping on my bag. Being in Rochester, NY, it is near the end of the golfing season and many local courses have closed. My only wish is that the balls had come out a month earlier so I could have gotten more on-course testing with them.

Have a great Holiday season everyone!

Very nice review and testing.  If the test ball is an AVX prototype, then the Tour Response would be a good comparator.

[Cfhandyman]

32 minutes ago, tbarnes80 said:

First off, thanks to Titleist and MGS for giving me a chance to play with some new golf balls, it seems like I am being type cast as a ball "demo"er! Although to be fair, my dad is thrilled anytime I get golf balls to test to save him a few bucks!  Anyways, I did the Sugar golf ball review this summer and am always thrilled to get to test anything! So thanks again. 

Now, here are my thoughts on these Titleist Demo Balls. 

• They look a lot like the AVX by way of dimple pattern and cover material/shine/feel. 
• They are super hot, really felt like they were long off the tee. I was playing in colder weather and the course I was at has long fairways that just roll forever when the ground is hard, so maybe that was adding to the distance? But I did play 2 balls (Test ball vs. ChromeSoft X) and felt like I was getting 5-10 extra yards pretty consistently across the entire round.
• Lower ball flight than I am used to, but not anything that was alarming to me. Could account for the added distance
• I liked the feel around the greens, had no problem stopping them and getting them to hold up. 
• They feel super soft, maybe a little too soft. But again, I liked chipping with them and being around the greens.
• Durability was an issue for me. I was chipping with one of the balls and practicing around the green and the cover took a bit more damage than I would have guessed it should have, based on comparing against ChromeSoft and ProV1s, my normal gamers. 
• Didn't quite have the control with my irons that I feel used to having. I shot 1 under with the Chromesoft and 2 over with the Test ball. Now, I know that is a small sample size and could be chalked up to other things, but my normal gamer was 3 shots better on the round. I am going to try and get another round in but the winter weather is basically here now in Utah, the mountains got a lot of snow last night and I don't know if I am going to get out again to do it? But I missed a lot of greens on approach shots, which usually isn't my issue. But I did get up and down a lot to save pars. 
• Overall, nice ball, just not sure I would throw it in the bag just yet and would like more testing. I do have 1 more ball left that I am going to go use in my friend's simulator, so hopefully I can get some more data on the speed, carry distance, roll out, apex height, etc. I will keep you posted.

And last thing here, I am posting a link to a couple of YouTube videos I made using the ball. This is holes #3 (par 5, 510 yards), 4(par 4, 450 yards), and 5 (par 4, 350 yards) at Glen Eagle in Syracuse, Utah, a great course that I play a LOT. I went 1 under on that stretch with the Titleist test ball but you will see that I got up and down 3 times. So only 1 GIR but 3 fairways hit, just didn't have the control with my irons and approach shots, but really nice off the tee. And I am in the one in the short sleeve shirt, my friend was playing his normal ball. 

 

 

Excellent review and nice addition with the video clips. Thanks for sharing.

[Cfhandyman]

3 hours ago, HikingMike said:

Great charts!

Thank you.  The beauty of Excel

[jj1010]

After a week I think I'm finally ready to give my thoughts on the TEST balls. Sadly, I wasn't able to get out to a course as I had a family emergency this weekend that got in the way of getting on last round in to test these bad boys, but I was finally able to get to the local simulator so that I could get some concrete data. As this was my first-time using Trackman though I definitely didn't have it setup right, so instead of having the shots broken up by what ball was being used it was all together. So, I don't have as good of a breakdown as I wanted but anyways, I was still able to come to a couple of conclusions. I decided to use my 7 iron and Driver for testing as right now my wedges are so inconsistent, I didn't think the data would be very reliable. I used 4 different balls The TEST ball, ProV1X, TP5 PIX and Callaway ERC Soft. I would do 5 with the test ball and then 5 of a mixture of the others. Below are the dispersion charts for these. 

 

As you can see from the chart when it came to the 7 irons. There was no noticeable difference when it came to the TEST ball and the 3 others that I used when it came to accuracy, trajectory and distance. But when it came to the Driver that's where I saw the big differences. The TEST Ball had a little higher trajectory, generated more spin than the others and was also a good 10 yards shorter. 

With my last hour on the simulator. I decided to play nine holes, one with the test ball, the other with my usual gamer, Callaway ERC Soft. During these nine holes I once again I noticed that the TEST ball was shorter on almost every shot. Once I took that into account, I didn't see much of a difference between the two the rest of the round. When I was all done though I noticed that the TEST ball was really starting to show wear on it, while none of the other balls I used that day showed much wear at all. 

So inconclusion I can see that the TEST ball is not for me, I had never used an AVX ball before and now I don't really plan to, it just creates to much driver spin for my liking and the loss of distance is something that I just can't afford. Also, the durability with these is a big issue that I think they really needs to be looked at. 

[CFreddie]

14 minutes ago, jj1010 said:

After a week I think I'm finally ready to give my thoughts on the TEST balls. Sadly, I wasn't able to get out to a course as I had a family emergency this weekend that got in the way of getting on last round in to test these bad boys, but I was finally able to get to the local simulator so that I could get some concrete data. As this was my first-time using Trackman though I definitely didn't have it setup right, so instead of having the shots broken up by what ball was being used it was all together. So, I don't have as good of a breakdown as I wanted but anyways, I was still able to come to a couple of conclusions. I decided to use my 7 iron and Driver for testing as right now my wedges are so inconsistent, I didn't think the data would be very reliable. I used 4 different balls The TEST ball, ProV1X, TP5 PIX and Callaway ERC Soft. I would do 5 with the test ball and then 5 of a mixture of the others. Below are the dispersion charts for these. 

 

As you can see from the chart when it came to the 7 irons. There was no noticeable difference when it came to the TEST ball and the 3 others that I used when it came to accuracy, trajectory and distance. But when it came to the Driver that's where I saw the big differences. The TEST Ball had a little higher trajectory, generated more spin than the others and was also a good 10 yards shorter. 

With my last hour on the simulator. I decided to play nine holes, one with the test ball, the other with my usual gamer, Callaway ERC Soft. During these nine holes I once again I noticed that the TEST ball was shorter on almost every shot. Once I took that into account, I didn't see much of a difference between the two the rest of the round. When I was all done though I noticed that the TEST ball was really starting to show wear on it, while none of the other balls I used that day showed much wear at all. 

So inconclusion I can see that the TEST ball is not for me, I had never used an AVX ball before and now I don't really plan to, it just creates to much driver spin for my liking and the loss of distance is something that I just can't afford. Also, the durability with these is a big issue that I think they really needs to be looked at. 

Really enjoyed the trackman charts here - agreed that this ball is kinda a "meh" for me as well (never gamed the AVX and have no plans to).  

[golfinnut]

The cover definitely has to be addressed if it does come to production.  I think all of us seem to have the same issues with cover durability.  And not from cart paths either 

[ZMendle10]

Test balls arrived last night. Let the games begin!

[snoopy79]

[mention=126099]snoopy79[/mention] & [mention=95318]2puttbogey[/mention] I had similar trouble with this ball off the putter, but it was only when doing my side-by-side test with the Vice Pro. When I'm only using the TEST ball, I seem to be able to get the feel/speed okay (not great, but okay). I'm not sure why though. Do you think it's the softness being less responsive off the face so I compensate by hitting it way too hard?

I don’t think you were hitting it too hard. I never felt a thing when it came off the putter face. I really think this is one of the softest covers I have played with in recent memory. I think you can get used to it over time.

It was showing signs of scuffing and cuts after 4 holes. Still playable though.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Jamieweiss1]

Congratulations testers. Looking forward to hearing how the new balls perform. 

[vandyland]

Back on Trackman for short game stuff. Hit both 3/4 54* shots (typical carry there is 80 yds) and 30 yd pitches with a 58*. Today I used Kirkland Performance + (yellow), Srixon Z-Star XV and the test ball. Again, a few things stand out...

-Kirkland doesn't really spin that much for me on shorter shots
-The test ball does a decent job spinning on these and seems to launch higher on average
-The test ball, to me, does a good job offsetting the potential loss in spin with higher peak height and land angle

 

 

Edited November 21, 2023 by vandyland

[CFreddie]

"Final" review is up for me - plan to keep playing with it over the next few months and will continue to provide feedback / thoughts as they come.  Overall, this is a "not for me" ball, but could see a market for golfers that like a super soft / med spin ball.  Thanks (as always) MGS for the opportunity!

Edited November 22, 2023 by CFreddie

[jbern]

When doing my previous posts, I forgot to mention durability. It would appear that I have not had the same durability issues that others have had. I played 15 holes with the photographed ball and after giving it a good wash, this was the worst damage I could find:

Note that I did not have any sand shots and also only hit a tree on two shots (one was a 9i and the other was a chip around the green). 

I’m planning to hit it a bunch more with a launch monitor, so we’ll see how long it lasts. 

[taylorjonasher]

Alrighty - I wrapped up my testing yesterday by playing the test ball in some capacity on most of the 11 holes that I got in. I did not take any on course pictures, as it was 39 degrees with 15 - 25 mph winds, and every spare second that my hands were not on the clubs were spent jammed in my pockets. I alternated playing my ProV1s and the test ball, occasionally swapping the test ball or playing a shot with each when I wanted to see what it would do when comparing against the ProV1 as my primary ball. 

- Shots off the tee were still straight (except for the very first zero warmup swing of the day that duck-hooked into someone's back yard, but that's why they sent me three, right?), but in yesterday's conditions the ball ballooned a lot higher when hit into the wind. Shots fell significantly shorter than my ProV1. Into the wind, my ProV1 was rolling out 220 - 230, carrying 200 - 215, whereas the test ball only rolled out to 210 after carrying 195 - 200 into the stiff breeze. Long drive of the day with the ProV1 was 334 (wind at the back and a nice downhill roll, carried around 290), and the test ball was around 260, with about a 245-250 carry. The test ball felt quite a bit softer off the driver, and given the distance loss, I prefer the ProV1. 

- Iron shots carried the same higher trajectory, which on a very windy day was not ideal. Shots again were about 10 - 15% shorter than the ProV1 and had significantly less spin and more roll out. Balls rolled out a few yards even with the much steeper landing angle. The lone bright spot for the test ball came on hole 8, playing 120 yards into the wind. I thinned my ProV1 with a 9 iron well long and left of the green, but was able to keep the test ball low and out of the wind and land it just short of pin high with about 10 feet of roll out. I have no idea how a ball with that low of a trajectory was able to hold (maybe it was the overnight rain that softened the exact landing spot that I hit), but I was able to can the putt for a sort-of bird. Besides this one shot, the ball flight was too high for the conditions and rolled out more than I would prefer. 

- Wedges were much lower spinning than the ProV1 and rolled out significantly further; I was able to check my ProV1 consistently throughout the day, but the test ball did not bite at all - like ZERO spin. It was like channeling my inner Tim Wakefield to chip knuckleballs and watch them roll out 20 yards. I could not get a feel for how to play the ball greenside effectively. I would hate to be short sided with a tight lie with this ball unless I was able to putt, as I don't have the confidence to be able to stop it. I have seen a few people comment that they were able to control it, but I was not able to. 

- Putting with the ball was not too much different than the ProV1, although today I noticed the difference in feel much more. The test ball felt quite a bit softer today, but it did not really impact how I took my stroke. It rolled true and I was able to hit some nice 10-15 footers and had no complaints. I am indifferent to this ball with the putter. 

All in all, I was not a huge fan of this ball. I am used to the ProV1, and this ball behaved much differently. Off the tee it was shorter, but straighter. Irons were shorter, but with more roll out. Wedges lacked the spin that I am accustomed to. Putting was fine. Based on how I played with this ball, I probably would not put it into my bag. I am very grateful to MGS and Titleist to be able to participate in this evaluation, and hope that I get the opportunity to do this again in the future!

[HikingMike]

1 hour ago, taylorjonasher said:

The lone bright spot for the test ball came on hole 8, playing 120 yards into the wind. I thinned my ProV1 with a 9 iron well long and left of the green, but was able to keep the test ball low and out of the wind and land it just short of pin high with about 10 feet of roll out. I have no idea how a ball with that low of a trajectory was able to hold (maybe it was the overnight rain that softened the exact landing spot that I hit), but I was able to can the putt for a sort-of bird.

[Cfhandyman]

20 hours ago, vandyland said:

Back on Trackman for short game stuff. Hit both 3/4 54* shots (typical carry there is 80 yds) and 30 yd pitches with a 58*. Today I used Kirkland Performance + (yellow), Srixon Z-Star XV and the test ball. Again, a few things stand out...

-Kirkland doesn't really spin that much for me on shorter shots
-The test ball does a decent job spinning on these and seems to launch higher on average
-The test ball, to me, does a good job offsetting the potential loss in spin with higher peak height and land angle

 

 

Very nice review and data

[Cfhandyman]

The Titleist TEST ball review – The Good, the bad, there is no ugly

Overall:  The Titleist TEST ball is a premium, high quality golf ball and performed relatively well against the competition.  It has a soft feel and is low spin off the driver and irons but has sufficient spin around the greens.  One concern/issue is durability. Two out of the three test balls had to be retired from testing after scuffing and wear.  What is not known is the price.  If this is an AVX prototype, then it is an improved version retaining soft feel, with lower compression, low launch, low spin capabilities but adding additional spin for improved greenside performance.  Overall grade, 26/30

Goals of testing:   How does it perform on course, with respect to feel, distance, spin, ability to hold the green and putt ability?  Is it a long low spin, low trajectory ball that has good greenside spin and control?  How does it measure against the competition? How durable is it?  Is it for moderate swing speeds or players with excessive spin.  If this is an AVX prototype how does it compare to the current version of AVX.

Tester: I’m a 65 year old male, and live in the greater Toronto area in Ontario, Canada.  I am a 6.5 handicap playing an average of 100 rounds per year with 400 rounds on Arccos. I am driven by the need to learn and improve. I am data driven and analytical. I didn’t play for 10+ years and only got back into golf 5 years ago.  I was inspired by a friend who once said, golf is the only game you can play for 30 years and never improve.  When I thought about it, it is rather true, so I was determined to do it right the second time around.  Hence lessons, fitted equipment and diligent practice. I was inspired again when I went to Tour Experience Golf (TXG) 5 years ago and came out not only with expertly fitted and built clubs, but many new friends.  I now go on a yearly basis to tweak my setup.  With respect to my game, I tend to be somewhat steep with a slight out to in swing with an average clubhead speed of 77-80 mph for 7 iron and 90-95 mph for driver. I tend to prefer medium to firm compression balls with a slightly softer feel on the putter face. I have been fitted for golf balls.  The vast majority of my career has been in healthcare, starting with medical research, then organ donation and transplantation for many years before transitioning into Rare diseases (Transplant, Bleeding disorders and growth disorders) with Wyeth and then Pfizer.  Now, my day job is golf, pickleball and my two huskies.

   TPC Sawgrass, I’m the guy in the middle in the blue and black.  

Initial Impressions: High quality, premium looking ball, very similar to the ProV1 line.  Nicely packaged and I couldn’t wait to get it out on the golf course and indoor range.  But wait, in all that excitement, how am I going to test it and evaluate it and what are the criteria for testing and evaluation, other than see ball, hit ball and try not to lose the ball.

  

Indoor testing protocol to be conducted like a golf ball fitting, in an indoor golf facility/academy with Trackman 4. I will hit 10 shots each 54* wedge, 7 iron and driver and take the average for each club and ball. Any outliers, if any (0 – 2) will be discarded to ensure a decent and representative sample size.

Test Parameters: I will be specifically looking at the following: clubhead speed, ball speed, smash factor, carry distance, total distance, spin, height, land angle, as well as club path, launch angle and dynamic loft.  The reference ball will be the Titleist ProV1x and the comparator balls will be what I’ve been fitted for by the Ping Ballnamic tool (ballfitting.com) as well as by the Titleist selector tool (ProV1x).  See table 1.  The other comparator ball will be the Titleist AVX ball primarily because the shipping label sent by Titleist indicated it was a sleeve of AVX balls and it has the same number of dimples (348) and design pattern as an AVX.  

Examining the inner core revealed a 3 piece ball with either purple power colour (AVX) or blueberry bomber colour (TEST). It also appeared that the cover of the test ball was slightly thicker than the AVX.   If the cover of the test ball is thicker and softer, will this mean more spin?

   

2023 AVX ball                              “retired” TEST ball after 1 round                     AVX – 3 pc, interior                            TEST – 3 pc, interior

 The Contestants                                                                                  

                                                                                                                                                          VERSUS

       

                               

   (References: MyGolfSpy Ball quality Comparison tool, titleist.com)

TESTING RESULTS         THEN SOMETHING HAPPENS  

My on course experience with the prototype TEST golf ball revealed a premium softer feeling ball with a lower compression than I normally play.  It became immediately apparent that the test ball is very different from what I normally use and it took me a few holes to get used to it.  Distance: For the most part and in my hands, I found the test ball to be longer (off the tee and in the fairway) an average of 1-10 yards longer.   Flight and trajectory:   Ball flight was lower or more penetrating than the comparator (Srixon Z star XV) with less apparent spin and especially side spin as this ball flies very straight.  Basically, it goes exactly where you are aimed.  Due to its less spin and more penetrating trajectory, it works very well in windy conditions and was usually longer than my comparator.  Given that I was playing in windy conditions (10-15 mph), this also may explain why the test ball was longer than the higher trajectory, higher spinning Srixon Z star XV.  When you hit it well, it seems to fly off the face of the club, almost like a rocket (hot). On a number of occasions, I hit a rocket only to see the ball fly the green or land and then roll to the back of the green or worse off the back. I.e it came in low and hot, most likely a function of decreased spin, lower height and land angle. This was more notable on the mid to long irons. Wedge shots on full and partial wedge shots provided you have enough height, the ball stopped relatively quickly but had a little more roll out than the higher spinning Srixon ball.  However, on flighted wedges, the test ball had a tendency to come in low and hot and would often roll to the back of the green or off the green, catching me by surprise.  Chipping around the green:  With bump and runs and little chip shots, the test ball worked well.  Quite often, it would bounce and then stop reasonably quickly, but with very little backspin.  For putting, the test ball was relatively soft of the face of the putter and rolled straight and true with good distance control. Not that much different than the Srixon. Made birdies with both balls. 

Indoor Testing: The on course results conflict with indoor testing which showed the test ball to be on average of 1-6 yards shorter than the comparator balls, yet on course it was 1 – 10 yards (estimation) longer.  See Chart 1, 2 and 3.  

CHART 1   

CHART 2  

CHART 3  

Overall impressions based on, on course play and indoor testing:  The test ball is a soft feeling, lower spinning and has a lower trajectory flight with good distance.   In my hands, for an average swing speed player (7 iron clubhead speed, 77-80 mph, 90-95 mph with driver), it was slightly longer, on average of 1-10 yards on course.  This ball is very different from what I am used to (ProV1x, Srixon, Bridgestone).  I liked the length off the tee, as well as with irons. It became more problematic around the greens as I prefer more spin and control, so initially I’m not sure if I could game this ball on a regular basis.  I would think for high swing speed players and a low compression ball would not be a good mix unless they had excessive spin.  To determine if the test ball worked well for slower swing speed players, I recruited my wife.

  

For the slow swing speed player (driver club head speed of 62 - 70 mph), the comparator ball was her Srixon Z star divide.  There was no difference with respect to clubhead speed or ball speed (all within 0.2-1 mph).  Height and land angles were higher with the Srixon Z star ball.  No difference in height for wedges, however, 7 iron and driver were on average 2' and 8' higher than the Test ball.  Launch angle was the same for wedge, but 0.5 and 3 degrees higher for the 7 iron and driver with the Srixon Z star ball. (data not shown).  Overall, for the slow swing speed player, the Titleist test ball performed well.  It was slightly longer, with reduced spin, slightly lower height and lower launch angles, so it would be a candidate for the bag.

Quality and durability: The quality and construction of the test ball are excellent and looks similar to a ProV1 and is made in the same ball plant 3.  In terms of quality assurance and control, Titleist is one of the best if not the best in the business as per MyGolfSpy ball tests.  After 1 round the ball and cover held up reasonably well, except for 1 scuff mark a result for hitting the cart path.  Unfortunately, upon further testing, two out of the three test balls had to be retired from testing after scuffing and wear. They were removed from testing as a scuffed ball would have negatively impacted the results. Is it possible they are using a softer or thicker cover which would result in more green side spin but are more susceptible to scuffing? 

  

Who is this ball for based on testing: It appears Ideal for the player who is looking for distance and/or needs less spin. If you like to keep the ball straight, this is a ball for you.  If you liked or play with the AVX ball, you will enjoy this new ball.  Titleist have improved on the AVX ball, soft feel, just as long with a bit more spin added around the greens.  Works very well in the wind with a more penetrating ball flight.  

Would it go into my bag.  No, primarily as the top 3 balls for me on testing were the Titleist ProV1x, Srixon Z star XV and Bridgestone tour B XS balls primarily due to a combination of distance, spin and feel.  This also matches up nicely with my ball fitting recommendations as well as the MGS golf ball test recommendations.   So, for now, the Titleist ProV1x stays in the bag.

                                           Titleist TEST ball Evaluation Scoring

          

 References:

1.      Titleist.com

2.    2023 Golf Ball Test | MyGolfSpy

3.    Best Golf Balls of 2023: Expert Tested & Data-Backed | MyGolfSpy

4.      Ping Ballnamic, ballfitting.com

 I want to sincerely thank MyGolfSpy and Titleist for this testing opportunity. It was an enlightening experience, which required much thought on how to test properly, what were suitable comparators/controls and why, to ensure a fair, balanced, evidence based review.  Then based on this, who would benefit, who would not and why, and more importantly, would it go in the bag.  It was a lot of fun.  Thank you for your patience and understanding as this is a lengthy review.

                                                            

[vandyland]

@Cfhandyman This is an elite review ^^^^^

[Cfhandyman]

12 minutes ago, vandyland said:

@Cfhandyman This is an elite review ^^^^^

Thank you, that is quite kind of you to say.